MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Dynamic assessment of myocardial perfusion and contractility in patients with refractory angina under combined intermittent hypo-hyperoxic therapy. (Clinical Trial No. REFRANGINA-TRIAL protocol)

2025· article· en· W7124308517 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
N.A. Mironov, T.N. Krasnova, L. A. Dyachuk, М.Б. Ушерзон, S.A. Zakharchuk, S.T. Matskeplishvili

Bibliographic record

VenueRussian Cardiology Bulletin · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac Imaging and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCanadian Cardiovascular SocietyAnginaEjection fractionCoronary artery diseaseContractilityClinical trialRefractory (planetary science)Placebo

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The clinical trial No. REFRANGINA-TRIAL protocol is aimed at dynamic assessment of myocardial perfusion and contractility in patients with refractory angina under combined intermittent hypo-hyperoxic therapy. Refractory angina characterized by persistent symptoms and impaired functional status despite optimal medical treatment, as well as ineffective invasive revascularization affects 5—10% of patients with coronary artery disease. The study will enroll 60 patients with coronary artery disease and refractory angina class II—III confirmed by stress tests. Patients will be randomized into three groups: group 1 — combined therapy (10 sessions of intermittent hypo-hyperoxic therapy over 2 weeks and 5-week medical therapy beginning 3 weeks prior to hypo-hyperoxic sessions); group 2 — a course of hypo-hyperoxic therapy with placebo (10 sessions over 2 weeks); group 3 — standard treatment according to current protocol. Treatment efficacy will be evaluated using contrast-enhanced perfusion MRI, echocardiography (with measurement of ejection fraction and global longitudinal strain of the left ventricle), stress tests (treadmill test and 6-minute walk test), as well as assessment of endothelial function by NICaS method and quality of life (SF-36 questionnaire). Treatment safety will be monitored through regular checks of vital signs, ECGs, laboratory tests, and physical examinations, along with recording of adverse events. The study is conducted in strict accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, legislation of the Russian Federation, and Good Clinical Practice standards (ICH-GCP). It is anticipated that final results will confirm safety and efficacy of this new non-invasive approach for treating refractory angina. This will optimize therapeutic strategies and update clinical guidelines in the Russian Federation.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Protocol · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreProtocol

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRussian Cardiology BulletinSame topicCardiac Imaging and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207