MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonism Prevents Aortic Plaque Progression and Reduces Left Ventricular Mass and Fibrosis in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Chronic Kidney Disease: The MAGMA Trial

2024· article· en· W4401500416 on OpenAlexaff
Sanjay Rajagopalan, Mirela Dobre, Jean‐Eudes Dazard, Armando Vergara-Martel, Kim A. Connelly, Michael E. Farkouh, Juan Gaztañaga, Heather Conger, Ann M. Dever, Laleh Razavi-Nematollahi, Anas Fares, Gabriel Tensol Rodrigues Pereira, Jonnelle M. Edwards, Mark J. Cameron, Cheryl Cameron, Sadeer Al‐Kindi, Robert D. Brook, Bertram Pitt, Matthew R. Weir

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicHormonal Regulation and Hypertension
Canadian institutionsSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersNational Institute of Environmental Health SciencesNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteNational Institutes of Health
KeywordsMedicineMineralocorticoid receptorSpironolactoneInternal medicineKidney diseaseCardiologyEndocrinologyPlaceboAldosteroneUrologyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Persistent mineralocorticoid receptor activation is a pathologic response in type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease. Whereas mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists are beneficial in reducing cardiovascular complications, direct mechanistic pathways for these effects in humans are lacking. METHODS: The MAGMA trial (Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonism Clinical Evaluation in Atherosclerosis) was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with high-risk type 2 diabetes with chronic kidney disease (not receiving dialysis) on maximum tolerated renin-angiotensin system blockade. The primary end point was change in thoracic aortic wall volume, expressed as absolute or percent value (ΔTWV or ΔPWV), using 3T magnetic resonance imaging at 12 months. Secondary end points were changes in left ventricle (LV) mass; LV fibrosis, measured as a change in myocardial native T1; and 24-hour ambulatory and central aortic blood pressures. Tertiary end points included plasma proteomic changes in 7596 plasma proteins using an aptamer-based assay. RESULTS: A total of 79 patients were randomized to placebo (n=42) or 25 mg of spironolactone daily (n=37). After a modified intent-to-treat, including available baseline data of study end points, patients who completed the trial protocol were included in the final analyses. At the 12-month follow-up, the average change in PWV was 7.1±10.7% in the placebo group and 0.87±10.0% in the spironolactone group ( P =0.028), and ΔTWV was 1.2±1.7 cm 3 in the placebo group and 0.037±1.9 cm 3 in the spironolactone group ( P =0.022). Change in LV mass was 3.1±8.4 g in the placebo group and −5.8±8.4 g in the spironolactone group ( P =0.001). Changes in LV T1 values were significantly different between the placebo and spironolactone groups (26.0±41.9 ms in the placebo group versus a decrease of −10.1±36.3 ms in the spironolactone group; P =6.33×10 −4 ). Mediation analysis revealed that the spironolactone effect on thoracic aortic wall volume and myocardial mass remained significant after adjustment for ambulatory and central blood pressures. Proteomic analysis revealed a dominant effect of spironolactone on pathways involving oxidative stress, inflammation, and leukocyte activation. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with diabetes with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease at elevated cardiovascular risk, treatment with spironolactone prevented progression of aortic wall volume and resulted in regression of LV mass and favorable alterations in native T1, suggesting amelioration of left-ventricular fibrosis. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT02169089.

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 score0.123
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations16
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCirculationSame topicHormonal Regulation and HypertensionFrench-language works237,207