MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 18244: A Multi-Ancestry GWAS of Calcific Aortic Stenosis Among 2.7 Million Individuals

2023· article· en· W4389957583 on OpenAlexaff
Aeron M Small, Line Dufresne, Eric Farber‐Eger, Erik Abner, Kristin Corey, Lincoln Nadauld, Henning Bundgaard, Jiwoo Lee, Johannes Schumacher, Teresa Trenkwalder, Stefan Söderberg, Andrea Ganna, Daniel J. Rader, Marta R. Moksnes, Meng Lin, Fabien Laporte, Susanna C. Larsson, Gustav Smith, Ron Do, Kaoru Ito, Hilma Hólm, Yan V. Sun, Kelly Kim, Peter Wilson, Christopher J. O’Donnell, Gina M. Peloso, James C. Engert, George Thanassoulis, Pradeep Natarajan

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health CentreMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenome-wide association studyMedicineCoronary artery diseaseBody mass indexInternal medicineLinkage disequilibriumCardiologyGenetic associationStenosisGeneticsSingle-nucleotide polymorphismHaplotypeAlleleGeneBiologyGenotype

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Calcific aortic stenosis (CAS) is a common, progressive fibrocalcific pathology of the aortic valve without medical therapy. The genetics of CAS remain only partially understood. Methods: We performed a genome wide association study (GWAS) of CAS among 2,799,598 individuals from the International Aortic Valve Genetics Consortium (IAVGC), comprising 28 cohorts. CAS was identified using a common ICD/CPT based phenotype. GWAS were meta-analyzed using inverse variance weighting with adjustment by linkage-disequilibrium score regression (LDSR) intercept. Unique genome-wide significant (GWS) loci and causal genes were annotated by nearest gene and eQTL colocalization. Genetic correlations were performed against atherosclerotic, adiposity, and lipid traits using LDSR with publicly available GWAS (CARDIoGRAMplusC4D for coronary artery disease [CAD], Million Veteran Program for peripheral artery disease [PAD], MEGASTROKE for ischemic stroke [IS], GIANT for body mass index [BMI], and GLGC for lipids). Results: There were 85,329 individuals with CAS (79,397 White, 3,126 Black, 1,403 Hispanic, and 1,403 East Asian) among 2,799,598 individuals. Meta-analysis of GWAS resulted in 224 unique GWS genomic regions, of which 205 were novel. The majority of the GWS genomic regions (134) did not overlap with prior risk loci for CAD, PAD, IS, BMI, or lipids. Genetic correlation demonstrated modest but significant correlations between CAS and CAD ( r =0.26, p=3.3x10 -18 ), PAD ( r =0.41, p=1.4x10 -30 ), IS ( r =0.18,p=2.8x10 -7 ), BMI ( r =0.22,p=8.6x10 -30 ), and lipids (LDL-C r =0.17,p=3.6x10 -10 ;triglycerides r =0.10,p=1.9x10 -5 ; HDL-C r =-0.07,p=8.0x10 -4 ). Conclusions: This largest to-date multi-ancestry GWAS of CAS identified 205 novel genomic regions. We demonstrate that CAS is genetically distinct from cardiometabolic traits, with only modest genetic correlations and with a majority of CAS risk loci having no overlap with cardiometabolic GWAS risk loci.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac Valve Diseases and Treatments→French-language works237,207→