Longitudinal Prediction of Ventricular Arrhythmic Risk in Patients With Arrhythmogenic Right Ventricular Cardiomyopathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The arrhythmogenic right ventricular cardiomyopathy (ARVC) risk calculator stratifies risk for incident sustained ventricular arrhythmias (VA) at the time of ARVC diagnosis. However, included risk factors change over time, and how well the ARVC risk calculator performs at follow-up is unknown. METHODS: This was a retrospective analysis of patients with definite ARVC and without prior sustained VA. Risk factors for VA including age, nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, premature ventricular complex burden, T-wave inversions on electrocardiogram, cardiac syncope, right ventricular function, therapeutic medication use, and exercise intensity were assessed at the time of 2010 Task Force Criteria based ARVC diagnosis and upon repeat evaluations. Changes in these risk factors were analyzed over 5-year follow-up. The 5-year risk of VA was predicted longitudinally using (1) the baseline ARVC risk calculator prediction, (2) the ARVC risk prediction calculated using updated risk factors, and (3) time-varying Cox regression. Discrimination and calibration were assessed in comparison to observed VA event rates. RESULTS: Four hundred eight patients with ARVC experiencing 132 primary VA events were included. Matched comparison of risk factors at baseline versus at 5 years of follow-up revealed decreased burdens of premature ventricular complexes (-1200/day) and nonsustained ventricular tachycardia (-14%). Presence of significant right ventricular dysfunction and number of T-wave inversions on electrocardiogram were unchanged. Observed risk for VA decreased by 13% by 5 years follow-up. The baseline ARVC risk calculator's ability to predict 5-year VA risk worsened during follow-up (C statistics, 0.83 at diagnosis versus 0.68 at 5 years). Both the updated ARVC risk calculator (C statistics of 0.77) and time-varying Cox regression model (C statistics, 0.77) had strong discrimination. The updated ARVC risk calculator overestimated 5-year VA risk by an average of +6%. CONCLUSIONS: Risk factors for VA in ARVC are dynamic, and overall risk for incident sustained VA decreases during follow-up. Up-to-date risk factor assessment improves VA risk stratification.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".