Development of a Risk Score Based on Aortic Calcification to Predict 1-Year Mortality After Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to develop a new scoring system based on thoracic aortic calcification (TAC) to predict 1-year cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. BACKGROUND: A calcified aorta is often associated with poor prognosis after transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR). A risk score encompassing aortic calcification may be valuable in identifying poor TAVR responders. METHODS: CAPRI (4 Cities for Assessing CAlcification PRognostic Impact) multicenter study included a training cohort (1,425 patients treated using TAVR between 2010 and 2014) and a contemporary test cohort (311 patients treated in 2015). TAC was measured by computed tomography pre-TAVR. CAPRI risk scores were based on the linear predictors of Cox models including TAC in addition to comorbidities and demographic, atherosclerotic disease and cardiac function factors. CAPRI scores were constructed and tested in 2 independent cohorts. RESULTS: increase in TAC was associated with a 6% increase in cardiovascular mortality and a 4% increase in all-cause mortality. The predicted and observed survival probabilities were highly correlated (slopes >0.9 for both cardiovascular and all-cause mortality). The model's predictive power was fair (AUC 68% [95% confidence interval [CI]: 64% to 72%]) for both cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. The model performed similarly in the training and test cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The CAPRI score, which combines the TAC variable with classical prognostic factors, is predictive of 1-year cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. Its predictive performance was confirmed in an independent contemporary cohort. CAPRI scores are highly relevant to current practice and strengthen the evidence base for decision making in valvular interventions. Its routine use may help prevent futile procedures.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".