Effects of taspoglutide on glycemic control and body weight in obese patients with type 2 diabetes (T‐emerge 7 study)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Therapies that lower blood glucose and provide weight loss may provide meaningful benefits for obese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study assessed the efficacy of taspoglutide compared with placebo on glycemic control and weight in obese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy. DESIGN AND METHODS: In a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, obese adults with T2DM were randomized (1:1) to weekly subcutaneous taspoglutide 20 mg (10 mg for first 4 weeks) (n = 154) or placebo (n = 151) for 24 weeks. Efficacy measures included hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels, body weight, percentage of patients achieving HbA1c ≤6.5 and ≤7.0%, and fasting plasma glucose (FPG). Adverse events (AEs) were assessed. RESULTS: Mean baseline HbA1c was 7.55% and mean baseline BMI was 36.7 kg/m(2) . HbA1c reductions from baseline were significantly greater with taspoglutide than placebo (least square mean [LSMean], -0.81% vs. -0.09%; P < 0.0001). Weight loss at week 24 was significantly greater with taspoglutide than placebo (LSMean, -3.16 vs. -1.85 kg; P < 0.01). In the taspoglutide and placebo groups, target HbA1c levels (≤6.5%) were achieved by 49 and 16% of patients, respectively, while 72 and 36% achieved HbA1c levels ≤7%. Decreases in FPG were significantly greater with taspoglutide than placebo (-23.59 vs. 0.09 mg/dl; P < 0.0001). Nausea and vomiting were the most common AEs associated with taspoglutide, but tended to be transient and generally mild or moderate. CONCLUSIONS: In obese patients with T2DM, once-weekly taspoglutide provided the combined benefits of glycemic control and weight loss.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".