Current Targets and Future Directions of Positive Inotropes for Heart Failure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While a congestive heart failure patient will ultimately need an assist device or even a replacement heart as the disease progresses, not every patient is qualified for such advanced therapy. Such patients awaiting better circulatory support benefit from positive inotropes in the meantime as palliative care. These agents are often prescribed in patients with acute decompensated heart failure, with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction and symptoms of organ dysfunction. Although positive inotropes, for example, digoxin, dobutamine, milrinone, levosimendan, etc., are successfully marketed and in use, a lot of their adverse effects, like arrhythmias, hypotension, and even sudden cardiac death, are rather encouraging further research on the development of novel positive inotropes. This review has investigated the molecular mechanisms of some of these adverse effects in terms of the proteins they target, followed by research on newer targets. Studies from 2013-2023 that have reported new small molecules with positive inotropic effects have been revisited in order to determine the progress made so far in drug discovery.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".