MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803763849 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfy104.sp415

SP415EMPAGLIFLOZIN AND PROGRESSION OF CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE IN TYPE 2 DIABETES COMPLICATED BY NEPHROTIC-RANGE PROTEINURIA: INSIGHTS FROM THE EMPA-REG OUTCOME® TRIAL

2018· article· en· W2803763849 on OpenAlexaff
Piero Ruggenenti, Silvio E. Inzucchi, Bernard Zinman, Stefan Hantel, Audrey Koitka‐Weber, Maximilian von Eynatten, Christoph Wanner

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineProteinuriaEMPAKidney diseaseInternal medicineType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyKidney

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION AND AIMS: In patients with diabetic kidney disease, nephrotic-range proteinuria is a major risk factor for accelerated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) loss, cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. In this post-hoc analysis of the EMPA-REG OUTCOME® trial, we evaluated the effects of the SGLT2 inhibitor empagliflozin (EMPA) in patients with type 2 diabetes, established cardiovascular disease and nephrotic-range proteinuria at study inclusion. METHODS: Patients were randomised to receive EMPA 10 or 25 mg/day, or placebo (PBO), in addition to standard of care. Median observation time was 3.1 years. According to Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria, nephrotic-range proteinuria was defined as urine albumin:creatinine ratio (UACR) ≥2200 mg/g. A mixed-model repeated measures analysis was used to evaluate changes in estimated GFR (eGFR) over time. Treatment differences in the average rate of annual loss of eGFR were assessed using a random coefficient model. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to investigate the risk of all-cause hospitalisation as ascertained by investigator ‘serious adverse event’ reporting. RESULTS: We identified 112 patients with nephrotic-range proteinuria (PBO, n=42; pooled EMPA, n=70). At baseline, mean [SD] eGFR (PBO, 63.6 [23.5]; EMPA, 60.3 [19.5] mL/min/1.73m²) and median UACR [interquartile range] (PBO, 3676 [2713-4865]; EMPA, 3532 [2701-4879] mg/g creatinine) were balanced between groups. After an acute fall in eGFR during the first 4 weeks in both groups, the PBO group experienced a steeper decline in eGFR than the EMPA group (Figure). Between week 4 to last value on treatment the annual loss of eGFR was 10.7 mL/min/1.73m² with PBO and 4.5 mL/min/1.73m² with EMPA; thus, yearly eGFR loss was 6.1 mL/min/1.73m² slower with EMPA than PBO (p=0.0098). Moreover, EMPA significantly reduced the risk of all-cause hospitalisation by 47% versus PBO (hazard ratio 0.53 [0.30-0.93]; p=0.0263). CONCLUSIONS: EMPA could be a new treatment option to slow GFR decline and reduce all-cause hospitalisations in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease at high risk for rapid loss of renal function due to nephrotic-range proteinuria.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207