MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 17252: High Low-density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Levels are Common Among High-risk Patients One Year After Initiating Statin Therapy: Results of a Large Canadian Cohort Study

2015· article· en· W4254178737 on OpenAlexaffabout
Dominic Mitchell, Mohdhar Habib, L. Pericleous, Robert J. Petrella

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsWestern UniversityAmgen (Canada)Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDyslipidemiaInternal medicineStatinCohortRisk factorDiabetes mellitusCohort studyRetrospective cohort studyIncidence (geometry)ObesityEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: Dyslipidemia is an important modifiable risk factor for CVD, yet studies show that dyslipidemia is undertreated in Canada. To evaluate the management of dyslipidemia in patients at high risk for CVD (including heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia [HeFH] and statin intolerant [SI]), we assessed lipid lowering treatment patterns, LDL-C target achievement, prevalence of CV risk factors, and the incidence of CV events, in a large Canadian cohort. Methods: We retrospectively analysed data from an open cohort of patients initiating statin therapy between 2004 and 2012 using the Southwestern Ontario primary care practice database. Inclusion criteria were diagnosis of dyslipidemia, ≥ 1 statin prescription, and ≥ 2 years statin-free baseline data. Patients were stratified into 3 CV risk levels. Here, we report the results of the high-risk patient group. Results: In a cohort of 41 733 patients who initiated statin therapy, we identified 14 607 (35%) high-risk patients. At baseline, the mean (SD) age was 54 (7) years, 51% were male, and LDL-C was 3.07 (0.41) mmol/L. On average, patients had 3 CV risk factors. Age (66% male > 45 y; 90% female > 55 y), obesity (36%, BMI > 27 kg/m 2 ), high-risk hypertension (31%), and diabetes (17%) were identified as the most important risk factors. After 1-year follow-up, 25% (n=3652) of patients who initiated statin therapy failed to reach target LDL-C. Among high-risk patients with SI (n=1294), 84% (n=1089) discontinued therapy or had a dose decrease. Six months after SI diagnosis, 51% (n=656) did not meet the LDL-C target; 74% (n=484) of these patients had their statin dose decreased or stopped or were treated with a non-statin. In the prevalent cohort (new and follow-up patients in 2012), 52% (n=64) of HeFH patients were treated for secondary prevention (ie, had experienced a prior CV event) and had LDL-C > 2.59 mmol/L, and among high-risk SI patients with LDL-C > 2.59 mmol/L, 65% (n=2304) were diagnosed with coronary heart disease and 32% (n=1132) were treated for secondary prevention. Conclusions: Despite widespread statin use, a significant therapeutic need remains for CV high-risk patients who fail to reach the recommended LDL-C target.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.232 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health→French-language works237,207→