Idiopathic Pulmonary Fibrosis Risk Loci in East Asian Populations Mirror Those of European Populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: Common and rare variants that are associated with the risk of developing idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) have been identified predominantly in European ancestry populations. OBJECTIVES: To better understand the genetic variants that contribute to IPF in individuals with Asian ancestry, we conducted a genome-wide association study of IPF in East Asian populations. METHODS: We included 1026 patients with IPF and compared them to 1723 unaffected controls of Japanese and Korean ancestry. Genome-wide association analysis was conducted in the Japanese and Korean ancestry cohorts separately and combined using meta-analysis. Restricted maximum likelihood was used to estimate the SNP-based heritability and local ancestry of chromosome 11 was inferred for each subject. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: We identified loci on chromosomes 4 (FAM13A; rs7690839), 5 (TERT; rs7734992), 6 (DSP; rs2076295), and 11 (MUC5B; rs35705950) that were significantly associated with risk of IPF. Importantly, the sentinel variants in each of these loci are the same as, or in strong linkage disequilibrium with, the risk variants that have been observed in studies of European ancestry populations. In aggregate, common variants (not including the MUC5B promoter variant) account for approximately 25% of the risk of developing IPF in these East Asian ancestry cohorts. Moreover, local ancestry analysis indicates that the presence of MUC5B promoter variant in the East Asian population is not a result of admixture with European ancestry populations. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the IPF risk loci in East Asian populations are shared with those of European ancestry populations, although their risk allele frequencies and effect sizes differ. These findings indicate shared genetic risk factors of IPF across ancestries.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".