MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200116546 · doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2021.07.065

Randomized Trial of Metoprolol in Patients With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy

2021· article· en· W4200116546 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Anne M. Dybro, Torsten B. Rasmussen, Roni Nielsen, Mads J. Andersen, Morten K. Jensen, Steen Hvitfeldt Poulsen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American College of Cardiology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNovo Nordisk Fonden
KeywordsMedicineMetoprololRandomized controlled trialCardiologyHypertrophic cardiomyopathyInternal medicineObstructive cardiomyopathy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The use of β-adrenergic receptor blocking agents in symptomatic patients with obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM) rests on clinical experience and observational cohort studies. OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to investigate the effects of metoprolol on left ventricular outflow tract (LVOT) obstruction, symptoms, and exercise capacity in patients with obstructive HCM. METHODS: This double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized crossover trial enrolled 29 patients with obstructive HCM and New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class II or higher symptoms from May 2018 to September 2020. Patients received metoprolol or placebo for 2 consecutive 2-week periods in random order. The effect parameters were LVOT gradients, NYHA functional class, Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) angina class, Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire Overall Summary Score (KCCQ-OSS), and cardiopulmonary exercise testing. RESULTS: Compared with placebo, the LVOT gradient during metoprolol was lower at rest (25 mm Hg [interquartile range (IQR): 15-58 mm Hg] vs 72 mm Hg [IQR: 28-87 mm Hg]; P = 0.007), at peak exercise (28 mm Hg [IQR: 18-40 mm Hg] vs 62 mm Hg [IQR: 31-113 mm Hg]; P < 0.001), and postexercise (45 mm Hg [IQR: 24-100 mm Hg] vs 115 mm Hg [IQR: 55-171 mm Hg]; P < 0.0001). During metoprolol treatment, 14% of patients were in NYHA functional class III or higher compared with 38% of patients receiving placebo (P < 0.01). Similarly, no patients were in CCS class III or higher during metoprolol treatment compared with 10% during placebo treatment (P < 0.01). These findings were confirmed by higher KCCQ-OSS during metoprolol treatment (76.2 ± 16.2 vs 73.8 ± 19.5; P = 0.039). Measures of exercise capacity, peak oxygen consumption, and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide did not differ between the study arms. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with placebo, metoprolol reduced LVOT obstruction at rest and during exercise, provided symptom relief, and improved quality of life in patients with obstructive HCM. Maximum exercise capacity remained unchanged. (The Effect of Metoprolol in Patients with Hypertrophic Obstructive Cardiomyopathy [TEMPO]; NCT03532802).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score0.389

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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

Citations171
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American College of CardiologySame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207