Utility of a Precision Medicine Test in Elderly Adults with Symptoms Suggestive of Coronary Artery Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Diagnosing obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) is challenging in elderly adults, and current diagnostic approaches for CAD expose these individuals to risks from contrast dye and invasive procedures. DESIGN: A Registry to Evaluate Patterns of Care Associated with the Use of Corus CAD in Real World Clinical Care Settings (PRESET; NCT01677156), pragmatic clinical trial. SETTING: Community, 21 primary care practices. PARTICIPANTS: Of 566 stable, nonacute outpatients presenting with symptoms suggestive of obstructive CAD, the 176 who were aged 65 and older (median age 70, 61% female) were the current study participants. INTERVENTION: Blood-based precision medicine test, incorporating age, sex, and gene expression score (ASGES) to improve clinical decision-making and quality of care. MEASUREMENTS: Information on demographic characteristics, clinical factors, ASGES results (range 1-40; low (≤15), high (>15)), referral patterns to cardiology and advanced cardiac testing, and major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) was collected in a subgroup analysis of elderly adults in the PRESET Registry. Follow-up was for 1 year after ASGES testing. RESULTS: Median ASGES was 25, and 40 (23%) participants had a low score. Clinicians referred 12.5% of participants with a low ASGES and 49.3% with a high ASGES to cardiology or advanced cardiac testing (odds ratio for referral = 0.12, P < .001, adjusted for participants demographics and clinical covariates). Higher scores were associated with greater likelihood of posttest cardiac referral. At 1-year follow-up, the incidence of a MACE or revascularization was 10% (13/136) in the high ASGES group and 0% (0/40) in the low ASGES group (P = .04). CONCLUSION: The ASGES test showed potential clinical utility in the evaluation of elderly outpatients with symptoms suggestive of obstructive CAD. Test use may reduce unnecessary referrals and the risk of procedure-related complications in individuals with low ASGES, who are unlikely to benefit from further testing, while also identifying individuals who may benefit from further cardiac evaluation and management.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 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".