Genetic analyses across cardiovascular traits: leveraging genetic correlations to empower locus discovery and prediction in common cardiovascular diseases
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Common genetic variation detected by genome-wide association studies (GWAS) partially explains variability in the spectrum of cardiac phenotypes. In this work, we explore genetic correlations among 58 cardiac-related traits/diseases, detecting novel ones. We subsequently employ multi-trait analysis of GWAS (MTAG), which meta-analyzes genetically correlated traits, to improve genomic loci discovery and prediction in atrial fibrillation (AF), coronary artery disease (CAD), and heart failure (HF). We identify 19 novel loci specific for AF, 131 for CAD, and 141 for HF. Polygenic scores (PGS) in 15,177 Canadian individuals show similar results when PGS are derived from conventional GWAS versus MTAG summary statistics, although MTAG-PGS improve prediction and discrimination of CAD in females [∆ R 2 1.735% (95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.609–2.856); Net reclassification index 0.208 (95%CI: 0.139–0.277)]. This work describes new relevant genetic correlations among cardiac-related traits/diseases and supports MTAG to improve loci discovery in common cardiovascular diseases and potentially improve the prediction of CAD in females.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".