Investigating the Relationship Between Age and Kidney Failure in Adults With Category 4 Chronic Kidney Disease
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: In people with severe chronic kidney disease (CKD), there is an inverse relationship between age and kidney failure. If this relationship is the same at any age (linear), one effect (hazard ratio) will be sufficient for accurate risk prediction; if it is nonlinear, the effect will vary with age. Objective: To investigate the relationship between age and kidney failure in adults with category G4 chronic kidney disease (G4 CKD). Methods: We performed a population-based study using linked administrative databases in Alberta, Canada, to study adults with G4 CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] = 15-30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ) and without previously documented eGFR <15 mL/min/1.73 m 2 or renal replacement. We used cause-specific Cox regression to model the relationship between age and the hazard of kidney failure (the earlier of eGFR <10 mL/min/1.73 m 2 or receipt of renal replacement) and death, incorporating spline terms to capture any nonlinear effect of age. We included sex, diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, albuminuria, and eGFR in all models. Results: Of the 27 823 participants (97 731 patient-years at risk; mean age = 76 years, ±13), 19% developed kidney failure and 51% died. The decline in the hazard of kidney failure associated with a given increase in age was not constant but became progressively larger as people aged; that is, the hazard ratio became progressively smaller (closer to 0). Assuming an eGFR of 25 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , for every 10-year increase in age, the hazard ratio declined from 0.76 (95% confidence interval = 0.73-0.79) at age 50 years to 0.43 (95% confidence interval = 34-56) at age 80 years in people without cardiovascular disease, and from 0.75 (95% confidence interval = 0.70-0.79) at age 50 years to 0.36 (95% confidence interval = 0.29-0.45) at age 80 years in people with cardiovascular disease. Conclusions: The relationship between kidney failure and age varies with age. An age-dependent effect, rather than a constant effect, needs to be specified to accurately predict risk. These findings have implications for risk prediction and advanced care planning.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
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".