New potential of Trimetazidine MB for coronary heart disease treatment in the real-world clinical practice: results of the Russian multi-centre randomised study PERSPECTIVE (Part II)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aim. As a clinical part of the Russian multi-centre randomised study, to assess the clinical benefits and safety of adding Trimetazidine MB to the standard treatment scheme in patients with stable angina (SA), in order to optimise their ambulatory therapy and improve their compliance. Material and methods. The study included 981 patients with Functional Class (FC) II-III SA and various concomitant diseases and syndromes, such as chronic heart failure (CHF), Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM-2), or chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) in smokers. All participants were divided into two groups: Group I (n=838) received standard therapy plus trimetazidine MB (70 mg/d, twice a day), while Group II (n=143) received standard therapy only. The treatment and follow-up phases lasted for 12 months. Results. In Group I, the weekly number of angina attacks decreased by 42 % from the baseline at one month (р<0,0001), and by 70 % at 12 months (р<0,0001). The number of nitroglycerin (NTG) tablets taken decreased, respectively, by 41 % (р<0,0001) and 68 % (р<0,0001). In Group II, the decrease in angina attack number and NTG tablet number was significant only at 6 months and was less pronounced than in Group I. Therefore, in Group I, the number of patients with FC I increased by 7 times, while the number of FC III patients decreased by 1,8 times. No marked FC dynamics was observed in Group II. In Group I, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) increased by 2,4 % (р<0,001), while interventricular septum and LV posterior wall thickness decreased, respectively, by 4,2 % (р<0,01) and 3,5 % (р<0,01). These parameters, however, did not change substantially in Group II patients. At 12 months, the number of patients hospitalised due to clinical decompensation, or becoming disable, was twice as high in Group II as in Group I. Conclusion. The Russian “PERSPECTIVE” Study results demonstrated high clinical effectiveness and safety ofTrimetazidineMB therapy, combined with standard treatment, in SA patients with CHF, DM-2, and COPD. Therefore, metabolic therapy could be more widely used in the real-world clinical settings.
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 | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".