MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118638029 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.2094

Cardiac myosin‐binding protein <scp>C</scp> in the diagnosis and risk stratification of acute heart failure

2021· article· en· W3118638029 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Nikola Kozhuharov, Desirée Wussler, Thomas E Kaier, Ivo Strebel, Samyut Shrestha, Dayana Flores, Albina Nowak, Zaid Sabti, Thomas Nestelberger, Tobias Zimmermann, Joan Walter, Maria Belkin, Eleni Michou, Pedro López‐Ayala, Danielle Menosi Gualandro, Dagmar I. Keller, Assen Goudev, Tobias Breidthardt, Christian Mueller, Michael Marber

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAcute Myocardial Infarction Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersGuy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation TrustMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaSchweizerische HerzstiftungSchweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen ForschungNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchAlereUniversitätsspital BaselUniversität BaselSingulexCardiovascular Research FoundationEuropean CommissionGuy's and St Thomas' CharityBritish Heart FoundationRocheAbbott LaboratoriesNational Science Foundation
KeywordsInterquartile rangeMedicineNatriuretic peptideHazard ratioHeart failureInternal medicineTroponin complexHeart-type fatty acid binding proteinConfidence intervalCardiologyTroponin TEmergency departmentProspective cohort studyTroponinReceiver operating characteristicRisk stratificationBiomarkerGastroenterologyMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Cardiac myosin-binding protein C (cMyC) seems to be even more sensitive in the quantification of cardiomyocyte injury vs. high-sensitivity cardiac troponin, and may therefore have diagnostic and prognostic utility. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a prospective multicentre diagnostic study, cMyC, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs-cTnT), and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) plasma concentrations were measured in blinded fashion in patients presenting to the emergency department with acute dyspnoea. Two independent cardiologists centrally adjudicated the final diagnosis. Diagnostic accuracy for acute heart failure (AHF) was quantified by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). All-cause mortality within 360 days was the prognostic endpoint. Among 1083 patients eligible for diagnostic analysis, 51% had AHF. cMyC concentrations at presentation were higher among AHF patients vs. patients with other final diagnoses [72 (interquartile range, IQR 39-156) vs. 22 ng/L (IQR 12-42), P < 0.001)]. cMyC's AUC was high [0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.78-0.83], higher than hs-cTnT's (0.79, 95% CI 0.76-0.82, P = 0.081) and lower than NT-proBNP's (0.91, 95% CI 0.89-0.93, P < 0.001). Among 794 AHF patients eligible for prognostic analysis, 28% died within 360 days; cMyC plasma concentrations above the median indicated increased risk of death (hazard ratio 2.19, 95% CI 1.66-2.89; P < 0.001). cMyC's prognostic accuracy was comparable with NT-proBNP's and hs-cTnT's. cMyC did not independently predict all-cause mortality when used in validated multivariable regression models. In novel multivariable regression models including medication, age, left ventricular ejection fraction, and discharge creatinine, cMyC remained an independent predictor of death and had no interactions with medical therapies at discharge. CONCLUSION: Cardiac myosin-binding protein C may aid physicians in the rapid triage of patients with suspected AHF.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations13
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicAcute Myocardial Infarction ResearchFrench-language works237,207