Prevalence of Cardiac Amyloidosis Among Elderly Patients With Recent-Onset Atrial Fibrillation: The PREVAL-ATTR Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transthyretin cardiac amyloidosis (ATTR-CA) is increasingly recognized as a treatable form of heart failure. Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with ATTR-CA. Whether recent-onset AF can be used as an early marker to identify patients with ATTR-CA has not been elucidated. METHODS: This was a prospective study conducted at 3 Spanish centres. ATTR-CA noninvasive screening was offered to patients ≥ 65 years of age recently diagnosed (< 1 year) with nonvalvular AF and who had ≥ 1 echocardiographic, electrocardiographic, or clinical sign suggestive of ATTR-CA. RESULTS: A total of 121 patients were included (75% male, mean age 77 ± 7 years). Ten patients (8.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI],4-14.7%), were diagnosed with cardiac amyloidosis (CA): 5 with definite wild-type ATTR-CA (ATTRwt), 4 with likely ATTRwt, and 1 with undetermined CA. Compared with patients without CA, patients with CA were older (84 ± 4 vs 76 ± 7 years; P < 0.001), more frequently men (90% vs 59%; P = 0.047), presented higher median N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NTproBNP) (3800 pg/L, interquartile range [IQR]:1682-6101 vs 1048 pg/mL, IQR: 427-3154; P = 0.017) and higher left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) (14 mm, IQR: 13-17 vs 12 mm, IQR: 12-13; P = 0.003). Patients with CA also showed higher rate of permanent AF (90% vs 49.5%; P = 0.018) and a greater need for pacemaker implantation during follow-up (30% vs 7.3%; P = 0.049). No differences in mortality were observed between patients with and without CA after a median follow-up of 13 months (IQR: 11-16 months). CONCLUSIONS: Routine DPD scanning in elderly patients with recent-onset AF, LVH and an additional red flag may help to identify patients with ATTR-CA. However, larger studies evaluating this strategy in more diverse clinical settings would be required.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".