Effectiveness and Tolerability of Trimetazidine 80 mg Once Daily in Patients with Chronic Coronary Syndrome in Brazil: The V-GOOD Observational Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The V-GOOD study evaluated the effectiveness of trimetazidine modified-release (MR) 80 mg once daily (OD) in patients with chronic coronary syndrome (CCS) who remained symptomatic despite antianginal therapies in routine clinical practice. METHODS: This prospective, observational study involved 1026 adult outpatients with symptomatic CCS from 70 sites in Brazil who were prescribed trimetazidine MR 80 mg OD plus background antianginal treatment. Data on number of angina attacks, short-acting nitrate consumption, prevalence of angina-free patients, severity of angina, patient-reported daily physical activity impairment, treatment adherence, tolerability, and cardiologist and patient satisfaction were collected at baseline (V1), then at 1 month (V2) and 3 months (V3). RESULTS: Following the addition of trimetazidine MR 80 mg OD, the mean ± standard deviation number of angina attacks per week decreased from 3.1 ± 2.8 at V1 to 1.0 ± 2.1 at V2, and 0.7 ± 1.7 at V3, with concurrent reductions in short-acting nitrate consumption, patient-reported daily physical activity impairment and the proportion of patients with limiting angina (Canadian Cardiovascular Society class III or IV), and increases in the proportion of angina-free patients (all p < 0.001 vs. V1). Most cardiologists rated trimetazidine MR 80 mg OD as satisfactory/very satisfactory (90.7% for effectiveness and 94.8% for tolerability); most patients rated the treatment schedule as convenient/very convenient (97.2%) and satisfactory/very satisfactory (97.1%). Treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: These data support the symptomatic benefits and good tolerability associated with adding trimetazidine MR 80 mg OD to other antianginal therapies in patients with persistent symptoms. Graphical abstract available for this article. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06464276.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".