MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4396802485 · doi:10.1161/jaha.123.034776

Prognostic Value and Determinants of High‐Sensitivity Cardiac Troponin T in Patients With a Systemic Right Ventricle: Insights From the SERVE Trial

2024· article· en· W4396802485 on OpenAlexaff
Francisco Javier Ruperti‐Repilado, Fabian Tran, Philip Haaf, Pedro López‐Ayala, Matthias Greutmann, Markus Schwerzmann, Judith Bouchardy, Harald Gabriel, Dominik Stambach, Tobias Rutz, Juerg Schwitter, Kerstin Wustmann, Michael Freese, Christian Mueller, Daniel Tobler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Heart Association · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVentricleCardiologyInternal medicineMedicineTroponinValue (mathematics)Sensitivity (control systems)Computer scienceEngineeringMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background The determinants and prognostic value of high‐sensitivity cardiac troponin T (hs‐cTnT) among patients with a systemic right ventricle are largely unknown. Methods and Results Ninety‐eight patients from the randomized controlled SERVE (Effect of Phosphodiesterase‐5 Inhibition With Tadalafil on Systemic Right Ventricular Size and Function) trial were included. The correlation between baseline hs‐cTnT concentrations and biventricular volumes and function quantified by cardiac magnetic resonance or cardiac multirow detector computed tomography was assessed by adjusted linear regression models. The prognostic value of hs‐cTnT was assessed by adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, survival analysis, and concordance statistics. The primary outcome was time to the composite of clinically relevant arrhythmia, hospitalization for heart failure, or all‐cause death. Median age was 39 (interquartile range, 32–48) years, and 32% were women. Median hs‐cTnT concentration was 7 (interquartile range, 4–11) ng/L. Coefficients of determination for the relationship between hs‐cTnT concentrations and right ventricular end‐systolic volume index and right ventricular ejection fraction (RVEF) were +0.368 ( P =0.046) and −0.381 ( P =0.018), respectively. The sex‐ and age‐adjusted hazard ratio for the primary outcome of hs‐cTnT at 2 and 4 times the reference level (5 ng/L) were 2.89 (95% CI, 1.14–7.29) and 4.42 (95% CI, 1.21–16.15), respectively. The prognostic performance quantified by the concordance statistics for age‐ and sex‐adjusted models based on hs‐cTnT, right ventricular ejection fraction, and peak oxygen uptake predicted were comparable: 0.71% (95% CI, 0.61–0.82), 0.72% (95% CI, 0.59–0.84), and 0.71% (95% CI, 0.59–0.83), respectively. Conclusions Hs‐cTnT concentration was significantly correlated with right ventricular ejection fraction and right ventricular end‐systolic volume index in patients with a systemic right ventricle. The prognostic accuracy of hs‐cTnT was comparable to that of right ventricular ejection fraction and peak oxygen uptake predicted. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT03049540.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.248 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Heart Association→Same topicPulmonary Hypertension Research and Treatments→French-language works237,207→