MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Differences in risk profiles and clinical outcomes according to age in patients with high-risk myocardial infarction: insights from the PARADISE-MI trial

2024· article· en· W4403805995 on OpenAlexaff
Karola Jering, Brian Claggett, Scott D. Solomon, Christopher B. Granger, Lars Køber, Ulf Landmesser, Eldrin F. Lewis, Aldo P. Maggioni, John J.V. McMurray, Béla Merkely, Grzegorz Opolski, Jean L. Rouleau, Michele Senni, Marc A. Pfeffer

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsMontreal Heart Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineCardiologyClinical trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Introduction Temporal declines in rates of rehospitalization and death after acute myocardial infarction (MI) have not been uniform across age groups. A better understanding of how risk profiles and clinical outcomes differ after MI by age may allow for targeted treatment and prevention strategies. Aims To investigate risk profiles and clinical outcomes following high-risk MI according to age in the Prospective ARNI vs ACE inhibitor trial to DetermIne Superiority in reducing heart failure Events after Myocardial Infarction (PARADISE-MI). Methods Adults without prior heart failure (HF) were randomized to sacubitril/valsartan versus ramipril within 0.5 to 7 days of a MI complicated by transient pulmonary congestion and/or left ventricular systolic dysfunction and additional risk-augmenting factors. Associations between age and clinical outcomes were analyzed using Cox proportional hazards regression models, which were additionally adjusted for baseline demographic and clinical covariates (Figure). Results The mean age of the 5,661 PARADISE-MI participants was 64 ± 11 years. Patients aged ≥75 years (n=1051) were more likely women, had more hypertension and atrial fibrillation and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate, were less likely to present with ST-segment elevation MI and regardless of type of MI were less likely to receive primary reperfusion and guideline-based medical therapy (Table). Age was significantly associated with all-cause death (HR 1.54 per 10-year increase; 95% CI, 1.41-1.68) and was more strongly associated with non-CV death (HR 2.09; 95% CI, 1.70-2.56) than with CV death (HR 1.43; 95% CI, 1.29-1.57). Age was also associated with incident HF (HR 1.37; 95% CI, 1.25-1.49) (Figure). Multivariable adjustment attenuated the risk relationship of age with recurrent fatal or non-fatal MI (HR 1.08; 95% CI, 0.96-1.21) and the coronary composite outcome (HR 1.01; 95% CI, 0.93-1.09). The relative treatment effect of sacubitril/valsartan versus ramipril on the primary composite outcome of CV death or incident HF was not significantly modified by age (p-interaction = 0.19). Conclusions Following high-risk MI, age was most strongly associated with subsequent non-CV death followed by CV death and incident HF, but was not independently associated with recurrent coronary events. The heightened risk of CV death and HF with advancing age was not explained by differences in clinical characteristics. Older patients may require closer surveillance and more aggressive treatment after MI to mitigate the elevated risk of CV death and HF.

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)0.004
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 score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors→French-language works237,207→