Sodium glucose cotransporter (SGLT)‐2 inhibitors: Do we need them for glucose‐lowering, for cardiorenal protection or both?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sodium glucose cotransporter (SGLT)-2 inhibitors are the newest addition to our treatment armamentarium for the management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes. Glucose-lowering per se reduces the risk of microvascular complications, but not the risk of cardiovascular disease, including heart failure and cardiovascular mortality. Also, even when embedded in optimal cardiovascular prevention, a large residual risk remains with respect to progression of diabetic kidney disease. SGLT-2 inhibitors lower blood glucose levels by inducing glucosuria. Through various proposed mechanisms, among which diuretic and natriuretic effects, SGLT-2 inhibitors decrease heart failure hospitalization, reduce cardiovascular mortality, and mitigate progression of diabetic kidney disease. In this perspective, we will discuss the glucose-lowering and other protective effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors on the cardiorenal axis, both in primary and secondary prevention. By comparing the glycemic and pleiotropic effects of these agents to other glucose-lowering drugs, we will address questions around whether SGLT-2 inhibitors should be considered primarily as glucose-lowering agents, cardiorenal drugs or both.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".