Peripheral Arterial Disease in Randomized Trial of Estrogen With Progestin in Women With Coronary Heart Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Postmenopausal estrogen use has been associated with reduced carotid atherosclerosis in observational studies, but this relationship has not been confirmed in a clinical trial. The impact of estrogen on atherosclerotic disease in other peripheral arteries is unknown. METHODS AND RESULTS: Postmenopausal women with coronary heart disease (CHD) and an intact uterus (n=2763) were randomly assigned to conjugated equine estrogens (0.625 mg) combined with medroxyprogesterone acetate (2.5 mg) daily or to placebo in a secondary CHD prevention trial. This analysis focuses on incident peripheral arterial procedures and deaths in the 2 treatment groups; peripheral vascular disease was a predefined secondary outcome. During a mean of 4.1 years of follow-up, 311 peripheral arterial events were reported in 213 women, an annual incidence of 2.9%. The number of women who had peripheral arterial events was 99 among those assigned to active estrogen/progestin and 114 among those assigned to placebo, a nonsignificant difference (relative hazard 0. 87, 95% CI 0.66 to 1.14). In the placebo group, hypertension and diabetes mellitus were independently associated with higher rates of peripheral arterial events, and plasma HDL cholesterol and body mass index were associated with lower rates of peripheral arterial events. In the estrogen/progestin group, current smoking and diabetes were independent predictors of peripheral arterial events. Incident peripheral arterial disease was not a significant predictor of coronary, cardiovascular, or total mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with oral conjugated estrogen plus medroxyprogesterone acetate was not associated with a significant reduction in incident peripheral arterial events in postmenopausal women with preexisting CHD.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".