MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Interim results from MyCLIMB, a natural history study of pediatric MYBPC3-associated hypertrophic cardiomyopathy

2025· article· en· W7128093247 on OpenAlexaffabout
B Feingold, H Wang, D Chowdhury, G Sarquella -Brugada, J P Kaski, J Rossano, Charles E. Canter, T Lee, Jeffrey G. Gossett, N A T Paterson, J Priest, Fatbardha Varfaj, J Bennet, N Bansal, Jennifer Conway

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural historyHypertrophic cardiomyopathyAsymptomaticNatural history studyCardiomyopathyFamily historyDiseaseRetrospective cohort studyHeart disease

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background Pathogenic loss-of-function variants in the MYBPC3 gene are the leading genetic cause of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HCM). Biallelic loss-of-function variants are uniformly fatal in infancy, while phenotypic manifestations for individuals who are heterozygous remain less well understood. To bridge this gap, we analyzed data from MyCLIMB, a global natural history study of pediatric patients with MYBPC3+HCM, to better understand disease progression and its relationship to genotype and ultimately guide development of emerging therapies such as gene replacement therapy. Methods MyCLIMB is designed to characterize the natural history of pediatric patients (<18 years) with cardiomyopathy due to pathogenic or likely pathogenic (P/LP) MYBPC3 variants. We obtained clinical and genetic data from 27 centers across the US, Canada, Spain and UK. As of 31 January 2025, 169 retrospective and 39 prospective patients were enrolled in MyCLIMB. This study was enriched for severe MYBPC3-associated HCM pediatric patients, including biallelic. 78 asymptomatic individuals were excluded from analysis. Patients were classified by genetic inheritance (homozygous, compound heterozygous, and heterozygous). Demographics, genotype, echocardiographic measures, prevalence of and time to major cardiac-related events were compared across cohorts with standard statistical measures. Results Homozygous infants (n=30) were diagnosed at a median age of 0.3 years and 87% of them experienced death or heart transplant by a median age of 0.53 years. Compound heterozygous children (n=11) were diagnosed at a median age of 2.9 years and 27% of them experienced death or heart transplant by a median age of 6.95 years and 30.8% experienced a heart-failure related hospitalization by a median age of 3.33 years. The prevalence of Ventricular Arrhythmia composite was 29.3% in heterozygous patients vs 72.7% in compound heterozygous, while prevalence of HF composite was 14.1% vs 36.4%, respectively. Heterozygous children (n=92) were diagnosed at a median age of 5.4 years, and had a median left ventricular mass indexed to body surface area (LVMI) of 104.5 (n=40), with heart failure associated hospitalizations of 30.4% and arrythmia-related events of 6.5%. Conclusions Homozygous patients had severe disease where majority died or received a heart transplant within the first eight months of life. Compound heterozygous MYBPC3+ HCM patients experienced a significant burden of disease and high prevalence of HF-related hospitalization and death or transplant. Severely affected heterozygous children experienced significant burden of heart failure hospitalizations and arrhythmia. Our results demonstrate the presence of significant and varying disease burden of MYBPC3+ HCM in pediatric patients, confirming the importance of genetic testing, close monitoring, and suggesting that children may also benefit from targeted effective treatments, including gene therapies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.046
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.245 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicCardiomyopathy and Myosin Studies→French-language works237,207→