GWAS of CRP response to statins further supports the role of APOE in statin response: A GIST consortium study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Statins are first-line treatments in the primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease. Clinical studies show statins act independently of lipid-lowering mechanisms to decrease C-reactive protein (CRP), an inflammation marker. We aim to elucidate genetic loci associated with CRP statin response. CRP statin response is the change in log-CRP between off-treatment and on-treatment measurements. Cohort-level Genome-Wide Association Studies (GWAS) of CRP response were performed using 1000 Genomes imputed data, testing ∼10 million common genetic variants. GWAS meta-analysis combined results from seven cohorts and clinical trials totalling 14,070 statin-treated individuals of European ancestry within the GIST consortium. Secondary analyses included statin-by-placebo interaction analyses, and lookups in African ancestry cohorts. Our GWAS identified two genome-wide significant (P < 5e-8) loci: APOE and HNF1A for CRP statin response corrected for baseline CRP. The missense lead variant rs429358 at APOE, contributing to the APOE-E4 haplotype, is a risk locus for dyslipidaemia, Alzheimer's and coronary artery disease (CAD). The HNF1A locus is associated with diabetes, cholesterol levels, and CAD. Both loci are also associated with baseline CRP levels, and neither locus achieved a significant (P < 0.05) result from the statin v. placebo interaction meta-analysis using randomized clinical trial data. However, the interaction result (P-int=0.09) for APOE was suggestive and possibly underpowered. The APOE-E4 signal may therefore be associated with both CRP and LDL-cholesterol statin response. Combined with suggestions in the literature that APOE also leads to differential statin benefit in Alzheimer's, the APOE locus warrants further investigation for potential genetic effects on healthcare with statin treatment.
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 | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".