nominally significantp < 2.3 × 10 −10
All traits showed higher-than-expected overlap via binomial testing (CAC: 102 nominally significant in CAC GWAS/1074 nominally significant in our DGEA; CAD: 145/1077; cIMT: 98/1077; all p < 2.3 × 10 −10 ).
All traits showed higher-than-expected overlap via binomial testing (CAC: 102 nominally significant in CAC GWAS/1074 nominally significant in our DGEA; CAD: 145/1077; cIMT: 98/1077; all p < 2.3 × 10 −10 ).