MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4409265001 · doi:10.1101/2025.04.03.25325054

Assessing Benefit in Heart Failure Patients with Reduced Ejection Fraction: Analysis of the VICTORIA Trial Using Novel Prognostic Risk Stratification

2025· preprint· en· W4409265001 on OpenAlexaff
Christopher M. O’Connor, Sarah Rathwell, Devan V. Mehrotra, Stefano Corda, Ciaran J. McMullan, Carolyn S.P. Lam, Justin A. Ezekowitz, Burkert Piekse, Adrian F. Hernandez, Kevin J. Anstrom, Robert J. Mentz, Christopher R. deFilippi, Adriaan A. Voors, Piotr Ponikowski, Javed Butler, Cynthia M. Westerhout, Paul W. Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenuemedRxiv · 2025
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian VIGOUR CentreUniversity of Alberta
FundersDuke Clinical Research InstituteRelypsaRespicardiaNational Institutes of HealthBoston Scientific CorporationGilead SciencesCytokineticsAmerican RegentSanofiBayerAbbott DiagnosticsBristol-Myers SquibbEli Lilly and CompanyAstraZenecaSiemens HealthineersAmgen
KeywordsEjection fractionRisk stratificationHeart failureStratification (seeds)Internal medicineCardiologyMedicineFraction (chemistry)Intensive care medicineChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Randomized controlled clinical trials remain the gold standard for determining efficacy of new heart failure (HF) therapies; however, failure to account for heterogeneity in risk of the primary endpoint(s) may dilute treatment efficacy. The novel 5-step stratified testing and amalgamation routine (5-STAR) methodology addresses these limitations using risk stratification based on treatment-independent associations between baseline covariates and clinical outcomes. We applied the 5-STAR methodology to the original VICTORIA database enriched by relevant ancillary information. Methods Within the 5-STAR analysis, elastic net Cox regression and a conditional inference tree tool blinded to treatment assignment were used to partition the trial population into risk strata for trial endpoints based on baseline covariates determined to be jointly strongly associated with the risk of the outcome. Core laboratory mechanistic biomarkers and baseline electrocardiographic variables were added to the VICTORIA dataset. After unblinding, treatments were compared for the primary composite endpoint of cardiovascular death or HF hospitalization within each risk stratum: stratum-level results were then averaged for overall inference. Results The 5-STAR analysis showed a greater vericiguat treatment effect on the primary composite endpoint than the original prespecified VICTORIA analysis (5-STAR-averaged HR, 95% CI: 0.85, 0.77–0.94 vs 0.90, 0.82–0.98), and on its components (5-STAR-averaged HR, 95% CI: cardiovascular death: 0.79, 0.67–0.93 vs 0.93, 0.81–1.06; HF hospitalization: 0.89, 0.79–1.00 vs 0.90, 0.81–1.00). Five biomarkers (GDF-15, NT-proBNP, albumin, blood urea nitrogen, urate) determined the risk strata across the 3 endpoints. Conclusions By developing treatment-independent risk stratification, the 5-STAR methodology attenuates dilution of treatment effects inherent in conventional prognostic risk heterogeneity. This retrospective analysis of VICTORIA revealed greater efficacy of vericiguat on the primary endpoint and its components. GDF-15 was consistently the strongest prognostic risk factor across the composite endpoint and its components of cardiovascular death and HF hospitalization. Clinical Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT02861534 ).

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)0.033
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.042
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.176

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0330.042
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.283 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuemedRxiv→Same topicHeart Failure Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→