MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Initial short‐term intensive insulin therapy as a strategy for evaluating the preservation of beta‐cell function with oral antidiabetic medications: a pilot study with sitagliptin

2010· article· en· W2113411572 on OpenAlexafffund
Ravi Retnakaran, Ying Qi, Christine Opsteen, Enrique José Antonio Robiou Vivero, Bernard Zinman

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Obesity and Metabolism · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of TorontoMount Sinai Hospital
FundersMerck Canada
KeywordsSitagliptinMedicineMetforminInternal medicineInsulinPlaceboSitagliptin PhosphateEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitusBeta cellInsulin resistanceType 2 diabetesPharmacologyIslet

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIM: Studies evaluating the effects of oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) on beta-cell function in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are confounded by an inability to establish the actual baseline degree of beta-cell dysfunction, independent of the deleterious effects of hyperglycaemia (glucotoxicity). Because intensive insulin therapy (IIT) can induce normoglycaemia, we reasoned that short-term IIT could enable evaluation of the beta-cell protective capacity of OADs, free from confounding hyperglycaemia. We applied this strategy to assess the effect of sitagliptin on beta-cell function. METHODS: In this pilot study, 37 patients with T2DM of 6.0 + 6.4 years duration and A1c 7.0 + 0.8% on 0-2 OADs were switched to 4-8 weeks of IIT consisting of basal detemir and premeal insulin aspart. Subjects achieving fasting glucose <7.0 mmol/l 1 day after completing IIT (n = 21) were then randomized to metformin with either sitagliptin (n = 10) or placebo (n = 11). Subjects were followed for 48 weeks, with serial assessment of beta-cell function [ratio of AUC(Cpep) to AUC(gluc) over Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) (AUC(Cpep/gluc) /HOMA-IR)] on 4-h meal tests. RESULTS: During the study, fasting glucagon-like-peptide-1 was higher (p = 0.003) and A1c lower in the sitagliptin arm (p = 0.016). Nevertheless, although beta-cell function improved during the IIT phase, it declined similarly in both arms over time (p = 0.61). By study end, AUC(Cpep/gluc) /HOMA-IR was not significantly different between the placebo and sitagliptin arms (median 71.2 vs 80.4; p = 0.36). CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment IIT can provide a useful strategy for evaluating the beta-cell protective capacity of diabetes interventions. In this pilot study, improved A1c with sitagliptin could not be attributed to a significant effect on preservation of 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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
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

Citations31
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes Obesity and MetabolismSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207