Differential expression of lipid peroxidation and total antioxidant status in Indian patients with cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Data from studies examining lipid peroxidation as a mechanism involved with hyperhomocysteinemia (HHcy)-induced vascular remodeling in patients with occlusive vascular disease have been contradictory. It has not yet been studied in Indians within the context of atherogenesis. Therefore, we measured the levels of homocysteine (Hcy), malondialdehyde (MDA) as a measure of lipid peroxides (LPOs), and total antioxidant status (TAS) in the serum of 167 patients with occlusive vascular disease [coronary artery disease (CAD) = 43; cerebrovascular disease (CVD) = 82; peripheral vascular disease (PVD) = 42]. Each of these groups was further divided into groups of individuals with or without HHcy. In the case of CAD and CVD, patients with HHcy had significantly higher LPOs than those without HHcy (p = 0.009, 0.001, respectively). TAS was significantly lower in CVD patients with HHcy than in those without (p = 0.014). In patients with CAD or CVD, Hcy directly correlated with LPOs (p = 0.002, 0.001, respectively). Lipid peroxidation is a significant mechanism in HHcy-induced vascular remodeling in CAD and CVD, but not in PVD, probably because it is not relevant in thrombosis (38 of 42 patients of PVD had deep-vein thrombosis). To explain the significantly lower TAS in CVD, we hypothesized that CVD patients present very early with grave symptoms, whereas CAD and PVD occur over a longer period of time. Therefore, when CVD presents, TAS is still overwhelmed by HHcy-induced oxidative stress. Hence, adjuvant therapy with antioxidants would benefit patients with CVD.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".