MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7127677975 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehaf784.717

Common genetic variants associated with characteristics and clinical outcomes of atrial fibrillation: from a large population based registry (FinnGen)

2025· article· en· W7127677975 on OpenAlexaff
R N Neff, M W Waseem, K V Vashistha, P C Chacko, Abhishek Maan

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGenome-wide association studyGenetic associationSingle-nucleotide polymorphismGenetic variantsGenetic variationPopulationDiseaseGenetic dataGenetic analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Atrial Fibrillation (AF) in younger patients without coexisting structural heart disease is believed to be mediated by genetic causes; however data on genetic associations from large registries are limited. Methods We obtained de-identified data from the FinnGen registry, which is a national census-based registry with available data on genetic variants from participants in Finland. Imputed genetic variants from microarray data including common genetic variants across cases and controls were analyzed by GWAS, and further fine-mapping of causal SNPs to gene-level, miRNA-level, and pathway-level association was performed. The diagnosis of AF was derived from the International Classification of Disease-10 (ICD) codes. Results The total sample size in Finn-Gen registry was 500,348 participants, amongst those 56.4% were females. The median age of AF-onset in females was 71.8 vs. 68.7 years in males. Upon analysis of participants with available genetic data, there were a total of 21,323,076 imputed genetic variants across 63,532 cases with AF and 252,810 controls. There were a total of 7,619 significant SNPs in GWAS which mapped to 183 enriched unique loci across 142 genes, including most strongly to loci in chromosomes 16 (near ZFHX3, 989 SNPs), 1 (KCND3, KCCN3, 759 SNPs), 7 (CAV1, 119 SNPs), and chromosome 4 (PITX2, LINC01438, 111 SNPs) (Figure 1). Additional gene-level analysis implicated 313 genes including both previously characterized and novel markers such as SCN5A, TBX5, TTN, and ELOVL6. Pathway-level association of significant genes were consistent with AF-related biological processes such as cardiac conduction within His-Purkinje cells, action potential generation, repolarization, actin-mediated cell contraction, potassium channel activity, and hyperaldosteronism. Two micro-RNA hsa-miR-204 and hsa-miR-211 were identified as potential key regulators of AF-associated genes from the study. After excluding the participants who had structural heart disease, the highest degree of genetic colocalization (as assessed by "Colocalization hits") was evident for the coexisting diagnosis of hypertension (HTN), cardioembolic stroke. During the follow-up of 21 years, between 01/1998 and 12/2019; AF diagnosis was associated with an increased risk of mortality in both men and women. The effect size of AF diagnosis and overall mortality was stronger in men (adjusted HR of 2.01, 95% CI: 1.84-2.19, p < 0.001) in comparison with women (adjusted HR of 1.87, 95% CI: 1.72-2.02, p < 0.001). Conclusions In a large epidemiological database (FinnGen), the diagnosis of atrial fibrillation was associated with a polygenic pattern of association across several genes including ZFHX3, KCND3, CAV1, PITX2, SCN5A, and TTN and biological processes. Over a relatively longer period of follow up of 21 years, the diagnosis of AF was associated with an increased risk of mortality in both men and women.Manhattan plot of AF-GWAS

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.067
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.295 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicAtrial Fibrillation Management and Outcomes→French-language works237,207→