Relation of red blood cell distribution width to risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, death, and effect of alirocumab after acute coronary syndromes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Elevated red blood cell distribution width (RDW) is associated with increased risk for major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) and death in patients with cardiovascular disease. The ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial compared alirocumab with placebo in 18,924 patients with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS) and elevated atherogenic lipoproteins despite optimized statin treatment. This post hoc analysis determined whether RDW independently predicts risk of MACE and death in patients after recent ACS, whether RDW influences MACE reduction with alirocumab, and whether alirocumab treatment affects RDW. Associations of baseline RDW with risk of MACE and death were analyzed in the placebo group in adjusted proportional hazards models. Interactions of RDW and treatment on the risk of MACE and death were evaluated. An increasing quartile of RDW was associated with characteristics that predicted risk of MACE and death including age, hypertension, diabetes, atherosclerotic conditions and events, revascularizations, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein. After adjusting for baseline characteristics associated with the risk of MACE or death, baseline RDW remained independently associated with the risk of MACE and death in the placebo group (hazard ratios [95% confidence intervals] 1.08 [1.02-1.15] and 1.13 [1.03-1.24] per 1% increase of RDW, respectively, both p <0.001). There was no interaction of RDW and treatment on MACE or death, nor did alirocumab affect RDW. RDW was associated with an increased risk of MACE and death, independent of established risk factors.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".