Discordance Analysis of VLDL-C and ApoB in UK Biobank and Framingham Study: A Prospective Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Recent observational and Mendelian randomization analyses have reported significant effects of VLDL-C (very-low density lipoprotein cholesterol) on risk that is independent of ApoB (apolipoprotein B). We aim to determine the independent association of VLDL-C and ApoB with the risk of new onset cardiovascular events in the UK Biobank and Framingham Heart Study cohorts. METHODS: We included 294 289 UK Biobank participants with a median age of 56 years, 42% men, and 2865 Framingham Heart Study participants (median age, 53 years; 47% men). The residual resulting from regressing VLDL-C on ApoB expresses the portion of VLDL-C not explained by ApoB, while the residual from regressing ApoB on VLDL-C expresses the portion of ApoB not explained by VLDL-C. Cox proportional hazards models for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease incidence were created for residual VLDL-C and residual ApoB. Models were analyzed with and without high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). Furthermore, we investigated the independent effects of VLDL-C after accounting for ApoB and HDL-C and of HDL-C after accounting for ApoB and VLDL-C. RESULTS: In the UK Biobank, ApoB was highly correlated with VLDL-C (r=0.70; P <0.001) but weakly negatively correlated with HDL-C (r=−0.11; P <0.001). The ApoB residual and the VLDL-C residual were significantly associated with new-onset atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (hazard ratio [HR], 1.08 and 1.05, respectively; P <0.001). After adjusting for HDL-C, the ApoB residual remained similar in magnitude (HR, 1.10; P <0.001), whereas the effect size of the VLDL-C residual was reduced (HR, 1.02; P =0.029). The independent effect of HDL-C (after accounting for ApoB and VLDL-C) remained robust (HR, 0.86; P <0.0001), while the independent effect of VLDL-C (after accounting for ApoB and HDL-C) was modest (HR, 1.02; P =0.029). All results were consistent in the Framingham cohort. CONCLUSIONS: When adjusted for HDL-C, the association of VLDL-C with cardiovascular risk was no longer clinically meaningful. Our residual discordance analysis suggests that adjustment for HDL-C cannot be ignored.
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 | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".