MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4366083411 · doi:10.1161/jaha.122.028310

High‐Intensity Statin Reduces the Risk of Mortality Among Chronic Liver Disease Patients With Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Population‐Based Cohort Study

2023· article· en· W4366083411 on OpenAlexaff
Sungho Bea, In‐Sun Oh, Ju Hwan Kim, Dong Hyun Sinn, Yoosoo Chang, Seungho Ryu, Ju‐Young Shin

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityJewish General Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineStatinMyocardial infarctionHazard ratioProportional hazards modelCardiologyStroke (engine)PopulationCohortConfidence interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background 2018 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology cholesterol guideline recommends statin in patients with chronic and/or stable liver disease for secondary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease yet remains equivocal on the adequate intensity of statin for patients with chronic liver disease (CLD). We aimed to assess the association between statin intensity and mortality among patients with CLD with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Methods and Results We conducted a population-based cohort study in South Korea. We assessed the risk of survival and clinical outcomes using inverse probability of treatment-weighted Cox proportional hazards regression. We also estimated the absolute risk difference between treatment groups based on the Poisson distribution. During an average of 2.35 person-years, 10 442 patients with CLD with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were identified. Among those patients, 5515 (52.8%) received high-intensity statin, and 4927 (47.2%) received low/moderate-intensity statin. High-intensity statin was associated with lower risk for all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [HR], 0.83 [95% CI, 0.75-0.92]), cardiovascular-cause mortality (HR, 0.85 [0.71-1.01]), liver-cause mortality (HR, 0.72 [0.54-0.97]) compared with low/moderate-intensity statin. Although both hospitalizations for recurrent myocardial infarction and stroke were shown to be increased among high-intensity statin users, effect estimate was homogeneous in the absolute scale (myocardial infarction: HR, 1.12 [1.04-1.19], risk difference, 7.57 [-0.69 to 15.84] per 1000 person-years; stroke: HR, 1.11 [0.97 to 1.27]; risk difference, -1.70 [-5.19 to 1.78]). Conclusions Among patients with CLD with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, high-intensity statin was significantly associated with a lower risk of mortality. These findings herein support the guidelines for statin use in patients with CLD while demonstrating potential benefit of optimal intensity use.

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)0.001
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations6
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart Association→Same topicLiver Disease Diagnosis and Treatment→French-language works237,207→