MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415474453 · doi:10.1681/asn.2025zhxjys21

Sex Differences in Kidney Failure in Adults Enrolled in CureGN

2025· article· en· W4415474453 on OpenAlexaff
Margaret Banker, Vimal K. Derebail, Abigail R. Smith, Laura H. Mariani, Michelle Hladunewich, Andrea L. Oliverio

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Society of Nephrology · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicRenal and Vascular Pathologies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKidney diseaseKidneyNephrologyMEDLINEYoung adult

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Prior studies of sex differences in CKD are from earlier treatment eras or among older, post-menopausal cohorts. We sought to assess sex differences in a longitudinal contemporary cohort of primary glomerular disease (GN) to understand sex-related risk factors and treatment patterns in females vs males. Methods: All adults enrolled in CureGN were included. The primary outcome was kidney failure (KF), defined as reaching dialysis, transplant, or an eGFR < 15ml/min/1.73m2 on two occasions. Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for diagnosis, race and ethnicity, age, eGFR, UPCR, and hypertension at enrollment, assessed risk for KF in females vs males. Longitudinal logistic regression assessed odds of renin-angiotensin aldosterone system inhibitor (RAASi) prescription at each study visit by sex and age. Subgroups by age were categorized based on the mean age of menopause in women (18-50 yrs vs > 50 yrs). Results: Table 1 describes the cohort at enrollment. In adjusted models, females had lower risk of KF than males (aHR 0.76, 95% CI 0.58-0.98). In disease-stratified models, females with MN had lower risk of KF but there was no sex difference in IgA nephropathy or FSGS (Figure 1). Over follow-up, females 18-50 yrs had lower odds of receiving RAASi than all other subgroups (vs males 18-50 yrs: OR 0.25, p<0.001) excluding those with pregnancy after enrollment. Females >50 yrs had similar odds to both male subgroups. Conclusion: Females were at lower risk of KF after a median follow-up of 5.6 years, after adjustment for enrollment characteristics. Given that younger females were also less likely to receive supportive RAASi therapy, other factors likely play a protective role. Funding: NIDDK SupportCharacteristics at enrollment - Total N Mean age (years) MN (n) IgA (n) FSGS (n) MCD (n) Mean eGFR (ml/min/1.73m2) Mean UPCR (g/g) % HTN % on RAASi Males 1030 46 342 310 256 122 69 3.4 26 70 Females 792 45 215 229 213 135 73 3.1 21 65

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 score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.261

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.259 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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