MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4214835272 · doi:10.1002/ehf2.13864

Outcome and Prognostic Value of N-Terminal Pro-Brain Natriuretic Peptide and High-Sensitivity C-Reactive Protein in Mildly Dilated Cardiomyopathy vs. Dilated Cardiomyopathy

2022· article· en· W4214835272 on OpenAlexaff
Jiayu Feng, Pengchao Tian, Lin Liang, Yuyi Chen, Yunhong Wang, Mei Zhai, Yan Huang, Qiong Zhou, Xuemei Zhao, Lang Zhao, Boping Huang, Liyan Huang, Yuhui Zhang, Jian Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueESC Heart Failure · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsCAE (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInternal medicineCardiologyDilated cardiomyopathyHazard ratioHeart failureEjection fractionNatriuretic peptideConfidence intervalBrain natriuretic peptideCardiomyopathyClinical endpointRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Mildly dilated cardiomyopathy (MDCM) was characterized as a subset of dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) with systolic dysfunction and modest ventricular dilatation, of which the prognostic studies were limited. We aimed to compare the prognostic value of the N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) between MDCM and DCM. METHODS AND RESULTS: in females. A total of 640 patients (median age 49 years, 24.8% female) were included in this study. At baseline, 110 cases (17%) were categorized as MDCM and 529 cases (83%) as DCM. Of 282 patients who had follow-up echocardiograms ≥ 6 months, 7 MDCM patients (11.1%) evolved to DCM and 70 DCM patients (32.0%) recovered to MDCM by the change of LVEDDi. Compared with DCM, patients with baseline MDCM had lower composite risks of all-cause mortality, heart transplantation, and heart failure rehospitalization [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.63, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.43-0.93, P = 0.019]. Both hs-CRP and NT-proBNP were independently associated with the composite endpoint in the overall cohort (hs-CRP: adjusted HR 1.07, 95% CI 1.00-1.15, P = 0.036; NT-proBNP: adjusted HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.02-1.22, P = 0.019). After a propensity-score matching between MDCM and DCM, higher NT-proBNP (above the median) was significantly associated with the outcome in DCM patients (HR 1.83, 95% CI 1.05-3.20, P = 0.034), but not in MDCM patients (HR 1.54, 95% CI 0.76-3.11, P = 0.227). On the contrary, higher hs-CRP (above the median) showed prognostic value for adverse events in MDCM patients (HR 3.19, 95% CI 1.52-6.66, P = 0.002), but not in DCM patients (HR 1.04, 95% CI 0.61-1.79, P = 0.88). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with MDCM, although no evidence suggested the prognostic role of NT-proBNP, higher level of hs-CRP was associated with outcome, supporting the use of hs-CRP in risk stratification for patients with MDCM.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations20
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESC Heart FailureSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207