Kidney Hemodynamic Function in Historic vs. Contemporary Patients with Type 1 Diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Advances in insulin technology have led to better glycemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), but whether renal hemodynamic function has changed over time with advances in insulin technology in T1D is unknown. Methods: We measured renal hemodynamic function in 23 patients with long-standing T1D from an ongoing clinical trial and compared findings to those from older adults with T1D from the Canadian Study of Longevity in Type 1 Diabetes (Lytvyn et al. AJKD 2019). Glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was measured using iohexol clearance, effective renal plasma flow (RPF) measured using para-aminohippurate clearance, while intraglomerular pressure (PGLO), renal vascular resistance (RVR), efferent arteriole resistance (RE), and afferent arteriolar resistance (RA) estimated using the Gomez equations. Results: Participants from the contemporary cohort were slightly younger and more likely to be male than the historic cohort (Table). HbA1c trended towards being lower in the contemporary cohort but it did not reach statistical significance. GFR, RPF, RBF, and PGLO were significantly greater in the contemporary vs. historic cohort. In contrast, FF, RVR, RE, and RA were significantly lower in the contemporary cohort. There were no differences in systolic blood pressure or mean arterial pressure between the groups. Conclusion: T1D patients from the contemporary cohort had significantly less renal vasoconstriction and intraglomerular pressure than patients from the historic cohort. Funding: Private Foundation Support - Parameter Contemporary Cohort (N=23) Historic Cohort (N=66) P-value Demographic and Clinical Characteristics Age, years 60 ± 15 66 ± 8 0.01 Male, N(%) 17 (73.9) 30 (45) <0.0001 BMI, kg/m2 28.1 ± 6.3 26.6 ± 3.9 0.29 HbA1C, % 7.0 ± 0.8 7.4 ± 0.8 0.07 Renal Hemodynamic Function RPF (ml/min) 586 ± 112 447 ± 101 <0.0001 GFR (ml/min) 107 ± 17 103 ± 17 <0.0001 Filtration Fraction 0.19 ± 0.03 0.24 ± 0.04 <0.0001 RBF (L/min) 1025 ± 251 689 ± 166 <0.0001 RVR (mm Hg/L/min) 0.09 ± 0.02 0.14 ± 0.04 <0.0001 Intraglomerular Hemodynamic Parameters PGLO, mm Hg 54.3 ± 4.2 51.4 ± 4.3 0.006 R E, dyne-s-cm-5 2,954 ± 878 4,546 ± 1714 <0.0001 RE, dyne-s-cm-5 1,586 ± 311 2,403 ± 544 <0.0001 Mean (SD) unless otherwise specified
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".