MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283011568 · doi:10.1161/circresaha.122.320877

Interleukin-6 Predicts Carotid Plaque Severity, Vulnerability, and Progression

2022· article· en· W4283011568 on OpenAlexaff
Joseph Kamtchum‐Tatuene, Luca Saba, Mirjam R. Heldner, Michiel H.F. Poorthuis, Gert J. de Borst, Tatjana Rundek, Stavros K. Kakkos, Seemant Chaturvedi, Raffi Topakian, Joseph F. Polak, Glen C. Jickling

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Research · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAtherosclerosis and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaWomen and Children’s Health Research Institute
FundersNational Institute on Minority Health and Health DisparitiesNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesNational Institute of Neurological Disorders and StrokeNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institute on Aging
KeywordsCardiologyMedicineInternal medicineVulnerability (computing)Vulnerable plaque

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: IL-6 (interleukin-6) has important roles in atherosclerosis pathophysiology. To determine if anti-IL-6 therapy warrants evaluation as an adjuvant stroke prevention strategy in patients with carotid atherosclerosis, we tested whether circulating IL-6 levels predict carotid plaque severity, vulnerability, and progression in the prospective population-based CHS (Cardiovascular Health Study). Methods: Duplex carotid ultrasound was performed at baseline and 5 years. Baseline plaque severity was scored 0 to 5 based on North American Symptomatic Carotid Endarterectomy Trial grade of stenosis. Plaque vulnerability at baseline was the presence of markedly irregular, ulcerated, or echolucent plaques. Plaque progression at 5 years was a ≥1 point increase in stenosis severity. The relationship of baseline plasma IL-6 levels with plaque characteristics was modeled using multivariable linear (severity) or logistic (vulnerability and progression) regression. Risk factors of atherosclerosis were included as independent variables. Stepwise backward elimination was used with P >0.05 for variable removal. To assess model stability, we computed the E -value or minimum strength of association (odds ratio scale) that unmeasured confounders must have with log IL-6 and the outcome to suppress the association. We performed internal validation with 100 bootstrap samples. Results: There were 4334 participants with complete data (58.9% women, mean age: 72.7±5.1 years), including 1267 (29.2%) with vulnerable plaque and 1474 (34.0%) with plaque progression. Log IL-6 predicted plaque severity (β=0.09, P =1.3×10 −3 ), vulnerability (OR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.05–1.40]; P =7.4×10 −3 , E -value=1.71), and progression (OR, 1.44 [95% CI, 1.23-1.69], P =9.1×10 −6 , E -value 2.24). In participants with >50% predicted probability of progression, mean log IL-6 was 0.54 corresponding to 2.0 pg/mL. Dichotomizing IL-6 levels did not affect the performance of prediction models. Conclusions: Circulating IL-6 predicts carotid plaque severity, vulnerability, and progression. The 2.0 pg/mL cutoff could facilitate the selection of individuals that would benefit from anti-IL-6 drugs for stroke prevention.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.289 · 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.

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

Citations60
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation ResearchSame topicAtherosclerosis and Cardiovascular DiseasesFrench-language works237,207