Cardiac troponin I, a possible predictor of survival in patients with stable congestive heart failure.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cardiac troponin I (cTnI) has been validated as a sensitive and specific marker of myocyte damage, and is elevated in some patients with congestive heart failure. OBJECTIVE: To assess the relationship between elevated levels of cTnI and survival in stable patients with congestive heart failure. PATIENTS AND METHODS: It was assessed whether detectable serial levels of cTnI were associated with mortality in 211 patients with stable, severe heart failure at entry and one month into the Prospective Randomized Flosequinan Longevity Evaluation (PROFILE) study. Of these patients, 66 also had measurements taken at 12 months. RESULTS: Patients were New York Heart Association (NYHA) class III (n=197) or IV (n=14), with a baseline left ventricular ejection fraction of 22+/-7% (range 8% to 35%). Patients with a detectable level of cTnI at one month had an increased mortality (OR 2.608 [95% CI 1.061 to 6.409]; P=0.037). The association between mortality and detectable cTnI levels at baseline or 12 months did not reach statistical significance. Patients with a cTnI level that rose or remained elevated between baseline and one month had a higher mortality rate (50%) than those in whom the cTnI level fell (9%) between baseline and one month (P=0.025). In a multivariate model of survival that included sex, treatment, age, left ventricular ejection fraction, NYHA class and creatinine, only detectable levels of cTnI at one month were associated with survival (P=0.037). CONCLUSIONS: cTnI is released in stable, chronic heart failure and is associated with a poor prognosis, independent of other important risk factors. The risk is particularly elevated when detectable cTnI levels rise or remain elevated over time.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".