MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2096846676 · doi:10.2337/dc09-1579

Effect of Rosiglitazone and Ramipril on β-Cell Function in People With Impaired Glucose Tolerance or Impaired Fasting Glucose

2009· article· en· W2096846676 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Anthony J. Hanley, Bernard Zinman, Patrick Sheridan, Salim Yusuf, Hertzel C. Gerstein

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Care · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsHamilton Health SciencesMcMaster UniversityPopulation Health Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchUniversity of TorontoCanadian Diabetes AssociationCanada Research ChairsGlaxoSmithKline
KeywordsImpaired glucose toleranceMedicineRosiglitazoneImpaired fasting glucoseInternal medicineRamiprilDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyImpaired renal functionType 2 diabetesRenal function

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to determine the degree to which ramipril and/or rosiglitazone changed beta-cell function over time among individuals with impaired fasting glucose (IFG) and/or impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) who participated in the Diabetes Reduction Assessment With Ramipril and Rosiglitazone Medication (DREAM) Trial, which evaluated whether ramipril and/or rosiglitazone could prevent or delay type 2 diabetes in high-risk individuals. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS The present analysis included subjects (n = 982) from DREAM trial centers in Canada who had oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline, after 2 years, and at the end of the study. beta-Cell function was assessed using the fasting proinsulin-to-C-peptide ratio (PI/C) and the insulinogenic index (defined as 30-0 min insulin/30-0 min glucose) divided by homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (insulinogenic index [IGI]/insulin resistance [IR]). RESULTS Subjects receiving rosiglitazone had a significant increase in IGI/IR between baseline and end of study compared with the placebo group (25.59 vs. 1.94, P < 0.0001) and a significant decrease in PI/C (-0.010 vs. -0.006, P < 0.0001). In contrast, there were no significant changes in IGI/IR or PI/C in subjects receiving ramipril compared with placebo (11.71 vs. 18.15, P = 0.89, and -0.007 vs. -0.008, P = 0.64, respectively). The impact of rosiglitazone on IGI/IR and PI/C was similar within subgroups of isolated IGT and IFG + IGT (all P < 0.001). Effects were more modest in those with isolated IFG (IGI/IR: 8.95 vs. 2.13, P = 0.03; PI/C: -0.003 vs. -0.001, P = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS Treatment with rosiglitazone, but not ramipril, resulted in significant improvements in measures of beta-cell function over time in pre-diabetic subjects. Although the long-term sustainability of these improvements cannot be determined from the present study, these findings demonstrate that the diabetes preventive effect of rosiglitazone was in part a consequence of improved beta-cell function.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.719
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.206 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations54
Published2009
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes CareSame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207