Prognostic implication of relative regional strain ratio in cardiac amyloidosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Cardiac amyloidosis (CA) is a rapidly progressive disease that portends poor prognosis. Our objective was to evaluate the prognostic impact of relative regional strain ratio (RRSR, a measure of the relative apical sparing of longitudinal strain (LS)) in CA. METHODS: This is a retrospective study evaluating 97 patients with CA from 2004 to 2013. Patients were included if they met criteria for CA based on endomyocardial biopsy or advanced imaging criteria coupled with either extracardiac biopsy or genetic analysis. Baseline clinical and imaging data were collected and compared between light-chain amyloidosis (AL) (n=59) and transthyretin amyloidosis (ATTR) (n=38) subtypes. RRSR was defined as the average apical LS divided by the sum of the average mid and basal LS values. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to assess the effects of clinical and echocardiographic characteristics, including RRSR, on the outcome of time to death or heart transplantation. RESULTS: Despite younger age, the AL subtype had a statistically significant association with the composite outcome as compared with ATTR (p=0.022). Log-transformed RRSR was independently associated with the composite outcome at 5 years (HR 2.45 (1.36 to 4.40), p=0.003). Patients with low ejection fraction and high RRSR had the worst prognosis. In multivariable analysis, RRSR remained predictive of the primary outcome (p=0.018). Addition of covariates related to systolic function (global LS and ejection fraction) to the model attenuated this effect. CONCLUSIONS: High RRSR is adversely prognostic in patients with cardiac amyloid. This novel tool is both diagnostic and prognostic and may have implications in management and suitability for treatment.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".