MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Inflammation and LDL cholesterol contribute independently to the progression of early human atherosclerotic plaque

2025· article· en· W7128005719 on OpenAlexaff
G Mendieta Badimon, S J Pocock, D Taylor, A Garcia-Alvarez, Virgina Mass, Josep Iglesies-Grau, Rodrigo Fernández‐Jiménez, Ana Devesa, Inés García-Lunar, J J Fuster, Borja Ibáñez, V Fuster

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic Diseases
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInflammationFibrinogenDyslipidemiaAsymptomaticC-reactive proteinPathophysiologyCoronary atherosclerosisLipoproteinCohortAtheroma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background The role of inflammatory processes in the risk of ischemic events (despite intensive lipid-lowering treatment) has received considerable attention in recent years, mainly amongst secondary prevention patients. Both dyslipidemia and inflammation contribute to the pathophysiology of atherosclerosis, and both predict future ischemic events. However, the interplay between lipids and inflammation in the early phases of human atherosclerosis [i.e., subclinical atherosclerosis (SA) and primary prevention] is largely unknown. Objectives To investigate the relative contribution of inflammation and LDLc as determinants of risk of SA progression in a cohort of middle-aged, asymptomatic individuals. Methods Participants from the PESA study (median age 45 years, 36% female) underwent 3 visits (at 3-year intervals) involving serial blood testing, physical examinations, 3D vascular ultrasound assessments of peripheral arteries (bilateral carotids and femorals), and coronary artery calcium scoring (CACS). Multiple linear regression models with global plaque volume (GPV, mm3) at 6-year follow-up (FU) as the primary outcome were performed to investigate its key determinants, first based on standard cardiovascular risk factors (i.e., smoking, diabetes, systolic blood pressure, and LDLc) and then followed by the potential additional role of mean levels of inflammatory markers [white blood cell count (WBC), fibrinogen, oxidized LDL (oxLDL), and high-sensitivity C reactive protein (hs-CRP)] and lipoprotein a [Lp(a)]. Results The 3,471 participants had mostly low risk lipid profiles according to current guidelines, and 2,013 (58%) had some SA (GPV >0mm3) at 6-year FU. Overall, mean WBC and mean fibrinogen had highly significant associations with the extent of GPV at 6-year FU after adjusting for age, sex and CVRFs. Mean oxLDL showed a weaker, yet significant association with greater GPV at 6-year FU, but hs-CRP and Lp(a) did not. WBC had the strongest statistical associations with extent of SA, equivalent in strength to the known link of LDLc with SA, followed by fibrinogen (Figure 1). For WBC the marked trend in risk only occurred at levels above its median. Baseline LDLc and the mean inflammatory marker levels predicted GPV at 6 years alongside each other but not in a synergistic manner (i.e., no statistical interactions in determining GPV at 6 years were found). Similar patterns were observed for separate analyses of femoral plaque, carotid plaque and CACS (Figure 2). Conclusion In a cohort of middle-aged, asymptomatic individuals without dyslipidemia according to current standards, both LDLc and inflammation (especially WBC) are associated with progression of SA, but independently of each other. Our results suggest inflammatory risk is relevant across the life continuum of atherosclerosis and should not be regarded as only a residual risk in secondary prevention.Figure 1 Figure 2

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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 JournalSame topicAdipokines, Inflammation, and Metabolic DiseasesFrench-language works237,207