MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367600445 · doi:10.2337/dc22-2331

Identification of a Common Variant for Coronary Heart Disease at <i>PDE1A</i> Contributes to Individualized Treatment Goals and Risk Stratification of Cardiovascular Complications in Chinese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

2023· article· en· W4367600445 on OpenAlexaff
Cadmon K.P. Lim, Andrea O. Y. Luk, Mai Shi, Hoi Man Cheung, Alex C.W. Ng, Heung Man Lee, Eric S. H. Lau, Baoqi Fan, Alice P.S. Kong, Risa Ozaki, Elaine Chow, Ka Fai Lee, Shing Chung Siu, Grace Hui, Chiu Chi Tsang, Kam Piu Lau, Jenny Leung, Elaine Cheung, Man Wo Tsang, Grace Kam, Ip Tim Lau, June K.Y. Li, Emmy Lau, Stanley Lo, Samuel Fung, Yuk Lun Cheng, Chun Chung Chow, Xiaodan Fan, Ting‐Fung Chan, Kevin Y.L. Yip, Si Lok, Weichuan Yu, Cheuk‐Chun Szeto, Nelson L.S. Tang, Brian Tomlinson, Yü Huang, Alicia J. Jenkins, Anthony Keech, Juliana C.N. Chan, Ronald C.W., Wing-yee So, Ka-Fai Lee, Shing‐Chung Siu, Chiu-Chi Tsang, Kam-Piu Lau, Man-Wo Tsang, Jo Jo Kwan, Yuk‐Lun Cheng, Stephen Kwok‐Wing Tsui, Fei Xie, Sen Zhang, Yu Pu, Meng Wang, Chun‐Chung Chow, Kitty Kit-Ting Cheung, Rebecca Y.M. Wong, Hon‐Cheong So, Chin-san Law, Anthea Ka Yuen Lock, Ingrid Kwok Ying Tsang, Susanna Chi Pun Chan, Yin-wah Chan, Cherry Chiu, Chi-sang Hung, Cheuk-wah Ho, Ivy Hoi Yee Ng, Maria W.H. Mak, K. W. Lee, Candy H.S. Leung, K.-C. Lee, Hui-ming Chan, W.Z.M. Wat, Tracy Lau, Cheuk-yiu Law, Ryan H.Y. Chan, Candice Lau, Pearl Tsang, Vincent Chan, Lap-ying Ho, Eva Wong, Josephine Chan, Jessy Pang, Y. Lee, Claudia H.T. Tam, Fei Xie, Wei Jiang, Meng Weng, Kelly Y. Li, Chuiguo Huang, Gechang Yu

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Care · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicGenetic Associations and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationHospital for Sick Children
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineRisk stratificationDiabetes mellitusCoronary heart diseaseType 2 diabetesDiseaseInternal medicineFramingham Risk ScoreCardiologyIdentification (biology)Intensive care medicineEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE: In this study we aim to unravel genetic determinants of coronary heart disease (CHD) in type 2 diabetes (T2D) and explore their applications. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a two-stage genome-wide association study for CHD in Chinese patients with T2D (3,596 case and 8,898 control subjects), followed by replications in European patients with T2D (764 case and 4,276 control subjects) and general populations (n = 51,442-547,261). Each identified variant was examined for its association with a wide range of phenotypes and its interactions with glycemic, blood pressure (BP), and lipid controls in incident cardiovascular diseases. RESULTS: We identified a novel variant (rs10171703) for CHD (odds ratio 1.21 [95% CI 1.13-1.30]; P = 2.4 × 10-8) and BP (β ± SE 0.130 ± 0.017; P = 4.1 × 10-14) at PDE1A in Chinese T2D patients but found only a modest association with CHD in general populations. This variant modulated the effects of BP goal attainment (130/80 mmHg) on CHD (Pinteraction = 0.0155) and myocardial infarction (MI) (Pinteraction = 5.1 × 10-4). Patients with CC genotype of rs10171703 had >40% reduction in either cardiovascular events in response to BP control (2.9 × 10-8 < P < 3.6 × 10-5), those with CT genotype had no difference (0.0726 < P < 0.2614), and those with TT genotype had a threefold increase in MI risk (P = 6.7 × 10-3). CONCLUSIONS: We discovered a novel CHD- and BP-related variant at PDE1A that interacted with BP goal attainment with divergent effects on CHD risk in Chinese patients with T2D. Incorporating this information may facilitate individualized treatment strategies for precision care in diabetes, only when our findings are validated.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes CareSame topicGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207