MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401791411 · doi:10.1002/acr.25420

Prediagnostic Amino Acid Metabolites and Risk of Gout, Accounting for Serum Urate: Prospective Cohort Study and Mendelian Randomization

2024· article· en· W4401791411 on OpenAlexaff
Natalie McCormick, Amit D. Joshi, Chio Yokose, Bing Yu, Adrienne Tin, Robert Terkeltaub, Tony R. Merriman, Oana A. Zeleznik, A. Heather Eliassen, Gary C. Curhan, Hang‐Korng Ea, Matthew Nayor, Laura M. Raffield, Hyon K. Choi

Bibliographic record

VenueArthritis Care & Research · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGout, Hyperuricemia, Uric Acid
Canadian institutionsArthritis Research Centre of CanadaResearch Canada
FundersNational Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin DiseasesNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsGoutMendelian randomizationMedicineInternal medicineHyperuricemiaUric acidMetabolomeHazard ratioProspective cohort studyPopulationGastroenterologyMetaboliteConfidence intervalGenotypeBiologyBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objective Our objective was to prospectively investigate prediagnostic population‐based metabolome for risk of hospitalized gout (ie, most accurate, severe, and costly cases), accounting for serum urate. Methods We conducted prediagnostic metabolome‐wide analyses among 249,677 UK Biobank participants with nuclear magnetic resonance metabolomic profiling (N = 168 metabolites, including eight amino acids) from baseline blood samples (2006–2010) without a history of gout. We calculated multivariable hazard ratios (HRs) for hospitalized incident gout, before and after adjusting for serum urate levels; we included patients with nonhospitalized incident gout in a sensitivity analysis. Potential causal effects were evaluated with two‐sample Mendelian randomization. Results Correcting for multiple testing, 107 metabolites were associated with incidence of hospitalized gout (n = 2,735) before urate adjustment, including glycine and glutamine (glutamine HR 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.54–0.75, P = 8.3 × 10 −8 ; glycine HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.61–0.78, P = 3.3 × 10 −9 between extreme quintiles), and glycoprotein acetyls (HR 2.48, 95% CI 2.15–2.87, P = 1.96 × 10 −34 ). Associations remained significant and directionally consistent following urate adjustment (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70–0.98; HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.76–0.98; HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.21–1.63 between extreme quintiles), respectively; corresponding HRs per SD were 0.91 (95% CI 0.86–0.97), 0.94 (95% CI 0.91–0.98), and 1.10 (95% CI 1.06–1.14). Findings persisted when including patients with nonhospitalized incident gout. Mendelian randomization corroborated their potential causal role on hyperuricemia or gout risk; with change in urate levels of −0.05 mg/dL (95% CI −0.08 to −0.01) and −0.12 mg/dL (95% CI −0.22 to −0.03) per SD of glycine and glutamine, respectively, and odds ratios of 0.94 (95% CI 0.88–1.00) and 0.81 (95% CI 0.67–0.97) for gout. Conclusion These prospective findings with causal implications could lead to biomarker‐based risk prediction and potential supplementation‐based interventions with glycine or glutamine.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationallow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.314 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArthritis Care & ResearchSame topicGout, Hyperuricemia, Uric AcidFrench-language works237,207