MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162755126 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.2221

Renal function and the effects of vericiguat in patients with worsening heart failure with reduced ejection fraction: insights from the <scp>VICTORIA</scp> ( <scp>Vericiguat</scp> Global Study in Subjects with <scp>HFrEF</scp> ) trial

2021· article· en· W3162755126 on OpenAlexaff
Adriaan A. Voors, Hillary Mulder, Eugene B. Reyes, Martín Cowie, Johan Lassus, Adrian F. Hernandez, Justin A. Ezekowitz, Javed Butler, Christopher M. O’Connor, Joerg Koglin, Carolyn S.P. Lam, Burkert Pieske, Lothar Roessig, Piotr Ponikowski, Kevin J. Anstrom, Paul W. Armstrong

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHeart Failure Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian VIGOUR CentreUniversity of Alberta
FundersDuke Clinical Research InstituteMerckBayer
KeywordsEjection fractionHeart failureMedicineCardiologyRenal functionInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims Vericiguat reduced the primary composite outcome of cardiovascular death or heart failure (HF) hospitalization in patients with worsening HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) and a lower limit of baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 15 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . We evaluated the relationship between the efficacy of vericiguat and baseline and subsequent changes in renal function. Methods and results In VICTORIA, core laboratory serum creatinine was measured at baseline ( n = 4956) and weeks 16, 32, and 48. Worsening renal function (WRF), defined as an increase ≥0.3 mg/dL in creatinine from baseline to week 16, was assessed via a Cox model with respect to subsequent primary events. Mean age was 69 years, 24% were female, and mean baseline eGFR was 61 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . During 48 weeks of treatment, the trajectories in eGFR and creatinine with vericiguat were similar to placebo ( P = 0.50 and 0.18). The beneficial effects of vericiguat on the primary outcome were not influenced by baseline eGFR (interaction P = 0.48). WRF occurred in 15% of patients and was associated with worse outcomes (adjusted hazard ratio 1.28, 95% confidence interval 1.11–1.47; P &lt; 0.001), but the beneficial effects of vericiguat on the primary outcome were similar in patients with or without WRF (interaction P = 0.76). Conclusion Renal function trajectories were similar between vericiguat‐ and placebo‐treated patients and the beneficial effects of vericiguat on the primary outcome were consistent across the full range of eGFR and irrespective of WRF.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.126
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations111
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicHeart Failure Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207