MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Abstract 4138662: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist in patients with acute myocardial infarction: An updated systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

2024· article· en· W4404341240 on OpenAlexaff
Marc-André d’Entremont, Zain Maqsood Cheema, Sasko Kedev, Jan H. Cornel, Goran Stanković, Raúl Moreno, Robert F. Storey, Matthias Bossard, Gilles Montalescot, Faı̈ez Zannad, Farzin Beygui, Bertram Pitt, Sanjit S. Jolly

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal Regulation and Hypertension
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research Institute
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMineralocorticoid receptorMyocardial infarctionRandomized controlled trialMeta-analysisAntagonistInternal medicineCardiologyAldosteroneReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: While mineralocorticoid antagonists (MRA) reduce mortality in patients developing heart failure post myocardial infarction (MI), it is unclear whether they are beneficial in an unselected post-MI population. Aims: Using a systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim to determine the effect of MRA treatment versus no MRA treatment on all-cause mortality in unselected post-MI patients from randomized data, simultaneously with the presentation of the largest randomized controlled trial on the topic, the CLEAR SYNERGY trial. Methods/Approach: We completed a systematic review of all randomized controlled trials comparing MRA treatment to no MRA treatment in post-MI patients. We will perform our primary analysis using fixed effects with the Peto odds ratio method and use random effects as a sensitivity analysis. The primary outcome will be all-cause mortality, and secondary outcomes will include cardiovascular mortality, new or worsening heart failure, recurrent myocardial infarction and stroke. Results/Data: Our systematic review of Pubmed, Embase, and CENTRAL from inception until April 30, 2024, yielded 456 records. A total of 11,199 participants from 11 randomized clinical trials will be included in addition to the late-breaking CLEAR SYNERGY trial. The CLEAR SYNERGY trial is a 2 x 2 factorial randomized controlled trial of low-dose colchicine 0.5mg daily versus placebo and spironolactone 25mg daily versus placebo in 7,062 post-MI patients who were within 72h of the index percutaneous coronary intervention. The results of the spironolactone factorial will be presented in the fall of 2024 with an expected median follow-up of 3.5 years. As the investigators of the CLEAR SYNERGY trial, we will combine our data with the other 11 trials for a total of 12 trials and 18,261 participants. Conclusions: CLEAR SYNERGY is the largest randomized controlled trial with the longest follow-up of spironolactone in the post-MI population. Our meta-analysis will provide updated effect estimates of post-MI MRA treatment, leveraging the late-breaking CLEAR SYNERGY data to reflect the totality of the evidence.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.045
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.097

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.045
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0200.029
Bibliometrics0.0100.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 designMeta-analysis
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueCirculationSame topicHormonal Regulation and HypertensionFrench-language works237,207