Genetic assessment of efficacy and safety profiles of coagulation cascade proteins identifies Factors II and XI as actionable anticoagulant targets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Aims Anticoagulants are routinely used by millions of patients worldwide to prevent blood clots. Yet, problems with anticoagulant therapy remain, including a persistent and cumulative bleeding risk in patients undergoing prolonged anticoagulation. New safer anticoagulant targets are needed. Methods and results To prioritize anticoagulant targets with the strongest efficacy [venous thromboembolism (VTE) prevention] and safety (low bleeding risk) profiles, we performed two-sample Mendelian randomization and genetic colocalization. We leveraged three large-scale plasma protein data sets (deCODE as discovery data set and Fenland and Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities as replication data sets] and one liver gene expression data set (Institut Universitaire de Cardiologie et de Pneumologie de Québec bariatric biobank) to evaluate evidence for a causal effect of 26 coagulation cascade proteins on VTE from a new genome-wide association meta-analysis of 44 232 VTE cases and 847 152 controls, stroke subtypes, bleeding outcomes, and parental lifespan as an overall measure of efficacy/safety ratio. A 1 SD genetically predicted reduction in F2 blood levels was associated with lower risk of VTE [odds ratio (OR) = 0.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) = 0.38–0.51, P = 2.6e−28] and cardioembolic stroke risk (OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.39–0.76, P = 4.2e−04) but not with bleeding (OR = 1.13, 95% CI = 0.93–1.36, P = 2.2e−01). Genetically predicted F11 reduction was associated with lower risk of VTE (OR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.58–0.64, P = 4.1e−85) and cardioembolic stroke (OR = 0.77, 95% CI = 0.69–0.86, P = 4.1e−06) but not with bleeding (OR = 1.01, 95% CI = 0.95–1.08, P = 7.5e−01). These Mendelian randomization associations were concordant across the three blood protein data sets and the hepatic gene expression data set as well as colocalization analyses. Conclusion These results provide strong genetic evidence that F2 and F11 may represent safe and efficacious therapeutic targets to prevent VTE and cardioembolic strokes without substantially increasing bleeding risk.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".