Vericiguat in patients with coronary artery disease and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Coronary artery disease (CAD) portends worse outcomes in heart failure (HF). We aimed to characterize patients with CAD and worsening HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and evaluate post hoc whether vericiguat treatment effect varied according to CAD. METHODS AND RESULTS: Cox proportional hazards were generated for the primary endpoint of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization (CVD/HFH). CAD was defined as previous myocardial infarction, percutaneous coronary intervention, or coronary artery bypass grafting. Of 5048 patients in VICTORIA with available data on CAD status, 2704 had CAD and were older, were more frequently male, diabetic, and had a lower glomerular filtration rate than those without CAD (all p <0.0001). Use of implantable cardioverter defibrillators and cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) was higher in patients with versus without CAD (33.5% vs. 21.1%; p <0.0001 and 16.3% vs. 12.8%; p = 0.0006). The primary endpoint of CVD/HFH was higher in those with versus without CAD (40.6 vs. 30.1/100 patient-years; adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 1.23; p <0.001) as was all-cause mortality (17.9% vs. 12.7%; adjusted HR 1.32; p <0.001). The primary outcome of CVD/HFH associated with vericiguat in patients with or without CAD was 38.8 versus 27.6 per 100 patient-years and for placebo was 42.6 versus 32.7 per 100 patient-years (interaction p = 0.78). CONCLUSION: In this post hoc study, CAD was associated with more CVD and HFH in patients with HFrEF and worsening HF. Vericiguat was beneficial and safe regardless of concomitant CAD.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".