Intracoronary 17 <i>β</i> -Estradiol and the Inotropic Response to Dobutamine in Postmenopausal Women
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gender differences with respect to clinical presentation and outcome of cardiovascular disease have prompted examination of sex-specific factors that may influence cardiovascular physiology and pathophysiology. The rationale for evaluating control of contractility by estrogen derives from preclinical data demonstrating that 17beta-estradiol (17beta-E(2)) can attenuate the myocardial response to adrenergic stimulation. METHODS: The effects of two doses of intracoronary 17beta-E(2) (150 and 300 ng/min) were tested on the left ventricular (LV) inotropic response to intravenous dobutamine in postmenopausal women who had undergone diagnostic cardiac catheterization. Peak positive LV+dP/dt (LV+dP/dt(max)) was obtained from analysis of LV pressure recorded by a micromanometer catheter. RESULTS: The study was terminated prematurely after the manufacturer stopped production of 17beta-E(2), and data from 7 patients who had completed the study were analyzed. Intracoronary 17beta-E(2) had no effect on basal LV+dP/dt(max) (1299 +/- 60 mm Hg/sec [mean +/- SE] at control vs, 1299 +/- 46 mm Hg/sec with 17beta-E(2)). Intracoronary 17beta-E(2) also had no significant effect on the LV+dP/dt(max) response to dobutamine (1672 +/- 95 mm Hg/sec with dobutamine alone vs. 1639 +/- 73 with dobutamine and 17beta-E(2), p = 0.51). CONCLUSIONS: In humans, no evidence of an acute moderate or large effect of 17beta-E(2) on adrenergically stimulated contractility was documented; a small effect size could not be excluded.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".