Development and Validation of Apolipoprotein AI-Associated Lipoprotein Proteome Panel for the Prediction of Cholesterol Efflux Capacity and Coronary Artery Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract BACKGROUND Cholesterol efflux capacity (CEC) is a measure of HDL function that, in cell-based studies, has demonstrated an inverse association with cardiovascular disease. The cell-based measure of CEC is complex and low-throughput. We hypothesized that assessment of the lipoprotein proteome would allow for precise, high-throughput CEC prediction. METHODS After isolating lipoprotein particles from serum, we used LC-MS/MS to quantify 21 lipoprotein-associated proteins. A bioinformatic pipeline was used to identify proteins with univariate correlation to cell-based CEC measurements and generate a multivariate algorithm for CEC prediction (pCE). Using logistic regression, protein coefficients in the pCE model were reweighted to yield a new algorithm predicting coronary artery disease (pCAD). RESULTS Discovery using targeted LC-MS/MS analysis of 105 training and test samples yielded a pCE model comprising 5 proteins (Spearman r = 0.86). Evaluation of pCE in a case–control study of 231 specimens from healthy individuals and patients with coronary artery disease revealed lower pCE in cases (P = 0.03). Derived within this same study, the pCAD model significantly improved classification (P < 0.0001). Following analytical validation of the multiplexed proteomic method, we conducted a case–control study of myocardial infarction in 137 postmenopausal women that confirmed significant separation of specimen cohorts in both the pCE (P = 0.015) and pCAD (P = 0.001) models. CONCLUSIONS Development of a proteomic pCE provides a reproducible high-throughput alternative to traditional cell-based CEC assays. The pCAD model improves stratification of case and control cohorts and, with further studies to establish clinical validity, presents a new opportunity for the assessment of cardiovascular health.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".