MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Effect of Pravastatin on Rate of Kidney Function Loss in People With or at Risk for Coronary Disease

2005· review· en· W2132627628 on OpenAlexaff
Marcello Tonelli, Chris Isles, Timothy E. Craven, Andrew Tonkin, Marc A. Pfeffer, James Shepherd, Frank M. Sacks, Curt D. Furberg, Stuart M. Cobbe, John Simes, Malcolm West, Chris J. Packard, Gary C. Curhan

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2005
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPravastatinMedicineRenal functionKidney diseaseInternal medicineUrologyPlaceboPost-hoc analysisKidneyCardiologyEndocrinologyCholesterolPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Limited data suggest that HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) reduce rates of kidney function loss. We performed this analysis to determine whether pravastatin reduced the rate of kidney function loss over approximately 5 years in people with or at high risk for coronary disease. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a post hoc subgroup analysis of data from 3 randomized double-blind controlled trials comparing pravastatin 40 mg/d and placebo in subjects with a previous acute coronary syndrome or who were at high cardiovascular risk. The primary outcome was the rate of change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR; in mL/min per 1.73 m2/y). The Modified Diet and Renal Disease Study (MDRD) and Cockcroft-Gault equations were used to estimate GFR. We studied 18,569 participants, 3402 (18.3%) of whom had moderate chronic kidney disease as defined by an estimated GFR of 30 to 59.9 mL/min per 1.73 m2 body surface area. In subjects with moderate chronic kidney disease at baseline, pravastatin reduced the adjusted rate of kidney function loss by approximately 34%, although the absolute reduction in the rate of loss was small (0.22 mL/min per 1.73 m2/y by MDRD-GFR; 95% CI, 0.07 to 0.37). Pravastatin did not reduce the frequency of > or =25% decreases in kidney function in this group when MDRD-GFR was used to estimate GFR (relative risk [RR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.66 to 1.06). When all 18,569 subjects were considered, pravastatin reduced the adjusted rate of kidney function loss by 8% (0.08 mL/min per 1.73 m2/y by MDRD-GFR; 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.15) and the risk of acute renal failure (RR, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.86) but did not significantly reduce the frequency of a > or =25% decline in kidney function by MDRD-GFR (RR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.01). CONCLUSIONS: Pravastatin modestly reduced the rate of kidney function loss in people with or at risk for cardiovascular disease. However, the primary indication for the use of statins in people with or at risk for coronary events remains the reduction in mortality that results from their use.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.603

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.292 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations196
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicLipoproteins and Cardiovascular HealthFrench-language works237,207