MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4280515431 · doi:10.2147/copd.s358927

Association between Inhaled β2-agonists Initiation and Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events: A Population-based Nested Case-Control Study

2022· article· en· W4280515431 on OpenAlexafffund
Joseph Emil Amegadzie, John‐Michael Gamble, Jamie Farrell, Zhiwei Gao

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of COPD · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicPharmacological Effects and Assays
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersReseau canadien de recherche respiratoire
KeywordsMedicineMaceNested case-control studyCOPDInternal medicineAsthmaCohortLamaMyocardial infarctionPopulationCardiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Despite ample evidence underpinning the efficacy of β 2 -agonists in asthma and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), the occurrence of β 1 - and β 2 -adrenoceptors in the heart suggests that β 2 -agonists may have deleterious cardiac effects. We investigated the association between new users of long-or short-acting β 2 -agonists (LABA or SABA) or ICS (inhaled corticosteroids)/LABA and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Methods: A nested case–control analysis was conducted using the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink of patients with asthma, COPD or asthma–COPD overlap with initial treatment of LABA, SABA, ICS/LABA, ICS, long-or short-acting muscarinic antagonist (LAMA or SAMA) between 01 January 1998 and 31 July 2018. The primary outcome was MACE, defined as the first occurrence of stroke, heart failure, myocardial infarction, arrhythmia, or cardiovascular death. Each case was matched with up to 10 controls on age, sex, date of cohort-entry, and duration of follow-up. The risk of MACE associated with β 2 -agonists was estimated using conditional logistic regression after controlling for potential confounders. Results: The cohort included 180,567 new users of β 2 -agonists, ICS, SAMA, or LAMA. Among asthmatics, β 2 -agonists were not associated with the risk of MACE (SABA vs ICS: HR 1.29 [0.96– 1.73]; ICS/LABA vs ICS, HR 0.75 [0.33– 1.73]). In contrast, among COPD patients, LABA (HR, 2.38 [1.04– 5.47]), SABA (HR, 2.02 [1.13– 3.59]) and ICS/LABA (HR, 2.08 [1.04– 4.16]) users had an increased risk of MACE compared with SAMA users. Among patients with asthma–COPD overlap, SABA (HR, 2.57 [1.26– 5.24]) was associated with an increased risk of MACE compared with ICS. Conclusion: In conclusion, initiation of LABA, SABA, or ICS/LABA in COPD or SABA in asthma–COPD overlap is associated with increased risk of MACE. No associations were observed among patients with asthma. Keywords: asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, nested case–control

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.295

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.244 · 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 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

Citations26
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of COPDSame topicPharmacological Effects and AssaysFrench-language works237,207