ArticleEClinicalMedicine2026
Frailty status, clinical and functional outcomes in cardiac amyloidosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In parallel with diagnostic advances and awareness of cardiac amyloidosis (CA) in aging populations, frailty is increasingly observed in CA. However, the relationship between the frailty and CA remains poorly characterized owing to limited studies that have defined frailty a priori. We performed a meta-analysis to characterize the impact of frailty on clinical and functional patient outcomes in CA. Methods: Systematic review of four electronic databases was performed for all studies reporting frailty prevalence, functional and clinical endpoints in patients with CA from January 2015 to April 2026 (CRD420251152212). Frailty was classified based on individual study scoring systems. The primary outcome of interest was all-cause mortality, expressed as pooled hazard (HR) or risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) using inverse-variance random-effects models. Other outcomes included hospitalizations, quality of life, functional status (6-min walk distance [6MWD]), and prescription of disease modifying treatment. Heterogeneity was summarized using the I Findings: Fifteen studies with a total of 5048 patients, predominantly (>95%) with transthyretin amyloid cardiomyopathy (ATTR-CM), were included. The prevalence of frailty ranged between 6.7% and 75% across studies with a pooled mean of 33.9% (826/2435 frail). Pooling 2141 patients with outcomes available, both pre-frailty (RR 2.22, 95% CI 1.37-3.60, p < 0.01) and frailty (RR 3.93, 95% CI 2.09-7.40, p < 0.01) significantly associated with increased risks of all-cause mortality after adjustment for age and frailty assessment tool. 6MWD, a functional surrogate of frailty, predicted poorer outcomes both using baseline 6MWD (<350/300 m: HR 2.22, 95% CI 1.15-4.31, p = 0.02) and 1-year interval change in 6MWD (>35 reduction: HR 1.80, 95% CI 1.52-2.14; >5% reduction: HR 1.89, 95% CI 1.60-2.23; both p < 0.01). Beyond mortality, frailty also predicted increased risk of functional decline, poorer quality of life, and reduced prescription of disease-modifying treatment. Interpretation: Patients with ATTR-CM and frailty have higher mortality risk, poorer functional outcomes and reduced prescription of disease-modifying treatment compared to those without frailty. Findings were consistent across frailty instruments and sensitivity analyses, supporting the incorporation of routine frailty assessment and 6MWD into clinical management of ATTR amyloidosis. Funding: None.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.