MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3000076254 · doi:10.1093/ehjci/ehz872.081

P253 Withdrawal of beta- blockers and ACE inhibitors after left ventricular systolic function recovery in patient with dilated cardiomyopathy randomized control trial

2020· article· en· W3000076254 on OpenAlexaff
Abeer Bakhsh, George Thanassoulis, James C. Engert, Eleanor Elstein, Thao Huynh, Nadia Giannetti

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsMcGill University Health Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionCardiologyInternal medicineHeart failureVentricleClinical endpointDilated cardiomyopathyRandomizationDiscontinuationRandomized controlled trialSystoleCardiomyopathyBlood pressureDiastole

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Funding Acknowledgements The Rosenfeld Heart Fund Introduction recovery of left ventricle (LV) systolic function with normalization of ejection fraction (LVEF) occurs in 10 - 27% of patients with 80% maintaining recovery. However, the need for medical therapy after recovery is often questioned. Previous randomized studies of treatment withdrawal were small, not selected for non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and had a reference of improved or recovered EF to > 40% or > 10% change from LVEF at time of diagnosis. Hypothesis: In patients with DCM with recovery of the LV systolic function to an EF (>50%), medical therapy withdrawal is possible without rebound LV systolic dysfunction. Method: This was a pilot randomized control open-label trial with 2:1 randomization for withdrawal of b-blockers and ACE inhibitors in patients with recovered LV systolic function. Patients’ medication discontinuation occurred in 2 phases with a six-month interval and patients were followed for one year. The primary endpoint was LVEF reduction (< 40%). Results: There were 22 patients (10 females) enrolled. The mean age was 60 ± 12y. The mean LVEF at enrollment was 58 ± 5% with no significant difference in the mean LVEF in both groups. Sixteen patients were assigned to the withdrawal group and 6 assigned to the control group. The primary endpoint occurred in 31% of the withdrawal group compared to none of the control. The rate of 1ry outcome after withdrawal of medical therapy was 19%, p-value 0.15. The mean LVEF at 1 year for the treatment withdrawal group was 46.8 ± 12% and control 55 ± 6%, p-value 0.15. In the medication withdrawal group, the mean LVEF reduction was 10.6 ± 11% and the difference between the mean LVEF at enrollment and at 1 year was 10.6 ± 11% with 95% CI (4.6,16.49), p-value 0.0017. Conclusion: In DCM patients with recovery of LV systolic function, we observed worsening of LVEF after withdrawal of b-blockers and ACE inhibitors. Abstract P253 Figure.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.008
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart JournalSame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207