Tirzepatide Reduces Albuminuria in Patients with T2D: Post-hoc Pooled Analysis of SURPASS 1-5
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Does tirzepatide (5, 10, 15 mg) reduce urine albumin-creatinine ratio (UACR) compared to placebo or other diabetes medications? Methods: In this post-hoc analysis, UACR (% difference) for TZP (5, 10, 15 mg) vs comparators (COMPs) was analysed. Analyses were conducted in the pooled entire SURPASS 1-5 population and populations pooled by COMP: placebo (SURPASS 1 & 5); active (SURPASS 2 [semaglutide 1 mg] & SURPASS 3-4 [insulins]); and insulins. In each pooled population, data were examined in all patients and in subgroups defined by baseline UACR ≥30 mg/g or eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73m^2. Mixed model for repeated measures was used to analyse on-treatment data from baseline up to the end of treatment visit. Results: UACR data was available in 6263 patients of whom 1846 had UACR ≥30 mg/g and 537 had eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73m^2. UACR decreased more with TZP 5, 10, and 15 mg vs COMPs in pooled SURPASS 1-5 and consistently across pooled placebo, active, and insulin COMP studies. UACR lowering appeared more pronounced in subgroups with baseline UACR ≥30 mg/g or eGFR<60 mL/min/1.73m^2. Conclusion: In people with T2D, including those with reduced kidney function, TZP decreased UACR vs COMPs to a clinically relevant degree, supporting a potential kidney protective effect.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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".