MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3213551190 · doi:10.1016/j.jchf.2021.08.006

Efficacy of Dapagliflozin in Black Versus White Patients With Heart Failure and Reduced Ejection Fraction

2021· article· en· W3213551190 on OpenAlexafffund
Kieran F. Docherty, Modele O. Ogunniyi, Inder S. Anand, Akshay S. Desai, Mirta Díez, Jonathan G. Howlett, José Carlos Nicolau, Eileen O’Meara, Subodh Verma, Silvio E. Inzucchi, Lars Køber, Mikhail Kosiborod, Daniel Lindholm, Felipe A. Martínez, Olof Bengtsson, Piotr Ponikowski, Marc S. Sabatine, Mikaela Sjöstrand, Scott D. Solomon, Anna Maria Langkilde, Pardeep S. Jhund, John J.V. McMurray

Bibliographic record

VenueJACC Heart Failure · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoMontreal Heart InstituteSt. Michael's HospitalUniversity of Calgary
FundersJanssen Research and DevelopmentSanofi PasteurNational Institutes of HealthUniversity Hospital FoundationVifor PharmaEisaiNational Heart and Lung InstituteBritish Heart FoundationNovo NordiskMyoKardiaGlaxoSmithKlineIFM TherapeuticsDaiichi-SankyoZora BiosciencesMedicines CompanyMedtronicGilead UK and Ireland Corporate ContributionsRocheRespicardiaNovartisSanofiMedImmuneMerckServierBayerBristol-Myers SquibbAstraZenecaActelion PharmaceuticalsPfizerBoehringer IngelheimAmgenAbbott Laboratories
KeywordsMedicineEjection fractionHeart failureDapagliflozinCardiologyInternal medicineBenzhydryl compoundsEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVES: This study sought to investigate the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in Black and White patients with heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) enrolled in DAPA-HF (Study to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on the Incidence of Worsening Heart Failure or Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure). BACKGROUND: Black patients may respond differently to certain treatments for HFrEF than White patients. METHODS: Patients with New York Heart Association functional class II to IV with an ejection fraction of ≤40% and elevated N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide were eligible for DAPA-HF. Because >99% of Black patients were randomized in the Americas, this post hoc analysis considered Black and White patients enrolled only in North and South America. The primary outcome was the composite of a worsening HF event (HF hospitalization or urgent HF visit requiring intravenous therapy) or cardiovascular death. RESULTS: Of the 4,744 patients randomized in DAPA-HF, 1,494 (31.5%) were enrolled in the Americas. Of these, 1,181 (79.0%) were White, and 225 (15.1%) were Black. Black patients had a higher rate of worsening HF events, but not mortality, compared with White patients. Compared with placebo, dapagliflozin reduced the risk of the primary endpoint similarly in Black patients (HR: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.37-1.03) and White patients (HR: 0.68; 95% CI: 0.52-0.90; P-interaction = 0.70). Consistent benefits were observed for other prespecified outcomes, including the composite of total (first and repeat) HF hospitalizations and cardiovascular death (P-interaction = 0.43) and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire total symptom score. Study drug discontinuation and serious adverse events were not more frequent in the dapagliflozin group than in the placebo group in either Black or White patients. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin reduced the risk of worsening HF and cardiovascular death, and it improved symptoms, similarly in Black and White patients without an increase in adverse events. (Study to Evaluate the Effect of Dapagliflozin on the Incidence of Worsening Heart Failure or Cardiovascular Death in Patients With Chronic Heart Failure [DAPA-HF]; NCT03036124).

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.237 · 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

Citations49
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJACC Heart FailureSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207