Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor therapy for stem cell mobilization following anterior wall myocardial infarction: the CAPITAL STEM MI randomized trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Small studies have yielded divergent results for administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) after acute myocardial infarction. Adequately powered studies involving patients with at least moderate left ventricular dysfunction are lacking. METHODS: Patients with left ventricular ejection fraction less than 45% after anterior-wall myocardial infarction were treated with G-CSF (10 μg/kg daily for 4 days) or placebo. After initial randomization of 86 patients, 41 in the placebo group and 39 in the G-CSF group completed 6-month follow-up and underwent measurement of left ventricular ejection fraction by radionuclide angiography. RESULTS: Baseline and 6-week mean ejection fraction was similar for the G-CSF and placebo groups: 34.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 32.6%-37.0%) v. 36.4% (95% CI 33.5%-39.2%) at baseline and 39.8% (95% CI 36.2%-43.4%) v. 43.1% (95% CI 39.2%-47.0%) at 6 weeks. However, G-CSF therapy was associated with a lower ejection fraction at 6 months relative to placebo (40.8% [95% CI 37.4%-44.2%] v. 46.0% [95% CI 42.7%-44.3%]). Both groups had improved left ventricular function, but change in left ventricular ejection fraction was lower in patients treated with G-CSF than in those who received placebo (5.7 [95% CI 3.4-8.1] percentage points v. 9.2 [95% CI 6.3-12.1] percentage points). One or more of a composite of several major adverse cardiac events occurred in 8 patients (19%) within each group, with similar rates of target-vessel revascularization. INTERPRETATION: In patients with moderate left ventricular dysfunction following anterior-wall infarction, G-CSF therapy was associated with a lower 6-month left ventricular ejection fraction but no increased risk of major adverse cardiac events. Future studies of G-CSF in patients with left ventricular dysfunction should be monitored closely for safety. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT00394498.
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 | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".