Weight and blood pressure response to weight management and sibutramine in diabetic and non‐diabetic high‐risk patients: an analysis from the 6‐week lead‐in period of the sibutramine cardiovascular outcomes (SCOUT) trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess treatment responses to sibutramine and weight management in diabetic patients during the lead-in period of the Sibutramine Cardiovascular OUTcomes (SCOUT) trial. METHODS: SCOUT is an ongoing, prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled outcome trial in cardiovascular high-risk overweight/obese patients. A total of 10 742 patients received single-blind sibutramine and individualized weight management during the 6-week lead-in period; 84% had a history of type 2 diabetes mellitus and additional co-morbidities. Post-hoc analyses assessed anthropomorphic and vital sign responses between patients with and without diabetes. RESULTS: Concomitant antidiabetic medication use was reported by 86% of the diabetic patients (approximately 30% required insulin-alone or in combination). Body weight and waist circumference decreased in diabetic patients: median 2.1 kg; 2.0 cm (both men and women); for those on insulin: 1.9 kg; 1.5/2.0 cm (men/women); without insulin: 2.3 kg; 2.0 cm (both men and women); blood pressure (BP) was also reduced (median systolic/diastolic 3.5/1.0 mmHg) with larger reductions in diabetic patients who were hypertensive and/or lost the most weight (>5%). In diabetic patients who entered with BP at target (<130/<85 mmHg) but did not lose weight (N = 245), increases of 3.5/2.0 mmHg were observed. Non-diabetic patients had greater weight losses (2.5 kg) but smaller reductions in BP (systolic/diastolic -2.5/-0.5 mmHg). Pulse rate increases were less in diabetic vs. non-diabetic patients (1.5 vs. 2.0 bpm). CONCLUSION: In these high-risk diabetic patients, sibutramine and lifestyle modifications for 6 weeks resulted in small, but clinically relevant, median reductions in body weight, waist circumference and BP. A small median increase in pulse rate was recorded.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".