Dapagliflozin Utilization in Chronic Kidney Disease and Its Real-World Effectiveness Among Patients with Lower Levels of Albuminuria in the USA and Japan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors such as dapagliflozin have been proven effective for slowing chronic kidney disease (CKD) progression in large outcomes trials that mainly included patients with higher levels of albuminuria. Understanding the real-world utilization and effectiveness of these drugs among patients with CKD with lower levels of albuminuria can inform clinical decision-making in this population. Claims data from the USA and Japan were used to describe patients with CKD and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) < 200 mg/g who were eligible for dapagliflozin 10 mg treatment (initiators and untreated) following its approval for CKD. A quantile regression analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of dapagliflozin 10 mg initiation versus no initiation on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) slope in a propensity score-matched cohort, using a prevalent new-user design. Dapagliflozin initiators (n = 20,407) mostly had stage 3–4 CKD (69–81% across databases). The most common comorbidities were type 2 diabetes, hypertension and cardiovascular disease. At baseline, a renin–angiotensin system inhibitor was prescribed in 53–81% of patients. Eligible but untreated patients were older and had a higher eGFR and lower comorbidity burden than initiators. Following dapagliflozin initiation, the differences in median eGFR slope between initiators and matched non-initiators were 1.07 mL/min/1.73 m2/year (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.40–1.74) in all patients with UACR < 200 mg/g and 1.28 mL/min/1.73 m2/year (95% CI − 1.56 to 4.12) in patients with UACR < 200 mg/g without type 2 diabetes. Dapagliflozin 10 mg was prescribed to a broad range of patients with CKD. In patients with UACR < 200 mg/g, dapagliflozin initiation was associated with a clinically meaningful attenuation of eGFR slope compared with non-initiation. These findings supplement available clinical efficacy evidence and suggest that dapagliflozin effectiveness may extend to patients with CKD and UACR < 200 mg/g. Graphical Abstract and Video Abstract available for this article.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".