MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386100303 · doi:10.1007/s40256-023-00604-6

Cognitive Function with PCSK9 Inhibitors: A 24-Month Follow-Up Observational Prospective Study in the Real World—MEMOGAL Study

2023· article· en· W4386100303 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
José Seijas‐Amigo, Maria José Mauriz-Montero, Pedro Suárez‐Artime, Mónica Gayoso‐Rey, Ana Estany-Gestal, Antonia Casas-Martínez, Lara González-Freire, Ana Rodriguez-Vazquez, Natalia Pérez-Rodríguez, Laura Villaverde-Piñeiro, Concepción Castro-Rubinos, Esther Espino-Faisán, Moisés Rodríguez‐Mañero, Alberto Cordero, José Ramón González‐Juanatey, Adrián Paz-Couce, Diego Rodríguez‐Penas, Begoña Cardeso-Paredes, Ana Seoane‐Blanco, María Moure‐González, Rita Soler-Martín, Luis Margusino‐Framiñán, Ana Suarez-Rodriguez, Marisol Rodríguez-Cobos, J Rojo-Valdés, Irene Zarra‐Ferro, Karina Lorenzo‐Lorenzo, Cristina Casanova‐Martínez, Carlos Crespo-Diz, María Dominguez-Guerra, María Elena González-Pereira, María Anido-García, Iveth Michelle Tajes-Gonzalez, Héctor Mozo-Peñalver, Alicia Silva-Lopez, J. L. Rodríguez-Sánchez, María Jesús García-Verde

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Cardiovascular Drugs · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversidade de Santiago de CompostelaCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red Enfermedades CardiovascularesInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de CompostelaFundación Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria de Santiago de Compostela
KeywordsAlirocumabEvolocumabMedicinePCSK9Internal medicineObservational studyCognitionCognitive declineCholesterolLipoproteinDementiaLDL receptorPsychiatryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: The cognitive safety of monoclonal antibody proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors (PCSK9i) has been established in clinical trials, but not yet in real-world observational studies. We assessed the cognitive function in patients initiating PCSK9i, and differences in cognitive function domains, to analyze subgroups by the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) achieved, and differences between alirocumab and evolocumab. METHODS: This has a multicenter, quasi-experimental design carried out in 12 Spanish hospitals from May 2020 to February 2023. Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA). RESULTS: Among 158 patients followed for a median of 99 weeks, 52% were taking evolocumab and 48% alirocumab; the mean change from baseline in MoCA score at follow-up was + 0.28 [95% CI (- 0.17 to 0.73; p = 0.216)]. There were no significant differences in the secondary endpoints-the visuospatial/executive domain + 0.04 (p = 0.651), naming domain - 0.01 (p = 0.671), attention/memory domain + 0.01 (p = 0.945); language domain - 0.10 (p = 0.145), abstraction domain + 0.03 (p = 0.624), and orientation domain - 0.05 (p = 0.224)-but for delayed recall memory the mean change was statistically significant (improvement) + 0.44 (p = 0.001). Neither were there any differences in the three stratified subgroups according to lowest attained LDL-C level-0-54 mg/dL, 55-69 mg/dL and ≥ 70 mg/dL; p = 0.454-or between alirocumab and evolocumab arms. CONCLUSION: We did not find effect of monoclonal antibody PCSK9i on neurocognitive function over 24 months of treatment, either in global MoCA score or different cognitive domains. An improvement in delayed recall memory was shown. The study showed no differences in the cognitive function between the prespecified subgroups, even among patients who achieved very low levels of LDL-C. There were no differences between alirocumab and evolocumab. REGISTRATION: ClinicalTtrials.gov Identifier number NCT04319081.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.281 · 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

Citations10
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Cardiovascular DrugsSame topicDementia and Cognitive Impairment ResearchFrench-language works237,207