MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765610051 · doi:10.1373/clinchem.2017.279422

Imputation of Baseline LDL Cholesterol Concentration in Patients with Familial Hypercholesterolemia on Statins or Ezetimibe

2017· article· en· W2765610051 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle L. Ruel, Sumayah Aljenedil, Iman Sadri, Émilie de Varennes, Robert A. Hegele, Patrick Couture, Jean Bergeron, Éric Wanneh, Alexis Baass, Robert Dufour, Daniel Gaudet, Diane Brisson, Liam R. Brunham, Gordon A. Francis, Lubomira Cermakova, James M. Brophy, Arnold Ryomoto, G.B. John Mancini, Jacques Genest

Bibliographic record

VenueClinical Chemistry · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsProvidence Health Care Research InstituteSt. Paul's HospitalMontreal Clinical Research InstituteUniversity of British ColumbiaProvidence Health CareMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityWestern UniversityUniversité de MontréalRoyal Victoria Regional Health CentreUniversité LavalRoyal Victoria Hospital
FundersSanofiPfizerAmgen
KeywordsEzetimibeFamilial hypercholesterolemiaMedicinePCSK9Internal medicineApolipoprotein BLdl cholesterolCholesterolStatinPercentileGastroenterologyLDL receptorEndocrinologyLipoprotein

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract BACKGROUND Familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is the most frequent genetic disorder seen clinically and is characterized by increased LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) (>95th percentile), family history of increased LDL-C, premature atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in the patient or in first-degree relatives, presence of tendinous xanthomas or premature corneal arcus, or presence of a pathogenic mutation in the LDLR, PCSK9, or APOB genes. A diagnosis of FH has important clinical implications with respect to lifelong risk of ASCVD and requirement for intensive pharmacological therapy. The concentration of baseline LDL-C (untreated) is essential for the diagnosis of FH but is often not available because the individual is already on statin therapy. METHODS To validate a new algorithm to impute baseline LDL-C, we examined 1297 patients. The baseline LDL-C was compared with the imputed baseline obtained within 18 months of the initiation of therapy. We compared the percent reduction in LDL-C on treatment from baseline with the published percent reductions. RESULTS After eliminating individuals with missing data, nonstandard doses of statins, or medications other than statins or ezetimibe, we provide data on 951 patients. The mean ± SE baseline LDL-C was 243.0 (2.2) mg/dL [6.28 (0.06) mmol/L], and the mean ± SE imputed baseline LDL-C was 244.2 (2.6) mg/dL [6.31 (0.07) mmol/L] (P = 0.48). There was no difference in response according to the patient's sex or in percent reduction between observed and expected for individual doses or types of statin or ezetimibe. CONCLUSIONS We provide a validated estimation of baseline LDL-C for patients with FH that may help clinicians in making a diagnosis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.392

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.316 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations65
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClinical ChemistrySame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207