Improving allograft survival
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: ALERT was an investigator-initiated, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with a 5-6 year follow-up conducted to assess the effect of fluvastatin on cardiac and renal outcomes in stable renal transplant recipients.The ALERT core study showed that treatment with fluvastatin significantly reduced LDL-Cholesterol by 32%, associated with a reduction in major adverse cardiac events by 17% (p=0.139).Fluvastatin reduced the risk of cardiac death by 38% (p = 0.031) and definite nonfatal MI risk by 32% (p=0.048).The extension study is expected to assess the longer-term effects of initial treatment allocation in patients with a follow-up period of up to 8 years.Methods: In the main trial, 2102 renal transplant recipients were randomly assigned fluvastatin or placebo and followed up for up to 6 years.Patients who completed the ALERT core trial were followed for an additional two years, to collect cardiac and renal endpoints.All patients were offered open-label fluvastatin for the duration of the 2 years regardless of their initial treatment assignment.However, the original treatment allocation has been kept blinded.Results: At the end of the core study 1788 patients were eligible to enter into the extension followed-up during 2 years.As the data base is to be locked on January 31, 2005, the results of the ALERT extension trial will be available for presentation at the Congress.Conclusion: The ALERT trial is the first and only large-scale cardiovascular outcome trial conducted in transplant recipients.The 2-year extension of the core trial will provide assessment of the longer-term effectiveness and safety of fluvastatin in the treatment of renal transplant recipients.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".