MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403237811 · doi:10.1002/ehf2.15102

Safety and Efficacy of up to 60 h of iv Istaroxime in Pre-Cardiogenic Shock Patients: Design of the SEISMiC Trial

2024· article· en· W4403237811 on OpenAlexaff
Jan Biegus, Alexander Mebazaa, Marco Metra, Matteo Pagnesi, Ovidiu Chioncel, Beth Davison, Agnieszka Tycińska, Maria Novosadova, Gaurav Gulati, Marianela Barros, Marı́a Luz Dı́az, Carlos Guardia, Robert Zymliński, Piotr Gajewski, Piotr Ponikowski, Phillip Simmons, Steven G. Simonson, Gad Cotter

Bibliographic record

VenueESC Heart Failure · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMechanical Circulatory Support Devices
Canadian institutionsSurgical Specialties (Canada)
FundersWindtree Therapeutics
KeywordsMedicineCardiogenic shockHeart failureInotropeHemodynamicsCardiologyClinical endpointBlood pressureLevosimendanInternal medicinePopulationMyocardial infarctionRandomized controlled trialAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is linked to high morbidity and mortality rates, posing a challenge for clinicians. Interventions to improve tissue perfusion and blood pressure are crucial to prevent further deterioration. Unfortunately, current inotropes, which act through adrenergic receptor stimulation, are associated with malignant arrhythmias and poorer outcomes. Due to its unique mechanism of action, istaroxime should improve haemodynamics without adrenergic overactivation. The SEISMiC study is designed to examine the safety and efficacy (haemodynamic effect) of istaroxime administrated in pre-CS patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: The SEISMiC study is a multinational, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled safety and efficacy study with two parts (A and B). The study enrols patients hospitalized for decompensated heart failure (pre-CS, not related to myocardial ischaemia) with persistent hypotension [systolic blood pressure (SBP) 70-100 mmHg for at least 2 h] and clinically confirmed congestion, NT-proBNP ≥1400 pg/mL, and LVEF≤40%. Subjects must not have taken intravenous (iv) vasopressors, inotropes or digoxin in the past 6 h. Eligible patients are randomized to receive IV infusion of istaroxime (different doses and regimens in Parts A and B) or placebo for up to 60 h. Central haemodynamics, ECG Holter monitoring, cardiac ultrasound and biomarkers are recorded at predefined time points during the trial. The study's primary efficacy endpoint is the SBP area under the curve from baseline curve from baseline to 6 and 24 h in the combined SEISMiC Parts A and B population. Key secondary efficacy endpoints include haemodynamic, laboratory and clinical measures in SEISMiC B alone in the combined SEISMiC A and B studies. CONCLUSIONS: The study results will contribute to our understanding of the role of istaroxime in pre-CS patients and potentially provide insight into the drug's haemodynamic effects and safety in this population.

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)0.004
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 designRandomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations11
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueESC Heart FailureSame topicMechanical Circulatory Support DevicesFrench-language works237,207