MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112952992 · doi:10.14740/cr1180

Association Between the Level of Low-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol and Coronary Atherosclerosis in Patients Who Have Undergone Coronary Computed Tomography Angiography

2020· article· en· W3112952992 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hiroko Inoue, Yuhei Shiga, Kohei Tashiro, Yuto Kawahira, Yasunori Suematsu, Yoshiaki Idemoto, Kanako Tano, Takashi Kuwano, Makoto Sugihara, Hiroaki Nishikawa, Yousuke Katsuda, Shin‐ichiro Miura

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFukuoka University
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary angiographyCoronary atherosclerosisComputed tomographyComputed tomography angiographyRadiologyAngiographyCoronary artery diseaseMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Although the Japan Atherosclerosis Society Guidelines 2017 recommend lower levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C, < 70 mg/dL or ≤ 100 mg/dL) to prevent secondary cardiovascular events, we cannot conclude that a low level of LDL-C prevents primary cardiovascular events in patients with suspected coronary artery disease (CAD). METHODS: We registered 1,016 patients who were clinically suspected to have CAD and who underwent coronary computed tomography angiography (CCTA) for screening of coronary atherosclerosis. We excluded 350 patients who were receiving anti-lipidemic therapies and finally analyzed 666 patients. The patients were divided into three groups according to the LDL-C level: < 70 mg/dL (n = 25, Low LDL-C), 70 - 99 mg/dL (n = 141, Middle LDL-C), and ≥ 100 mg/dL (n = 500, High LDL-C). A ≥ 50% coronary stenosis was initially diagnosed as CAD, and the number of significantly stenosed coronary vessels (VD), Gensini score and coronary artery calcification (CAC) score were quantified. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, rates of hypertension, hemoglobin A1c, blood sugar or systolic blood pressure among the Low, Middle and High LDL-C groups. On the other hand, there were significant differences in rates of males, smoking, dyslipidemia and diabetes, diastolic blood pressure and triglyceride among the groups. The prevalence of CAD values in the Low, Middle and High LDL-C groups were similar, at 52%, 47%, and 46%, respectively. In addition, there were no significant differences in the number of VD, Gensini score or CAC score among the Low LDL-C, Middle LDL-C and High LDL-C groups. CONCLUSIONS: We showed that the level of LDL-C was not associated with the presence or severity of CAD, which indicates that we need to screen by CCTA to prevent primary coronary events even if patients without anti-lipidemic therapies show low levels of LDL-C.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.563

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.096
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology ResearchSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207