MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2894856947 · doi:10.1161/circ.137.suppl_1.048

Abstract 048: Circulating Branched-Chain Amino Acids and Incident Cardiovascular Disease in a Prospective Cohort of US Women

2018· article· en· W2894856947 on OpenAlexaff
Deirdre K. Tobias, Patrick R. Lawler, Paulo H. N. Harada, Olga Demler, Paul M. Ridker, JoAnn E. Manson, Susan Cheng, Samia Mora

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsHeart and Stroke FoundationUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineHazard ratioProspective cohort studyProportional hazards modelMyocardial infarctionDiabetes mellitusBody mass indexCardiologyConfidence intervalCohortType 2 diabetesEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Recent metabolomics studies have identified circulating levels of branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs; isoleucine, leucine, valine) as strong predictors of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Whether BCAAs are implicated in cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk has not been established. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that higher baseline levels of plasma BCAAs are associated with an elevated risk of incident CVD events, and evaluated whether this relationship was dependent on an intermediate diagnosis of T2D. Methods: Participants enrolled in the Women’s Health Study prospective cohort were eligible if they did not report CVD or cancer prior to baseline blood collection (N=27,172, mean baseline age=54.7 years). Plasma BCAA metabolites were measured via proton NMR spectroscopy, ln-transformed, and standardized for analysis. We used multivariable Cox proportional regression models to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) per standard deviation (SD) of total and individual BCAAs with incident CVD (myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, coronary revascularization). Results: 1,917 confirmed CVD events occurred over follow-up (mean 18.6 years). In models adjusted for age, body mass index, smoking status, diet quality, physical activity, and other established CVD risk factors, total BCAAs were positively associated with CVD (per SD, HR=1.13, CI=1.08 to 1.19), comparable in magnitude to the association of LDL cholesterol with CVD (per SD, HR=1.15, CI=1.09 to 1.21). In particular, BCAAs were associated with coronary events (MI: HR=1.21, CI=1.10 to 1.33; revascularization: HR=1.15, CI=1.07 to 1.23), but not with stroke (HR=1.07, CI=0.98 to 1.15). The BCAA-CVD relationship was notably greater (p-interaction=0.008) among participants who developed T2D prior to a CVD event (HR=1.25, CI=1.13 to 1.39), vs. women without T2D (HR=1.07, CI=1.01 to 1.13). Isoleucine, leucine, and valine were each associated with CVD (p<0.05). Further adjusting for biomarkers of potential intermediates, HbA1c, lipids, and a lipoprotein-based insulin resistance score entirely eliminated the associations of BCAAs with CVD. Conclusions: Circulating plasma BCAAs were positively associated with long-term incident CVD in a cohort of US women, in particular among women who developed T2D prior to a CVD event. Impaired BCAA metabolism may represent a shared pathway of insulin resistance that links the risks of T2D 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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Observationalhigh
models agreeAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiovascular Health and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→