Changes in cardiac and vascular haemodynamics as potential mediators of improvements in cardiovascular and kidney outcomes with empagliflozin in type 2 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: Evaluate changes in haemodynamic markers as mediators of cardiovascular (CV) and kidney benefits with empagliflozin. METHODS: Post-hoc analysis of EMPA-REG OUTCOME in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and established CV disease receiving empagliflozin (10 and 25 mg) or placebo. Outcomes were CV death, hospitalisation for heart failure [HF], HF death, incident/worsening nephropathy, new onset macroalbuminuria, and the composite of sustained estimated glomerular filtration rate decline ≥40 % from baseline, renal replacement therapy or renal death. To be considered a mediator, changes in variable (pulse pressure, mean arterial pressure and cardiac workload) over time had to be (1) affected by active treatment, (2) associated with the outcome, and (3) adjustment for changes over time must reduce treatment effect versus an unadjusted analysis. Variables were evaluated in Cox regression analyses. RESULTS: Pulse pressure, mean arterial pressure and cardiac workload were significantly reduced by empagliflozin vs placebo. Using change from baseline to Week 12 or sensitivity analyses (time-dependent updated mean and current change from baseline) of these CV parameters, only small impacts on empagliflozin effect on CV and kidney outcomes were shown. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in haemodynamic parameters did not substantially mediate empagliflozin benefits on CV and kidney outcomes in patients with T2DM and established CV disease.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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".