Prognostic Utility of Stress Testing and Cardiac Biomarkers in Menopausal Women at Low to Intermediate Risk for Coronary ARTery Disease (SMART Study): 5-Year Outcome
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In women with low to intermediate risk of coronary artery disease (CAD), prognostic detection strategies have been controversial. We present the follow-up data of the SMART trial in peri/postmenopausal women at low to intermediate risk of CAD. OBJECTIVES: To determine the value of contrast stress echocardiography (CSE), stress electrocardiogram (sECG), and serum biomarkers for prediction of cardiovascular events (CE) in peri/postmenopausal women at low to intermediate risk of CAD. MATERIALS AND METHODS: , Lantheus Medical Imaging) and sECG. Laboratories included brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), atrial natriuretic peptide, endothelin, and high sensitivity C-reactive protein. Wall motion score index was based on a 16-segment model. Abnormal CSE was defined as new or worsening wall motion abnormality at stress, while abnormal sECG was ≥1 mm horizontal/downsloping ST segment depression/elevation (80 mseconds duration). Self-reported outcome data were collected from a mailed Women's Heart Clinic Questionnaire. CE outcomes included all-cause mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), heart failure, chest pain hospitalization or development of typical angina (CP), and revascularization (REVASC). Adjusted Cox proportional hazard ratios (HR; 95% confidence intervals) were reported. RESULTS: A total of 366 women (54.4 ± 5.5 years, Framingham risk 6.5% ± 4.4%) completed simultaneous CSE and sECG. Forty-two (11.5%) had abnormal CSE, while sECG was abnormal in 22 (6%) women. Follow-up (4.4 ± 1.2 years) was available in 315/366 (86%) women (78% exercise-CSE, 22% dobutamine-CSE). In those who completed follow-up, CSE was abnormal in 33 women (10.5%) and sECG was abnormal in 21 (6.7%). In 33 women with abnormal CSE, sECG was abnormal in 7 (21.2%) and normal in 26 (79%), p = 0.0004. CE occurred in 27 (8.6%) women: 8 all-cause mortality, 2 nonfatal MI, 13 CP, and 4 REVASC. CE occurred in 21% versus 7% of women with abnormal versus normal CSE, p = 0.014 and 38% versus 6% of women with abnormal versus normal sECG, p < 0.0001. Rest BNP was higher in women with CE versus those without (p = 0.018). Abnormal sECG and abnormal CSE were associated with CE, while only abnormal sECG was an independent predictor of CE (adjusted HR 10.3 [1.9-61.4], p = 0.007). Of the laboratory results, only BNP was associated with CE (adjusted HR 2.9 [1.1-7.3], p = 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: sECG and rest BNP were independent predictors of subsequent CE within 5 years in peri/postmenopausal women at low to intermediate risk of CAD.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".