MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2331089096 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1203165

Peginesatide in Patients with Anemia Undergoing Hemodialysis

2013· article· en· W2331089096 on OpenAlexaff
Steven Fishbane, Brigitte Schiller, Francesco Locatelli, Adrian Covic, Robert Provenzano, Andrzej Więcek, Nathan W. Levin, Mark Kaplan, Iain C. Macdougall, Carol Francisco, Martha Mayo, Krishna R. Polu, Anne‐Marie Duliège, Anatole Besarab

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythropoietin and Anemia Treatment
Canadian institutionsSt. Clair College
FundersFresenius Medical Care North AmericaFibroGenCelgeneAkebia TherapeuticsAmgen
KeywordsMedicineAnemiaHemodialysisErythropoiesisKidney diseaseIntensive care medicineErythropoietinInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Peginesatide, a synthetic peptide-based erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA), is a potential therapy for anemia in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. METHODS: We conducted two randomized, controlled, open-label studies (EMERALD 1 and EMERALD 2) involving patients undergoing hemodialysis. Cardiovascular safety was evaluated by analysis of an adjudicated composite safety end point--death from any cause, stroke, myocardial infarction, or serious adverse events of congestive heart failure, unstable angina, or arrhythmia--with the use of pooled data from the two EMERALD studies and two studies involving patients not undergoing dialysis. In the EMERALD studies, 1608 patients received peginesatide once monthly or continued to receive epoetin one to three times a week, with the doses adjusted as necessary to maintain a hemoglobin level between 10.0 and 12.0 g per deciliter for 52 weeks or more. The primary efficacy end point was the mean change from the baseline hemoglobin level to the mean level during the evaluation period; noninferiority was established if the lower limit of the two-sided 95% confidence interval was -1.0 g per deciliter or higher in the comparison of peginesatide with epoetin. The aim of evaluating the composite safety end point in the pooled cohort was to exclude a hazard ratio with peginesatide relative to the comparator ESA of more than 1.3. RESULTS: In an analysis involving 693 patients from EMERALD 1 and 725 from EMERALD 2, peginesatide was noninferior to epoetin in maintaining hemoglobin levels (mean between-group difference, -0.15 g per deciliter; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.30 to -0.01 in EMERALD 1; and 0.10 g per deciliter; 95% CI, -0.05 to 0.26 in EMERALD 2). The hazard ratio for the composite safety end point was 1.06 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.26) with peginesatide relative to the comparator ESA in the four pooled studies (2591 patients) and 0.95 (95% CI, 0.77 to 1.17) in the EMERALD studies. The proportions of patients with adverse and serious adverse events were similar in the treatment groups in the EMERALD studies. The cardiovascular safety of peginesatide was similar to that of the comparator ESA in the pooled cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Peginesatide, administered monthly, was as effective as epoetin, administered one to three times per week, in maintaining hemoglobin levels in patients undergoing hemodialysis. (Funded by Affymax and Takeda Pharmaceutical; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00597753 [EMERALD 1], NCT00597584 [EMERALD 2], NCT00598273 [PEARL 1], and NCT00598442 [PEARL 2].).

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score0.725

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations111
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicErythropoietin and Anemia TreatmentFrench-language works237,207