Erythropoietic Response and Outcomes in Kidney Disease and Type 2 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Non–placebo-controlled trials of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs) comparing lower and higher hemoglobin targets in patients with chronic kidney disease indicate that targeting of a lower hemoglobin range may avoid ESA-associated risks. However, target-based strategies are confounded by each patient's individual hematopoietic response. METHODS: We assessed the relationship among the initial hemoglobin response to darbepoetin alfa after two weight-based doses, the hemoglobin level achieved after 4 weeks, the subsequent darbepoetin alfa dose, and outcomes in 1872 patients with chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus who were not receiving dialysis. We defined a poor initial response to darbepoetin alfa (which occurred in 471 patients) as the lowest quartile of percent change in hemoglobin level (<2%) after the first two standardized doses of the drug. RESULTS: Patients who had a poor initial response to darbepoetin alfa had a lower average hemoglobin level at 12 weeks and during follow-up than did patients with a better hemoglobin response (a change in hemoglobin level ranging from 2 to 15% or more) (P<0.001 for both comparisons), despite receiving higher doses of darbepoetin alfa (median dose, 232 μg vs. 167 μg; P<0.001). Patients with a poor response, as compared with those with a better response, had higher rates of the composite cardiovascular end point (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.09 to 1.59) or death (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.12 to 1.78). CONCLUSIONS: A poor initial hematopoietic response to darbepoetin alfa was associated with an increased subsequent risk of death or cardiovascular events as doses were escalated to meet target hemoglobin levels. Although the mechanism of this differential effect is not known, these findings raise concern about current target-based strategies for treating anemia in patients with chronic kidney disease. (Funded by Amgen; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00093015.)
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".