Abstract 18416: Discordance Between nonHDLc and Lipoprotein Particle Concentration (apoB and LDLp) in Relation to Future Coronary Events in Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: There remains equipoise as to which plasma lipid/lipoprotein marker most accurately reflects longitudinal risk of coronary heart disease (CHD) events. To compare differences in risk related to nonHDLc (atherogenic particle cholesterol) and LDL particle number (LDLp) or apoB (atherogenic particle number), we examined risk when these markers were discordant. Methods and Results: We divided 27,533 initially-healthy women in the Women’s Health Study (NCT00000479) into concordant/discordant groups based on median nonHDLc (154 mg/dL) and apoB (100 mg/dL) or 1 H NMR-measured LDLp (1,216 nmol/L). Discordance was defined as nonHDLc < median and the alternative measure ≥ median, or vice versa. We compared risks between concordant and discordant groups (using the concordant group as reference) with Cox proportional hazard models adjusted incrementally for: age; and randomization arm, hormone use, postmenopausal status, smoking, and hypertension (“minimally adjusted”); and diabetes, BMI, hsCRP, HDLc, triglycerides, and family history of CHD (“fully adjusted”). Although all 3 biomarkers were strongly correlated - nonHDLc and apoB (Spearman r=0.86, P<0.0001), nonHDLc and LDLp (r=0.77, P<0.0001), and apoB and LDLp (r=0.85, P<0.0001) - discordance between nonHDLc and apoB or LDLp occurred in 13.9% and 20.2% of women, respectively. A total of 1,246 CHD events occurred over median (max) 20.4 (21.7) years of follow-up (514,725 person-years). With nonHDLc < median (Fig. a), CHD risk was underestimated among women with discordant high apoB or LDLp: fully adjusted HR (95% CI) high apoB = 1.33 (1.04, 1.71); high LDLp = 1.27 (1.01, 1.61). Alternately, with nonHDLc ≥ median (Fig. b), CHD risk was overestimated among women with discordant low apoB or LDLp: fully adjusted HR [95% CI] low apoB = 0.74 (0.57, 0.96); low LDLp = 0.93 (0.76, 1.14). Conclusions: For women with discordant levels of nonHDLc with apoB or LDLp, CHD risk may be underestimated or overestimated with nonHDLc.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".