Distinct genetic liability profiles define clinically relevant patient strata across common diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stratified medicine holds great promise to tailor treatment to the needs of individual patients. While genetics holds great potential to aid patient stratification, it remains a major challenge to operationalize complex genetic risk factor profiles to deconstruct clinical heterogeneity. Contemporary approaches to this problem rely on polygenic risk scores (PRS), which provide only limited clinical utility and lack a clear biological foundation. To overcome these limitations, we develop the CASTom-iGEx approach to stratify individuals based on the aggregated impact of their genetic risk factor profiles on tissue specific gene expression levels. The paradigmatic application of this approach to coronary artery disease or schizophrenia patient cohorts identified diverse strata or biotypes. These biotypes are characterized by distinct endophenotype profiles as well as clinical parameters and are fundamentally distinct from PRS based groupings. In stark contrast to the latter, the CASTom-iGEx strategy discovers biologically meaningful and clinically actionable patient subgroups, where complex genetic liabilities are not randomly distributed across individuals but rather converge onto distinct disease relevant biological processes. These results support the notion of different patient biotypes characterized by partially distinct pathomechanisms. Thus, the universally applicable approach presented here has the potential to constitute an important component of future personalized medicine paradigms.
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 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".