Protein Biomarkers and Cardiovascular Outcomes in People With Type 2 Diabetes and Acute Coronary Syndrome: The ELIXA Biomarker Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To use protein biomarkers to identify people with type 2 diabetes at high risk of cardiovascular outcomes and death. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Biobanked serum from 4,957 ELIXA (Evaluation of Lixisenatide in Acute Coronary Syndrome) trial participants was analyzed. Forward-selection Cox models identified independent protein risk factors for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and death that were compared with a previously validated biomarker panel. RESULTS: NT-proBNP and osteoprotegerin predicted both outcomes. In addition, trefoil factor 3 predicted MACE, and angiopoietin-2 predicted death (C = 0.70 and 0.79, respectively, compared with 0.63 and 0.66 for clinical variables alone). These proteins had all previously been identified and validated. Notably, C statistics for just NT-proBNP plus clinical risk factors were 0.69 and 0.78 for MACE and death, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: NT-proBNP and other proteins independently predict cardiovascular outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes following acute coronary syndrome. Adding other biomarkers only marginally increased NT-proBNP's prognostic value.
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 | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".