MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2187526770 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehv464

Influence of ejection fraction on outcomes and efficacy of spironolactone in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

2015· article· en· W2187526770 on OpenAlexaff
Scott D. Solomon, Brian Claggett, Eldrin F. Lewis, Akshay S. Desai, Inder S. Anand, Nancy K. Sweitzer, Eileen O’Meara, Sanjiv J. Shah, Sonja M. McKinlay, Jerome L. Fleg, George Sopko, Bertram Pitt, Marc A. Pfeffer

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal Regulation and Hypertension
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteU.S. Public Health ServiceNational Institutes of HealthNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesU.S. Department of Health and Human Services
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionSpironolactoneHeart failureInternal medicineCardiologyFraction (chemistry)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: While mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have been shown to benefit patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), spironolactone did not reduce the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death, heart failure hospitalization, or aborted cardiac arrest in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) in the TOPCAT trial, which enrolled patients with LVEF of 45% or greater. We utilized data from TOPCAT to assess the relationship between LVEF as well as outcomes and efficacy of spironolactone. METHODS AND RESULTS: We assessed differences in baseline characteristics and outcomes across LVEF categories in 3444 patients with HFpEF, and determined whether LVEF modified the treatment effect of spironolactone. Ejection fraction ranged from 44 to 85%. Patients with higher ejection fraction were older, more likely to be female, less likely to have a history of myocardial infarction, and more likely to have a history of hypertension and diabetes. The incidence of the primary endpoint and cardiovascular death was highest in patients at the lower end of the ejection fraction spectrum. Ejection fraction modified the spironolactone treatment effect, particularly in the patients enrolled in the Americas, for the primary outcome (P = 0.046) and for heart failure hospitalization (P = 0.039), with stronger estimated benefits of spironolactone at the lower end of the ejection fraction spectrum with respect to the primary endpoint (LVEF <50%: HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.50, 1.05; LVEF ≥60%: HR 0.97, 95% CI 0.76, 1.23) and heart failure hospitalization (LVEF <50%: HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.46, 1.27; LVEF ≥60%: HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.74, 1.30). CONCLUSION: In patients with HFpEF enrolled in TOPCAT, patient characteristics and outcomes varied substantially by LVEF. The potential efficacy of spironolactone was greatest at the lower end of the LVEF spectrum. CLINICALTRIALSGOV NUMBER: NCT00094302.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations525
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicHormonal Regulation and HypertensionFrench-language works237,207