MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808897143 · doi:10.2337/db18-99-lb

Impact of Switching from Twice-Daily Basal Insulin to Once-Daily Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes (T1DM)—Phase 4 OPTIMIZE Study, Belgian Cohort

2018· article· en· W2808897143 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Chantal Mathieu, Péter Stella, Jacques Bruhwyler, Kathy Alexandre

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInsulin glargineInsulinInsulin detemirBasal (medicine)Internal medicineCohortPopulationBasal insulinType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyBody mass indexProspective cohort studyPediatrics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 28-week, prospective, multicenter, open-label OPTIMIZE study, conducted in Belgium and Canada, evaluated treatment optimization with once-daily (OD) Gla-300 in combination with a prandial rapid-acting insulin analog in adults with T1DM previously uncontrolled (HbA1c 8-10%) on twice-daily (BID) basal insulin as part of basal-bolus therapy. The intent-to-treat (ITT) and safety populations of the Belgian cohort comprised 48 patients (52.1% women); mean (SD) age 51.7 (12.8) years and mean (SD) body mass index 28.2 (4.9) kg/m². Prior to the study, 37.5% were on insulin glargine 100 U/mL and 62.5% were on insulin detemir. There was a statistically significant reduction in HbA1c from baseline to month 6 (primary endpoint, p<0.0001). No significant changes were observed in basal or prandial insulin dose, or in total or nocturnal hypoglycemic event rates. Statistically significant improvements were seen in the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) total and perceived hyperglycemia scores (p<0.05) (Table), and in the patient satisfaction score for number of injections (p=0.004). Switching from a BID basal insulin analog to OD Gla-300 in this challenging T1DM population was associated with a statistically significant improvement in HbA1c levels and better overall treatment satisfaction. Disclosure C. Mathieu: Research Support; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Advisory Panel; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Research Support; Self; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Sanofi. Advisory Panel; Self; Sanofi. Research Support; Self; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.. Advisory Panel; Self; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.. Research Support; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Advisory Panel; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Research Support; Self; Novartis AG. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Novartis AG. Advisory Panel; Self; Novartis AG, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. Speaker's Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca. Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Pfizer Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. Advisory Panel; Self; Hanmi Pharmaceutical. Research Support; Self; Roche Diagnostics Corporation. Advisory Panel; Self; Roche Diagnostics Corporation. Research Support; Self; Medtronic. Advisory Panel; Self; Medtronic, MannKind Corporation. Research Support; Self; Intrexon. Advisory Panel; Self; Intrexon, Dianax, UCB, Inc.. Research Support; Self; Abbott. P. Stella: Employee; Self; Sanofi. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Sanofi. J. Bruhwyler: Other Relationship; Self; Sanofi. K. Alexandre: Employee; Self; Sanofi. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Sanofi.

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)0.002
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.287 · 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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207