MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 4140115: Comparison of Lipoprotein(a) and Other Apo B Containing Lipoproteins as Predictors of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events in ODYSSEY OUTCOMES

2024· article· en· W4404246459 on OpenAlexaff
Vera Bittner, Michael Szarek, Philippe Gabríel Steg, J. Wouter Jukema, Esther Reijnders, Deepak L. Bhatt, Rafael Díaz, Sergio Fazio, Geneviève Garon, Shaun G. Goodman, Robert A. Harrington, H. D. White, Andreas M. Zeiher, Christa M. Cobbaert, Gregory G. Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer, Lipids, and Metabolism
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalSanofi (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineLipoprotein(a)Apolipoprotein BLipoproteinAdverse effectCardiologyCholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] and other atherogenic lipoproteins each contain one molecule of apolipoprotein B (apoB) per particle. Recent studies have suggested that on a per particle basis, Lp(a) is more strongly associated with major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) than low density lipoprotein. Hypothesis: In statin-treated patients with recent acute coronary syndrome (ACS), we tested the hypothesis that, on a per particle basis, Lp(a) and its change on treatment with alirocumab (ALI) are more strongly associated with MACE than other [non-Lp(a)] apoB-containing particles. Methods: Molar apolipoprotein(a) [corresponding to Lp(a)] and apo B were measured by mass spectrometry at baseline and month 4 (M4) in a subgroup of 11,957 patients who provided consent for use of stored samples in the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial. Non-Lp(a) apoB in nmol/L was calculated as total apo B – Lp(a). Lp(a) and non-Lp(a) apo B at baseline in the placebo group, and absolute changes in their levels on ALI, were related to risk of MACE using proportional hazards models. The latter analysis was adjusted for baseline Lp(a) and non-Lp(a) apo B and stratified by baseline Lp(a) (<125 nmol/L and ≥125 nmol/L). Results: Baseline levels of Lp(a) and non-Lp(a) apoB are shown in the Table . In the placebo group, both baseline Lp(a) and non-Lp(a) apo B independently predicted MACE. At M4 in the ALI group, median Lp(a) change from baseline was -40.9 and -7.0 in those with baseline levels ≥ or <125 nmol/L, respectively. Corresponding median changes in non-Lp(a) apoB were -739 and -776 nmol/L (all P<0.001). In the ALI group with baseline Lp(a)>125 nmol/L, the decrease from baseline in Lp(a), but not the decrease in non-Lp(a) apo B, was significantly related to risk of MACE. Among those with baseline Lp(a)≤125 nmol/L, the decrease from baseline in non-Lp(a) apo B, but not in Lp(a), with ALI was significantly related to risk of MACE. Conclusions: On a per particle basis, baseline Lp(a) and non-Lp(a) apo B both predicted MACE. Among those with high baseline Lp(a), reduction in MACE with ALI was predominantly associated with reduction of Lp(a); among those with lower baseline Lp(a) reduction in MACE with ALI was predominantly associated with reduction in non-Lp(a) apo-B. Lp(a) may be an important target of treatment with ALI in those with elevated levels after ACS.

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)0.002
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.012

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 venueCirculationSame topicCancer, Lipids, and MetabolismFrench-language works237,207