Impact of different exercise training modalities on the coronary collateral circulation and plaque composition in patients with significant coronary artery disease (EXCITE trial): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Exercise training (ET) in addition to optimal medical therapy (OMT) in patients with stable coronary artery disease (CAD) has been demonstrated to be superior to percutaneous coronary interventions (PCI) with respect to the composite endpoint of death, myocardial infarction, stroke, revascularization and hospitalization due to worsening of angina. One mechanism leading to this superiority discussed in the literature is the increase in coronary collateral blood flow due to ET. Until now, data demonstrating the positive effect of ET on the collateral blood flow and the functional capacity of the coronary collateral circulation are still lacking. METHODS/DESIGN: The EXCITE trial is a three-armed randomized, prospective, single-center, open-label, controlled study enrolling 60 patients with stable CAD and at least one significant coronary stenosis (fractional flow reserve ≤0.75). The study is designed to compare the influence and efficacy of two different 4-week ET programs [high-intensity interval trainings (IT) versus moderate-intensity exercise training (MT) in addition to OMT] versus OMT only on collateral blood flow (CBF). The primary efficacy endpoint is the change of the CBF of the target vessel after 4 weeks as assessed by coronary catheterization with a pressure wire during interruption of the antegrade flow of the target vessel by balloon occlusion. Secondary endpoints include the change in plaque composition as assessed by intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) after 4 weeks, myocardial perfusion as analyzed in MRI after 4 weeks and 12 months, peak oxygen uptake (V02 peak), change in endothelial function and biomarkers after 4 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months. The safety endpoint addresses major adverse cardiovascular events (death from cardiovascular cause, myocardial infarction, stroke, TIA, target vessel revascularization or hospitalization) after 12 months. DISCUSSION: The trial investigates whether ET for 4 weeks increases the CBF in patients with significant CAD compared to a sedentary control group. It also examines the impact of two intensities of ET on the CBF as well as the histological plaque composition. The trial started recruitment in June 2009 and will complete recruitment until June 2012. First results are expected in December 2012 (4-week follow-up), final results (12-month long-term secondary endpoint) in December 2013. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration information-URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov.Unique identifier: NCT01209637.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".