Application of REVEAL Lite 2 and COMPERA 2.0 risk scores to patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension switching to riociguat in the REPLACE study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In Riociguat rEplacing PDE5i therapy evaLuated Against Continued PDE5i thErapy (REPLACE) (NCT02891850), improvements in risk status were observed in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) at intermediate risk switching to riociguat versus continuing phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors (PDE5i). This post hoc study applied the Registry to Evaluate Early and Long-Term PAH Disease Management (REVEAL) Lite 2 and Comparative Prospective Registry of Newly Initiated Therapies for Pulmonary (COMPERA) 2.0 risk-assessment tools to REPLACE to investigate the impact of baseline risk status on clinical improvement. The proportions of riociguat- and PDE5i-treated patients achieving the primary end-point at REVEAL Lite 2 low, intermediate, and high baseline risk reflected the overall population. Proportions of riociguat-treated patients achieving the primary end-point were comparable between the COMPERA 2.0 intermediate-low risk (39%) and intermediate-high risk (43%) groups. Our findings show that patients in REPLACE achieved clinical improvement by switching from PDE5i to riociguat across all COMPERA 2.0 and most REVEAL Lite 2 baseline risk strata.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".