MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography Ischemia as a Predictor of the Placebo-Controlled Efficacy of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Stable Coronary Artery Disease

2019· article· en· W2979752265 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rasha Al‐Lamee, Matthew Shun‐Shin, James P. Howard, Alexandra N. Nowbar, Christopher Rajkumar, David Thompson, Sayan Sen, Sukhjinder Nijjer, Ricardo Petraco, John R. Davies, Thomas Keeble, Kare Tang, Iqbal Malik, Nina Bual, Christopher Cook, Yousif Ahmad, Henry Seligman, Andrew S.P. Sharp, Robert Gerber, Suneel Talwar, Ravi Assomull, Graham D. Cole, Niall Keenan, Gajen Kanaganayagam, Joban Sehmi, Roland Wensel, Frank E. Harrell, Jamil Mayet, Simon Thom, Justin E. Davies, Dárrel P. Francis

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersImperial College Healthcare NHS TrustImperial College LondonBritish Heart FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care Research
KeywordsMedicineCardiologyConventional PCIStress EchocardiographyInternal medicineCoronary artery diseasePercutaneous coronary interventionAnginaPlaceboAngioplastyCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyDobutamineStress testing (software)Myocardial infarctionHemodynamicsPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Dobutamine stress echocardiography is widely used to test for ischemia in patients with stable coronary artery disease. In this analysis, we studied the ability of the prerandomization stress echocardiography score to predict the placebo-controlled efficacy of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) within the ORBITA trial (Objective Randomised Blinded Investigation With Optimal Medical Therapy of Angioplasty in Stable Angina). Methods: One hundred eighty-three patients underwent dobutamine stress echocardiography before randomization. The stress echocardiography score is broadly the number of segments abnormal at peak stress, with akinetic segments counting double and dyskinetic segments counting triple. The ability of prerandomization stress echocardiography to predict the placebo-controlled effect of PCI on response variables was tested by using regression modeling. Results: At prerandomization, the stress echocardiography score was 1.56±1.77 in the PCI arm (n=98) and 1.61±1.73 in the placebo arm (n=85). There was a detectable interaction between prerandomization stress echocardiography score and the effect of PCI on angina frequency score with a larger placebo-controlled effect in patients with the highest stress echocardiography score ( P interaction =0.031). With our sample size, we were unable to detect an interaction between stress echocardiography score and any other patient-reported response variables: freedom from angina ( P interaction =0.116), physical limitation ( P interaction =0.461), quality of life ( P interaction =0.689), EuroQOL 5 quality-of-life score ( P interaction =0.789), or between stress echocardiography score and physician-assessed Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class ( P interaction =0.693), and treadmill exercise time ( P interaction =0.426). Conclusions: The degree of ischemia assessed by dobutamine stress echocardiography predicts the placebo-controlled efficacy of PCI on patient-reported angina frequency. The greater the downstream stress echocardiography abnormality caused by a stenosis, the greater the reduction in symptoms from PCI. Clinical Trial Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02062593.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.228 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations73
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207