MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399569175 · doi:10.1001/jamacardio.2024.1310

Individual Variation in the Distribution of Apolipoprotein B Levels Across the Spectrum of LDL-C or Non–HDL-C Levels

2024· article· en· W4399569175 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmed Sayed, Eric D. Peterson, Salim S. Virani, Allan D. Sniderman, Ann Marie Návar

Bibliographic record

VenueJAMA Cardiology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineApolipoprotein BInternal medicineVariation (astronomy)Cholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Importance: Although apolipoprotein B (apoB) is a superior marker of lipid-related risk compared with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), few data exist to translate the goals and thresholds from LDL-C to their apoB equivalent. In addition, although current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines provide a relative indication for apoB measurement among individuals with hypertriglyceridemia, whether discordance is limited to those subgroups is unknown. Objectives: To assess the variability in apoB level across the spectrum of LDL-C or non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) levels and evaluate whether discordance between apoB and LDL-C or non-HDL-C is limited to specifiable subgroups. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cross-sectional study used data from a nationally representative sample of 12 688 adult participants not using statins in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey between 2005 and 2016. Statistical analysis was performed from April 2023 to February 2024. Main Outcomes and Measures: Quantile regression was used to assess the population distribution of apoB across LDL-C or non-HDL-C levels. Discordance between apoB and LDL-C was the difference between measured apoB and median apoB levels for an individual's LDL-C level. Discordance was evaluated by age, sex, race and ethnicity, obesity, diabetes, triglyceride level, hemoglobin A1c level, body mass index (BMI), statin use, and metabolic health (defined as a BMI between 18.5 and 24.9, triglyceride level <150 mg/dL, and no diabetes). Results: Among the sample of 12 688 participants (median age, 41.0 years [IQR, 29.0-54.0 years]; 52.9% women) for LDL-C values of 55, 70, 100, and 190 mg/dL, the corresponding population median apoB levels were 49, 60, 80, and 140 mg/dL, respectively. For given levels of LDL-C, a range of apoB values was observed. At an LDL-C level of 100 mg/dL, the 95% population distribution of apoB ranged from 66 mg/dL to 99 mg/dL. ApoB variability was highest for LDL-C values estimated using the Friedewald equation, lower when using Sampson or Martin-Hopkins equations, and lowest for non-HDL-C. Although individuals with metabolic risk factors were more likely to have discordantly high apoB levels (ie, had higher median observed apoB levels relative to what was estimated based on LDL-C), significant variability in apoB levels was observed even among metabolically healthy individuals. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that even metabolically healthy individuals may have discordantly high apoB levels relative to LDL-C or non-HDL-C levels. The current guideline approach for apoB testing only for those with hypertriglyceridemia appears too narrow. Population percentile data can be used to translate LDL-C goals and thresholds to their apoB equivalent to facilitate clinical adoption.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.620

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJAMA CardiologySame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207