Abstract 8460: High-Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T and the Risk of Incident Atrial Fibrillation: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Structural changes in the heart, such as increased left atrial size and decreased ejection fraction, are known risk factors for atrial fibrillation (AF). An association between cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), a marker of myocardial cell damage measured with a high sensitivity assay, and the risk of AF could have implications for AF risk stratification. Objective: To estimate the association between hs-cTnT and the risk of incident AF in the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study, a prospective cohort of middle-aged adults from 4 U.S. communities. Methods: Study was restricted to 10,596 participants free of AF at the fourth clinic visit (1996-98). AF was defined using ICD codes from hospitalizations and death certificates. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate the association between hs-cTnT and the risk of AF adjusting for potential confounders (Table). Net reclassification index (NRI) was used to examine its discriminative ability for 10-year AF risk (<5%, 5-15%, and >15%). Results: We observed 920 incident AF cases over 109,607 person-years. The AF rate was lowest among participants with undetectable hs-cTnT levels and greatest among those with hs-cTnT > 0.014 µg/L (Table). After adjustment for potential confounders, a 1 standard deviation difference in ln(hs-cTnT) was associated with a hazard ratio of 1.21 (95% CI = 1.13, 1.30). Addition of hs-cTnT to known AF predictors did not increase the area under the curve appreciably (without hs-cTnT: 0.755, 95% CI = 0.740, 0.771; with hs-cTnT: 0.759, 95% CI = 0.743, 0.774). Among those who developed AF, 3.2% had their risk increased by the inclusion hs-cTnT and 3.9% had their risk decreased (p=0.50). Among those who did not develop AF, 2.7% had their risk increased and 3.4% had their risk decreased (p=0.0001). There was no net improvement in risk stratification (NRI=0.36%, p=0.72). Conclusions: Hs-cTnT level is associated with an increased rate of AF but did not improve risk stratification.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".