Liraglutide and the Preservation of Pancreatic β-Cell Function in Early Type 2 Diabetes: The LIBRA Trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Clinical studies evaluating the effects of medications on β-cell function in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are compromised by an inability to determine the actual baseline degree of β-cell dysfunction independent of the reversible dysfunction induced by hyperglycemia (glucotoxicity). Short-term intensive insulin therapy (IIT) is a strategy for eliminating glucotoxicity before randomization. This study determined whether liraglutide can preserve β-cell function over 48 weeks in early T2DM following initial elimination of glucotoxicity with IIT. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, 51 patients with T2DM of 2.6 ± 1.9 years' duration and an A1C of 6.8 ± 0.8% (51 ± 8.7 mmol/mol) completed 4 weeks of IIT before randomization to daily subcutaneous liraglutide or placebo injection, with serial assessment of β-cell function by Insulin Secretion-Sensitivity Index-2 (ISSI-2) on oral glucose tolerance test performed every 12 weeks. RESULTS: The primary outcome of baseline-adjusted ISSI-2 at 48 weeks was higher in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group (339.8 ± 27.8 vs. 229.3 ± 28.4, P = 0.008). Baseline-adjusted HbA1c at 48 weeks was lower in the liraglutide group (6.2 ± 0.1% vs. 6.6 ± 0.1%, P = 0.055) (44 ± 1.1 vs. 49 ± 1.1 mmol/mol). At each quarterly assessment, >50% of participants on liraglutide had an HbA1c ≤6.0% (42 mmol/mol) and glucose tolerance in the nondiabetic range. Despite this level of glycemic control, no difference was found in the incidence of hypoglycemia between the liraglutide and placebo groups (P = 0.61). Two weeks after stopping treatment, however, the beneficial effect on ISSI-2 of liraglutide versus placebo was entirely lost (191.9 ± 24.7 vs. 238.1 ± 25.2, P = 0.20). CONCLUSIONS: Liraglutide provides robust enhancement of β-cell function that is sustained over 48 weeks in early T2DM but lost upon cessation of therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".