Effect of an Aggressive Lipid-Lowering Strategy on Progression of Atherosclerosis in the Left Main Coronary Artery From Patients in the Post Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Post Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Trial, designed to compare the effects of two lipid-lowering regimens and low-dose anticoagulation versus placebo on progression of atherosclerosis in saphenous vein grafts of patients who had had CABG surgery, demonstrated that aggressive lowering of LDL cholesterol levels to a mean yearly cholesterol level from 93 to 97 mg/dL compared with a moderate reduction to a level of 132 to 136 mg/dL decreased the progression of atherosclerosis in saphenous vein grafts. Low-dose anticoagulation did not affect progression. This secondary analysis tested the hypothesis that a similar decrease in progression of atherosclerosis would also be present in native coronary arteries as measured in the left main coronary artery (LMCA). METHODS AND RESULTS: A sample of 402 patients was randomly selected from 1102 patients who had baseline and follow-up views of the LMCA suitable for analysis. Patients treated with the aggressive lipid-lowering strategy had less progression of atherosclerosis in the LMCA as measured by changes in minimum (P=0.0003) lumen diameter or the maximum percent stenosis (P=0.001), or the presence of substantial progression (P=0.008), or vascular occlusion (P=0.005) when compared with the moderate strategy. CONCLUSIONS: A strategy of aggressive lipid lowering results in significantly less atherosclerosis progression than a moderate approach in LMCAs.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".