Abstract P414: Biomarkers of Very Long-chain Saturated Fatty Acids and Incident Coronary Heart Disease: Prospective Evidence From 15 Cohorts in the Fatty Acids and Outcomes Research Consortium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Biomarker levels of very long-chain saturated fatty acids (VLCSFAs) have been found to be favorably associated with cardiovascular risk factors including lower risk of diabetes and reduced triglycerides. Few studies have examined the association between VLCSFAs and coronary heart disease (CHD). Aims: To assess the association of circulating arachidic acid (20:0), behenic acid (22:0), and lignoceric acid (24:0) with incident total, fatal, and nonfatal CHD. Methods: We used data from the Fatty Acids and Outcomes Research Consortium consisting of 15 prospective cohorts worldwide which included adults (age≥18 years) who were free of cardiovascular disease and had blood measurements of 20:0, 22:0, and 24:0 at baseline. A study protocol with standardized definitions of exposures, disease outcomes, and covariates was developed, for which each cohort conducted individual participant-level analysis. Cohort-specific associations were pooled using inverse variance-weighted meta-analysis to calculate the overall relative risk (RR) per interquintile range (difference between the 90 th and 10 th percentiles) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Among 33,083 participants, 6,165 cases of total CHD were ascertained. The overall pooled RR and 95% CI were 0.96 (0.89, 1.02) for 20:0, 1.01 (0.92, 1.11) for 22:0, 0.94 (0.86, 1.02) for 24:0, and 0.96 (0.89, 1.04) for 20:0 + 22:0 + 24:0 ( Figure 1 ). However, we noted heterogeneity by lipid compartments, with significant inverse associations for higher 22:0 [0.77 (0.62, 0.96)], 24:0 [0.61 (0.49, 0.77)], and 20:0 + 22:0 + 24:0 [0.73 (0.60, 0.89)] in the total plasma/serum compartment but not in the phospholipid compartment. Similar associations were observed for fatal and nonfatal CHD and when using a random-effects model. Conclusion: Higher circulating VLCSFAs were not associated with total CHD in a global consortium of prospective studies. The finding of an inverse association with total CHD for VLCSFAs in the total plasma/serum compartment warrants further research.
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 | 0.024 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".