MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208019884 · doi:10.1159/000519812

The Therapeutic Evaluation of Steroids in IgA Nephropathy Global (TESTING) Study: Trial Design and Baseline Characteristics

2021· article· en· W3208019884 on OpenAlexaffabout
Muh Geot Wong, Jicheng Lv, Michelle Hladunewich, Vivekanand Jha, Lai Seong Hooi, Helen Monaghan, Ming‐Hui Zhao, Sean Barbour, Heather N. Reich, Daniel C. Cattran, Richard J. Glassock, Adeera Levin, Meg Jardine, David C. Wheeler, Mark Woodward, Laurent Billot, Tak Mao Chan, Zhihong Liu, David W. Johnson, Alan Cass, John Feehally, Jürgen Floege, Giuseppe Remuzzi, Yangfeng Wu, Rajiv Agarwal, Hong Zhang, Vlado Perkovic

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Nephrology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia detection and treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity Health NetworkUniversity of British ColumbiaHealth Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoSunnybrook Health Science Centre
FundersNational Health and Medical Research CouncilMedical Research CouncilPfizer
KeywordsMedicinePlaceboMethylprednisoloneRandomized controlled trialDialysisNephropathyInternal medicineKidney transplantationProteinuriaTransplantationKidneyDiabetes mellitusEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION: Despite optimal current care, up to 30% of individuals suffering from immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN) will develop kidney failure requiring dialysis or kidney transplantation. The Therapeutic Evaluation of STeroids in IgA Nephropathy Global (TESTING) study was designed to assess the benefits and risks of steroids in people with IgAN. We report the trial design as well as the baseline characteristics of study participants. METHODS: It is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial of individuals with kidney biopsy-confirmed IgAN, proteinuria ≥1 g/day, and an estimated GFR of 20-120 mL/min/1.73 m2, following at least 3 months of standard of care including maximum labelled (or tolerated) dose of renin-angiotensin system blockade. The original study design randomized participants 1:1 to oral methylprednisolone (0.6-0.8 mg/kg/day, maximum 48 mg/day) for 2 months, with subsequent weaning by 8 mg/day/month over 6-8 months, or matching placebo. The intervention was modified in 2016 (due to an excess of serious infection) to low-dose methylprednisolone (0.4 mg/kg/day, maximum 32 mg/day) for 2 months, followed by weaning by 4 mg/day/month over 6-9 months, or matching placebo. Participants recruited after 2016 also received prophylaxis against Pneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia during the first 12 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: The study recruitment period extended from May 2012 to November 2019. By the time the excess of serious infections was observed, 262 participants had been randomized to the original full-dose treatment algorithm, and an interim analysis was reported in 2016. Subsequently, 241 additional participants were randomized to a revised low-dose protocol, for a total of 503 participants from China (373), India (78), Canada (24), Australia (18), and Malaysia (10). The mean age of randomized participants was 38, 39% were female, mean eGFR at randomization was 62.7 mL/min/1.73 m2, and mean 24-h urine protein 2.54 g. The primary endpoint is a composite of 40% eGFR decline from baseline or kidney failure (dialysis, transplantation, or death due to kidney disease), and participants will be followed until the primary outcome has been observed in at least 160 randomized participants. Analyses will also be made across predefined subgroups. Effects on eGFR slope and albuminuria will also be assessed overall, as well as by the steroid dosing regimen. CONCLUSIONS: The TESTING study (combined full and low dose) will define the benefits of corticosteroid use on major kidney outcomes, as well as the risks of therapy, and provide data on the relative effects of different doses, in individuals with high-risk IgAN.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.864
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.285 · 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.

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

Citations31
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of NephrologySame topicPneumocystis jirovecii pneumonia detection and treatmentFrench-language works237,207