ArticleJournal of the American Heart Association2026
Lipoprotein(a), Insulin Resistance, and Cardiovascular Disease in the UK Biobank.
Article in Journal of the American Heart Association, 2026. 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.
- Lipoprotein(a), insulin resistance, and cardiovascular outcomes in metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease.Cardiovascular diabetology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundInsulin resistance (IR) and lipoprotein(a), Lp(a), are established contributors to cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk. Whether IR modifies the association between Lp(a) and CVD in primary prevention remains uncertain.
methodsThis prospective cohort study included UK Biobank participants without baseline CVD. IR at enrollment was assessed using the triglyceride-glucose index (TyG). The primary outcome was first major adverse cardiovascular event, defined as peripheral arterial disease, coronary artery disease, myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or cardiovascular death. Cox models estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with 95% CIs for log-transformed Lp(a) and TyG, adjusting for each other. Lp(a) was categorized as <125 or ≥125 nmol/L; high IR was TyG ≥75th cohort percentile. Participants were stratified into 4 joint Lp(a)/IR groups using low Lp(a)/low IR as reference.
resultsAmong 328 031 participants (mean age 56.4 years; 54.7% women), 26 865 CVD events occurred over 14.6 years median follow-up (interquartile range 13.7-15.4). Per 1-SD increase, aHRs were 1.08 (95% CI, 1.06-1.09) for log-Lp(a) and 1.06 (95% CI, 1.04-1.07) for TyG, each adjusted for the other. The
conclusionsLp(a) and IR each independently contribute to cardiovascular risk, with a combination offering improved risk stratification. This suggests that accounting for IR may enhance the assessment of Lp(a)-associated risk in the context of primary CVD prevention setting.
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.