MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314168905 · doi:10.3109/0886022x.2016.1165065

Effect of calcium channels blockers and inhibitors of the renin-angiotensin system on renal outcomes and mortality in patients suffering from chronic kidney disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

2016· review· en· W2314168905 on OpenAlex
Hongjin Zhao, Yan Li, Shan-Mei Liu, Xiang-Guo Sun, Min Li, Hao Yan, Lianqun Cui, Aihong Wang

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueRenal Failure · 2016
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsChild and Family Research InstituteUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNatural Science Foundation of Shandong Province
KeywordsMedicineMeta-analysisKidney diseaseAngiotensin Receptor BlockersDiseaseRenin–angiotensin systemInternal medicineNephrologyACE inhibitorIntensive care medicineKidneyUrologyEndocrinologyPharmacologyAngiotensin-converting enzymeBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: The renoprotective effect of inhibitors of renin-angiotensin system (RAS) has been identified through placebo-controlled trials. However, the effect of calcium-channel blockers (CCBs) on renal system is still controversial. Our current meta-analysis includes available evidences to compare the effect of dihydropyridine CCBs and ACEIs or ARBs on renal outcomes and mortality. We also further investigate whether CCBs can be used in combination with inhibitors of RAS to improve the prognosis of patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). METHODS AND RESULTS: Electronic databases were searched up to July 2012, for clinical randomized controlled trials, assessing the effect of dihydropyridine CCBs on the incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and all-cause mortality in contrast to ACEIs or ARBs. Eight clinical trials were included containing 25,647 participants. ESRD showed significantly higher frequency with CCBs therapy compared with ACEIs or ARBs therapy, though blood pressure was decreased similarly in both groups in every trial (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.05-1.48; p = 0.01). In contrast, there was no significant difference in the incidence of all-cause mortality between these two groups, though ACEIs or ARBs exhibited better renoprotective effect compared to CCBs (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.89-1.03; p = 0.24). CONCLUSIONS: CCBs did not increase all-cause mortality incidence in patients with CKD though they displayed weaker renoprotective, compared to ACEIs or ARBs therapy. Our results suggest the combination of a CCB and an ACEI or ARB should be a preferable antihypertensive therapy in patients with CKD, considering their higher effect in decreasing blood pressure and fewer adverse metabolic problems caused.

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.

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: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.581
Threshold uncertainty score0.996

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0110.002
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.275 · 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