Clinical Trials Update from the European Society of Cardiology meeting 2005: CARE-HF Extension Study, ESSENTIAL, CIBIS-III, S-ICD, ISSUE-2, STRIDE-2, SOFA, IMAGINE, PREAMI, SIRIUS-II and ACTIVE
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides information and a commentary on trials presented at the European Society of Cardiology meeting held in September 2005, relevant to the pathophysiology, prevention and treatment of heart failure. All reports should be considered as preliminary data, as analyses may change in the final publication. In the CARE-HF extension study, the benefits of cardiac resynchronisation therapy (CRT) observed in the original study were maintained over an increased follow-up period. A study of oral enoximone (25-50 mg t.i.d.) in advanced heart failure (ESSENTIAL) showed limited benefit compared to placebo. The CIBIS-III study showed that heart failure therapy could be safely initiated with bisoprolol followed by the addition of enalapril. A subcutaneous ICD system (S-ICD) showed potential as an alternative to a transvenous ICD. In the ISSUE-2 study, an implantable loop recorder was used to guide therapy in patients with recurrent syncope. The selective endothelin antagonist sitaxsentan improved 6-MWT and functional class in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension in the STRIDE-2 study. In SOFA, fish oil had no beneficial effect on the incidence of life-threatening arrhythmias in patients with an ICD. In IMAGINE, quinapril showed no benefit when administered to patients following CABG. Perindopril reduced cardiac remodelling in post-MI patients with normal LV function in PREAMI. SIRIUS-II showed encouraging results for the use of intravenous ularitide in symptomatic decompensated chronic heart failure. The ACTIVE W study of warfarin versus aspirin plus clopidogrel in atrial fibrillation has been stopped due to superiority of warfarin.
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 | 0.029 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.010 |
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".