MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2118959942 · doi:10.1586/14779072.1.3.385

Vascular protectants for the treatment of atherosclerosis

2003· review· en· W2118959942 on OpenAlexaffabout
Jean‐Claude Tardif, Jean Grégoire, Marc-André Lavoie, Philippe L. L’Allier

Bibliographic record

VenueExpert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy · 2003
Typereview
Languageen
FieldImmunology and Microbiology
TopicAtherosclerosis and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProbucolMedicineRestenosisConventional PCIPercutaneous coronary interventionInflammationAntioxidantCardiologyInternal medicineCoronary atherosclerosisCoronary artery diseaseStentMyocardial infarctionCholesterolBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AGI-1067, the monosuccinic acid ester of probucol, is a phenolic antioxidant member of a novel class of agents termed vascular protectants. It has strong antioxidant properties, equipotent to those of probucol, and anti-inflammatory properties. It inhibits gene expression of vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 and monocyte chemotactic protein-1 and has been effective at preventing atherosclerosis in all tested animal models. It also improved luminal dimensions of reference segments in the percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) vessels in the CART-1 clinical trial, which suggests a direct anti-atherosclerosis effect. Two important trials that test the antioxidant/anti-inflammatory hypothesis are ongoing with AGI-1067: the Canadian Atherosclerosis and Restenosis Trial, which assesses its value for the reduction of both atherosclerosis progression in non-PCI vessels and post-PCI restenosis, and the Aggressive Reduction of Inflammation Stops Events trial, which is evaluating the effects of AGI-1067 on hard cardiovascular outcomes.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Meta-epidemiology (broad)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.948
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.030
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.066
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.265 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2003
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueExpert Review of Cardiovascular TherapySame topicAtherosclerosis and Cardiovascular DiseasesFrench-language works237,207