MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403833093 · doi:10.1681/asn.2024c0crz6n5

Prognostic Enrichment Using the Klinrisk Model: Insights from Landmark Kidney Disease Clinical Trials

2024· article· en· W4403833093 on OpenAlexaff
Brendon L. Neuen, Thomas W. Ferguson, Meg Jardine, Bruce Neal, Vlado Perkovic, George L. Bakris, Rajiv Agarwal, Patrick Schloemer, Alfredo E. Farjat, Niels Jongs, Hiddo J.L. Heerspink, David C. Wheeler, Glenn M. Chertow, Navdeep Tangri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal and Vascular Pathologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaOrthopaedic Innovation Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLandmarkKidney diseaseClinical trialMedicineDiseaseInternal medicineComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Patients with macroalbuminuria (KDIGO stage A3) experience high rates of CKD progression and cardiovascular events. Identifying patients with lesser degrees of albuminuria who also experience high kidney and cardiovascular event rates could enhance access to, and improve efficiency of, CKD-focused clinical trials. Methods: We applied the Klinrisk model, a validated machine learning model incorporating routinely collected laboratory data, to patients with uACR ≥30 mg/g who were evaluated for participation in the CANVAS Program, CREDENCE, FIDELIO, FIGARO and DAPA-CKD trials but who failed screening due to albuminuria levels below the randomization threshold. We examined 2-year incidence of CKD progression (40% decline in eGFR or kidney failure) in different uACR categories, stratified by Klinrisk score (low, intermediate, and high risk indicating <2%, 2–10%, and >10% 2-year risk of CKD progression, respectively). We subsequently reviewed screen failure data from the CREDENCE, FIDELIO and DAPA-CKD trials to determine what proportion of individuals with uACR 30–300 mg/g could have been enrolled using a Klinrisk-informed approach. Results: Across the included trials, the incidence of CKD progression among participants with uACR 30–300mg/g (KDIGO stage A2) was highly variable across risk categories, ranging from 1.1 to 9.7% in those classified as low vs. high risk by the Klinrisk model, respectively. Compared to participants with uACR 300-1000 mg/g, event rates were similar or higher for participants with uACR 30-300mg/g classified as high-risk based on the Klinrisk model. 24 to 36% of participants who screen failed due to A2 albuminuria in the CREDENCE, FIDELIO and DAPA-CKD trials were classified as high risk with the Klinrisk model. Conclusion: Extending recruitment to patients with uACR 30-300mg/g at high-risk based on the Klinrisk algorithm could facilitate recruitment for CKD progression trials without affecting event rates. Prognostic enrichment using Klinrisk has the potential to accelerate drug development in CKD by enabling more inclusive and efficient clinical trials.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.421
Threshold uncertainty score0.332

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.104
GPT teacher head0.407
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Society of NephrologySame topicRenal and Vascular PathologiesFrench-language works237,207