FP485EFFECTS OF ERTUGLIFLOZIN TREATMENT OVER 2 YEARS ON MEASURES OF RENAL FUNCTION
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
INTRODUCTION: Two RCTs evaluating ertugliflozin 5 mg (E5, n=652), 15 mg (E15, n=640) vs non-ertugliflozin (NE, glimepiride or placebo, n=644) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) were pooled to evaluate effects of ertugliflozin on eGFR and albuminuria. METHODS: Change over time in eGFR (MDRD) and UACR (UACR, geometric mean of % change from baseline) were analysed by mixed model repeated measures in the overall population and by baseline UACR category (UACR <30 mg/g or ≥30 mg/g). Transition in albuminuria category (UACR <30 or ≥30 mg/g) was analysed by calculating the transition from baseline to week 104. The rate of change in eGFR (eGFR slope) per week, was analyzed by random coefficient models. The model included eGFR value as response variable with treatment group, time in weeks, treatment by time interaction, and baseline eGFR as fixed effects. Two study periods (0-6 and 6-104 week) were modeled separately. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were balanced among the treatment groups. Overall, mean baseline eGFR was 88.2 ml/min/1.73m² and geometric mean baseline UACR was 11.6 mg/g. In patients with baseline UACR < 30 mg/g (n=1521) mean values for UACR over time were similar between groups. In patients with baseline UACR ≥30 mg/g (n=415) the week 104 ΔUACR [95% CI] compared to NE was -29.0% ([-47.0, -4.5]; p=0.02) for E5 and -32.7% ([95%CI -50.4, -8.6]; p=0.01) for E15. In patients with baseline UACR <30 mg/g the proportion of patients that transitioned to the UACR ≥30 mg/g category at week 104 were 11.5, 10.6 and 7.4%, respectively for the NE, E5 and E15 groups. The difference vs. NE were non-significant. Of the patients with baseline UACR ≥30 mg/g the proportion of patients that transitioned to the UACR <30 mg/g category at week 104 were 31.8, 37.3 and 44.1%, respectively for the NE, E5 and E15 groups. The difference vs. NE were non-significant. At week 6, changes from baseline in eGFR were: -2.3, -2.7 and -0.7 ml/min/1.73m², for the E5, E15 and NE groups, respectively. From week 6, mean eGFR with ertugliflozin increased over time, while it decreased in the NE group. The week 104 ΔeGFR [95% CI] from baseline compared to NE was 1.81 ([0.13, 3.49]; p=0.04) and 2.10 ml/min/1.73m² ([0.42, 3.78]; p=0.01) for E5 and E15, respectively. For the 0 to 6-week treatment period the mean (95% CI) weekly change from baseline in the eGFR slope were -0.10 (-0.32, 0.13), -0.38 (-0.60, -0.15), and -0.45 (-0.68, -0.21) respectively for the NE, E5 and E15 groups. The mean weekly NE-corrected differences were -0.29 [(-0.61, 0.04) p=0.08] and -0.35 [(-0.68, -0.02) p=0.04] for the E5 and E15 groups. For the 6 to 104-week treatment period the mean (95% CI) weekly change from baseline in eGFR slope were -0.01 (-0.02, -0.004), 0.02 (0.01, 0.03), 0.03 (0.02, 0.04) ml/min/1.73m² respectively for the NE, E5 and E15 groups, which corresponds to a slope over the 98 week period of -0.98, 1.96 and 2.94, respectively for the NE, E5 and E15 groups. Results were similar by baseline UACR category. CONCLUSIONS: Ertugliflozin acutely (first 6 weeks) reduced eGFR possibly based on known hemodynamic effects. At week 104, eGFR values were higher with ertugliflozin than control. The significant decreases in UACR in patients with baseline elevated albuminuria along with significant differences in eGFR are suggestive of renal function preservation with ertugliflozin treatment.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,006 | 0,004 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,004 | 0,008 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».