Systemic Cardiac Amyloidoses
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most studies of amyloidotic cardiomyopathy consider as a single entity the 3 main systemic cardiac amyloidoses: acquired monoclonal immunoglobulin light-chain (AL); hereditary, mutated transthyretin-related (ATTRm); and wild-type transthyretin-related (ATTRwt). In this study, we compared the diagnostic/clinical profiles of these 3 types of systemic cardiac amyloidosis. METHODS AND RESULTS: We conducted a longitudinal study of 233 patients with clear-cut diagnosis by type of cardiac amyloidosis (AL, n=157; ATTRm, n=61; ATTRwt, n=15) at 2 large Italian centers providing coordinated amyloidosis diagnosis/management facilities since 1990. Average age at diagnosis was higher in AL than in ATTRm patients; all ATTRwt patients except 1 were elderly men. At diagnosis, mean left ventricular wall thickness was higher in ATTRwt than in ATTRm and AL. Left ventricular ejection fraction was moderately depressed in ATTRwt but not in AL or ATTRm. ATTRm patients less often displayed low QRS voltage (25% versus 60% in AL; P<0.0001) or low voltage-to-mass ratio (1.1+/-0.5 versus 0.9+/-0.5; P<0.0001). AL patients appeared to have greater hemodynamic impairment. On multivariate analysis, ATTRm was a strongly favorable predictor of survival, and ATTRwt predicted freedom from major cardiac events. CONCLUSIONS: AL, ATTRm, and ATTRwt should be considered 3 different cardiac diseases, probably characterized by different pathophysiological substrates and courses. Awareness of the diversity underlying the cardiac amyloidosis label is important on several levels, ranging from disease classification to diagnosis and clinical management.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.005 | 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".