MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2894726433 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-33483-y

Comparative Safety of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors Versus Sulfonylureas and Other Glucose-lowering Therapies for Three Acute Outcomes

2018· article· en· W2894726433 on OpenAlexafffund
John‐Michael Gamble, Jennifer Donnan, Eugene Chibrikov, Laurie Twells, William K. Midodzi, Sumit R. Majumdar

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of WaterlooMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchGovernment of CanadaDiabetes Canada
KeywordsMedicineAcute pancreatitisMetforminAcute kidney injuryDipeptidyl peptidase-4Hazard ratioInternal medicineType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusGastroenterologyInsulinPharmacologyConfidence intervalEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the glucose lowering effect of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors is well established, several potential serious acute safety concerns have been raised including acute kidney injury, respiratory tract infections, and acute pancreatitis. Using the UK-based Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), we identified initiators (365-day washout period) of DPP4 inhibitors and relevant comparators including initiators of sulfonylureas, metformin, thiazolidinediones, and insulin between January 2007 and January 2016 to quantify the association between DPP4 inhibitors and three acute health events - acute kidney injury, respiratory tract infections, and acute pancreatitis. The associations between drug and study outcomes were estimated using Cox proportional hazard models adjusted for deciles of high-dimensional propensity scores and number of additional glucose lowering agents. After controlling for potential confounders, the risk was not significantly increased or decreased for initiators of DPP4 inhibitors compared to sulfonylureas (hazard ratio (HR) [95% confidence interval (CI)] for acute kidney injury: 0.81 [0.56-1.18]; HR for respiratory tract infections: 0.93 [0.84-1.04]; HR for acute pancreatitis 1.03 [0.42-2.52], metformin (HR for respiratory tract infection 0.91 [0.65-1.27]), thiazolidinediones (HR for acute kidney injury: 1.12 [0.60-2.10]; HR for respiratory tract infections: 1.02 [0.86-1.21]; HR for acute pancreatitis: 1.21 [0.25-5.72]), or insulin (HR for acute kidney injury: 1.40 [0.77-2.55]; HR for respiratory tract infections: 0.74 [0.60-0.92]; HR for acute pancreatitis: 1.01 [0.24-4.19]). Initiators of DPP4 inhibitors were associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury when compared to metformin initiators (HR [95% CI] for acute kidney injury: 1.85 [1.10-3.12], although this association was attenuated when DPP4 inhibitor monotherapy was compared to metformin monotherapy exposure as a time-dependent variable (HR 1.39 [0.91-2.11]). Initiation of a DPP4 inhibitor was not associated with an increased risk of acute kidney injury, respiratory tract infections, or acute pancreatitis compared to sulfonylureas or other glucose-lowering therapies.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations23
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific Reports→Same topicDiabetes Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→