Lipoprotein(a) in Familial Hypercholesterolemia
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BackgroundLow density lipoprotein (LDL) and Lipoprotein(a) (Lp(a)) are pro-atherogenic apolipoprotein (apo) B-containing members of the non-high-density lipoprotein (non-HDL) family of particles. Elevated plasma levels of LDL cholesterol (C), non-HDL-C and apo B are defining features of heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia (HeFH), but reports of elevated plasma Lp(a) concentration are inconsistent.MethodsWe performed retrospective chart reviews of 256 genetically characterized patients with hypercholesterolemia and 272 control subjects from the Lipid Genetics Clinic at University Hospital in London, Ontario. We evaluated pairwise correlations between plasma levels of Lp(a) and those of LDL-C, non-HDL-C and apo B.ResultsMean Lp(a) levels were not different between individuals with hypercholesterolemia and control subjects. No correlations were found between Lp(a) and LDL-C or non-HDL-C levels in control or hypercholesterolemia patients; all R-values < 0.079 and all P-values > 0.193. Borderline weak correlations between Lp(a) and apo B were identified in patients r = 0.103, P = 0.112) and controls (r = 0.175, P = 0.005). Results were similar across genotypic subgroups.ConclusionsLp(a) levels are independent of LDL-C and non-HDL-C; in particular Lp(a) levels are not increased in patients with hypercholesterolemia and molecularly proven HeFH. Apo B was only weakly associated with Lp(a). Elevated Lp(a) does not cause FH in our clinic patients. Genetic variants causing HeFH that raise LDL-C do not affect Lp(a), confirming that these lipoproteins are metabolically distinct. Lp(a) cannot be predicted from LDL-C and must be determined separately to evaluate its amplifying effect on atherosclerotic risk in patients with hypercholesterolemia.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it