Importance of the lipid‐related pathways in the association between statins, mortality, and cardiovascular disease risk: The Multi‐Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
PURPOSE: Estimating how much of the impact of statins on coronary heart diseases (CHD), cardiovascular disease (CVD), and mortality risk is attributable to their effect on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL), and triglycerides. METHODS: A semi-parametric g-formula estimator together with data from the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (a prospective multi-center cohort study) was utilized to perform a mediation analysis. A total of 5280 participants, men and women of various race/ethnicities from multiple sites across the United States, were considered in the current study. RESULTS: The adherence adjusted total relative risk reduction (RRR) estimate (95% confidence interval) of statins on CHD was 14% (-16%, 37%), and the indirect component through LDL was 23% (-4%, 58%). For CVD, the total RRR was 23% (2%, 40%), and the indirect component through LDL was 5% (-13%, 25%). The total RRR of mortality was 18% (-1%, 35%), and the indirect component through LDL was -4% (-17%, 12%). The estimated indirect components through HDL and triglycerides were close to zero with narrow confidence intervals for all 3 outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The estimated effect of statins on mortality, CVD, and CHD appeared to be independent of their estimated effect on HDL and triglycerides. Our study provides evidence that the preventive effect of statins on CHD could be attributed in large part to their effect on LDL. Our g-formula estimator is a promising approach to elucidate pathways, even if it is hard to make firm conclusions for the LDL pathway on mortality and CVD.
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 | 0.014 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".