MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407202814 · doi:10.1097/crd.0000000000000862

Trimetazidine Use in Cardiovascular Disease

2025· article· en· W4407202814 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mahmoud Kallash, William H. Frishman

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiology in Review · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiovascular Function and Risk Factors
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTrimetazidineMedicineCardiologyCoronary artery diseaseInternal medicineHeart failureEjection fractionAnginaCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyPercutaneous coronary interventionMyocardial infarction

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trimetazidine is an antianginal medication approved in numerous countries for use in the symptomatic treatment of stable coronary artery disease and angina pectoris. Its main mechanism of action revolves around the inhibition of β-oxidation of free fatty acids in the myocardium, in addition to its antioxidant properties and inhibition of cardiac fibrosis. Based on current evidence, trimetazidine is classified by European guidelines as a second-line antianginal agent and as an add-on for the symptomatic treatment of stable angina in patients not adequately controlled with first-line antianginal therapies such as beta-blockers. However, its role in the treatment of cardiovascular disease extends past coronary artery disease, as numerous studies have demonstrated its potential benefit in heart failure patients as well. Unfortunately, trimetazidine's role in the treatment of heart failure is still not clearly identified, since most studies on this topic were underpowered and unable to reach a decisive conclusion regarding any potential mortality benefits in heart failure. Current European guidelines have categorized trimetazidine as a class IIb recommendation in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and angina because of its additive effects of improved left ventricular function and anginal symptom relief in patients already on beta-blockers. Additionally, trimetazidine's use in coronary interventions (ie, percutaneous coronary intervention and coronary artery bypass grafting) showed a reduction in the frequency of anginal attacks and myocardial damage, but the studies were also underpowered and therefore unable to conclusively determine whether trimetazidine should be incorporated in guideline-directed therapy for coronary interventions.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.008

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiology in ReviewSame topicCardiovascular Function and Risk FactorsFrench-language works237,207