Study of angiogenic cell therapy for progressive pulmonary arterial hypertension: intervention with repeat dosing of eNOS-enhanced EPCs: the SAPPHIRE trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pulmonary arterial hypertension (PAH) is characterized by widespread pruning of the distal pulmonary arterial bed, leading to increased pulmonary vascular resistance, right heart failure, and death. PAH patients receiving background therapy were randomized to receive a course of 4 monthly infusions of placebo or angiogenic endothelial progenitor cells (EPCs) transfected with endothelial NO synthase (eNOS) over the first 6-month period for a cumulative dose of 80 M cells. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the trial was stopped after 12 of the planned 45 patients were enrolled (five placebo, seven eNOS-EPCs). While the small sample size precluded appropriately powered analyses, a possible difference was seen in 6MWD between the eNOS-EPC and placebo groups over 6 months, with a greater proportion of patients in the cell therapy group achieving a minimal clinically important increase in 6MWD of 33-m (71.4% vs 40%, respectively). Treatment of PAH patients with a course of 4 monthly infusions of eNOS-EPCs was well tolerated and may have resulted in clinical benefit.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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".