The Efficacy of Vildagliptin Concomitant With Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetic Subjects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Japan, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitors have become standard therapeutic agents for type 2 diabetes, and numbers of patients receiving insulin therapy combined with DPP4 inhibitors, which is a highly effective regimen, are increasing. METHODS: In this study, we evaluated the efficacy of vildagliptin administered at the dose of 100 mg twice daily in 57 patients with type 2 diabetes already receiving insulin treatment. RESULTS: The 36 patients who simply received add-on vildagliptin showed a 0.6% decrease in HbA1c levels, despite a marked insulin dose reduction, mainly bolus insulin, of approximately 8.3 units. In addition, body mass index exhibited a significant negative correlation with the efficacy of vildagliptin, i.e., ΔHbA1c. On the other hand, the 21 patients switched from 50 mg of sitagliptin to vildagliptin showed HbA1c decreases approaching 0.7%. CONCLUSION: Taking into consideration that twice-daily oral vildagliptin has already been reported to be advantageous in reducing postprandial hyperglycemia, this drug was suggested to be more effective in reducing HbA1c than sitagliptin under conditions in which it is used as a supplement to basal insulin, as in this study.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".