Investigating the role of the relaxin-3/RXFP3 system in neuropsychiatric disorders and metabolic phenotypes: a candidate gene approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The relaxin-3/RXFP3 system has been implicated in the modulation of depressive- and anxiety-like behaviour in the animal literature; however, there is a lack of human studies investigating this signalling system. We seek to bridge this gap by leveraging the large UK Biobank study to retrospectively assess genetic risk variants linked with this neuropeptidergic system. Specifically, we conducted a candidate gene study in the UK Biobank to test for potential associations between a set of functional, candidate single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) pertinent to relaxin-3 signalling, determined using in silico tools, and several outcomes, including depression, atypical depression, anxiety and metabolic syndrome. For each outcome, we used several rigorously defined phenotypes, culminating in subsample sizes ranging from 85,881 to 386,769 participants. Across all outcomes, there were no associations between any candidate SNP and any outcome phenotype, following corrections for multiple testing burden. Regression models comprising several SNPs per relevant candidate gene as exploratory variables further exhibited no prediction of outcome. Our findings corroborate conclusions from previous literature about the limitations of candidate gene approaches, even when based on firm biological hypotheses, in the domain of genetic research for neuropsychiatric disorders.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".