MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Vigorous Exercise in Patients With Congenital Long QT Syndrome: Results of the Prospective, Observational, Multinational LIVE-LQTS Study

2024· article· en· W4400987389 on OpenAlexaff
Rachel Lampert, Sharlene M. Day, Barbara E. Ainsworth, Matthew M. Burg, Bradley S. Marino, Lisa Salberg, Maite Tome, Dominic J. Abrams, Peter F. Aziz, Cheryl Barth, Elijah R. Behr, Cheyanne Bell, Charles I. Berul, J. Martijn Bos, David J. Bradley, David S. Cannom, Bryan C. Cannon, Maryann Concannon, Marina Cerrone, Richard J. Czosek, Anne M. Dubin, James Dziura, Christopher C. Erickson, N.A. Mark Estes, Susan P. Etheridge, Ilan Goldenberg, Belinda Gray, Carla Haglund-Turnquist, Kimberly G. Harmon, Cynthia A. James, Christopher L. Johnsrude, Prince J. Kannankeril, Alice Lara, Ian H. Law, Fangyong Li, Mark S. Link, Silvana Molossi, Brian Olshansky, Peter A. Noseworthy, Elizabeth V. Saarel, Shubhayan Sanatani, Maully J. Shah, Laura Simone, Jonathan R. Skinner, Gordon F. Tomaselli, James S. Ware, Gregory Webster, Wojciech Zaręba, Douglas P. Zipes, Michael J. Ackerman

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsBC Children's Hospital
FundersBritish Heart FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchBoston Scientific CorporationDaiichi-SankyoPfizerImperial College LondonInvitaeMyoKardiaMedical Research CouncilCytokineticsBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsMedicineObservational studyLong QT syndromeProspective cohort studyCardiologyInternal medicinePediatricsQT interval

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Whether vigorous exercise increases risk of ventricular arrhythmias for individuals diagnosed and treated for congenital long QT syndrome (LQTS) remains unknown. METHODS: The National Institutes of Health-funded LIVE-LQTS study (Lifestyle and Exercise in the Long QT Syndrome) prospectively enrolled individuals 8 to 60 years of age with phenotypic and/or genotypic LQTS from 37 sites in 5 countries from May 2015 to February 2019. Participants (or parents) answered physical activity and clinical events surveys every 6 months for 3 years with follow-up completed in February 2022. Vigorous exercise was defined as ≥6 metabolic equivalents for >60 hours per year. A blinded Clinical Events Committee adjudicated the composite end point of sudden death, sudden cardiac arrest, ventricular arrhythmia treated by an implantable cardioverter defibrillator, and likely arrhythmic syncope. A National Death Index search ascertained vital status for those with incomplete follow-up. A noninferiority hypothesis (boundary of 1.5) between vigorous exercisers and others was tested with multivariable Cox regression analysis. RESULTS: Among the 1413 participants (13% <18 years of age, 35% 18-25 years of age, 67% female, 25% with implantable cardioverter defibrillators, 90% genotype positive, 49% with LQT1, 91% were treated with beta-blockers, left cardiac sympathetic denervation, and/or implantable cardioverter defibrillator), 52% participated in vigorous exercise (55% of these competitively). Thirty-seven individuals experienced the composite end point (including one sudden cardiac arrest and one sudden death in the nonvigorous group, one sudden cardiac arrest in the vigorous group) with overall event rates at 3 years of 2.6% in the vigorous and 2.7% in the nonvigorous exercise groups. The unadjusted hazard ratio for experience of events for the vigorous group compared with the nonvigorous group was 0.97 (90% CI, 0.57-1.67), with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.17 (90% CI, 0.67-2.04). The upper 95% one-sided confidence level extended beyond the 1.5 boundary. Neither vigorous or nonvigorous exercise was found to be superior in any group or subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Among individuals diagnosed with phenotypic and/or genotypic LQTS who were risk assessed and treated in experienced centers, LQTS-associated cardiac event rates were low and similar between those exercising vigorously and those not exercising vigorously. Consistent with the low event rate, CIs are wide, and noninferiority was not demonstrated. These data further inform shared decision-making discussions between patient and physician about exercise and competitive sports participation. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02549664.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.011

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations20
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation→Same topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias→French-language works237,207→