Circulating Progenitor Cells and Cognitive Impairment in Men and Women with Coronary Artery Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Circulating progenitor cells (CPC) have been associated with memory function and cognitive impairment in healthy adults. However, it is unclear whether such associations also exist in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD). OBJECTIVE: To assess the association between CPCs and memory performance among individuals with CAD. METHODS: We assessed cognitive function in 509 patients with CAD using the verbal and visual Memory subtests of the Wechsler memory scale-IV and the Trail Making Test parts A and B. CPCs were enumerated with flow cytometry as CD45med/CD34+ blood mononuclear cells, those co-expressing other epitopes representing populations enriched for hematopoietic and endothelial progenitors. RESULTS: After adjusting for demographic and cardiovascular risk factors, lower number of endothelial progenitor cell counts were independently associated with lower visual and verbal memory scores (p for all < 0.05). There was a significant interaction in the magnitude of this association with race (p < 0.01), such that the association of verbal memory scores with endothelial progenitor subsets was present in Black but not in non-Black participants. No associations were present with the hematopoietic progenitor-enriched cells or with the Trail Making Tests. CONCLUSION: Lower numbers of circulating endothelial progenitor cells are associated with cognitive impairment in patients with CAD, suggesting a protective effect of repair/regeneration processes in the maintenance of cognitive status. Impairment of verbal memory function was more strongly associated with lower CPC counts in Black compared to non-Black participants with CAD. Whether strategies designed to improve regenerative capacity will improve cognition needs further study.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".