The Impact of Cell Therapy on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Refractory Angina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Rationale: Cell-based therapies are a novel potential treatment for refractory angina and have been found to improve markers of angina. However, the effects on mortality and major adverse cardiac events (MACE) have not been definitively investigated. Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of stem cell treatment compared with optimal medical treatment for refractory angina by conducting an updated meta-analysis, looking at clinical outcomes. Methods and Results: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses guidelines. A comprehensive search was performed of PubMed, EMBASE (Excerpta Medica database), Cochrane, ClinicalTrials.gov , Google Scholar databases of randomized controlled trials, and scientific session abstracts. Studies were deemed eligible if they met the following criteria: (1) full-length publications in peer-reviewed journals; (2) evaluated cell therapy use in patients with no further revascularisation options while on optimal medical treatment; (3) patients had ongoing angina, Canadian Cardiovascular Society class II—IV; and (4) included a placebo/control arm. We calculated risk ratios for all-cause mortality, combined MACE events. We assessed heterogeneity using χ 2 and I 2 tests. We identified 1191 citations with 8 randomized controlled trials meeting inclusion criteria involving 526 patients. Outcomes pooled were MACE, mortality, and indices of angina (angina episodes, Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class, exercise tolerance, and antianginal medications). Our analysis showed a decreased risk of both MACE (odds ratio, 0.41; CI, 0.25−0.70) and mortality (odds ratio, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.10−0.60) in cell-treated patients compared with patients on maximal medical therapy. This was supported by improvements in surrogate end points of anginal episodes, use of antianginal medications, Canadian Cardiovascular Society class, and exercise tolerance. Conclusions: In addition to improvements in indices of angina, cell-based therapies improve cardiovascular outcomes (mortality/MACE) in patients with refractory angina. Given the premature termination of the phase III study, this supports the need for further definitive trials. Prospero Registration : URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/ . Unique identifier: CRD42018084257.
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 | 0.020 | 0.041 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".