MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402392922 · doi:10.4081/monaldi.2024.2972

Lipid-lowering therapy in patients with coronary heart disease: an Italian real-life survey. Results from the Survey on Risk FactOrs and CardiovascuLar secondary prEvention and drug strategieS (SOFOCLES) in Italy

2024· article· en· W4402392922 on OpenAlexaff
Caterina Oriana Aragona, A. Bianco, Roberto Caruso, Massimo Cerulli, Antonio Cittadini, Michele Gabriele, Mario Mallardo, Roberto Marini, Bruna Miserrafiti, Pietro Palermo, Alfonso Galati

Bibliographic record

VenueMonaldi Archives for Chest Disease · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsCargill (Canada)
FundersSanofi
KeywordsMedicineRosuvastatinEzetimibeAtorvastatinInternal medicinePopulationDiabetes mellitusObservational studyStatinCardiologyLipid profileCholesterolEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In patients at high cardiovascular risk, a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) reduction of ≥50% from baseline and an LDL-C goal of <70 mg/dL (or <55 mg/dL in very high-risk patients) are recommended. Multiple registry and retrospective studies have shown that patients with high atherosclerotic cardiovascular risk often do not reach the targets defined by the European Society of Cardiology guidelines as a result of suboptimal management of LDL-C. Here, we report the data on lipid-lowering therapy and lipid targets from the Survey on Risk FactOrs and CardiovascuLar secondary prEvention and drug strategieS (SOFOCLES), an observational, prospective study designed to collect data on patients with ischemic heart disease treated at cardiac outpatient clinics across the Italian national territory. We included patients with known coronary heart disease (CHD) who underwent follow-up visits at various outpatient cardiology clinics. A total of 2532 patients were included (mean age: 67±17 years, 80% male). Among patients with available laboratory data (n=1712), 995 (58%) had LDL-C<70 mg/dL, 717 (42%) had LDL-C≥70 mg/dL, and 470 (27%) had LDL-C<55 mg/dL. Patients who more frequently achieved the recommended LDL-C levels were male, had diabetes, had a higher educational level, and performed intense physical activity. Statins were used in 2339 (92%) patients, high-intensity statins (e.g., rosuvastatin 20/40 mg or atorvastatin 40/80 mg) in 1547 patients (61% of the whole population and 66% of patients on statins), and ezetimibe in 891 patients (35%). Patients receiving high-intensity statins tended to be younger, not to have diabetes, and to have been included in a cardiac rehabilitation program. In a real-world sample of Italian patients with CHD, adherence to lipid-lowering therapy fell markedly short of optimal levels. Many patients did not achieve the LDL-C target of 70 mg/dL, and even fewer reached the LDL-C target of 55 mg/dL. Notably, patients with a lower educational level had a greater likelihood of being undertreated. Strategies aimed at improving preventive interventions for CHD and overcoming social disparities should be evaluated and optimized.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonaldi Archives for Chest DiseaseSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207