Nephrotic-range proteinuria in type 2 diabetes: Effects of empagliflozin on kidney disease progression and clinical outcomes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: analysis of data from the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial (NCT01131676). METHODS: Cox proportional hazards models were used to investigate the risk of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in participants with and without NRP, defined by urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) ≥2200 mg/g at baseline. Annual loss of eGFR during chronic treatment (eGFR slopes) and hypothetical time to projected end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), conditioning upon linearity of eGFR change over time if a patient did not decease before projected ESKD, were calculated using a random-intercept random-coefficient model. Safety was described based on investigator-reported adverse events. FINDINGS: 0·005). Empagliflozin was estimated to double the median hypothetical time to projected ESKD in participants with NRP. The overall safety profile of empagliflozin was comparable between participants with and without NRP at baseline. INTERPRETATION: Our data suggests that empagliflozin might slow kidney function loss and delay the estimated onset of projected ESKD in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease complicated by NRP.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".