MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2323579407 · doi:10.1097/tp.0b013e31821f303f

Framingham Risk Score and Novel Cardiovascular Risk Factors Underpredict Major Adverse Cardiac Events in Kidney Transplant Recipients

2011· article· en· W2323579407 on OpenAlexaff
Samuel A. Silver, Michael Huang, Michelle M. Nash, G. V. Ramesh Prasad

Bibliographic record

VenueTransplantation · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and Treatments
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaceMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionCardiologyFramingham Risk ScoreUric acidRenal functionCreatinineProportional hazards modelConfidence intervalPercutaneous coronary intervention

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Framingham Risk Score (FRS) is an insufficient cardiovascular event predictor in unselected kidney transplant recipients. Its role in different risk subgroups and the value of adding novel risk factor candidates to FRS is unknown. METHODS: We reviewed patients who underwent transplantation from 1998 to 2008 with minimum 3 months graft function, determining FRS-ascertained 10-year risk at 3 months along with relevant clinical and laboratory information. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) (myocardial infarction, coronary artery revascularization, or cardiac death) 3 months posttransplant were captured. Time-to-MACE multivariate Cox modeling with FRS and novel risk factors (C-reactive protein, uric acid, urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio) as independent variables was performed. RESULTS: Of 956 patients, 89 experienced MACE (2.17 events/100 patient-years). FRS-predicted 10-year risk was 14.7% ± 10.0% in males with and 9.2% ± 8.2% in those without subsequent MACE (P < 0.0001), although FRS substantially underestimated MACE (actual-to-predicted event ratio 1.2-8.4 in different subgroups, all P < 0.0001). Although patients with MACE had a higher C-reactive protein (5.4 ± 6.0 vs. 3.8 ± 2.5 mg/L, P = 0.026) and uric acid (417 ± 109 vs. 386 ± 101 μmol/L, P = 0.012) level as well as lower 3-month estimated glomerular filtration rate (50.1 ± 20.1 vs. 54.8 ± 18.3 mL/min/1.73 m(2), P = 0.022), only FRS more than or equal to 10% (hazard ratio 2.313, 95% confidence interval 1.49-3.58, P = 0.0002) and estimated glomerular filtration rate less than 50 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (hazard ratio 2.291, 95% confidence interval 1.06-4.94, P = 0.034) predicted MACE in multivariate analysis. Adding novel risk factors to FRS did not improve FRS prediction. CONCLUSION: FRS substantially underpredicts MACE in kidney transplant recipients among all risk subgroups. Commonly available novel risk factors do not improve FRS predictive value.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations61
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTransplantationSame topicRenal Transplantation Outcomes and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207