Effects and patient compliance of sustained‐release versus immediate‐release glipizides in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta‐analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review aimed to address effects of sustained-release versus immediate-release glipizide on glucose control, insulin secretion, and compliance. We searched Medline, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and Chinese Biomedical database from inceptions to May 31, 2011, screened reference lists of relevant studies, and contacted pharmaceutical companies. Randomized trials and cohort studies were included. We pooled data using a random-effect model. Nineteen trials involving a total of 1440 patients and 2 retrospective cohort studies with a total of 13452 patients were included. Trials were of low quality. No trials reported patient important outcomes. The reduction of fasting plasma glucose from the baseline appeared larger for sustained-release than for immediate-release glipizide (mean difference -0.26 mmol/L, 95% CI -0.52 to -0.01). The reduction was not significantly different between the two drugs for HbA1c (-0.03%, -0.20% to 0.14%) or 2-hour postprandial plasma glucose (-0.21 mmol/L, -0.96 to 0.55). Sustained-release glipizide appeared to reduce insulin secretion from the baseline, whereas the immediate-release formulation increased the secretion (fasting insulin: -1.04 vs. 0.88 μIU/ml; 2-hour postprandial insulin: -2.94 vs. 0.24 μIU/ml). Patients administering sustained-release glipizide had less hypoglycemia (Peto odds ratio 0.21, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.52) and lower missed dosing (Peto odds ratio 11. 42, 95% CI 6.47 to 20.18). The cohort studies showed patient compliance results consistent with those of the trials. Sustained-release glipizide appears to achieve similar glucose control with decreased insulin secretion, fewer hypoglycemic episodes, and higher patient compliance than immediate-release glipizide. However, these findings are inconclusive due to inadequate study quality, short follow up, and unavailability of patient important outcomes.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Meta-analysis | low |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Review About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Meta-analysis | high |
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 | 0.011 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.019 | 0.031 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
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".