Assessment of Clinical Worsening End Points as a Surrogate for Mortality in Pulmonary Arterial Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Clinical worsening (CW) is a composite end point commonly used in pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) trials. We aimed to assess the trial-level surrogacy of CW for mortality in PAH trials, and whether the various CW components were similar in terms of frequency of occurrence, treatment-related relative risk (RR) reduction, and importance to patients. Methods: We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (January 1990 to December 2020) for trials evaluating the effects of PAH therapies on CW. The coefficient of determination between the RR for CW and mortality was assessed by regression analysis. The frequency of occurrence, RR reduction, and importance to patients of the CW components were assessed. Results: We included 35 independent cohorts (9450 patients). PAH therapies significantly reduced CW events (RR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.55–0.73]), including PAH-related hospitalizations (RR, 0.61 [95% CI, 0.47–0.79]), treatment escalation (RR, 0.57 [95% CI, 0.38–0.84]) and symptomatic progression (RR, 0.58 [95% CI, 0.48–0.69]), and modestly reduced all-cause mortality when incorporating deaths occurring after a primary CW-defining event (RR, 0.860 [95% CI, 0.742–0.997]). However, the effects of PAH-specific therapies on CW only modestly correlated with their effects on mortality ( R 2 trial , 0.35 [95% CI, 0.10–0.59]; P <0.0001), and the gradient in the treatment effect across component end points was large in the majority of trials. The weighted proportions of CW-defining events were hospitalization (33.5%) and symptomatic progression (32.3%), whereas death (6.7%), treatment escalation (5.6%), and transplantation/atrioseptostomy (0.2%) were infrequent. CW events were driven by the occurrence of events of major (49%) and mild-to-moderate (37%) importance to patients, with 14% of the events valued as critical. Conclusions: PAH therapies significantly reduced CW events, but study-level CW is not a surrogate for mortality in PAH trials. Moreover, components of CW largely vary in frequency, response to therapy, and importance to patients and are thus not interchangeable. Registration: URL: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO ; Unique identifier: CRD42020178949.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.034 | 0.076 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.028 | 0.038 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".