Effects of veverimer on serum bicarbonate and physical function in women with chronic kidney disease and metabolic acidosis: a subgroup analysis from a randomised, controlled trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Globally, the prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) is higher in women than in men; however, women have been historically under-represented in nephrology clinical trials. Metabolic acidosis increases risk of progressive loss of kidney function, causes bone demineralization and muscle protein catabolism, and may be more consequential in women given their lower bone and muscle mass. Veverimer, an investigational, non-absorbed polymer that binds and removes gastrointestinal hydrochloric acid, is being developed as treatment for metabolic acidosis. METHODS: ) and metabolic acidosis who were treated for up to 1 year with veverimer or placebo. We present the findings from a pre-specified subgroup analysis evaluating the effects of veverimer on metabolic acidosis and physical function among women (N = 77) enrolled in this trial. RESULTS: At week 52, women treated with veverimer had a greater increase in mean (± standard error) serum bicarbonate than the placebo group (5.4 [0.5] vs. 2.2 [0.6] mmol/L; P < 0.0001). Physical Function reported by patients on the Kidney Disease and Quality of Life - Physical Function Domain, a measure that includes items related to walking, stair climbing, carrying groceries and other activities improved significantly in women randomized to veverimer vs placebo (+ 13.2 vs. -5.2, respectively, P < 0.0031). Objectively measured performance time on the repeated chair stand test also improved significantly in the veverimer group vs. placebo (P = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Veverimer was effective in treating metabolic acidosis in women with CKD, and significantly improved how they felt and functioned. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03390842 . Registered on January 4, 2018.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".