Trial reportCirculation. Population health and outcomes2026
Assessing the Prognostic Value of Serial Seattle Angina Questionnaire Scores in Chronic Coronary Disease.
Trial report in Circulation. Population health and outcomes, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT01471522 (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches), which is not on this 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.
International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness With Medical and Invasive Approaches (ISCHEMIA)
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
13 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatient-centered prognostic assessment in chronic coronary disease is vital for treatment optimization. Although the Seattle Angina Questionnaire Summary Score (SAQ-SS) correlates with clinical outcomes, clinicians lack guidance on how to weigh prior, current, or changes in scores, and whether prognostic significance varies by revascularization strategy.
methodsThe ISCHEMIA trial (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness with Medical and Invasive Approaches; 2012-2019) was a global, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. This secondary analysis evaluated the prognostic value of serial SAQ-SS assessments. The SAQ-SS ranges from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating better health status. To simulate routine clinical care, the follow-up in ISCHEMIA was equated to outpatient clinic visits-we defined the 3-month SAQ-SS as the prior score and the 6-month assessment as the current score in the clinic. Analyses were stratified by treatment strategy: conservative management and invasive management with revascularization. Cox proportional hazards models assessed the association of the prior score, the current score, and the change in scores with ISCHEMIA's primary composite end point (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, and resuscitated cardiac arrest), adjusting for 17 clinical covariates.
resultsThis analysis included 3405 participants (1965 in conservative management: 77.4% male, mean age 64.3 years±9.5; 1440 in invasive management: 77.6% male, mean age 64.0 years±9.4). Over a median follow-up of 3.2 years, 215 (11.0%) and 96 (6.7%) participants in the conservative and invasive cohorts, respectively, experienced the primary composite end point. Higher prior, current, and change SAQ-SS were each independently associated with a lower risk of cardiovascular events. In the conservative cohort, each 5-point increase in the current SAQ-SS was associated with a 7% lower risk of the primary end point (hazard ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.90-0.96]); in the invasive cohort, the association was 9% (hazard ratio, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.86-0.96]).
conclusionsIn patients with chronic coronary disease, the most recent SAQ-SS is the strongest health status predictor of future cardiovascular events. Serial SAQ-SS assessments provide a practical, dynamic, and patient-centered approach for updating prognosis in chronic coronary disease management. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01471522.
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.