Bellazzi, Riccardo

Sharing research code in an open access version-controlled repository offers significant benefits for both science as a whole and for individual researchers. In this article, we focus on this practice, which is fully aligned with the NIH’s Gold Standard Science (GSS) program as well as FAIR (findable, accessible, interoperable, reusable) and TRUST (transparency, responsibility, user focus, sustainability, technology) principles. Gold Standard Science supports open science by emphasizing transparency, reproducibility, and the use of best practices that enable others to verify and extend research. Pairing a research article’s cited data snapshot with a versioned, environment-specific code release, deposited in a companion code repository, ensures that, upon submission to a medical journal, readers and reviewers can directly verify results. An executable and updatable companion code repository complements, rather than replaces, established research data repositories. When code underlying medical research results is made openly available, then other scientists can inspect, run, and validate analyses. These activities enhance reproducibility, which is a core aim of GSS. Shared code also facilitates collaborative innovation by allowing researchers to extend the utility of the code to new datasets and applications. For researchers, code sharing can increase visibility, credibility, and citation impact. Demonstrating transparency through shared executable and updatable code builds trust with journal readers, peer reviewers, funders, and peers. Shared code in an open access repository signals adherence to high standards of scientific integrity and attracts opportunities for collaboration. A researcher who shares code receives recognition as a leader in reproducible, trustworthy research consistent with NIH’s GSS principles.

Background: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) affects >200 million people worldwide and is associated with high mortality and morbidity. We sought to identify genomic variants associated with PAD overall and in the contexts of diabetes and smoking status. Methods: We identified genetic variants associated with PAD and then meta-analyzed with published summary statistics from the Million Veterans Program and UK Biobank to replicate their findings. Next, we ran stratified genome-wide association analysis in ever smokers, never smokers, individuals with diabetes, and individuals with no history of diabetes and corresponding interaction analyses, to identify variants that modify the risk of PAD by diabetic or smoking status. Results: We identified 5 genome-wide significant ( P association ≤5×10 −8 ) associations with PAD in 449 548 (N cases =12 086) individuals of European ancestry near LPA (lipoprotein [a]), CDKN2BAS1 (CDKN2B antisense RNA 1), SH2B3 (SH2B adaptor protein 3) - PTPN11 (protein tyrosine phosphatase non-receptor type 11), HDAC9 (histone deacetylase 9), and CHRNA3 (cholinergic receptor nicotinic alpha 3 subunit ) loci (which overlapped previously reported associations). Meta-analysis with variants previously associated with PAD showed that 18 of 19 published variants remained genome-wide significant. In individuals with diabetes, rs116405693 at the CCSER1 (coiled-coil serine rich protein 1 ) locus was associated with PAD (odds ratio [95% CI], 1.51 [1.32–1.74], P diabetes =2.5×10 −9 , P interactionwithdiabetes =5.3×10 −7 ). Furthermore, in smokers, rs12910984 at the CHRNA3 locus was associated with PAD (odds ratio [95% CI], 1.15 [1.11–1.19], P smokers =9.3×10 −10 , P interactionwithsmoking =3.9×10 −5 ). Conclusions: Our analyses confirm the published genetic associations with PAD and identify novel variants that may influence susceptibility to PAD in the context of diabetes or smoking status.