MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396991789 · doi:10.1681/asn.20213210s1b5c

Dapagliflozin and Kidney Outcomes in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19 Infection: Results from the DARE-19 Randomized Controlled Trial

2021· article· en· W4396991789 on OpenAlexaff
Hiddo J.L. Heerspink, Remo Holanda de Mendonça Furtado, Otávio Berwanger, Gary G. Koch, Felipe A. Martínez, Omar Mukhtar, Subodh Verma, Samvel B. Gasparyan, Fengming Tang, Sheryl L. Windsor, Joan Buenconsejo, Russell Esterline, Jan Oscarsson, Phil Ambery, Anna Maria Langkilde, Mikhail Kosiborod

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPancreatitis Pathology and Treatment
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)MedicineRandomized controlled trialDapagliflozinSevere acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2)2019-20 coronavirus outbreakInternal medicineIntensive care medicineVirologyOutbreakDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyType 2 diabetes

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Hospitalized patients with COVID-19 infection are at high risk of acute kidney injury (AKI) and renal replacement therapy, especially in the presence of chronic kidney disease (CKD). The DARE-19 trial showed that in hospitalized patients with COVID-19, treatment with dapagliflozin (DAPA) vs placebo resulted in numerically fewer patients experiencing organ failure or death, although these differences were not statistically significant. We performed a pre-specified secondary analysis of DARE-19 to determine the efficacy and safety of DAPA on kidney outcomes in the overall population and by CKD status. Methods: The DARE-19 trial randomized 1250 hospitalized patients (231 [18.5%] had eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m2) with COVID-19 and cardiometabolic risk factors to DAPA or placebo. Dual primary outcomes (time to new or worsened organ dysfunction or death, and a hierarchical composite endpoint of recovery [change in clinical status by Day 30]), and the specific kidney outcome (composite of AKI, renal replacement therapy or death), as well as safety were assessed in patients with baseline eGFR <60 and ≥60 mL/min/1.73m2. Results: The effect of DAPA vs placebo on the primary prevention outcome (hazard ratio [HR] 0.80 [95%CI 0.58, 1.10]) and primary recovery outcome (win ratio 1.09 [95%CI 0.97, 1.22]) was consistent across eGFR subgroups (p for interaction 0.98 and 0.67, respectively). The effect on the composite kidney outcome (HR 0.74 [95%CI 0.50, 1.07]) was also consistent in eGFR subgroups (p for interaction 0.44). There were numerically fewer AKI events with DAPA in patients with eGFR<60 ml/min/1.73m2 (HR 0.71 [95%CI 0.29, 1.77]) and ≥60 ml/min/1.73m2 (HR 0.69 [95%CI 0.37, 1.29]). DAPA was well tolerated in patients with eGFR <60 and ≥60 mL/min/1.73m2. Conclusions: The effects of DAPA on primary and secondary outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 were consistent in those with/without CKD. DAPA was well tolerated and did not increase the risk of AKI in patients with/without CKD. Funding: Commercial Support - AstraZeneca

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.471

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.274 · 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 designRandomized trial
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicPancreatitis Pathology and TreatmentFrench-language works237,207