Health Status Outcomes After Computed Tomography or Invasive Coronary Angiography for Stable Chest Pain
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Importance: The effect of computed tomography (CT) vs invasive coronary angiography (ICA) on health status outcomes is unknown. Objective: To evaluate CT and ICA first-test strategies on quality of life (QOL) and angina. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Diagnostic Imaging Strategies for Patients With Stable Chest Pain and Intermediate Risk of Coronary Artery Disease (DISCHARGE) randomized clinical trial, conducted between October 2015 and April 2019 in 26 European centers, followed up patients with stable chest pain and intermediate probability of coronary artery disease for a median 3.5 years. Data analysis was from December 2023 to July 2024. Interventions: Random assignment to CT or ICA. Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient-reported Euro QOL 5-dimensions descriptive system (EQ-5D-3L) visual analog scale (EQ-5D-3L-VAS) and 12-item Short Form Health Survey (SF-12) physical component score (SF-12-PCS) were primary prespecified QOL outcomes. Angina was the primary prespecified chest pain outcome. The EQ-5D-3L-VAS, summary index (EQ-5D-3L-SI), mental component summary (SF-12-MCS), and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-anxiety subscale (HADS-A) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale-anxiety subscale (HADS-D) were also evaluated. Results: Among 3561 patients (mean [SD] age, 60.1 [10.1] years; 2002 female [56.2%]), 1735 (96.0%) in the CT group and 1671 (95.3%) in the ICA group completed at least 1 health status assessment during 3.5 years of follow-up. Health status outcomes were similar between groups, with significant improvements in all QOL outcomes (eg, mean EQ-5D-3L-VAS 3.5 year minus baseline score: CT = 4.0; 95% CI, 3.1-4.9; P < .001; ICA = 4.6; 95% CI, 3.6-5.6; P =.002), except HADS-D, which improved only in the CT group (mean EQ-5D-3L-VAS 3.5 year minus baseline score: CT = -0.2; 95% CI, -0.4 to 0; P = .04; ICA = -0.2; 95% CI, -0.4 to 0; P = .12). Female patients had worse baseline and follow-up QOL than male patients (eg, baseline EQ-5D-3L-VAS difference between men and women = 5.2; 95% CI, 4.0-6.3; P <.001 and at 3.5 years = 3.1; 95% CI, 1.9-4.4; P < .001) but showed greater improvements in EQ-5D-3L-VAS (-1.9; 95% CI, -3.4 to -0.5; P = .009), SF-12-PCS (-1.4; -2.1 to -0.7; P < .001), and HADS-A (0.3; 0-0.7; P = .04). Angina outcomes were comparable between groups at 3.5 years, with similar 1-year rates in the CT group but higher rates in female than male patients in the ICA group (10.2% vs 6.2%; P = .007). Conclusions and Relevance: Results of this secondary analysis of the DISCHARGE randomized clinical trial reveal that there was no significant difference in QOL or chest pain outcomes with CT vs ICA at 3.5 years. Female patients had worse health status than male patients at baseline and follow-up, and CT or ICA did not affect these differences. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02400229.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".