Sodium Zirconium Cyclosilicate for Management of Hyperkalemia During Spironolactone Optimization in Patients With Heart Failure
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRA) improve outcomes in patients with heart failure and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) but are underused in clinical practice. Observational data suggest that hyperkalemia is the leading obstacle for the suboptimal use of MRA. OBJECTIVES: This study sought to evaluate the effects of sodium zirconium cyclosilicate (SZC) in optimizing use of spironolactone among participants with HFrEF and hyperkalemia. METHODS: REALIZE-K (Study to Assess Efficacy and Safety of SZC for the Management of High Potassium in Patients With Symptomatic HFrEF Receiving Spironolactone) was a prospective, double-blind, randomized- withdrawal trial in participants with HFrEF (NYHA functional class II-IV; left ventricular ejection fraction ≤40%), optimal guideline-directed therapy (except MRA), and prevalent or incident MRA-induced hyperkalemia. During open-label run-in, participants underwent spironolactone titration (target: 50 mg/day); those with hyperkalemia started SZC. Participants with normokalemia (potassium: 3.5-5.0 mEq/L) on SZC and spironolactone ≥25 mg/day were randomized to continued SZC or placebo for 6 months. The primary endpoint was optimal treatment response (normokalemia on spironolactone ≥25 mg/day without rescue therapy for hyperkalemia [months 1-6]). The 5 secondary endpoints were tested hierarchically. Exploratory endpoints included a composite of adjudicated cardiovascular death or worsening heart failure (HF) events (hospitalizations and urgent visits). RESULTS: Overall, 203 participants were randomized (SZC: 102; placebo: 101). Higher percentage of SZC- vs placebo-treated participants had optimal response (71% vs 36%; OR: 4.45; 95% CI: 2.89-6.86; P < 0.001). SZC (vs placebo) improved the first 4 secondary endpoints: normokalemia on randomization dose of spironolactone and without rescue therapy (58% vs 23%; OR: 4.58; 95% CI: 2.78-7.55; P < 0.001); receiving spironolactone ≥25 mg/day (81% vs 50%; OR: 4.33; 95% CI: 2.50-7.52; P < 0.001); time to hyperkalemia (HR: 0.51; 95% CI: 0.37-0.71; P < 0.001); and time to decrease/discontinuation of spironolactone due to hyperkalemia (HR: 0.37; 95% CI: 0.17-0.73; P = 0.006). There was no between-group difference in Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire-Clinical Summary Score at 6 months (-1.01 points; 95% CI: -6.64 to 4.63; P = 0.72). Adverse events (64% vs 63%) and serious adverse events (23% vs 22%) were balanced between SZC and placebo, respectively. Composite of cardiovascular (CV) death or worsening HF occurred in 11 (11%) participants in the SZC group (1 with CV death, 10 with HF events) and 3 (3%) participants in the placebo group (1 with CV death, 2 with HF events; log-rank nominal P = 0.034). CONCLUSIONS: In participants with HFrEF and hyperkalemia, SZC led to large improvements in the percentage of participants with normokalemia while on optimal spironolactone dose, and reduced risk of hyperkalemia and down-titration/discontinuation of spironolactone. Although underpowered for clinical outcomes, more participants had HF events with SZC than placebo, which should be factored into the clinical decision making. (Study to Assess Efficacy and Safety of SZC for the Management of High Potassium in Patients With Symptomatic HFrEF Receiving Spironolactone; NCT04676646).
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it