MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2981875740 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehz745.0083

3331Impact of baseline hemoglobin level and white blood cell count in real-world patients undergoing contemporary percutaneous coronary intervention: insights from the GLOBAL LEADER study

2019· article· en· W2981875740 on OpenAlexaff
Ply Chichareon, Rodrigo Modolo, Mariusz Tomaniak, Norihiro Kogame, Géza Fontos, Pierre Lantelme, Pascal Barraud, Christian W. Hamm, Philippe Gabríel Steg, Peter Jüni, Pascal Vranckx, Marco Valgimigli, Stephan Windecker, Yoshinobu Onuma, Patrick W. Serruys

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous coronary interventionConventional PCIInternal medicineClinical endpointMyocardial infarctionAnemiaAbsolute neutrophil countWhite blood cellCardiologySurgeryRandomized controlled trialNeutropeniaChemotherapy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction The impact of hemoglobin (Hb) level and white blood cell count (WBC) on the outcomes in all-comers PCI patients is unknown. Purpose We sought to assess the association between baseline Hb level, WBC count on 2-year outcomes after PCI in all-comers patients in the GLOBAL LEADERS study. We compared the outcomes between anemic and non-anemic patients according to WHO definition. Methods GLOBAL LEADERS study assessed the efficacy and safety of two antiplatelet strategies in 15,991 patients undergoing PCI. The primary endpoint was all-cause mortality or new Q wave myocardial infarction (MI) at 2 years. Secondary safety endpoint was BARC 3 or 5 bleeding at 2 years. The association between WBC count, Hb level and outcomes at 2 years were assessed in the multivariable Cox model adjusted for age, diabetes, ejection fraction and renal impairment. For Hb level, patients were categorized according to the WHO definition of anemia (Hb <12 g/dL in women, Hb <13 g/dL in men). Results Of 15991 patients randomized in the GLOBAL LEADER study, baseline WBC count and Hb levels were available in 14960 (93.7%) patients and 15215 (95.3%) patients, respectively. Hb level had an inverse association with adverse events after PCI. In the multivariable Cox model, Hb level was an independent predictor for ischemic and bleeding outcomes at 2 years while the WBC count was not (see table). Compared with non-anemic patients, anemic patients had significantly higher risk of primary endpoint (adjusted HR 2.07, 95% CI 1.72–2.49), BARC 3 or 5 bleeding (adjusted HR 1.49 95% CI 1.14–1.96), all-cause mortality (adjusted HR 2.33, 95% CI 1.89–2.86), any MI (adjusted HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.11–1.80), and any revascularization (adjusted HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.03–1.39). Hb level, WBC count and 2-year outcomes Outcomes at 2 years Hemoglobin level (mg/dL) WBC count (109/L) HR (95% CI) P value HR (95% CI) P value All-cause mortality or new Q wave MI 0.87 (0.82–0.91) <0.0001 1.00 (0.999–1.002) 0.33 All-cause mortality 0.82 (0.78–0.87) <0.0001 1.00 (0.999–1.002) 0.37 Any myocardial infarction 0.93 (0.87–0.99) 0.0165 1.00 (0.996–1.001) 0.23 Any revascularization 0.96 (0.93–1.00) 0.0302 1.00 (1.00–1.001) 0.25 BARC 3 or 5 bleeding 0.85 (0.79–0.91) <0.0001 1.00 (0.997–1.002) 0.76 Conclusion In the all-comers patients undergoing PCI, the baseline Hb level was significantly associated with the ischemic and bleeding outcomes at 2 years whereas baseline WBC count was not. Baseline WBC count may not be useful as a prognostic factor after PCI.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicVenous Thromboembolism Diagnosis and Management→French-language works237,207→