MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210849677 · doi:10.1161/jaha.121.024156

ABCD‐GENE Score and Clinical Outcomes Following Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: Insights from the TAILOR‐PCI Trial

2022· article· en· W4210849677 on OpenAlexaff
Davide Capodanno, Dominick J. Angiolillo, Ryan J. Lennon, Shaun G. Goodman, Sang‐Wook Kim, Fearghas O’Cochlain, Derek So, John P. Sweeney, Charanjit S. Rihal, Michael E. Farkouh, Naveen L. Pereira

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular Diseases
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaCanadian VIGOUR CentreUniversity of TorontoUniversity of AlbertaSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicinePercutaneous coronary interventionConventional PCIClopidogrelInternal medicineMyocardial infarctionStroke (engine)P2Y12CardiologyDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background In TAILOR‐PCI, genotype‐guided selection of P2Y 12 inhibitors after percutaneous coronary intervention did not significantly reduce the risk of ischemic events at 12 months. The Age, Body Mass Index, Chronic Kidney Disease, Diabetes, and Genotyping (ABCD‐GENE) score identifies patients with high platelet reactivity on clopidogrel at increased risk of ischemic events. The aim of this study was to investigate the value of the ABCD‐GENE score for tailoring P2Y 12 inhibitor selection after percutaneous coronary intervention. Methods and Results In a post hoc analysis of the TAILOR‐PCI, outcomes were analyzed by ABCD‐GENE score and allocation to genotype‐guided or conventional P2Y 12 inhibitor selection. Primary (death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and secondary (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, stroke, stent thrombosis, or severe recurrent ischemia) outcomes were assessed. Among 3883 patients discharged on clopidogrel in the genotype‐guided and conventional therapy groups, 15.8% and 84.2% had high (≥10 points) or low (<10) ABCD‐GENE scores, respectively. At 12 months, both the primary (5.2% versus 2.6%, P <0.001) and secondary outcomes (7.7% versus 4.6%, P =0.001) were significantly increased in patients with high ABCD‐GENE score. Among 4714 patients allocated to genotype‐guided or conventional therapy, the former did not significantly reduce the 12‐month risk of the primary and secondary outcomes in both the high and low ABCD‐GENE score groups (p interaction =0.48 and 0.27, respectively). Conclusions Among patients with percutaneous coronary intervention on clopidogrel, the ABCD‐GENE score was helpful in identifying those at higher risk. The ABCD‐GENE score may potentially enhance the precision of tailored selection of P2Y 12 inhibitors, which needs to be confirmed in prospective investigations. Clinical Trial Registration URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique Identifier: NCT01742117.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.288 · 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

Citations35
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart AssociationSame topicAntiplatelet Therapy and Cardiovascular DiseasesFrench-language works237,207