Hyperhomocysteinemia and transplant coronary artery disease in cardiac transplant recipients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In cardiac transplant recipients, long-term survival may be limited by transplant coronary artery disease (TxCAD). Hyperhomocysteinemia (Hhcy) has been associated with vascular disease and is common in transplant recipients. The objective of this study was to determine the relationship between fasting homocysteine (Hcy) concentrations and TxCAD in a cohort of cardiac transplant recipients. METHODS: Forty-eight patients more than 5 yr after transplant were recruited from a cohort of 72 consecutive patients with in-depth analysis of homocysteine levels from the Cardiac Transplant Clinic. Early morning fasting blood was obtained, and the plasma separated and frozen within 30 min. Hcy concentrations were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with pulsed integrated amperometry. Coronary angiograms were reviewed in a blinded fashion. TxCAD was diagnosed, using the most recent angiogram, when a >25% lesion was present anywhere in the coronary tree. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients transplanted between 1985 and 1994 were studied. The mean Hcy concentration for the cohort was 23.5+/-5.0 micromol/L, all patients had homocysteine levels above the upper range of normal (5-15 micromol/L). Hcy concentrations were significantly higher in patients with angiographic evidence of TxCAD: 25.0+/-5.9 vs. 21.9+/-3.4 micromol/L, p=0.03. This effect persisted when covariates were taken into account using logistic regression analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Hhcy is associated with TxCAD. Prospective studies are required to confirm this association and to assess the efficacy of Hcy-lowering therapy in this patient population.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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) | 0.002 | 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".