Development and validation of DNA methylation scores in two European cohorts augment 10-year risk prediction of type 2 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) presents a major health and economic burden that could be alleviated with improved early prediction and intervention. While standard risk factors have shown good predictive performance, we show that the use of blood-based DNA methylation information leads to a significant improvement in the prediction of 10-year T2D incidence risk. Previous studies have been largely constrained by linear assumptions, the use of cytosine–guanine pairs one-at-a-time and binary outcomes. We present a flexible approach (via an R package, MethylPipeR) based on a range of linear and tree-ensemble models that incorporate time-to-event data for prediction. Using the Generation Scotland cohort (training set ncases = 374, ncontrols = 9,461; test set ncases = 252, ncontrols = 4,526) our best-performing model (area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) = 0.872, area under the precision-recall curve (PRAUC) = 0.302) showed notable improvement in 10-year onset prediction beyond standard risk factors (AUC = 0.839, precision–recall AUC = 0.227). Replication was observed in the German-based KORA study (n = 1,451, ncases = 142, P = 1.6 × 10−5). Early type 2 diabetes (T2D) risk assessment could help slow or prevent disease onset. Here the authors used blood-based DNA methylation data to develop 10-year risk prediction models for incident T2D. The results show an improvement in performance beyond standard risk factors typically used to predict the risk of T2D onset.
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 | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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".