MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981691995 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz747.0421

P822Statin treatment in symptomatic patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease reduces the risk of all-cause mortality

2019· article· en· W2981691995 on OpenAlexaff
Christine K. Kissel, Gang Chen, Michelle Fung, Stephen B. Wilton, Todd J. Anderson

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsLibin Cardiovascular Institute of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCoronary artery diseaseStatinAcute coronary syndromeCardiologyMedical prescriptionMortality rateStenosisAnginaCause of deathDiseaseMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Symptomatic patients with non-obstructive coronary artery disease (NOCAD; stenosis >0% <50%) have a worse prognosis and an increased risk for all-cause mortality compared with age-matched controls. Currently, treatment of these patients is empiric, and secondary preventive measures are less often implemented. The goal of the study was to examine whether statin prescription has an impact on all-cause mortality in symptomatic NOCAD patients, and which factors influence statin prescription in patients with NOCAD. Methods We examined 4039 symptomatic patients who presented either with stable angina (SA) or an acute coronary syndrome (ACS) who underwent coronary angiography; 1582 had angiographically normal coronary arteries, 2457 had minimal disease (NOCAD). The comparison group consisted of 2998 patients with stable obstructive CAD (stenosis ≥50%). Patients had at least one lipid panel tested between April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2014. We examined the rate of statin prescription amongst the groups, as well as predictors of all-cause mortality and statin treatment. Results Symptomatic patients with NOCAD are less likely to receive statin therapy (60.4%) compared to patients with obstructive CAD (87.3%). After one, three and five year(s), LDL levels in NOCAD patients are higher than in CAD patients (2.21±0.88mmol/l vs. 1.84mmol/l±0.77mmol/l after 1 year). Statin treatment was associated with a significantly lower risk of all-cause mortality in NOCAD (HR 0.64 (0.44–0.95)), as well as in CAD (HR 0.44 (0.31–0.62)), but not in patients with normal coronaries HR 0.55 (0.27–1.15)). Sex, age and the presence of other cardiovascular risk factors influenced the prescription of statin therapy in the first 5 years after initial diagnosis of NOCAD- older patients with diabetes and hypertension were more likely to receive statin therapy. Women received statin therapy to a lower percentage than men in the NOCAD group (year 1: men 62.9% vs, women 56.9%; p=0.003). No effect of cardiovascular risk factors, age or sex on statin prescription was seen in the CAD group or patients with normal coronaries. Conclusion Statin therapy reduces the risk of all-cause mortality in symptomatic patients with NOCAD. In spite of this benefit, patients with NOCAD, and especially women, are less likely to receive secondary-preventive statin therapy.

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 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)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health→French-language works237,207→