MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405423266 · doi:10.1002/mus.28308

Mortality Trends and Causes of Death in Myotonic Dystrophy Type 1 Patients From the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink

2024· article· en· W4405423266 on OpenAlexafffund
Rotana Alsaggaf, Ruth M. Pfeiffer, Emily Pearce, Mark H. Greene, Hanns Lochmüller, Shahinaz M. Gadalla

Bibliographic record

VenueMuscle & Nerve · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicGenetic Neurodegenerative Diseases
Canadian institutionsOttawa HospitalChildren's Hospital of Eastern OntarioUniversity of Ottawa
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Cancer InstituteMuscular Dystrophy CanadaNational Institutes of HealthCanada Research ChairsDivision of Cancer Epidemiology and Genetics, National Cancer InstituteCanada Foundation for Innovation
KeywordsMedicineMyotonic dystrophyHazard ratioInternal medicineProportional hazards modelPopulationConfidence intervalCohortCause of deathStandardized mortality ratioCohort studySurgeryDisease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION/AIM: Patients with myotonic dystrophy type1 (DM1) have reduced lifespan. This study aimed to quantify mortality risks, and evaluate causes and time trends in DM1. METHODS: We identified 1021 DM1 patients and 15,104 matched DM1-free controls from the United Kingdom (UK) Clinical Practice Research Datalink. We used Cox proportional hazards regression models to assess differences in all-cause or cause-specific mortality between DM1 patients and matched controls, and computed standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) for comparisons of DM1 patients with the UK general population. RESULTS: DM1 patients were at higher risk of death compared with matched DM1-free controls (hazard ratio [HR] = 2.9, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 2.5-3.4) or the general UK population (SMR = 8.1, 95% CI = 7.3-9.1). The excess risk was primarily attributed to deaths from respiratory failure (HR = 26.7, p < 0.001), aspiration pneumonia (HR = 15.8, p < 0.001), arrythmia, and conduction defects (HR = 15.7, p < 0.001). No mortality risk difference between DM1 patients and matched DM1-free cohort was noted for all cancers combined (p = 0.52). No significant calendar time-related changes in overall survival were seen for DM1 patients (p trend = 0.19). In mortality cause-specific analysis, and compared with patients diagnosed before 1993, death from cancer was on the rise (HR = 2.35, and 5.82 for patients diagnosed 1993-2003, and 2004-2016). DISCUSSION: Most DM1 patients died of known disease complications. This highlights the need for integrated clinical approaches with more careful and frequent monitoring.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.506

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.452
Teacher spread0.238 · 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 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

Citations8
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuscle & NerveSame topicGenetic Neurodegenerative DiseasesFrench-language works237,207