Redox Genetic Risk Score and the Incidence of End-Stage Kidney Disease in People with Type 1 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
End-stage kidney disease (ESKD) is a multifactorial condition influenced by genetic background, but the extent to which a genetic risk score (GRS) improves ESKD prediction is unknown. We built a redox GRS on the base of previous association studies (six polymorphisms from six redox genes) and tested its relationship with ESKD in three cohorts of people with type 1 diabetes. Among 1012 participants, ESKD (hemodialysis requirement, kidney transplantation, eGFR < 15 mL/min/1.73 m2) occurred in 105 (10.4%) during a 14-year follow-up. High redox GRS was associated with increased ESKD risk (adjusted HR for the upper versus the lowest GRS tertile: 2.60 (95% CI, 1.51–4.48), p = 0.001). Each additional risk-allele was associated with a 20% increased risk of ESKD (95% CI, 8–33, p < 0.0001). High GRS yielded a relevant population attributable fraction (30%), but only a marginal enhancement in c-statistics index (0.928 [0.903–0.954]) over clinical factors 0.921 (0.892–0.950), p = 0.04). This is the first report of an independent association between redox GRS and increased risk of ESKD in type 1 diabetes. Our results do not support the use of this GRS in clinical practice but provide new insights into the involvement of oxidative stress genetic factors in ESKD risk in type 1 diabetes.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".