Dyspnea, Quality of Life and Walking Capacity during 1 Year Follow-up after a First Episode of Pulmonary Embolism: Results of the E.L.O.P.E. Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Most pulmonary embolism (PE) research has focused on outcomes such as mortality and PE recurrence. Patient-centered outcomes such as persistent dyspnea, impaired quality of life (QOL) and reduced walking capacity after PE have been largely unstudied. To address this knowledge gap, we performed the ELOPE (Evaluation of Longterm Outcomes after PE) study, a prospective, observational, multicenter cohort study of long-term outcomes after acute PE (www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01174628). Objectives: To describe and quantify dyspnea, quality of life and walking capacity during the 1 year following PE diagnosis. Methods: Patients ³ 18 years old with a 1st episode of acute PE diagnosed within the previous 10 days screened at 5 Canadian recruiting centers were potentially eligible to participate. Exclusion criteria were subsegmental-only PE, preexisting severe cardiopulmonary comorbidity, previous proximal DVT, contraindication to CT pulmonary angiography, life expectancy <1 year, unable to read questionnaire in English and French or to attend follow-up visits, and unable or unwilling to consent. At baseline, 1, 3, 6 and 12 months after PE, we measured dyspnea (UCSD Shortness of Breath Questionnaire [SOBQ]), generic QOL (SF-36), PE-specific QOL (PEmbQoL), and walking capacity (6-minute walk test (6MWT)). Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) was performed at 1 year; the primary outcome of the study was maximal aerobic capacity defined by peak oxygen uptake (VO2) as a percent of predicted maximal VO2 (VO2max) on 1-year CPET, with <80% predicted VO2max considered abnormal, as per American Thoracic Society guidelines. For this analysis, we summarized demographic and clinical characteristics of study subjects, and calculated mean (SD) dyspnea scores, QOL scores and 6MWT distance at each study visit during 1 year follow-up in the total population and according to 1-year CPET result. Results: 984 patients were screened for participation; of these, 150 were eligible and 100 (67%) consented to participate. Mean (SD) age was 50 (15) years, 57% were male, 80% were outpatients and 33% had concomitant DVT. PE was provoked in 21% and unprovoked in 79%; none were cancer-related. During 1 year follow-up, SOBQ scores improved by an average of 16.9 points compared with baseline, SF-36 PCS (physical component score) by 9.0 points, SF-36 MCS (mental component score) by 5.6 points, PEmbQoL (e.g. intensity of complaints dimension) by 33.4 points, and 6MWT by 43 meters. Improvement tended to be more marked during the first 3 months after PE and tapered off thereafter. For all measures, degree of improvement was significantly reduced and 1 year scores were significantly worse among the 46.5% (40/86) of patients with <80% predicted VO2max on 1-year CPET (e.g., SF-36 PCS: see Figure). Conclusions: On average, dyspnea, QOL and walking capacity improve during the year after PE, most notably during the first 3 months after PE diagnosis. However, those patients with abnormal VO2max at 1 year had less improvement over time and worse 1 year scores for all measures, compared to those with normal VO2max at 1 year. Further analyses will focus on identifying clinical, biomarker and imaging-based determinants of dyspnea, poor QOL and reduced walking capacity at 1 year after PE. Funding: Canadian Institutes of Health Research (MOP-93627) Figure 1. Figure 1. Disclosures Wells: BMS/Pfizer: Research Funding; Bayer: Honoraria.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".