Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction Associated with Pulmonary Hypertension Riociguat Trial (LEPHT): Rationale and Design
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) due to systolic left ventricular dysfunction (PH-sLVD) frequently complicates heart failure (HF), and greatly worsens the prognosis of patients with sLVD, but as yet has no approved treatment. The LEPHT study aims to characterize the haemodynamic profile, safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic profile of riociguat (BAY 63-2521), an oral stimulator of soluble guanylate cyclase, in patients with PH-sLVD. METHODS AND RESULTS: This 16-week, phase IIb, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study enrols patients with PH-sLVD, defined as left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≤40% and mean pulmonary arterial pressure (PAP(mean)) ≥25 mmHg at rest. Patients using optimized HF medication will receive placebo or riociguat 0.5 mg, 1 mg, or up to 2 mg three times daily. The dose will be titrated for 8 weeks, based on systolic blood pressure and well-being, followed by 8 weeks of treatment at a stable dose. The primary efficacy variable is PAP(mean), while secondary efficacy endpoints include LVEF, exercise capacity, quality of life, and other haemodynamic and echocardiographic measurements. Safety and pharmacokinetics will also be assessed. After the 16-week study, patients will have the opportunity to be treated with riociguat in a long-term extension phase. CONCLUSION: The LEPHT study will provide valuable information on the haemodynamic, echocardiographic, and preliminary clinical effects of riociguat in patients with PH-sLVD. Trial registration NCT01065454.
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".