MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4380448037 · doi:10.1093/ndt/gfad063c_5749

#5749 RATES OF SELECTED CARDIOVASCULAR AND NON-CARDIOVASCULAR EVENTS AMONG DIALYSIS PATIENTS WITH ANEMIA IN THE US MEDICARE POPULATION

2023· article· en· W4380448037 on OpenAlexaff
James B. Wetmore, Julie Rouette, Haifeng Guo, Gema Requena, Suying Li, George Mu, Liyuan Ma, Jolyon Fairburn-Beech, Anna Richards, David T. Gilbertson, Sally Wetten, Jiannong Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueNephrology Dialysis Transplantation · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicErythropoietin and Anemia Treatment
Canadian institutionsGlaxoSmithKline (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineDialysisPopulationCohortMyocardial infarctionKidney diseaseTransplantationClinical trialAnemiaInternal medicineRetrospective cohort studyStroke (engine)Kidney transplantationCohort studyPediatricsIntensive care medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background and Aims The safety and efficacy of daprodustat in patients on dialysis were reported in ASCEND-D/ID trials [1,2]. Trials impose strict criteria for enrollment, making participants more narrowly selected than a broader population with disease who might benefit from treatment. We describe events, of which most were noted as safety events in ASCEND-D/ID trials, among general anemia “treatment eligible” (TE) patients on dialysis and patients similar to those in ASCEND-D/ID trials (“clinical trial-like” [CTL]) in the US. Method Using United States Renal Data System data, we conducted a retrospective cohort study of incident dialysis-dependent (IDD) patients from 2017–2019 and, separately, point prevalent dialysis-dependent (PDD) patients as of Jan 1 2018. Dialysis initiation date was the index date for IDD patients and Jan 1 2018 for PDD patients. We also required patients to have ≥6 months of continuous Medicare coverage before, and be aged ≥18 years on, index date. Patients with a history of kidney transplant or who had cancer during the year prior, and those who had a hospitalization for heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke in the 4 weeks before, the index date were excluded. For IDD patients, we required use of ESAs at the index date to support comparability to the PDD patients. The CTL cohort was a subset of the TE cohort, approximating eligibility in the ASCEND-D/ID trials. Patients were followed from index date to the earliest date of death, loss of Medicare coverage, kidney transplantation, or Dec 31 2019. We assessed cardiovascular (CV: all-cause death, HF, MI, stroke, thromboembolic events [TEEs], major cardiovascular events [MACE: death, MI, stroke] and MACE+HF) and non-CV (cancer, gastric erosions, ocular events, seizures, serious infections) events, derived from medical claims in the follow-up period using ICD-10 diagnosis, Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System, and Current Procedural Terminology codes. HF, MI, stroke, and serious infections were defined as inpatient events. First event rates for TE and CTL cohorts were calculated separately for IDD and PDD patients and expressed as number of events per 100 patient-years (PYs). Results Of IDD patients, 23,909 were in the TE and 6,962 in the CTL cohorts; corresponding numbers were 230,055 and 41,980 for PDD patients. Median follow-up was 12.6 and 13.8 months for the TE and CTL cohorts, respectively, in IDD patients; and 24 months for both TE and CTL cohorts in PDD patients. Mean ages were 70.3 and 71.0 years for the TE and CTL cohorts in IDD patients; and 63.3 and 64.1 years for the TE and CTL cohorts in PDD patients. For both IDD and PDD patients, the TE and CTL cohorts had similar demographics, but the TE cohorts had a slightly higher proportion of patients with comorbidities. First event rates are shown in the Table. TE cohorts had higher rates than CTL cohorts for most CV events (mortality, 17.3 vs 14.0 per 100 PYs in IDD and 16.8 vs 15.1 in PDD; MACE; 20.9 vs 17.5 in IDD and 20.3 vs 18.6 in PDD; MACE+HF, 25.6 vs 21.8 in IDD, 26.9 vs 25.1 in PDD). In IDD patients, HF was more common in the TE than the CTL cohort (7.1 vs 6.1) but was similar in PDD patients. MI, stroke, and TEEs (vascular access thrombosis [in hemodialysis patients only], deep venous thrombosis, and pulmonary embolism) had similar rates in the TE and CTL cohorts for both IDD and PDD patients. Serious infections were higher in the TE than the CTL cohort in both IDD and PDD patients. In PDD patients, gastric erosions were higher in the TE than the CTL cohort (40.0 vs 38.5) while ocular events and retinal hemorrhage were lower in the TE cohort. Conclusion Rates for most CV events were higher in TE cohorts, comprised of patients eligible for anemia treatment, compared with CTL cohorts mimicking trial participants. Rates of non-CV events did not show a consistent pattern. As expected, rates of VAT were higher in IDD than PDD patients. These findings further contextualize real-world event rates of interest in dialysis populations. Reported rates were crude (unadjusted) and should be interpreted with caution. Funding: GSK (study 217316).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.218 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNephrology Dialysis TransplantationSame topicErythropoietin and Anemia TreatmentFrench-language works237,207