MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Elevated lipoprotein(a) identifies patients with acute coronary syndrome who derive earlier and greater cardiovascular benefit of alirocumab, particularly for limb events

2025· article· en· W7127625573 on OpenAlexaff
K K Ray, MICHAEL SZAREK, D L Bhatt, V A Bittner, S Fazio, S G Goodman, R A Harrington, J W Jukema, Irena Stevanovic, H D White, P G Steg, G G Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaceHazard ratioAcute coronary syndromePlaceboAlirocumabConfidence intervalMyocardial infarctionRandomization

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Lipoprotein(a) [Lp(a)] is believed to be a causal risk factor for major adverse cardiovascular and limb events (MACE, MALE). Levels ≥50mg/dl are increasingly recognized as a risk enhancing threshold in multiple guidelines. PCSK9 inhibitors have been shown to reduce cardiovascular risk, including traditional MACE and MALE in patients with ASCVD. We assessed whether significantly elevated Lp(a) levels influenced the time to benefit of treatment with the PCSK9 inhibitor alirocumab (ALI) in statin-treated patients with acute coronary syndrome. Methods In post hoc analysis of the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial, patients randomized to ALI or placebo were dichotomized by baseline Lp(a) ≥50 (n=5709) or <50 mg/dL (n=13,215). Median follow up was 2.8 yrs. Time-varying treatment hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) was determined for MACE (CV death, MI, ischemic stroke, unstable angina, or ischemia-driven coronary revascularization) and MALE (critical limb ischemia, revascularization, or amputation). Results In Lp(a) categories ≥50 vs <50 mg/dL, median baseline Lp(a) was 84 vs 11 mg/dL, median Lp(a) reduction (ALI vs placebo) was 14 vs 3 mg/dL, and median LDL-C reduction was 55 vs 54 mg/dL. There were 2775 MACE and 246 MALE. ALI reduced the composite of MACE+ MALE in both baseline Lp(a) ≥50 and <50 mg/dL categories [HR 0.80 (95% CI 0.71, 0.91) and 0.90 (0.83, 0.99), respectively]. However, 95% CI for MACE treatment HR was <1 at 1.25 yrs from randomization onwards in patients with Lp(a) ≥50 mg/dL vs 2.45 years onwards with Lp(a) <50 mg/dL (FIGURE, top). Similarly, 95% CI for MALE treatment HR was <1 at 0.24 yrs onwards for patients with Lp(a) ≥50 mg/dL but reached <1 only briefly at 0.6 yrs in those with Lp(a) <50 mg/dL (FIGURE, bottom). Conclusion In this post hoc analysis of the ODYSSEY OUTCOMES trial, we observed that patients with Lp(a) ≥ 50mg/dl derived similar LDL-C lowering, greater absolute Lp(a) lowering and an earlier, as well as greater relative risk reduction for both MACE and MALE compared to those with Lp(a) levels <50mg/dl. Patients with Lp(a) levels ≥ 50mg/dl may represent a particularly higher risk group with early modifiable risk from PCSK9 inhibition with ALI.

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)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health→French-language works237,207→