Abstract 13124: Exercise Capacity as a Predictor of the Placebo-controlled Efficacy of Percutaneous Coronary Intervention in Stable Coronary Artery Disease: The Ventilatory Gas Exchange-stratified Analysis of ORBITA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Improvement in exercise capacity is a therapeutic goal of percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) for stable coronary artery disease (CAD). Cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) provides an accurate quantification of cardio-respiratory fitness through analysis of ventilatory gas exchange (VGE). The aim of this secondary analysis from the ORBITA trial is to determine the placebo-controlled effect of PCI on VGE parameters and determine if pre-randomisation exercise capacity predicts the placebo-controlled efficacy of PCI. Methods: Following a 6-week medication optimisation phase, patients with severe single vessel CAD underwent pre-randomisation treadmill CPET using the smoothed modified Bruce protocol. Patients were then randomly assigned to PCI or a placebo procedure. At the end of the 6-week follow up period, patients underwent repeat CPET before being unblinded to treatment allocation. Results: CPET data was available for 195 patients (mean age 66.1 ± 9.1, 73.3% male). At baseline, peak oxygen uptake (VO 2 ) was 21.5±6.7ml/kg/min in the PCI arm (n=102) and 20.6±6.6ml/kg/min in the placebo arm (n=93). At follow up, there was no significant benefit from PCI over a placebo procedure for any ventilatory gas exchange (peak VO 2 , p=0.826; O 2 -pulse plateau, p=0.638) or haemodynamic parameter (rate-pressure product, p=0.215). Although PCI resulted in significantly improved patient-reported freedom from angina (OR, 2.58 [95% CI, 1.35-14.92] p=0.004) and angina frequency score (OR, 1.73 [95% CI, 1.02 to 2.96], p=0.0432), there was no detectable interaction between peak VO 2 and these endpoints (P interaction(int) =0.715 and P int =0.588 respectively). Similarly, pre-randomisation peak VO 2 did not predict the placebo-controlled benefit of PCI on physical limitation (P int =0.293), quality of life (P int =0.380), EuroQOL 5 visual analogue score (P int =0.695), Canadian Cardiovascular Society angina class (P int =0.120) or exercise time (P int =0.897). Conclusions: When assessed against placebo, PCI does not improve VGE or exercise capacity, assessed by CPET. Furthermore, pre-randomisation exercise capacity does not predict the placebo-controlled effect of PCI on symptom relief, even in patients with lower functional capacity.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".