Inflammation and Hypertension in Rheumatoid Arthritis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Hypertension (HTN), a common modifiable cardiovascular risk factor, is more common in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA), but the underlying mechanisms are unclear. We examined the hypothesis that mediators of inflammation and markers of cardiovascular risk are associated with HTN in RA. METHODS: We compared measures of inflammation [serum C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-α), interleukin 6 (IL-6), homocysteine, and leptin concentrations] and insulin resistance [homeostasis model assessment index (HOMA)] in RA patients with (n = 90) and without HTN (n = 79). HTN was defined as blood pressure ≥ 140/90 mm Hg or treatment with antihypertensive therapy. The independent association of markers of interest with HTN was examined using multivariable logistic regression. RESULTS: Patients with HTN were significantly older and had longer disease duration than those without HTN (both p < 0.001). Concentrations of homocysteine [11.1 (8.5-13.5) μmol/l vs 9.3 (7.8-11.0) μmol/l] were significantly higher in patients with HTN (p < 0.001). After adjustment for age, sex, race, smoking, body mass index, and corticosteroid and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAID) use, increased concentrations of homocysteine (OR 2.9, 95% CI: 1.5-5.5, p = 0.001), and leptin (OR 2.0, 95% CI: 1.0-3.8, p = 0.046) were significantly associated with HTN, but the 28-joint Disease Activity Score, IL-6, CRP, TNF-α, and HOMA index were not (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: HTN in patients with RA is not associated with generalized systemic inflammation or insulin resistance, but is associated with increasing concentrations of homocysteine and leptin. The pathogenesis of HTN in RA may involve pathways more regularly associated with fat and vascular homeostasis.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".