MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2981832500 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz746.0343

P5383Autologous adipose-derived stromal cell treatment for patients with refractory angina (MyStromalCell Trial) - 3-years follow-up results

2019· article· en· W2981832500 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Abbas Ali Qayyum, Anders Bruun Mathiasen, Steffen Helqvist, E. Joergensen, M H Haack-Soerensen, Annette Ekblond, Jens Kastrup

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiomedical Ethics and Regulation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionAnginaInternal medicineCardiologyCoronary artery diseasePlaceboCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyRefractory (planetary science)Adipose tissueHeart failureSurgeryMyocardial infarctionPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Improvements in medical and interventional therapies have transformed ischemic heart disease into a chronic illness for lot of patients. The disease is in progress and by time patients suffer from cardiac symptoms, reduced work capacity and decline in quality of life. Stem cell therapy is investigated as a treatment option for these patients. Purpose In this study, long-term safety and efficacy of autologous intra-myocardial injections of adipose-derived stromal cells (ASCs) were studied in patients with refractory angina. Methods Sixty patients were double-blinded 2:1 randomised to ASC or saline injections and followed for three years. The patients had significant angina due to ≥1 coronary artery stenosis but preserved left ventricular ejection fraction. ASCs were obtained from abdomen, ex vivo culture expanded and VEGF-A165 stimulated before delivery into the ischemic myocardium. Results The cardiac symptoms, CCS and NYHA classification, were significantly reduced in the ASC group during the three years follow-up period (2.5±0.9 to 1.8±1.2, P=0.002 and 2.4±0.6 to 2.2±0.8, P=0.007, respectively). However, no significant change was observed in CCS or NYHA in the placebo group during the follow-up period (2.5±0.8 to 2.1±1.3, P=0.186 and 2.7±0.6 to 2.4±0.8, P=0.314, respectively). Moreover, the number of weekly angina attacks reported was significantly reduced in the ASC group (P=0.017), but not in the placebo group (P=0.425). For patients in the ASC group, the bicycle exercise time (383±30s to 370±44s, P=0.052) and the exercise performance in watt were un-changed (81±6 to 78±10, P=0.123), but the performance in METs was reduced significantly (4.2±0.3 to 4.0±0.4, P=0.027) during the follow-up period. At the same time in the placebo group, there was a significant decline in bicycle exercise time (437±53s to 383±58s, P=0.001), the exercise performance measured in watt (87±12 watt to 80±12 watt, P=0.019) and in METs (4.5±0.4 to 4.1±0.4, P=0.002). In both groups, significant improved quality-of-life, angina stability, angina frequency and physical limitation score was observed but not for overall satisfaction score. Conclusion Patients receiving ASCs had improved cardiac symptoms during the three years follow-up period, which was not the case for patients in the placebo group. Moreover, patients receiving ASCs had unchanged exercise capacity, in opposition to deterioration in the placebo group. Acknowledgement/Funding Arvid Nilssons Foundation; Rigshospitalets Research Foundation; Aase and Ejnar Danielsens Foundation

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.384
Threshold uncertainty score0.591

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicBiomedical Ethics and RegulationFrench-language works237,207