Sex-specific association of cardiovascular drug doses with adverse outcomes in atrial fibrillation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Sex differences occur in atrial fibrillation (AF), including age at first manifestation, pathophysiology, treatment allocation, complication rates and quality of life. However, optimal doses of cardiovascular pharmacotherapy used in women with AF with or without heart failure (HF) are unclear. We investigated sex-specific associations of beta-blocker and renin-angiotensin system (RAS) inhibitor doses with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with AF or AF with concomitant HF. METHODS: We used data from the prospective Basel Atrial Fibrillation and Swiss Atrial Fibrillation cohorts on patients with AF. The outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), including death, myocardial infarction, stroke, systemic embolisation and HF-related hospitalisation. Predictors of interest were spline (primary analysis) or quartiles (secondary analysis) of beta-blocker or RAS inhibitor dose in per cent of the maximum dose (reference), in interaction with sex. Cox models were adjusted for demographics, comorbidities and comedication. RESULTS: Among 3961 patients (28% women), MACEs occurred in 1113 (28%) patients over a 5-year median follow-up. Distributions of RAS inhibitor and beta-blocker doses were similar in women and men. Cox models revealed no association between beta-blocker dose or RAS inhibitor dose and MACE. In a subgroup of patients with AF and HF, the lowest hazard of MACE was observed in women prescribed 100% of the RAS inhibitor dose. However, there was no association between RAS dose quartiles and MACE. CONCLUSIONS: In this study of patients with AF, doses of beta-blockers and RAS inhibitors did not differ by sex and were not associated with MACE overall.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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".