Genome-wide association study meta-analysis provides insights into the etiology of heart failure and its subtypes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Heart failure (HF) is a major contributor to global morbidity and mortality. While distinct clinical subtypes, defined by etiology and left ventricular ejection fraction, are well recognized, their genetic determinants remain inadequately understood. In this study, we report a genome-wide association study of HF and its subtypes in a sample of 1.9 million individuals. A total of 153,174 individuals had HF, of whom 44,012 had a nonischemic etiology (ni-HF). A subset of patients with ni-HF were stratified based on left ventricular systolic function, where data were available, identifying 5,406 individuals with reduced ejection fraction and 3,841 with preserved ejection fraction. We identify 66 genetic loci associated with HF and its subtypes, 37 of which have not previously been reported. Using functionally informed gene prioritization methods, we predict effector genes for each identified locus, and map these to etiologic disease clusters through phenome-wide association analysis, network analysis and colocalization. Through heritability enrichment analysis, we highlight the role of extracardiac tissues in disease etiology. We then examine the differential associations of upstream risk factors with HF subtypes using Mendelian randomization. These findings extend our understanding of the mechanisms underlying HF etiology and may inform future approaches to prevention and 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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".