MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3024335606 · doi:10.22374/cjgim.v15i1.343

Rhabdomyolysis as a Side Effect of the Drug Interaction between Atorvastatin and Sacubitril/Valsartan

2020· article· en· W3024335606 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ka Hong Chan, Payam Pournazari, Patick Champagne

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of General Internal Medicine · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSacubitril, ValsartanMedicineRhabdomyolysisAtorvastatinSacubitrilStatinInternal medicineValsartanPharmacology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sacubitril/valsartan is an increasingly used medication in patients with severe left ventricular dysfunction. Here, we present an 83-year-old male with an ejection fraction of 18% who presented with rhabdomyolysis shortly after initiation of this medication in the setting of being on atorvastatin safely for many years previously. Interestingly, prior pharmacological studies have demonstrated an interaction between sacubitril and atorvastatin via the OATP pathway. In particular, sacubitril has been shown to inhibit OATP1B1 and 1B3, the rate-limiting step for the elimination of atorvastatin, which can result in the drug’s accumulation. This phenomenon was determined to be the most likely etiology behind the patient’s rhabdomyolysis in this case. Once the medications were discontinued, the rhabdomyolysis resolved. If both a statin and sacubitril/valsartan need to be co-administered, starting the statin at a low dose with careful monitoring of symptoms, CK, electrolytes, and creatinine during gradual titration should be considered.

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)0.000
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: Case report · Consensus signal: Case report
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.262 · 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 designCase report
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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of General Internal MedicineSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207