Effect of statins on oxidative stress and cognitive function in patients with cerebral atherosclerosis: results of a prospective cohort study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The widespread use of statins for cardiovascular complications prevention makes it important to study their effects on the body. There is still no unambiguous opinion regarding the effect of statins on cognitive functions (CF). Objective : to evaluate the effect of a 12-week course of statins on the parameters of oxidative stress and CF in patients with cerebral atherosclerosis (CA) and moderate cognitive impairment. Patients and methods . 106 patients aged 45–75 years with CA and vascular risks were included, they received stable therapy for 12 weeks, including antihypertensive, nootropic drugs, antiplatelet agents and statins with stable dose and combination of drugs. At baseline and after 12 weeks of treatment, parameters of oxidative stress using Fe2+-induced chemiluminescence and cognitive phenotype, using the MoCA test, including MoCA indices, were assessed in two groups of patients: treated with statins (group 1; n=34) and those who did not receive statins (group 2; n=72). Results and discussion . In patients of group 1, more pronounced manifestations of oxidative stress and lower initial values of CF indicators were revealed. The therapy made it possible to achieve an improvement in cognitive performance in all patients, but an improvement in oxidative performance was only in group 1. The positive effect of statins on CF was manifested as a significant increase in attention- (by 1.5 points versus 0.1 points; p<0.05) and memory- (by 0.9 points against 0.2 points; p<0.05) indicators; and on the oxidative status – an increase of the indicator of resistance of lipoproteins to lipid peroxidation (LPO) by 25.9 sec vs. 3.5 sec (p<0.05) and a decrease in the activity of LPO processes (-13.6 mV vs. 39.1 mV; p<0.05). Conclusion . The 3 month therapeutic course of statins in patients with CA and vascular risks helps to reduce the manifestations of oxidative stress and improve attention and mnestic function.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".