Myocardial fibrosis is not associated with reduced quality of life in patients with dilated or hypertrophic cardiomyopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One-hundred and seven consecutive patients with either DCM (n=50) or HCM (n=57) referred for MRI evaluation were identified. DCM was defined as a LVEF <40% and no significant coronary disease by angiography. HCM was defined by standard echocardiographic criteria. All patients completed both the Minnesota Living With Heart Failure (MLWHF) and SF-12 QOL questionnaires at time of MRI. A standard DE-MRI protocol was performed 10 minutes following the administration of intravenous gadolinium (Gadovist®, Bayer Inc). DE images were both visually scored using a validated 68 sub-segment segment model and quantitatively analyzed for signal enhancement (threshold >3SD above reference myocardium) using validated commercial software. Mean age for DCM and HCM groups was 59 (±13.4) and 53 (±12.1) years respectively with a mean ejection fraction of 34.7 ±16.9% and 74.2 ±10.8 % respectively. The respective mean NYHA class of the 2 groups was 2.0 ±0.9 and 1.4 ±1.1. The prevalence of any MF on visual scoring was 64% in the DCM group and 82% in those with HCM. By quantitative evaluation there was significantly more MF detected in patients with HCM than in DCM (19.2% vs. 13.1% of LV mass (p=0.008)). QOL, as assessed by MHLWF, was not significantly different in patients with any MF versus those without for either the DCM group (39.9 vs. 26.1, p=0.067) or HCM group (28.7 vs. 26.1, p=0.45). The SF12 physical and mental scores were also similar for both the DCM group (46.4 vs. 50.2 (p=0.25), and 46.2 vs. 44.4 (p=0.83), respectively) and HCM group (40.4 vs. 45.5 (p=0.36), and 46.2 vs. 44.4 (p=0.83), respectively). There was no correlation found between the quantitative volume of MF and any QOL score in either patient group. MF is common in patients with DCM and HCM. However, its presence and severity is not correlated with reductions in QOL relative to patients without MF. Prospective studies to evaluate the impact of MF on the natural history of disease progression and interim change in QOL are underway.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".