MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3033323670 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfaa144.p0178

P0178COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS OF RENIN-ANGIOTENSIN SYSTEM INHIBITORS AND CALCIUM CHANNEL BLOCKERS IN INDIVIDUALS WITH ADVANCED CHRONIC KIDNEY DISEASE: A NATIONWIDE COHORT STUDY

2020· article· en· W3033323670 on OpenAlexaff
Edouard L. Fu, Catherine M. Clase, Marie Evans, Bengt Lindholm, Joris I. Rotmans, Merel van Diepen, Friedo W. Dekker, Juan Jesús Carrero

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBlood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityImpact
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineKidney diseasePropensity score matchingInternal medicineConfoundingCohortNephrologyMaceDialysisProportional hazards modelMarginal structural modelCohort study

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and Aims There is a lack of data that could help to guide the choice of antihypertensive agents in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD). We evaluated whether initiating treatment with a renin-angiotensin system inhibitor (RASi) is superior to calcium channel blockers (CCB) in preventing mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) or kidney replacement therapy (KRT) in patients with advanced CKD. Method Observational study from the Swedish Renal Register, 2007-2017. We identified all nephrologist-referred patients in Sweden who initiated RASi or CCB treatment and had non-dialysis dependent advanced CKD (eGFR <30 ml/min/1.73m2). The associations between RASi vs CCB initiation, mortality, MACE and KRT were assessed by Cox regression. Analyses were adjusted with propensity score weighting for a wide range of confounders, including demographics, blood pressure, laboratory measures, comorbidities and medications. As a positive control we evaluated new use of the same drugs in patients with CKD G3 (N = 2608; eGFR between 30-60 ml/min/1.73m2). Furthermore subgroup, as-treated and competing risk analyses were performed. Results The propensity-score weighted cohort included 2479 RASi and 2327 CCB initiators who were well-matched for baseline confounders (all standardized differences <0.1). Median follow-up was 4.1 years, with a maximum follow-up of over 10 years. Compared to CCB, initiation of RASi was associated with a similar risk of mortality (adjusted HR 0.94; 95% CI 0.85-1.03) and MACE (0.99; 0.87-1.13), but with a lower risk of KRT (0.87; 0.78-0.98). Results were consistent across subgroups, in as-treated analyses and after accounting for the competing risk of death. In the control cohort of patients with CKD G3, initiation of RASi (versus CCB) was associated with lower KRT risk (adjusted HR 0.67; 0.47-0.96), and similar risk of mortality (0.91; 0.76-1.08) and MACE (1.06; 0.82-1.35). Conclusion Compared with CCB, initiation of RASi in patients with advanced CKD was associated with a lower risk of KRT, but no different risk of mortality or MACE.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.247 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicBlood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesFrench-language works237,207