MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2808981859 · doi:10.2337/db18-301-or

Similar Glycemic Control and Less or Comparable Hypoglycemia with Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) vs. Degludec 100 U/mL (IDeg-100) in Insulin-Naïve T2DM on Antihyperglycemic Drugs ± GLP-1 RAs—The BRIGHT Randomized Study

2018· article· en· W2808981859 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alice Cheng, Julio Rosenstock, Robert Ritzel, Zsolt Bosnyák, Christine Devisme, Péter Stella, Anna M. G. Cali, Xiangling Wang, Juan P. Frías, Ronan Roussel, Geremia B. Bolli

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineInsulin degludecHypoglycemiaGlycemicInsulin glargineInsulinInternal medicineEndocrinologyClinical endpointAdverse effectRandomized controlled trial

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BRIGHT is the first head-to-head clinical trial investigating the efficacy and safety of Gla-300 vs. IDeg-100. In this 24-week, multinational, open-label, parallel-group, treat-to-target trial (NCT02738151), 929 insulin-naïve T2DM adults (mean HbA1c, 8.6%; DM duration, 10.6 years; BMI, 31.5 kg/m2), inadequately controlled with oral antihyperglycemic drugs ± GLP-1 RAs, were randomized 1:1 to once-daily Gla-300 or IDeg-100. Primary endpoint: HbA1c change from baseline to week 24. Secondary endpoints included hypoglycemia, blood glucose levels, and adverse events. Non-inferiority of Gla-300 vs. IDeg-100 was demonstrated for the primary endpoint (Table). Gla-300 had similar fasting SMPG reduction to IDeg-100 (Table), with final daily insulin doses of 0.54 and 0.43 U/kg from starting evening doses, per label, of 0.2 U/kg and 10 U/day (0.12 U/kg), respectively. Over the 24-week period, incidence of confirmed (≤70 mg/dL) or severe hypoglycemia was comparable, but event rates were lower with Gla-300 vs. IDeg-100, by 14% at any time of day (24h) and 19% at night (00:00-05:59 h) (Table). In summary, BRIGHT showed that Gla-300 provides similar glycemic control to IDeg-100, with less or comparable hypoglycemia, in previously inadequately controlled, insulin-naïve adults with T2DM. Disclosure A.Y.Y. Cheng: Advisory Panel; Self; Abbott. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Abbott. Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca. Speaker's Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca. Advisory Panel; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. Advisory Panel; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Advisory Panel; Self; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Advisory Panel; Self; Merck & Co., Inc.. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Merck & Co., Inc.. Advisory Panel; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Advisory Panel; Self; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Sanofi. Consultant; Self; Takeda Canada Inc.. Research Support; Self; Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH. J. Rosenstock: Advisory Panel; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Consultant; Self; Eli Lilly and Company. Research Support; Self; Novo Nordisk Inc.. Consultant; Self; Novo Nordisk Inc.. Advisory Panel; Self; Sanofi. Consultant; Self; Sanofi. Advisory Panel; Self; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Consultant; Self; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Advisory Panel; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Consultant; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Advisory Panel; Self; Intarcia Therapeutics, Inc.. Consultant; Self; Intarcia Therapeutics, Inc.. Research Support; Self; Merck & Co., Inc., Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Novo Nordisk Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Eli Lilly and Company, Intarcia Therapeutics, Inc., Genentech, Inc. R. Ritzel: Speaker's Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca. Consultant; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S. Consultant; Self; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Sanofi. Consultant; Self; Servier. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation. Z. Bosnyak: Employee; Self; Sanofi. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Sanofi. C. Devisme: Employee; Self; Sanofi. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Sanofi. P. Stella: Employee; Self; Sanofi. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Sanofi. A.M. Cali: Employee; Self; Sanofi. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Sanofi. X. Wang: Employee; Self; Sanofi. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Sanofi. J.P. Frias: Research Support; Self; AbbVie Inc., Allergan, Amgen Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company. Consultant; Self; CeQur Corporation. Research Support; Self; Cirius Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Calibra Medical, Elcelyx Therapeutics, Inc.. Consultant; Self; Elcelyx Therapeutics, Inc.. Research Support; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Genentech, Inc., Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., ICON plc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Consultant; Self; Johnson & Johnson Diabetes Institute, LLC.. Research Support; Self; Lexicon Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Ligand Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Consultant; Self; Ligand Pharmaceuticals, Inc.. Research Support; Self; Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, Novo Nordisk Inc., Pfizer Inc., Sanofi. Consultant; Self; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Sanofi. Research Support; Self; Theracos, Inc. R. Roussel: Advisory Panel; Self; AbbVie Inc., Abbott, Eli Lilly and Company, Sanofi, Novo Nordisk A/S, AstraZeneca. Speaker's Bureau; Self; Servier. Consultant; Self; Bayer AG. Advisory Panel; Self; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp.. Research Support; Self; Amgen Inc., Sanofi, Novo Nordisk A/S, Danone Research. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Iriade. Advisory Panel; Self; Physiogenex S.A.S. G.B. Bolli: Speaker's Bureau; Self; Menarini Group, Sanofi. Research Support; 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.252
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 designRandomized 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

Citations5
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207