Renal, Cardiovascular, and Safety Outcomes of Canagliflozin by Baseline Kidney Function: A Secondary Analysis of the CREDENCE Randomized Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Significance Statement The CREDENCE randomized trial demonstrated that canagliflozin reduces risk of cardiovascular and renal events in people with type 2 diabetes and substantial albuminuria. The authors analyzed CREDENCE data to assess whether canagliflozin’s benefits are safely preserved in people with reduced eGFR, finding that the relative benefits for renal and cardiovascular outcomes appeared consistent among subgroups with initial eGFR ranging from 30 to <90 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 . Absolute benefit for renal outcomes was greater in subgroups with an initial eGFR of <60 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 . Safety outcomes were generally consistent among eGFR subgroups. Canagliflozin led to an acute eGFR drop, followed by relative stabilization of eGFR loss across subgroups. Canagliflozin’s benefits and safety are apparent across the eGFR range, including among those initiating treatment with eGFR as low as 30 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 . Background Canagliflozin reduced renal and cardiovascular events in people with type 2 diabetes in the CREDENCE trial. We assessed efficacy and safety of canagliflozin by initial estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Methods CREDENCE randomly assigned 4401 participants with an eGFR of 30 to <90 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 and substantial albuminuria to canagliflozin 100 mg or placebo. We used Cox proportional hazards regression to analyze effects on renal and cardiovascular efficacy and safety outcomes within screening eGFR subgroups (30 to <45, 45 to <60, and 60 to <90 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ) and linear mixed effects models to analyze the effects on eGFR slope. Results At screening, 1313 (30%), 1279 (29%), and 1809 (41%) participants had an eGFR of 30 to <45, 45 to <60, and 60 to <90 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 , respectively. The relative benefits of canagliflozin for renal and cardiovascular outcomes appeared consistent among eGFR subgroups (all P interaction >0.11). Subgroups with lower eGFRs, who were at greater risk, exhibited larger absolute benefits for renal outcomes. Canagliflozin’s lack of effect on serious adverse events, amputations, and fractures appeared consistent among eGFR subgroups. In all subgroups, canagliflozin use led to an acute eGFR drop followed by relative stabilization of eGFR loss. Among those with an eGFR of 30 to <45 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 , canagliflozin led to an initial drop of 2.03 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 . Thereafter, decline in eGFR was slower in the canagliflozin versus placebo group (–1.72 versus –4.33 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ; between-group difference 2.61 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 ). Conclusions Canagliflozin safely reduced the risk of renal and cardiovascular events, with consistent results across eGFR subgroups, including the subgroup initiating treatment with an eGFR of 30 to <45 ml/min per 1.73 m 2 . Absolute benefits for renal outcomes were greatest in subgroups with lower eGFR. Clinical Trial registry name and registration number Evaluation of the Effects of Canagliflozin on Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Participants With Diabetic Nephropathy (CREDENCE), NCT02065791.
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 | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".