Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Safety of Methotrexate and Its Possible Benefits on Restenosis After Bare-Metal Stent Deployment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) revolutionized treatment of coronary artery disease. Drug-eluting stents are effective and safe but their cost is high, especially for some countries. The primary objective was to evaluate the safety of methotrexate (MTX) in patients who underwent PCI and the secondary goal was to evaluate the possibility that MTX has an impact on restenosis. METHODS: This was a transversal, prospective and descriptive study that recruited 16 patients in whom PCI was planned. MTX was administered to patients at a dose of 5 mg/week for 2 weeks before PCI and 8 weeks after PCI. Bare-metal stent (BMS) deployment was performed according to standard practice. Patients were monitored clinically every 15 days during the first 2 months after the procedure and monthly until 9 months after PCI. RESULTS: There were no immediate or late complications associated with PCI. Adverse events and side effects due to MTX occurred in three patients (prevalence 18.7%). These side effects are classified as minor complications. MTX was not discontinued due to these side effects. There were no reported cases of clinical restenosis. CONCLUSIONS: MTX was safe in the study population and raised the possibility that a low-cost drug may have positive effects on restenosis after BMS implantation. However, studies with larger sample sizes and other imagine modalities (intravascular ultrasound and/or optical coherence tomography) are required to confirm this hypothesis.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".