Effects of High-Dose Statin Therapy on Cognitive Functions and Quality of Life in Very High Cardiovascular Risk Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim. To investigate the effects of intensive lipid-lowering therapy on cognitive functions and quality of life in patients (pts) with very high cardiovascular risk. Material and methods. In 93 pts (58 men, 63.2±9.5 years old with history of clinically evident cardiovascular disease and fasting low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) >1.8 mmol/l or non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) >2.6 mmol/l the mental status and quality of life were assessed before and after 6 months of therapy with atorvastatin 80 mg/day. The Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) scale and Questionnaire SF-36 (russian version) were used to evaluate cognitive functions and quality of life. Results. 59 (63%) pts had cognitive dysfunction (less than 26 scores by MoCA scale). We observed significant difference in cognitive status between pts >65 and <65 years (21.1±3.3 vs 25.6±1.8 points, p<0.05) and between pts with and without stroke (22.4±3.1 vs 24.7±2.78 points, p<0.05). Changes of cognitive function were insignificant in all groups. We observed improvement of mean scores in all sections of SF-36 except vitality: physical functioning (PF) from 57.3±26.7 to 62.9±23.4 points, role-physical functioning (RP) from 40.0±27.9 to 47.1±26.2, bodily pain (BP) from 58.9±30.1 to 70.3±25.4, general health (GH) from 51.9±13.6 to 57.4±14.1, social functioning (SF) from 62.5±23.1 to 70.3±25.4 points, role-emotional (RE) from 53.3±39.4 to 61.4±33.1, mental health (MH) from 66.4±15.1 to 71.3±18.2 points (p<0.05 for all trends). Values of PF, RP, GH and RE grew more in <65 years group. Conclusion. 63% of patients with high cardiovascular risk had cognitive impairment. No association between statin use and cognition was found. Intensive lipid-lowering therapy was association significant improvement of quality of life according to SF-36.
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 | 0.003 |
| 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".