The benefits of renin-angiotensin blockade in renal transplant recipients with biopsy-proven allograft nephropathy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Allograft nephropathy, regardless of aetiology, leads to progressive renal injury and eventual graft loss. In native kidney disease, treatment of hypertension, in particular with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) or angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB), has proven beneficial in retarding renal function decline. In the present study, we reviewed the clinical course of a renal transplant recipient cohort that was prescribed either an ACEi or ARB for biopsy-proven allograft nephropathy. METHODS: Patients were followed from the time of post-biopsy initiation of ACEi/ARB and were stratified based on biopsy findings. Outcomes of interest included safety, allograft survival, renal function and change in slope of renal function pre- and post-ACEi/ARB. RESULTS: The 5 year allograft survival after biopsy diagnosis of allograft nephropathy was 83%. Serum creatinine was 191+/-97 (86-377) micromol/l at the time of biopsy and 228+/-102 (102-575) micromol/l at last follow-up. The slopes of reciprocal creatinine vs time were used to calculate the decline in renal function and were compared pre- and post-ACEi/ARB. The mean slope+/-SD was -0.06+/-0.21 l/micromol x 10(-3) per month in the 12 months prior to therapy and -0.03+/-0.09 l/micromol x 10(-3) per month following therapy. The absolute difference in slopes was 0.03 (P =<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with ACEi/ARB may be beneficial in the management of allograft nephropathy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".