Decreased plasma apolipoprotein AIV levels in patients with acute coronary syndrome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the relationship between apolipoprotein A-IV (apoA-IV) plasma concentrations and acute coronary syndrome (ACS). METHODS: Plasma apoA-IV concentrations were measured in 115 patients with different types of ACS and in 68 gender- and age-matched control subjects using Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA) kits. The clinical data were collected by an internist, who was blinded to plasma apoA-IV concentrations. RESULTS: Plasma apoA-IV levels in ACS patients were significantly decreased compared to the levels in control subjects (437.0±157.5 μg/mL vs. 590.2±183.7 μg/mL, P<0.001). An statistically significant decreasing trend of plasma apoA-IV levels from the control subjects, to patients with unstable angina pectoris (UAP) (457.3±152.9 μg/mL), to patients with acute myocardial infarction (AMI) (311.7±127.8 μg/mL), was observed. Moreover, plasma apoA-IV level was negatively associated with New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class. NYHA class II (467.2±142.1 μg/mL, P<0.001) and class III/IV (368.1±170.8 μg/mL, P<0.001) patients had statistically decreased levels of plasma apoA-IV when compared to the control subjects. A stepwise multivariate regression analysis identified types of ACS, NYHA classes, and plasma fibrinogen levels as the most important determinants of plasma apoA-IV levels in ACS patients. CONCLUSIONS: Low plasma apoA-IV levels are associated with ACS, and plasma apoA-IV levels may be a potential treatment target for ACS patients.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".