MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract 4122486: Multicenter Study of Primary Fetal Cardiomyopathy: Clinical Outcomes And Genetic Etiologies, A Fetal Heart Society Research Collaborative Study

2024· article· en· W4404324393 on OpenAlexaff
Astha Burande, Lisa K. Hornberger, Oana Caluseriu, Shabnam Peyvandi, Elijah H. Bolin, Tíscar Cavallé-Garrido, Sue Chandra, James Cnota, Jennifer Conway, Sara Creighton, Bettina F. Cuneo, Marlayna Despres, Tam Doan, J Doucet, Michelle Grenier, Whitnee Hogan, Michelle Kaplinski, Mahima K Bijji, Ann Kavanaugh‐McHugh, Sam Keller, Elena Kwon, Steven E. Lipshultz, Amara Majeed, Gitanjali P. Mansukhani, Amanda McIntosh, Deani H. McVadon, Erik Michelfelder, Michelle S. Miller, Caitlin Milligan, Seema Mital, Adriana Montes Gil, Anita J. Moon‐Grady, Neda Mulla, Sheetal Patel, Cathleen Pruitt, Amna Qasim, Hari Rajagopal, Sanghee Suh Ro, David Schidlow, Kristin Schneider, Ranjini Srinivasan, Jennifer Sutton, Carolyn L. Taylor, Angela McBrien

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenWestern UniversityLondon Health Sciences CentreMontreal Children's HospitalUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineEtiologyFetusCardiomyopathyPeripartum cardiomyopathyFetal heartHeart failureCardiologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicinePediatricsPregnancyGenetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Fetal cardiomyopathy (FCM) affects 8 per 100,000 live births, often with unknown etiology. Progress in fetal cardiac screening, genetic testing and management may have impacted historically poor outcomes. Aims: We sought to investigate genetic associations and clinical outcomes of FCM in the current era. Methods: This was a retrospective Fetal Heart Society Research Collaborative cohort study of FCM cases diagnosed from January 2017-December 2021 in 39 centers. Cases of fetal myocardial disease attributable to maternal diabetes, structural heart disease, arrhythmia or extra-cardiac conditions were excluded. Data including outcomes to 1 year after birth were collected. Significance of genetic testing results and FCM subtype were classified by each center. Results: There were 138 FCM cases diagnosed at a median gestational age of 27 +4 weeks (range 13-39 weeks). Suspected fetal heart disease (41%, 56/138) was the most common referral indication. There was a known family history of CM in 19% (26/138). FCM phenotypes included 38% (52/138) dilated, 24% (33/138) hypertrophic, 17% (24/138) non-compacted, 10% (14/138) mixed, 5% (7/138) restrictive, 3% (4/138) ventricular aneurysm, 3% (4/138) unspecified. Hydrops was present at diagnosis in 15% (20/138) and by delivery or at fetal demise in 26% (36/138). Of 128 continued pregnancies, 7% (9/128) had a fetal demise, 92% (118/128) a live birth and one was lost to follow-up. Among live births, 10% (12/118) received only palliative care. Of 106 actively treated, 75% (80/106) survived to 1 year; 7% (7/106) required ECMO, and 22% (23/106) were listed for transplant with 18 of these successfully transplanted. Of the cohort, a total of 80% (110/138) had genetic testing (including 30 with invasive prenatal testing), with 38% (52/138) having a confirmed genetic etiology and 28% (38/138) with a variant of uncertain significance (VUS) (Figure 1). Transplant-free survival to 1 year was similar for those with and without a genetic diagnosis (40%,21/52 vs 47%,40/86, p=0.48). Conclusion: Outcomes remain poor in FCM, with <50% 1-year survival overall. Confirmed genetic etiologies are now identified in nearly 40%, highlighting the importance of genetic testing.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.311 · 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 venueCirculation→Same topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies→French-language works237,207→