MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4403219284 · doi:10.1101/2024.10.08.24315109

Insulin moderates the effects of early life adversity on executive functioning in a sex-specific manner

2024· preprint· en· W4403219284 on OpenAlexafffund
Aashita Batra, Irina Pokhvisneva, Guillaume Elgbeili, Olivia Ruge, Eamon Fitzgerald, Sachin Patel, Darina Czamara, Michael J. Meaney, Elisabeth B. Binder, Patrícia Pelufo Silveira

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2024
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBirth, Development, and Health
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersMedical Research CouncilCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchFonds de Recherche du Québec - SantéUniversity of BristolMcGill UniversityHarvard University
KeywordsPsychologyDevelopmental psychologyExecutive functionsCognitionNeuroscience

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Early life adversity (ELA) is associated with altered insulin signaling and altered EF behaviors, in a potentially sex-specific manner. Considering the high co-morbidity between altered metabolism and executive function (EF) problems, we hypothesized that the genetic background associated with altered fasting insulin (FI) and EF could be shared Methods Our study used conjunctional false discovery rate (ConjFDR) to identify the shared genetic architecture between FI and two EFs: impulsivity and attention deficit-hyperactivity disorder (ADHD). We identified the polygenic risk score (PRS) threshold from a FI genome-wide association study (GWAS) that best predicted insulin levels in male and female ALSPAC children [N males =1,901, N females =1,834; p t-intial-males = 0.05 (11,121 SNPs), p t-intial-females = 0.15 (27,202 SNPs)], further refining it to only include SNPs significantly associated with insulin levels in children [N SNP-males = 635 SNPs, N SNP-females = 1,449 SNPs]. A phenome-wide association study (PheWAS) was also run to identify EFs associated with the interaction between the refined PRS (rPRS) and early adversity. To investigate the presence of a direct causal relationship between FI and impulsivity in the presence of adversity, we applied mendelian randomization (MR) Results ConjFDR suggested that environmental factors could be involved in the association between insulin and EFs, as there was no shared genetic background. PheWAS highlighted impulsivity and attention-related outcomes in interaction models between FI rPRS and early adversity. Finally, two-sample MR suggested a causal association between higher fasting insulin levels and impulsive behavior, specifically in females exposed to adversity (p < 0.001). Overall, a sex-specific impulsivity GWAS demonstrated that MYT1L and TSSC1 , genes that are associated with motor impulsivity, were enriched only in females. Conclusions Our study solidifies the evidence that the relationship between high FI and EF is not direct, but rather interacting with ELA exposure, especially in females. Key points Early life adversity is associated with alterations in insulin signaling and executive functioning behaviors. We report a causal association between high fasting insulin and increased impulsivity in females exposed to adversity. Our findings also support the idea that fasting insulin moderates the long-term effects of early life adversity on executive functions in females. This research provides insights into the mechanisms by which insulin moderates the effects of early life adversity on executive function disorders and informs the development of potential interventions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicBirth, Development, and Health→French-language works237,207→