Design for the sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) compared with enalapril study of pediatric patients with heart failure due to systemic left ventricle systolic dysfunction (PANORAMA-HF study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sacubitril/valsartan (LCZ696) is an angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor approved for the treatment of adult heart failure (HF); however, the benefit of sacubitril/valsartan in pediatric HF patients is unknown. STUDY DESIGN: This global multi-center study will use an adaptive, seamless two-part design. Part 1 will assess the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics of single ascending doses of sacubitril/valsartan in pediatric (1 month to <18 years) HF patients with systemic left ventricle and reduced left ventricular systolic function stratified into 3 age groups (Group 1: 6 to <18 years; Group 2: 1 to <6 years; Group 3: 1 month to <1 year). Part 2 is a 52-week, efficacy and safety study where 360 eligible patients will be randomized to sacubitril/valsartan or enalapril. A novel global rank primary endpoint derived by ranking patients (worst-to-best outcome) based on clinical events such as death, initiation of mechanical life support, listing for urgent heart transplant, worsening HF, measures of functional capacity (NYHA/Ross scores), and patient-reported HF symptoms will be used to assess efficacy. CONCLUSION: The PANORAMA-HF study, which will be the largest prospective pediatric HF trial conducted to date and the first to use a global rank primary endpoint, will determine whether sacubitril/valsartan is superior to enalapril for treatment of pediatric HF patients with reduced systemic left ventricular systolic function.
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 | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".