Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin when used in conjunction with incretin‐mimetic therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: To assess the efficacy and safety of canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, in patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled in the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) who were on an incretin mimetic [dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor or glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist]. METHODS: CANVAS is a double-blind, placebo-controlled study that randomized participants to canagliflozin 100 or 300 mg or placebo added to routine therapy. The present post hoc analysis assessed the efficacy and safety of canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg compared with placebo in subsets of patients from CANVAS who were taking background DPP-4 inhibitors or GLP-1 receptor agonists with or without other antihyperglycaemic agents at week 18. RESULTS: Of the 4330 patients in CANVAS, 316 were taking DPP-4 inhibitors and 95 were taking GLP-1 receptor agonists. At 18 weeks, canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg provided larger placebo-subtracted reductions in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients taking DPP-4 inhibitors [-0.56% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.77, -0.35), and -0.75% (95% CI: -0.95, -0.54), respectively] and GLP-1 receptor agonists [-1.00% (95% CI: -1.35, -0.65), and -1.06% (95% CI: -1.43, -0.69), respectively]. Body weight and blood pressure (BP) reductions were seen with canagliflozin versus placebo in both subsets. Higher incidences of genital mycotic infections and osmotic diuresis-related adverse events (AEs) were seen with canagliflozin compared with placebo. The incidence of hypoglycaemia was numerically higher with canagliflozin versus placebo; nearly all events occurred in patients on background insulin or insulin secretagogues. CONCLUSIONS: In patients on background incretin mimetics, canagliflozin improved HbA1c, body weight and BP, with an increased incidence of AEs related to SGLT2 inhibition.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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".