Erythropoietin Therapy and Left Ventricular Mass Index in CKD and ESRD Patients
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The purpose was to evaluate changes in the left ventricular mass index (LVMi) among anemic chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients treated with recombinant human erythropoietin (EPO). DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: A systematic review of the literature, reporting LVMi for patients before and after EPO therapy, was performed. The change in LVMi from baseline to the end of treatment was calculated and stratified by severity of anemia at baseline, target hemoglobin (Hb), and stage of kidney disease. RESULTS: Fifteen eligible studies involving 1731 patients were identified. Cohorts with severe anemia at baseline (<10 g/dl), when given EPO using a lower target level (Hb <or= 12 g/dl or Hct <or= 36%) experienced significant reductions in LVMi (-32.7 g/m(2); 95% CI: -49.4 to -16.1, P < 0.05). However, these studies lacked control groups. Cohorts with moderate anemia at baseline showed insignificant changes in LVMi: 5.3 g/m(2) (95% CI: -0.8 to 11.3) for patients assigned to a lower target, and -6.6 g/m(2) (95% CI: -17.2 to 4.0) for patients assigned to a higher target (Hb > 12 g/dl or Hct > 36%). The effect size was similar in direction for both CKD and ESRD cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Aggregated results from multiple studies suggest that in severe anemia conventional Hb targets for EPO therapy are associated with a reduction in LVMi, but that in moderate anemia target Hb above 12 g/dl does not have a significant beneficial impact on LVMi compared with conventional targets.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".