Clinical Characteristics and Outcomes of Patients with and without Diabetes in the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Hypothesis 1 of the Surgical Treatment for Ischemic Heart Failure (STICH) trial enrolled 1212 patients with an LVEF of ≤35% and CAD amenable to coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). Patients were randomized to CABG and optimal medical therapy (MED) or MED alone. The objective was to assess whether or not patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) enrolled in the STICH trial would have greater benefit from CABG than patients without DM. METHODS AND RESULTS: The characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with and without DM randomized to CABG and MED or MED alone were compared. DM was present in 40%. At baseline, patients with DM had more triple vessel CAD, higher LVEF, and smaller left ventricular volumes. In patients with DM, the primary outcome of all-cause mortality occurred in 39% of patients in the MED group and 39% in the CABG group [hazard ratio (HR) with CABG 0.96, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.73-1.26]. In patients without DM, the primary outcome occurred in 41% of patients in the MED group and 32% in the CABG group (HR with CABG 0.80, 95% CI 0.63-1.02). While numerically it would appear that the treatment effect of CABG is blunted in patients with DM, there was no significant interaction between DM and treatment group on formal statistical testing. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with DM enrolled in the STICH trial had more triple vessel disease, smaller hearts, and higher LVEF than those without DM. CABG did not exert greater benefit in patients with DM.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".