MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387356963 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.3049

Safety of Continuing Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonist Treatment in Patients with Heart Failure with Reduced Ejection Fraction and Severe Kidney Disease: Data from Swedish Heart Failure Registry

2023· article· en· W4387356963 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Federica Guidetti, Lars H. Lund, Lina Benson, Camilla Hage, Francesca Musella, Davide Stolfo, Peter G. M. Mol, Andreas J. Flammer, Frank Ruschitzka, Ulf Dahlström, Giuseppe Rosano, Oscar Ö. Braun, Gianluigi Savarese

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal Regulation and Hypertension
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersBiosense WebsterHORIZON EUROPE Framework ProgrammeUniversität ZürichServierKarolinska InstitutetHjärt-LungfondenMundipharma Medical Company, BaselBoston Scientific CorporationHamilton Health SciencesAmgenCardinal HealthEdwards LifesciencesCytokineticsSanofiNovo NordiskTeva Pharmaceutical IndustriesStockholms Läns LandstingZOLL Medical CorporationAstraZenecaVifor PharmaVetenskapsrådetPfizer
KeywordsMedicineHeart failureEjection fractionHazard ratioInternal medicineKidney diseaseRenal functionDialysisCardiologyMineralocorticoid receptorPopulationConfidence intervalAldosterone

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Aims Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) improve outcomes in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but remain underused and are often discontinued especially in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) due to concerns on renal safety. Therefore, in a real-world HFrEF population we investigated the safety of MRA use, in terms of risk of renal events, any mortality and any hospitalization, across the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) spectrum including severe CKD. Methods and results We analysed patients with HFrEF (ejection fraction <40%), not on dialysis, from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry. We performed multivariable logistic regression models to investigate patient characteristics independently associated with MRA use, and univariable and multivariable Cox regression models to assess the associations between MRA use and outcomes. Of 33 942 patients, 17 489 (51%) received MRA, 32%, 45%, 54%, 54% with eGFR <30, 30–44, 45–59 or ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m2, respectively. An eGFR ≥60 ml/min/1.73 m2 and patient characteristics linked with more severe HF were independently associated with more likely MRA use. In multivariable analyses, MRA use was consistently not associated with a higher risk of renal events (i.e. composite of dialysis/renal death/hospitalization for renal failure or hyperkalaemia) (hazard ratio [HR] 1.04, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.98–1.10), all-cause death (HR 1.02, 95% CI 0.97–1.08) as well as of all-cause hospitalization (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95–1.02) across the eGFR spectrum including also severe CKD. Conclusions The use of MRAs in patients with HFrEF decreased with worse renal function; however their safety profile was demonstrated to be consistent across the entire eGFR spectrum.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.797

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.244
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

Citations28
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicHormonal Regulation and HypertensionFrench-language works237,207