Impact of Coronary Artery Disease on Cardiovascular Outcomes Differs Between Men and Women With Severe Aortic Stenosis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is heterogeneity in coronary artery disease (CAD) severity among individuals with severe aortic stenosis (AS), but whether this differentially influences prognosis is unknown. METHODS: Patients with severe AS in the PARTNER 1, 2, and 3 trials and registries (Placement of Aortic Transcatheter Valves) were stratified by obstructive CAD (coronary stenosis ≥50%, prior myocardial infarction, or revascularization) or no obstructive CAD (all stenoses <50%). Multivariable Cox proportional-hazards models examined the association between CAD severity groups and clinical outcomes. The primary composite end point was death, heart failure hospitalization, or stroke at 5 years. Interaction between sex and CAD severity was evaluated. RESULTS: Among 7505 patients with severe AS, 2062 (27.5%) had no obstructive CAD and were more likely to be women (60.5%) with fewer CAD risk factors. After multivariable adjustment, the primary end point was significantly lower among patients with no obstructive CAD compared with those with obstructive CAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.92 [CI, 0.84–1.00]; P =0.04), irrespective of AS treatment. However, there were significant differences by sex ( P interaction =0.0002). Men with no obstructive CAD had a 16% lower event rate compared with men with obstructive CAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.84 [CI, 0.73–0.96]; P =0.01). In contrast, women with no obstructive CAD did not have a significantly lower rate of death, stroke, or heart failure hospitalization compared with women with obstructive CAD (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.95 [CI, 0.85–1.07]; P =0.41). Women with no obstructive CAD had a more advanced heart failure phenotype and higher event rates compared with men with no obstructive CAD. CONCLUSIONS: Obstructive CAD was associated with a higher risk of long-term adverse events after treatment for severe AS, but there was a significant sex disparity in clinical outcomes among men and women with no obstructive CAD. Further study is needed to optimize the evaluation and management of women with severe AS.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 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".