MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400513246 · doi:10.3389/fgene.2024.1356696

Genetically predicted 1091 blood metabolites and 309 metabolite ratios in relation to risk of type 2 diabetes: a Mendelian randomization study

2024· article· en· W4400513246 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jixin Li, Wenru Wang, Fengzhao Liu, Linjie Qiu, Yan Ren, Meijie Li, Wenjie Li, Feng Gao, Jin Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Genetics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersChina Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences
KeywordsMendelian randomizationMetaboliteSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenome-wide association studySNPType 2 diabetesFalse discovery rateBiologyMetabolomeGeneticsInternal medicineMedicineDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyGenotypeGenetic variantsGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Metabolic dysregulation represents a defining characteristic of Type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Nevertheless, there remains an absence of substantial evidence establishing a direct causal link between circulating blood metabolites and the promotion or prevention of T2DM. In addressing this gap, we employed Mendelian randomization (MR) analysis to investigate the potential causal association between 1,091 blood metabolites, 309 metabolite ratios, and the occurrence of T2DM. Methods Data encompassing single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) for 1,091 blood metabolites and 309 metabolite ratios were extracted from a Canadian Genome-wide association study (GWAS) involving 8,299 participants. To evaluate the causal link between these metabolites and Type 2 diabetes (T2DM), multiple methods including Inverse Variance Weighted (IVW), Weighted Median, MR Egger, Weighted Mode, and Simple Mode were employed. p-values underwent correction utilizing False Discovery Rates (FDR). Sensitivity analyses incorporated Cochran’s Q test, MR-Egger intercept test, MR-PRESSO, Steiger test, leave-one-out analysis, and single SNP analysis. The causal effects were visualized via Circos plot, forest plot, and scatter plot. Furthermore, for noteworthy, an independent T2DM GWAS dataset (GCST006867) was utilized for replication analysis. Metabolic pathway analysis of closely correlated metabolites was conducted using MetaboAnalyst 5.0. Results The IVW analysis method utilized in this study revealed 88 blood metabolites and 37 metabolite ratios demonstrating a significant causal relationship with T2DM (p < 0.05). Notably, strong causal associations with T2DM were observed for specific metabolites: 1-linoleoyl-GPE (18:2) (IVW: OR:0.930, 95% CI: 0.899–0.962, p = 2.16 × 10−5), 1,2-dilinoleoyl-GPE (18:2/18:2) (IVW: OR:0.942, 95% CI: 0.917–0.968, p = 1.64 × 10−5), Mannose (IVW: OR:1.133, 95% CI: 1.072–1.197, p = 1.02 × 10−5), X-21829 (IVW: OR:1.036, 95% CI: 1.036–1.122, p = 9.44 × 10−5), and Phosphate to mannose ratio (IVW: OR:0.870, 95% CI: 0.818–0.926, p = 1.29 × 10−5, FDR = 0.008). Additionally, metabolic pathway analysis highlighted six significant pathways associated with T2DM development: Valine, leucine and isoleucine biosynthesis, Phenylalanine metabolism, Glycerophospholipid metabolism, Alpha-Linolenic acid metabolism, Sphingolipid metabolism, and Alanine, aspartate, and glutamate metabolism. Conclusion This study identifies both protective and risk-associated metabolites that play a causal role in the development of T2DM. By integrating genomics and metabolomics, it presents novel insights into the pathogenesis of T2DM. These findings hold potential implications for early screening, preventive measures, and treatment strategies for T2DM.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in GeneticsSame topicMetabolomics and Mass Spectrometry StudiesFrench-language works237,207