Comparison of short-acting versus extended-release nifedipine: Effects on hemodynamics and sympathetic activity in patients with stable coronary artery disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We investigated the impact of short-acting and extended release nifedipine on sympathetic activity using radiotracer methodology in patients with stable coronary artery disease in order to more accurately document the response of the sympathetic nervous system to different formulations of this dihydropyridine calcium channel antagonist. Participants were randomized to placebo, short-acting or extended release nifedipine for 7-10 days. On the final day, systemic blood pressure, cardiac filling pressures, cardiac output, plasma norepinephrine (NE) and total body NE spillover were measured at baseline (time 0) and repeated at intervals for 6 hours. There were no differences in baseline measures between groups. Following the morning dose of study medication there were no changes in hemodynamics or sympathetic activity in the placebo group. However, there was a significant fall in blood pressure and a significant increase in total body NE spillover in both nifedipine groups. Importantly, the increase in sympathetic activity in response to short-acting nifedipine began earlier (30 minutes) and was much greater than that observed in the extended release group, which occurred later (270 minutes). These findings confirm that sustained therapy with nifedipine is associated with activation of the sympathetic nervous system which is dependent on the pharmacokinetics of the formulation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".