MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416088102 · doi:10.1161/circgen.125.005502

Mavacamten Monotherapy in Real-World Patients With Obstructive Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy: Evidence From COLLIGO-HCM

2025· article· en· W4416088102 on OpenAlexaff
Ozlem Bilen, Arnon Adler, Rachel Bastiaenen, James P. MacNamara, E. Paratz, Elad Maor, Michael Arad, Matthew Gold, Nirav Patel, Cliff Pruett, Edward Burford, Garima Arora, Ervant J. Maksabedian Hernandez, Xu Han, P. K. Schuler, Belinda Sandler, Leanne Li, Dajun Tian, Pankaj Arora

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation Genomic and Precision Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health Network
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMEDLINEDiseaseIncidence (geometry)ComplicationContext (archaeology)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Mavacamten has been shown to improve cardiac function and symptoms in patients with symptomatic (New York Heart Association class II-III) obstructive hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Clinical studies suggest that mavacamten monotherapy is efficacious and has a favorable safety profile, but limited evidence exists regarding monotherapy in real-world studies. This analysis aimed to describe the effectiveness and safety outcomes of mavacamten monotherapy in the real-world COLLIGO-HCM study (Mavacamten ObservationaL Evidence Global Consortium in Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy). METHODS: Patient-level data recorded between April 2022 and February 2025 at 7 sites across 5 countries were extracted. Adult patients with a diagnosis of HCM from 2018 onwards were eligible for inclusion if they had ≥1 mavacamten prescription after the date of diagnosis. Patients were categorized based on background therapy status during mavacamten treatment: mavacamten monotherapy or mavacamten with background therapy (down-titration or no dose modification). RESULTS: Overall, 278 patients were included and received mavacamten (mavacamten monotherapy, n=88; mavacamten with background therapy, n=190). At month 9, most patients achieved ≥1 New York Heart Association class improvement from baseline (mavacamten monotherapy, 60.0%; mavacamten with background therapy, 61.0%). Improvements in resting and Valsalva left ventricular outflow tract gradients from baseline to month 9 were observed in both subgroups; mean left ventricular ejection fraction through month 9 remained ≥62.0% with mavacamten monotherapy and ≥61.4% with mavacamten with background therapy. Two patients in the mavacamten monotherapy subgroup and 1 patient in the mavacamten with background therapy subgroup permanently discontinued treatment owing to left ventricular ejection fraction <50%. CONCLUSIONS: Mavacamten monotherapy was associated with improvements in cardiac function and symptoms, and positive benefits to the risk profile over a 9-month follow-up period; this was consistent with improvements observed in patients treated with mavacamten with background therapy. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT06372457.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.679

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculation Genomic and Precision MedicineSame topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin StudiesFrench-language works237,207