ArticlemedRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences2026
APOB to estimated APOB ratio for screening for the APOE2 genotype.
Article in medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences, 2026. 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
- Updated by
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Familial dysbetalipoproteinemia (FDB) is a genetic lipoprotein disorder that can develop in patients homozygous for the APOE2 genotype (ε2/ε2). It is associated with decreased clearance of remnant lipoproteins and increased atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk disproportionate to their level of LDL-C. A goal of this study was to develop a screening test for the ε2/ε2 genotype based on routinely available lipid tests and to determine those at most risk for ASCVD. Methods: After assembly of a primary prevention cohort from the UK Biobank (n= 269,895), gene array and exome data was utilized to classify patients as being ε2/ε2 genotype positive or negative. Lipid profiles and APOB levels were extracted and the number of ASCVD events was tabulated during a 15-year follow-up period. Results: Using a newly developed equation for estimating APOB (eAPOB) with lipid panel test results, the ratio of measured APOB to eAPOB was better than any other individual lipid test or ratio for identifying patients with the ε2/ε2 genotype (AUC: APOB/eAPOB: 0.990 (0.986-0.994), nonHDL-C/APOB: 0.961 (0.952-0.970), APOB: 0.955 (0.949-0.961), VLDL/TG: 0.788 (0.771-0.804)). The majority of ε2/ε2 patients could be identified with the APOB/eAPOB ratio even before they expressed the FDB phenotype with elevated TG and nonHDL-C. The PCE or PREVENT risk equations were the most accurate method for identifying higher risk patients (AUC: PREVENT: 0.690 (0.637-0.742), PCE: 0.697 (0.645-0.749)). Conclusion: The APOB/eAPOB ratio can be used to accurately identify the ε2/ε2 genotype and conventional risk equations are the best method for determining those at risk for ASCVD.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.