ArticleFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2024
Cardiovascular disease risk in patients with elevated LDL-C levels: FH vs. non-FH.
Article in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Coronary artery disease (CAD) remains the primary cause of death worldwide, and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH) is a common disease that leads to CAD. This study aimed to explore the difference in CAD risk between FH and non-FH patients with high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. Methods: Individuals (≥18 years) who underwent coronary angiography (CAG) from June 2016 to September 2020 were consecutively enrolled. Participants with LDL-C levels ≥4.0 mmol/L were ultimately included in this study. For all participants, next-generation sequencing was performed with expanded gene panels including 11 genes (LDLR, APOB, PCSK9, LDLRAP1, ABCG5, ABCG8, LIPA, LPA, APOBR, LRPAP1, and STAP1). Results: A total of 223 individuals were included in this study. According to the CAG findings, 199 CAD patients and 24 non-CAD patients were included. The proportions of FH genes, regardless of whether 3 major genes or all 11 genes were sequenced, were not significantly different between the CAD and non-CAD groups ( Conclusions: FH mutation did not increase the rate of CAD in individuals with an MLDL-C level ≥4.0 mmol/L. However, among CAD patients (MLDL-C level ≥4.0 mmol/L) with almost normal renal function (≥87.4 ml/min/1.73 m
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.