Dyslipidemia of Mothers With Familial Hypercholesterolemia Deteriorates Lipids in Adult Offspring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: It is unknown whether elevated maternal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels lead to dyslipidemia in the offspring. Because this could have important consequences for cardiovascular prevention in mother and child, we explored the relationship between maternal familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) and lipids in adult offspring. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a large cohort of both Dutch and Canadian origin, we compared lipid profiles between patients, aged 18 to 85 years, who inherited FH maternally (n=1069) and those who inherited FH paternally (n=1270). This relationship was evaluated using multivariate regression analyses. Levels of total cholesterol (TC), LDL-C, and apolipoprotein B 100 (ApoB100) were significantly elevated in patients who inherited FH maternally compared with patients who inherited FH paternally (adjusted differences in TC: 0.156 mmol/L, P=0.037; LDL-C: 0.187 mmol/L, P=0.012; ApoB: 0.064 g/L, P=0.022). CONCLUSIONS: Our data show that maternal hereditary hypercholesterolemia slightly increases TC, LDL-C, and ApoB levels in their offspring later in life. Although the molecular mechanisms underlying these observations still require elucidation, our data suggest that maternal hypercholesterolemia during pregnancy may program lipid metabolism to a certain extent in the fetus.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".