MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7073779308

Coronary Sinus Narrowing for Treating Refractory Angina: REDUCER-I Multicenter “Real-World” Observational Study Primary Endpoint Analysis

2024· article· en· W7073779308 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicDiverse Scientific and Economic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClinical endpointInterim analysisAdverse effectAnginaObservational studyRefractory (planetary science)Quality of life (healthcare)Coronary sinus
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Patients with refractory angina are often ineligible for revascularization and have poor quality of life despite optimal medical therapy. The coronary sinus (CS) Reducer (Shockwave Medical Inc) was safe and effective in the treatment of refractory angina in the COSIRA (Coronary Sinus Reducer for Treatment of Refractory Angina) randomized sham-controlled trial. Objectives: This study sought to perform the primary endpoint analysis of the complete REDUCER-I (An Observational Study of the Neovasc Reducer System) study cohort. Methods: REDUCER-I is a nonrandomized, “real-world” study of patients with refractory angina treated with the CS Reducer conducted at 25 centers from 9 European countries. The primary effectiveness endpoint was an improvement in Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) class at 6 months. The primary safety endpoints were major adverse cardiac events and device- or procedure-related serious adverse events through 30 days. Study follow-up is planned through 5 years with some interim 3-year analyses included here. Results: From 2016 to 2023, 400 patients were enrolled, including 78.0% (312/400) male patients, 54.3% (216/398) with previous myocardial infarction, 73.6% (293/398) with previous revascularization, and 72.0% (280/389) CCS class III/IV. Major adverse cardiac event and serious adverse event rates were 1.6% (95% CI: 0.7-3.6) and 1.1% (4/371), respectively, with no deaths within 30 days. At 6 months, 69.8% (240/344) of patients improved by ≥1 CCS class. Six-minute walk distances improved by 34.1 ± 85.8 m at 6 months (P < 0.0001). Interim 3-year results showed CCS class and Seattle Angina Questionnaire quality of life improvements were sustained (P < 0.0001). Conclusions: The complete primary endpoint analysis of the REDUCER-I study shows patients with refractory angina were safely and effectively treated with the CS Reducer. Improvements in angina and quality of life appear sustained through 3 years.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.170 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUtrecht University Repository (Utrecht University)Same topicDiverse Scientific and Economic StudiesFrench-language works237,207