MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413865019 · doi:10.1038/s41591-025-03939-6

Effects of volenrelaxin in worsening heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: a phase 2 randomized trial

2025· article· en· W4413865019 on OpenAlexafffund
Barry A. Borlaug, Jeffrey M. Testani, Mark C. Petrie, Zhenzhong Wang, Jonathan W. Cunningham, Kirkwood F. Adams, Offer Amir, Jan Bělohlávek, Edimar Alcides Bocchi, Aguinaldo Figueiredo Freitas, Miguel Hominal, Toshiaki Kadokami, Béla Merkely, Chris Miller, Julio Núñez, Subodh Verma, Mehmet Birhan Yılmaz, Ena Oru, Flora Sam

Bibliographic record

VenueNature Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicPregnancy-related medical research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
FundersCongressionally Directed Medical Research ProgramsRelypsaINCLIVA Instituto de Investigación SanitariaNational Heart, Lung, and Blood InstituteSun PharmaServierNovo NordiskSanofiAbiomedAmicus TherapeuticsHorizon TherapeuticsPfizerModernaUniversity of TorontoBritish Heart FoundationCytokineticsRegeneron PharmaceuticalsBoston Scientific CorporationEli Lilly and CompanyU.S. Department of DefenseHLS TherapeuticsLivaNovaGlaxoSmithKlineBristol-Myers SquibbAstraZenecaDokuz Eylül ÜniversitesiAmgenEdwards LifesciencesU.S. Department of Health and Human ServicesAlnylam Pharmaceuticals
KeywordsHeart failureEjection fractionRandomized controlled trialCardiologyInternal medicineMedicineHeart failure with preserved ejection fractionFraction (chemistry)Chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Relaxin is a peptide hormone that may decrease circulatory congestion and improve kidney function. In this study, we conducted a double-blind, international, multicenter trial to test whether volenrelaxin, a long-acting form of human relaxin, can improve left atrial (LA) function, reduce congestion and improve kidney function in patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). We randomly assigned patients with New York Heart Association (NYHA) class II–IV HFpEF and recent heart failure (HF) decompensation to 25-mg, 50-mg or 100-mg volenrelaxin or placebo administered subcutaneously once weekly. The primary outcome was the change in LA reservoir strain at 26 weeks, with key secondary endpoints including changes in N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and safety. The trial was stopped early by the sponsor because of evidence for worsening congestion after 332 participants had been enrolled (mean age 74 years, 49% women, mean body mass index 30.6 kg m − 2 , 31.9% NYHA class III–IV). Compared to placebo, 25-mg volenrelaxin improved LA reservoir strain (+3.9%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.1–6.6, P = 0.006) but did not have effects on this outcome at 50-mg (+1.3%, 95% CI: −1.3 to 3.9, P = 0.332) or 100-mg (+0.9%, 95% CI: −1.8 to 3.6, P = 0.521) doses. At 26 weeks, volenrelaxin (pooling all dosages) increased NT-proBNP levels (+24.5%, 95% CI: 2.0–51.8) and had no significant effect on eGFR (+2.2 ml min −1 1.73 m − 2 , 95% CI: −1.8 to 6.3). Volenrelaxin was also associated with a non-significant increase in risk for HF hospitalization compared to placebo (hazard ratio = 2.64, 95% CI: 0.93–7.56, P = 0.070), along with signals for an increased number of cardiovascular and renal serious adverse events (odds ratio = 2.52, 95% CI: 0.95–6.68, P = 0.056). In conclusion, despite some evidence for improvement in LA function at a low dose, treatment with this long-acting form of human relaxin was associated with worsening congestion in patients with recently decompensated HFpEF. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05592275 .

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.340 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNature MedicineSame topicPregnancy-related medical researchFrench-language works237,207