The Impact of Levothyroxine on Cardiac Function in Older Adults With Mild Subclinical Hypothyroidism: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Subclinical hypothyroidism has been associated with heart failure, but only small trials assessed whether treatment with levothyroxine has an impact on cardiac function. METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, trial nested within the TRUST trial, Swiss participants ages ≥65 years with subclinical hypothyroidism (thyroid-stimulating hormone [TSH] 4.60-19.99 mIU/L; free thyroxine level within reference range) were randomized to levothyroxine (starting dose of 50 µg daily) to achieve TSH normalization or placebo. The primary outcomes were the left ventricular ejection fraction for systolic function and the ratio between mitral peak velocity of early filling to early diastolic mitral annular velocity (E/e' ratio) for diastolic function. Secondary outcomes included e' lateral/septal, left atrial volume index, and systolic pulmonary artery pressure. RESULTS: A total of 185 participants (mean age 74.1 years, 47% women) underwent echocardiography at the end of the trial. After a median treatment duration of 18.4 months, the mean TSH decreased from 6.35 mIU/L to 3.55 mIU/L with levothyroxine (n = 96), and it remained elevated at 5.29 mIU/L with placebo (n = 89). The adjusted between-group difference was not significant for the mean left ventricular ejection fraction (62.7% vs 62.5%, difference = 0.4%, 95% confidence interval -1.8% to 2.5%, P = 0.72) and the E/e' ratio (10.6 vs 10.1, difference 0.4, 95% confidence interval -0.7 to 1.4, P = 0.47). No differences were found for the secondary diastolic function parameters or for interaction according to sex, baseline TSH, preexisting heart failure, and treatment duration (P value >0.05). CONCLUSION: Systolic and diastolic heart function did not differ after treatment with levothyroxine compared with placebo in older adults with mild subclinical hypothyroidism.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".