ReviewBiomedicines2023
Age and the Residual Risk of Cardiovascular Disease following Low Density Lipoprotein-Cholesterol Exposure.
Review in Biomedicines, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Case Report: Elevated Lp(a) as a cause of severe ASCVD in a healthy veteran athlete with low calculated QRISK3 score.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We believe that there is sufficient evidence from basic science, longitudinal cohort studies and randomised controlled trials which validates the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) or lipid hypothesis. It is important that we can communicate details of the cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk reduction that the average patient could expect depending on the scale of LDL-C decrease following lipid lowering therapy. It is also essential that residual risk (ResR) of CVD be highlighted. To achieve this aim by using existing trial evidence, we developed mathematical models initially for relative risk reduction (RRR) and absolute risk (AR) reduction and then showed that despite optimising LDL-C levels, a considerable degree of ResR remains that is dependent on AR. Age is significantly associated with AR (odds ratio: 1.02, 95% confidence intervals: 1.01-1.04) as was previously demonstrated by analysing the Whickham study cohort using a logistic regression model (age remaining significant even when all the other significant risk factors such as sex, smoking, systolic blood pressure, diabetes and family history were included in the regression model). A discussion of a paper by Ference et al. provided detailed evidence of the relationship between age and AR, based on lifetime LDL-C exposure. Finally, we discussed non-traditional CVD risk factors that may contribute to ResR based on randomised controlled trials investigating drugs improving inflammation, thrombosis, metabolic and endothelial status.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.