MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904126392 · doi:10.1007/s13300-018-0553-7

Investigating the Association Between Baseline Characteristics (HbA1c and Body Mass Index) and Clinical Outcomes of Fast-Acting Insulin Aspart in People with Diabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis

2018· article· en· W2904126392 on OpenAlexaff
Keith Bowering, Helena W. Rodbard, David Russell‐Jones, Bruce W. Bode, Stewart B. Harris, Milivoj Piletič, Simon Heller, Vincent Woo, Vinay Babu, Claus Dethlefsen, Chantal Mathieu

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Therapy · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaWestern UniversityUniversity of Alberta
FundersNovo Nordisk
KeywordsInsulin aspartMedicinePost-hoc analysisBody mass indexType 2 diabetesInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusInsulinType 1 diabetesEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The aim of this study was to investigate the association between baseline characteristics [HbA1c and body mass index (BMI)] and the effect of mealtime fast-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) relative to insulin aspart (IAsp) or basal-only insulin therapy on several efficacy and safety outcomes in people with diabetes. Post hoc analysis of three randomised phase 3a trials in people with type 1 diabetes (T1D; onset 1) and type 2 diabetes (T2D; onset 2 and 3). Participants (N = 1686) were stratified according to baseline BMI (< 25 kg/m2, 25–< 30 kg/m2, ≥ 30 kg/m2) or HbA1c (≤ 58 mmol/mol, > 58–< 64 mmol/mol, ≥ 64 mmol/mol; ≤ 7.5%, > 7.5–< 8.0%, ≥ 8.0%). In participants with T2D, the estimated treatment difference for change in HbA1c was similar for all BMI and HbA1c subgroups. No major differences between treatments were observed in risk of overall hypoglycaemia or insulin dose across subgroups. In participants with T1D, change in HbA1c was similar across BMI and HbA1c subgroups, and no major differences between treatments were observed for severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemia across subgroups. Total daily insulin dose (U/kg) was similar across all baseline HbA1c groups and the BMI < 25 kg/m2 and 25–30 kg/m2 groups, but was significantly lower with mealtime faster aspart compared with IAsp in the BMI > 30 kg/m2 subgroup. In participants with T1D and T2D, treatment differences (for change in HbA1c and overall hypoglycaemia) between mealtime faster aspart and insulin comparators were similar to the corresponding overall analysis across baseline HbA1c and BMI subgroups. The finding of a lower total daily insulin dose in participants with obesity (BMI > 30 kg/m2) and T1D treated with faster aspart, versus those treated with IAsp, may warrant further investigation. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01831765 (onset 1); NCT01819129 (onset 2); NCT01850615 (onset 3). Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.135
Threshold uncertainty score0.787

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes TherapySame topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and LipoproteinsFrench-language works237,207