MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Efficacy and safety of Shexiang Baoxin pill in patients with ischemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (LESS): a phase 4, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial

2024· article· en· W4403806051 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chun Liang, N Li, Zhaoyun He

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboDouble blindClinical trialInternal medicinePillRandomized controlled trialCardiologyIschemiaCoronary arteriesArteryPharmacologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Patients with ischemia with non-obstructive coronary arteries (INOCA) present with ischemic signs and symptoms but no obstructive coronary artery disease (CAD) at coronary angiography. Shexiang Baoxin pill (MUSKARDIA) is effective in reducing angina frequency in patients with stable CAD. Purpose This phase 4 trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MUSKARDIA in INOCA patients. Methods This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial (NCT04897126). The enrolled patients with INOCA confirmed as eligible by leading PI were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive MUSKARDIA or placebo (oral 4 pills 3 times a day) on the basis of conventional treatment until the end of follow-up. The primary endpoint was the angina-related outcomes based on the Seattle Angina Questionnaire (SAQ) score that assessed by same doctor at week 12. Results 236 INOCA patients were randomized (MUSKARDIA group, n = 117; placebo group, n=119). At week 12, patients in MUSKARDIA group showed higher SAQ scores compared with placebo group (all P<0.0001, Figure 1) indicating MUSKARDIA could significantly relieve symptoms of angina. According to the Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) grading of angina pectoris, the severity of angina pectoris was significantly reduced in MUSKARDIA group compared with placebo group at week 12 (grade Ⅰ [91.09% vs 48.15%]; grade Ⅱ [8.91% vs 25.93%]; grade Ⅲ [0% vs 19.44%]; grade Ⅳ [0% vs 6.48%]; P<0.001). After 12 weeks of treatment with MUSKARDIA, numbers of weekly angina attacks were significantly reduced compared with placebo group (-2.60 vs -0.42; LSM difference: -2.18; P<0.0001). The percentage of patients who did not used nitroglycerin was noticeably higher in MUSKARDIA group than that in placebo group (84.16% vs 58.33%, P<0.001). The incidence of adverse events did not differ meaningfully between two groups. Conclusion MUSKARDIA was confirmed to be an effective, safe and well-tolerated treatment for INOCA patients in clinical settings.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designRandomized trial
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 JournalSame topicTraditional Chinese Medicine AnalysisFrench-language works237,207