MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4224235109 · doi:10.1007/s00125-022-05694-6

Effect of dapagliflozin on kidney and cardiovascular outcomes by baseline KDIGO risk categories: a post hoc analysis of the DAPA-CKD trial

2022· article· en· W4224235109 on OpenAlexaff
Simke W. Waijer, Priya Vart, David Z.I. Cherney, Glenn M. Chertow, Niels Jongs, Anna Maria Langkilde, Johannes F.E. Mann, Ofri Mosenzon, John J.V. McMurray, Peter Rossing, Ricardo Correa‐Rotter, Bergur V. Stefánsson, Robert D. Toto, David C. Wheeler, Hiddo J.L. Heerspink

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetologia · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoUniversity Health Network
FundersDefense Acquisition Program AdministrationSteno Diabetes Center CopenhagenAstraZeneca
KeywordsPost-hoc analysisMedicineDapagliflozinBaseline (sea)Internal medicinePost hocKidney diseaseRenal functionDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyType 2 diabetesBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: In the Dapagliflozin and Prevention of Adverse Outcomes in Chronic Kidney Disease (DAPA-CKD) trial, dapagliflozin reduced the risks of progressive kidney disease, hospitalised heart failure or cardiovascular death, and death from all causes in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) with or without type 2 diabetes. Patients with more severe CKD are at higher risk of kidney failure, cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. In this post hoc analysis, we assessed the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin according to baseline Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) risk categories. METHODS: and urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (UACR) of ≥22.6 and <565.0 mg/mmol (200-5000 mg/g) to dapagliflozin 10 mg/day or placebo. The primary endpoint was a composite of ≥50% reduction in eGFR, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), and death from a kidney or cardiovascular cause. Secondary endpoints included a kidney composite (≥50% reduction in eGFR, ESKD and death from a kidney cause), a cardiovascular composite (heart failure hospitalisation or cardiovascular death), and death from all causes. We used Cox proportional hazards regression analyses to assess relative and absolute effects of dapagliflozin across KDIGO risk categories. RESULTS: Of the 4304 participants in the DAPA-CKD study, 619 (14.4%) were moderately high risk, 1349 (31.3%) were high risk and 2336 (54.3%) were very high risk when categorised by KDIGO risk categories at baseline. Dapagliflozin reduced the hazard of the primary composite (HR 0.61; 95% CI 0.51, 0.72) and secondary endpoints consistently across KDIGO risk categories (all p for interaction >0.09). Absolute risk reductions for the primary outcome were also consistent irrespective of KDIGO risk category (p for interaction 0.26). Analysing patients with and without type 2 diabetes separately, the relative risk reduction with dapagliflozin in terms of the primary outcome was consistent across subgroups of KDIGO risk categories. The relative frequencies of adverse events and serious adverse events were also similar across KDIGO risk categories. CONCLUSION/INTERPRETATIONS: The consistent benefits of dapagliflozin on kidney and cardiovascular outcomes across KDIGO risk categories indicate that dapagliflozin is efficacious and safe across a wide spectrum of kidney disease severity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03036150. FUNDING: The study was funded by AstraZeneca.

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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score0.546

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations68
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetologiaSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207