P3422Contrasting the risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events among individuals with lower extremity peripheral artery disease, coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background Having more vascular conditions, including coronary heart disease (CHD), cerebrovascular disease and lower extremity artery disease (LEAD), may increase the risk for atherosclerosis cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) events. Specific vascular conditions may increase the ASCVD event rate more than others. Purpose To compare the risk for future ASCVD events associated with the number and type of vascular conditions among adults with a history of CHD, cerebrovascular disease and/or LEAD. Methods We analyzed data from US adults ≥19 years of age with commercial or Medicare health insurance who had a history of CHD, cerebrovascular disease and/or LEAD as of December 31, 2014 (N=901,391). Individuals were followed through December 31, 2016 (median follow-up: 2 years) for ASCVD events, including myocardial infarction, coronary revascularization, stroke, carotid revascularization and lower extremity amputation or revascularization. Results Among individuals included in the current analysis (mean age 63 years, 45% female), 70%, 23% and 7% had 1, 2 and 3 vascular conditions, respectively. After adjustment for sociodemographic and cardiovascular risk factors, the hazard ratio for ASCVD among individuals with 2 and 3 versus 1 vascular conditions was 1.88 (1.85, 1.92) and 2.93 (2.86, 3.00), respectively. Among individuals with 1 vascular condition, the rate of ASCVD events per 1,000 person-years was 46.5 (95% CI 44.1, 49.0), 29.6 (95% CI 29.0, 30.1) and 19.9 (95% CI 19.2, 20.8) for those with LEAD, CHD and cerebrovascular disease, respectively. The multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) for ASCVD events comparing individuals with LEAD only and CHD only versus those with cerebrovascular disease only was 1.84 (1.77, 1.92) and 1.12 (1.08, 1.16), respectively. Among individuals with 2 vascular conditions, the ASCVD event rate per 1,000 person-years was higher in those with LEAD and CHD (122.0, 95% CI 112.5, 132.2) and with LEAD and cerebrovascular disease (92.4, 95% CI 79.9, 106.4), versus those with CHD and cerebrovascular disease (59.1, 95% CI 54.8, 63.6). The multivariable-adjusted hazard ratio (95% CI) comparing individuals with LEAD and CHD and those with LEAD and cerebrovascular disease versus those with CHD and cerebrovascular disease was 1.48 (1.44, 1.53) and 1.49 (1.41, 1.58), respectively. Conclusion Among adults with vascular disease, having LEAD confers a higher risk for future ASCVD events than CHD or cerebrovascular disease and this group may benefit from more intensive risk reduction treatment. Acknowledgement/Funding Amgen Inc.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".