MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4408412759 · doi:10.1161/jaha.124.038955

Impact of Lipoprotein(a) on Valvular and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Calcific Aortic Valve Stenosis

2025· article· en· W4408412759 on OpenAlexaff
Arnaud Girard, Audrey Paulin, Hasanga D. Manikpurage, Emma Lajeunesse, Marie‐Annick Clavel, Philippe Pîbarot, John H. Krege, Patrick Mathieu, Sébastien Thériault, Benoît J. Arsenault

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalInstitut universitaire de cardiologie et de pneumologie de Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyInternal medicineHazard ratioMyocardial infarctionLipoprotein(a)Aortic valve replacementStroke (engine)Aortic valve stenosisStenosisHeart failureProportional hazards modelAortic valveRisk factorLipoproteinConfidence intervalCholesterol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Lp(a) (lipoprotein(a)) is an independent risk factor for calcific aortic valve stenosis (CAVS). Whether patients with CAVS and high Lp(a) levels are at higher risk of valvular or cardiovascular events is unknown. The aim of this study is to determine whether higher Lp(a) levels are associated with valvular and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with CAVS. METHODS AND RESULTS: We identified 1962 patients from the UK Biobank with an electronic health record or self-reported CAVS diagnosis but who did not previously undergo aortic valve replacement (AVR) and had a minimal follow-up time of 2.5 years. Cox proportional hazard regression was used to evaluate the effect of Lp(a) on AVR, AVR or cardiac death, and valvular or cardiovascular events (AVR, cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke, heart failure, or coronary artery bypass grafting). The maximal follow-up time was set to 5 years. During the follow-up, 198 patients underwent AVR, 260 had AVR or cardiac death, and 435 had at least 1 valvular or cardiovascular event. Patients with Lp(a) levels ≥125 versus <125 nmol/L were at higher risk of AVR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.58 [95% CI, 1.17-2.12]), AVR or cardiac death (HR, 1.43 [95% CI, 1.10-1.86]), and cardiovascular or valvular events (HR, 1.36 [95% CI, 1.11-1.68]). Point estimates were comparable in men versus women, younger versus older patients, and in patients with higher versus lower plasma C-reactive protein levels. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with CAVS, Lp(a) levels predicted a higher risk of valvular and cardiovascular outcomes. The impact of Lp(a)-lowering therapies on valvular and cardiovascular health should be assessed in a long-term randomized clinical trial.

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)0.004
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 score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Citations7
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart Association→Same topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health→French-language works237,207→