A novel method to interpret early phase trials shows how the narrowing of the coronary sinus concordantly improves symptoms, functional status and quality of life in refractory angina
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Reduction of the coronary sinus was shown to improve angina in patients unsuitable for revascularisation. We assessed whether a percutaneous device that reduces the diameter of the coronary sinus improved outcomes across multiple endpoints in a phase II trial. METHODS: ngina) trial, which enrolled patients with Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class 3-4 refractory angina. We used four domains: symptoms (CCS Angina Scale), functionality (total exercise duration), ischaemia (imaging) and health-related quality of life. For all domains, we specified a meaningful threshold for change. The primary endpoint was defined as a probability of ≥80% that the reducer exceeded the meaningful threshold on two or more domains (group-level analysis) or that the average efficacy score in the reducer group exceeded the sham control group by at least two points (patient-level analysis). RESULTS: We randomised 104 participants to either a device that narrows to coronary sinus (n=52) or a sham implantation (n=52). The reducer group met the prespecified criteria for concordance at the group level and demonstrated improvement in symptoms (0.59 CCS grade, 95% credible interval (CrI)=0.22 to 0.95), total exercise duration (+27.9%, 95% CrI=2.8% to 59.8%) and quality of life (stability +11.2 points, 95% CrI=3.3 to 19.1; perception +11.0, 95% CrI=3.3 to 18.7). CONCLUSIONS: The reducer concordantly improved symptoms, functionality and quality of life compared with a sham intervention in patients with angina unsuitable for coronary revascularisation. Concordant analysis such as this one can help interpret early phase trials and guide the decision to pursue a clinical programme into a larger confirmatory trial. TRAIL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01205893.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".