MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974260792 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa1911303

Dapagliflozin in Patients with Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

2019· article· en· W2974260792 on OpenAlexaff
John J.V. McMurray, Scott D. Solomon, Silvio E. Inzucchi, Lars Køber, Mikhail Kosiborod, Felipe A. Martínez, Piotr Ponikowski, Marc S. Sabatine, Inder S. Anand, Jan Bělohlávek, Michael Böhm, Chern‐En Chiang, Vijay Chopra, Rudolf A. de Boer, Akshay S. Desai, Mirta Díez, Jarosław Dróżdż, Andrej Dukát, Junbo Ge, Jonathan G. Howlett, Tzvetana Katova, Masafumi Kitakaze, Charlotta Ljungman, Béla Merkely, José Carlos Nicolau, Eileen O’Meara, Mark C. Petrie, Pham Nguyễn Vinh, Morten Schou, С. Н. Терещенко, Subodh Verma, Claes Held, David L. DeMets, Kieran F. Docherty, Pardeep S. Jhund, Olof Bengtsson, Mikaela Sjöstrand, Anna-Maria Langkilde

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMontreal Heart InstituteLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersAstraZeneca
KeywordsDapagliflozinEjection fractionHeart failureCardiologyInternal medicineFraction (chemistry)MedicineChemistryDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyChromatography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: In patients with type 2 diabetes, inhibitors of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) reduce the risk of a first hospitalization for heart failure, possibly through glucose-independent mechanisms. More data are needed regarding the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with established heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, regardless of the presence or absence of type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this phase 3, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned 4744 patients with New York Heart Association class II, III, or IV heart failure and an ejection fraction of 40% or less to receive either dapagliflozin (at a dose of 10 mg once daily) or placebo, in addition to recommended therapy. The primary outcome was a composite of worsening heart failure (hospitalization or an urgent visit resulting in intravenous therapy for heart failure) or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: Over a median of 18.2 months, the primary outcome occurred in 386 of 2373 patients (16.3%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 502 of 2371 patients (21.2%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.65 to 0.85; P<0.001). A first worsening heart failure event occurred in 237 patients (10.0%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 326 patients (13.7%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.70; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.83). Death from cardiovascular causes occurred in 227 patients (9.6%) in the dapagliflozin group and in 273 patients (11.5%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.69 to 0.98); 276 patients (11.6%) and 329 patients (13.9%), respectively, died from any cause (hazard ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.71 to 0.97). Findings in patients with diabetes were similar to those in patients without diabetes. The frequency of adverse events related to volume depletion, renal dysfunction, and hypoglycemia did not differ between treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with heart failure and a reduced ejection fraction, the risk of worsening heart failure or death from cardiovascular causes was lower among those who received dapagliflozin than among those who received placebo, regardless of the presence or absence of diabetes. (Funded by AstraZeneca; DAPA-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03036124.).

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)0.001
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: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations6,873
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207