MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7047602273

Genetic epidemiological aspects of obesity and related traits. Human studies in Swedish and North-American cohorts

2006· dissertation· en· W7047602273 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueGothenburg University Publications Electronic Archive (Gothenburg University) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality Monitoring and Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsObesityGenetic epidemiologyPopulationEpidemiologyPedigree chartProbandFrameshift mutationMetabolic syndrome
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aims: To investigate two obesity candidate genes, the melanocortin-4 receptor (MC4R) and the adiponectin hormone (APM1), by screening their genomic sequences. To search the human genome for quantitative trait loci (QTLs) related to resting metabolic rate (RMR), and respiratory quotient (RQ). To investigate whether the aetiology of the obesity epidemic might have a genetic component via assortative mating for obesity.Methods: The coding and flanking sequence of MC4R was screened in a total of 433 Whites and 96 Blacks (94% females) obese and normal-weight subjects from the Swedish Obese Subjects (SOS) study, the HERITAGE Family Study, and a Memphis cohort. The translated exons and part of intron 2 of APM1 was sequenced in 96 obese and 96 normal-weight Swedish women from the SOS study. Regression-based and variance-components-based genome-wide autosomal scans on RMR and RQ phenotypes, obtained from indirect calorimetry, were performed in 169 families ascertained to the Quebec Family Study via an obese proband or from the general population. Measured and validated questionnaire data on family members from 7834 obese Swedish probands, and from 829 subjects randomly ascertained from the general Swedish population were available for analysis.Results: Twelve missense MC4R mutations were detected. None of them were associated with obesity phenotypes. Moreover, two heterozygous deletions were found in two obese women: a 65_ 64delTG mutation, and a 171delC frameshift mutation, predicted to result in a truncated non-functional receptor. Three previously know APM1 variants were found in equal frequencies among obese and controls. Among them, T45T and G276G were associated with features of the metabolic syndrome in obese carriers. Evidence for linkage to RMR was detected on chromosomes 3q26.1 (LOD = 2.74), 1q21.2 (2.44), and 22q12.3 (1.33). QTLs influencing RQ were found on 12q13 (1.65) and 14q22 (1.83). Considerable locus heterogeneity within this population was suggested, as the majority of families were unlinked to any one QTL. Spouse correlations in body mass index (BMI) were strongest among couples with the shortest duration of cohabitation, suggesting assortative mating. Obesity concordance in parents was associated with an obesity prevalence of 20.1% in adult offspring, compared to 1.4% if parents were concordantly non-obese (odds ratio (OR): 18.3, 95% confidence interval: 9.0 37.4). No association was found between rearing parents and non-biological offspring s BMI.Conclusions: Pathogenic mutations in the MC4R are rare in the general obese population. Synonymous and intronic APM1 variants may influence components of the metabolic syndrome in obese carriers. All three RMR linkages overlapped regions previously linked to the metabolic syndrome, and a significant association between RMR and the metabolic syndrome found in the present cohort reinforces this relationship. The QTL on 1q21 may be a replication of one previously reported. Assortative mating for obesity confers a higher risk for obesity in the offspring generation and may therefore contribute to the obesity epidemic. Parental obesity concordance is a strong, easily identifiable genetic risk factor that should be considered in designing primary prevention programs.

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)0.002
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 score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGothenburg University Publications Electronic Archive (Gothenburg University)Same topicWater Quality Monitoring and AnalysisFrench-language works237,207