Methods of creatine kinase-MB analysis to predict mortality in patients with myocardial infarction treated with reperfusion therapy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Larger infarct size measured by creatine kinase (CK)-MB release is associated with higher mortality and has been used as an important surrogate endpoint in the evaluation of new treatments for ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI). Traditional approaches to quantify infarct size include the observed CK-MB peak and calculated CK-MB area under the curve (AUC). We evaluated alternative approaches to quantifying infarct size using CK-MB values, and the relationship between infarct size and clinical outcomes. METHODS: Of 1,850 STEMI patients treated with reperfusion therapy in the COMplement inhibition in Myocardial infarction treated with Angioplasty (COMMA) (percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)-treated) and the COMPlement inhibition in myocardial infarction treated with thromboLYtics (COMPLY) (fibrinolytic-treated) trials, 1,718 (92.9%) (COMMA, n = 868; COMPLY, n = 850) had at least five of nine protocol-required CK-MB measures. In addition to traditional methods, curve-fitting techniques were used to determine CK-MB AUC and estimated peak CK-MB. Cox proportional hazards modeling assessed the univariable associations between infarct size and mortality, and the composite of death, heart failure, shock and stroke at 90 days. RESULTS: In COMPLY, CK-MB measures by all methods were significantly associated with higher mortality (hazard ratio range per 1,000 units increase: 1.09 to 1.13; hazard ratio range per 1 standard deviation increase: 1.41 to 1.62; P <0.01 for all analyses). In COMMA, the associations were similar but did not reach statistical significance. For the composite outcome of 90-day death, heart failure, shock and stroke, the associations with all CK-MB measures were statistically significant in both the COMMA and COMPLY trials. CONCLUSIONS: Sophisticated curve modeling is an alternative to infarct-size quantification in STEMI patients, but it provides information similar to that of more traditional methods. Future studies will determine whether the same conclusion applies in circumstances other than STEMI, or to studies with different frequencies and patterns of CK-MB data collection.
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 | 0.030 | 0.071 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 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".