The Prognostic Significance of Bundle Branch Block in High‐Risk Chronic Stable Vascular Disease Patients: A Report from the HOPE Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: The prognostic significance of left and right bundle branch block (LBBB and RRBB) in patients with chronic stable cardiovascular (CV) disease is not well characterized and was evaluated in the Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation (HOPE) study cohort. DESIGN: Observational analysis of data prospectively collected in the HOPE trial. SETTING AND PATIENTS: HOPE was a multicenter, international trial, which evaluated ramipril and vitamin E in 9,541 patients aged > or = 55 years with CV disease or diabetes with > or = 1 CV risk factor(s) but without heart failure (HF) or known left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Follow-up extended for a median of 4.5 years. Electrocardiograms were obtained at baseline in all study participants and were read centrally. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Major CV events (defined as CV death, myocardial infarction, or stroke), heart failure, CV death, all-cause death, and sudden death. RESULTS: Baseline LBBB was present in 246 (2.6%) patients and was associated with increased risk for major CV events (HR = 1.54; 95% CI, 1.18-2.02), CV death (HR 2.29; 95% CI, 1.63-3.20), heart failure (HR 2.99; 95% CI, 2.31-3.87), sudden death (HR 3.17; 95% CI, 2.13-4.73), and all-cause death (HR = 2.10; 95% CI, 1.59-2.77). In multivariate models, LBBB remained an independent predictor of heart failure, sudden death, CV death, and all-cause death (P < or = 0.002 for all). Baseline RBBB was present in 428 (4.5%) of patients and was not associated with increased CV risk. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with stable chronic CV disease, LBBB but not RBBB is an independent predictor of heart failure, sudden death, CV death, and all-cause death.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".