MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2763339077 · doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehx504.3910

3910SUSTAIN 6: a post-hoc analysis of the effect of semaglutide on cardiovascular outcomes over time in subjects with type 2 diabetes

2017· article· en· W2763339077 on OpenAlexaff
Esteban Jódar, Jochen Seufert, L.H. Damgaard, Anders G. Holst, L.A. Leiter

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Heart Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoSt. Michael's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSemaglutideMedicinePost-hoc analysisType 2 diabetesPost hocDiabetes mellitusInternal medicineEndocrinologyLiraglutide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue in development for type 2 diabetes (T2D). SUSTAIN 6, a 2-year, cardiovascular (CV) outcomes, randomised, placebo-controlled trial, was conducted in 3297 adults with T2D at high CV risk. Once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg) added to standard of care led to a significant 26% reduction (hazard ratio [HR], 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58–0.95) in risk of the primary outcome (CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI) or non-fatal stroke) vs placebo, driven by risk reductions in non-fatal MI (26%; HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51–1.08) and non-fatal stroke (39%; HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38–0.99). Purpose: To explore the effect of semaglutide on the primary outcome over time. This analysis can help support mechanistic understanding by evaluating whether there is evidence of a weakened, strengthened or constant treatment effect during the trial. Methods: An extended Cox model with a time-varying treatment effect was used to plot the cumulative treatment coefficient (logarithm of the HR) in order to further assess the dynamic in the overall treatment effect. These results were compared to the cumulative incidence over time of subjects with a CV event for each treatment, as depicted in a Kaplan–Meier plot.

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)0.018
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0180.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.007
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.245 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Heart Journal→Same topicDiabetes Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→