Credibility assessment of a mechanistic model of atherosclerosis to predict cardiovascular outcomes under lipid-lowering therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Demonstrating cardiovascular (CV) benefits with lipid-lowering therapy (LLT) requires long-term randomized clinical trials (RCTs) with thousands of patients. Innovative approaches such as in silico trials applying a disease computational model to virtual patients receiving multiple treatments offer a complementary approach to rapidly generate comparative effectiveness data. A mechanistic computational model of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) was built from knowledge, describing lipoprotein homeostasis, LLT effects, and the progression of atherosclerotic plaques leading to myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, major acute limb event and CV death. The ASCVD model was successfully calibrated and validated, and reproduced LLT effects observed in selected RCTs (ORION-10 and FOURIER for calibration; ORION-11, ODYSSEY-OUTCOMES and FOURIER-OLE for validation) on lipoproteins and ASCVD event incidence at both population and subgroup levels. This enables the future use of the model to conduct the SIRIUS programme, which intends to predict CV event reduction with inclisiran, an siRNA targeting hepatic PCSK9 mRNA.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".