Gastrin analogue administration adds no significant glycaemic benefit to a glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist acutely or after washout of both analogues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIM: To determine if a 4-week course of 14 mg weekly GLP-1 agonist LY2428757 combined with 3 mg or 2 mg daily gastrin analogue TT223 (LY+TT223) results in long-term glycaemic changes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with in adequately-controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus ±metformin (N=151) were randomized to a 4-week course of LY+TT223 (3 mg), LY+TT223 (2 mg), LY+TT223 placebo (LY-only) or LY placebo+TT223 placebo (placebo). The primary objective was change in HbA1c from baseline to 5 month safter completion of therapy (i.e. at 6 months) and safety and tolerability with LY+TT223 versus LY-only. RESULTS: LY groups showed HbA1c reductions during the active treatment phase. These did not persist during follow-up phase. Combining TT223 with LY did not result in additional glycaemic effects during treatment or follow-up. At 6 months, LSM ± SE for change in HbA1c from baseline was: LY+TT223 (3 mg): -0.1 ± 0.2%; LY+TT223 (2 mg): 0.1 ± 0.2%; LY-only: -0.2 ± 0.2%; placebo: 0.04 ± 0.2%. Secondary analyses were consistent with primary results. LY+TT223 was not superior to LY for other time points or end points, including insulin secretory response to mixed meal tolerance tests. The most common adverse events (nausea and vomiting) were more frequent with LY+TT223 versus LY-only. The safety profile was consistent with previous findings. CONCLUSION: GLP-1+gastrin combination therapy did not improve glycaemic control versus GLP-1 alone.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".