Obese-Inflammatory Phenotypes in Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Comorbidity-driven microvascular inflammation is posited as a unifying pathophysiologic mechanism for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). Obesity is proinflammatory and common in HFpEF. We hypothesized that unique obesity-inflammation HFpEF phenotypes exist and are associated with differences in clinical features, fibrosis biomarkers, and functional performance. Methods: Patients (n=301) from 3 HFpEF clinical trials were studied. Unsupervised machine learning (hierarchical clustering) with obese status and 13 inflammatory biomarkers as input variables was performed. Associations of clusters with HFpEF severity and fibrosis biomarkers (PIIINP [procollagen III N-terminal peptide], CITP [C-telopeptide for type I collagen], IGFBP7 [insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-7], and GAL-3 [galectin-3]) were assessed. Results: Hierarchical clustering revealed 3 phenotypes: pan-inflammatory (n=129; 64% obese), noninflammatory (n=83; 55% obese), and obese high CRP (C-reactive protein; n=89; 98% obese). The pan-inflammatory phenotype had more comorbidities and heart failure hospitalizations; higher left atrial volume, NT-proBNP (N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide), and fibrosis biomarkers; and lower glomerular filtration rate, peak oxygen consumption, 6-minute walk distance, and active hours/day ( P <0.05 for all). The noninflammatory phenotype had the most favorable values for all measures. The obese high CRP phenotype resembled the noninflammatory phenotype except for isolated elevation of CRP and lower functional performance. Hierarchical cluster assignment was independent of CRP genotype combinations that alter CRP levels and more biologically plausible than other clustering approaches. Multiple traditional analytic techniques confirmed and extended the hierarchical clustering findings. Conclusions: Unique obesity-inflammation phenotypes exist in HFpEF and are associated with differences in comorbidity burden, HFpEF severity, and fibrosis. These data support comorbidity-driven microvascular inflammation as a pathophysiologic mechanism for many but not all HFpEF patients.
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) | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".