Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 310

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Leukocyte Count as a Predictor of Cardiovascular Events and Mortality in Postmenopausal Women: The Women’s Health Initiative Observational Study

Margolis, Karen L.·2005·Archives of Internal Medicine

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence supports a role for inflammation in the atherosclerotic process. The role of the leukocyte count as an independent predictor of risk of a first cardiovascular disease (CVD) event remains uncertain. Our objective was to describe the relation between the baseline white blood cell (WBC) count and future CVD events and mortality in postmenopausal women. METHODS: In this prospective cohort study set in 40 US clinical centers, the study population comprised 72 242 postmenopausal women aged 50 to 79 years, free of CVD and cancer at baseline, enrolled in the Women's Health Initiative Observational Study. Main outcome measures included incident fatal coronary heart disease (CHD), nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, and total mortality. RESULTS: At baseline, the mean +/- SD age of the women was 63 +/- 7.3 years, 84% were white, 4% had diabetes, 35% had hypertension, and 6% were current smokers. The mean WBC count was 5.8 +/- 1.6 x 10(9) cells/L. During a mean of 6.1 years of follow-up, there were 187 CHD deaths, 701 nonfatal myocardial infarctions, 738 strokes, and 1919 deaths from all causes. Compared with women with WBC counts in the first quartile (2.5-4.7 x 10(9) cells/L), women in the fourth quartile (6.7-15.0 x 10(9) cells/L) had over a 2-fold elevated risk for CHD death (hazard ratio, 2.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.51-3.68), after multivariable adjustment for age, race, diabetes, hypertension, smoking, hypercholesterolemia, body mass index, alcohol intake, diet, physical activity, aspirin use, and hormone use. Women in the upper quartile of the WBC count also had a 40% higher risk for nonfatal myocardial infarction, a 46% higher risk for stroke, and a 50% higher risk for total mortality. In multivariable models adjusting for C-reactive protein, the WBC count was an independent predictor of CHD risk, comparable in magnitude to C-reactive protein. CONCLUSIONS: The WBC count, a stable, well-standardized, widely available and inexpensive measure of systemic inflammation, is an independent predictor of CVD events and all-cause mortality in postmenopausal women. A WBC count greater than 6.7 x 10(9) cells/L may identify high-risk individuals who are not currently identified by traditional CVD risk factors.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/archinte.165.5.500

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 5 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Margolis, K. L.
Venue
Archives of Internal Medicine
Published
2005-03-14
Volume
165
Issue
5
Pages
500
ISSN
0003-9926 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2158284618
Cited by
310
References
5
FWCI
10.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.