MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3152341695 · doi:10.1093/cvr/cvab128

Effects of canagliflozin on myocardial infarction: a <i>post hoc</i> analysis of the CANVAS programme and CREDENCE trial

2021· article· en· W3152341695 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Yu, Jingwei Li, Phillip J Leaver, Clare Arnott, Mark D. Huffman, Jacob A. Udell, Vlado Perkovic, Kenneth W. Mahaffey, Dick de Zeeuw, Greg Fulcher, David R. Matthews, Wayne Shaw, Norman Rosenthal, Bruce Neal, Gemma A. Figtree

Bibliographic record

VenueCardiovascular Research · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsToronto General HospitalWomen's College HospitalUniversity of Toronto
FundersJanssen Research and DevelopmentNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilSanofi PasteurMerck Sharp and DohmeMitsubishi Tanabe Pharma CorporationServierRelypsaAstellas PharmaGilead SciencesEuropean Association for the Study of DiabetesVerily Life SciencesNovo NordiskSanofiGlaxoSmithKlineAmgenPfizerEuropean Foundation for the Study of DiabetesAstraZenecaEli Lilly and CompanyBristol-Myers Squibb
KeywordsCanagliflozinMedicineMyocardial infarctionInternal medicineEmpagliflozinHazard ratioType 2 diabetesPost-hoc analysisPlaceboCredenceCardiologyPopulationDiabetes mellitusConfidence intervalEndocrinologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: Given the benefits of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibition (SGLT2i) in protecting against heart failure in diabetic patients, we sought to explore the potential impact of SGLT2i on the clinical features of patients presenting with myocardial infarction (MI) through a post hoc analysis of CANVAS Programme and CREDENCE trial. METHODS AND RESULTS: Individuals with type 2 diabetes and history or high risk of cardiovascular disease (CANVAS Programme) or type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CREDENCE) were included. The intervention was canagliflozin 100 or 300 mg (combined in the analysis) or placebo. MI events were adjudicated as ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI, and type 1 MI or type 2 MI. A total of 421 first MI events in the CANVAS Programme and 178 first MI events in the CREDENCE trial were recorded (83 fatal, 128 STEMI, 431 non-STEMI, and 40 unknown). No benefit of canagliflozin compared with placebo on time to first MI event was observed [hazard ratio (HR) 0.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.75, 1.05]. Canagliflozin was associated with lower risk for non-STEMI (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.65, 0.95) but suggested a possible increase in STEMI (HR 1.55; 95% CI 1.06, 2.27), with no difference in risk of type 1 or type 2 MI. There was no change in fatal MI (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.78, 1.93). CONCLUSION: Canagliflozin was not associated with a reduction in overall MI in the pooled CANVAS Programme and CREDENCE trial population. The possible differential effect on STEMI and Non-STEMI observed in the CANVAS cohort warrants further investigation. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT01032629, NCT01989754, and 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 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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.005
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.038
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Citations19
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCardiovascular ResearchSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207