MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3038598579 · doi:10.1002/ejhf.1958

Association Between Glycated Haemoglobin Levels and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease: A Secondary Analysis of the TECOS Randomized Clinical Trial

2020· article· en· W3038598579 on OpenAlexaff
Finlay A. McAlister, Yinggan Zheng, Cynthia M. Westerhout, John B. Buse, Eberhard Standl, Darren K. McGuire, Frans Van de Werf, Jennifer B. Green, Paul W. Armstrong, Rury R. Holman

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Heart Failure · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsCanadian VIGOUR CentreUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHazard ratioInternal medicineInterquartile rangeHeart failureMyocardial infarctionUnstable anginaDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesCardiologyStroke (engine)Randomized controlled trialGlycated hemoglobinSitagliptinConfidence intervalEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aims Whether glycaemic control is associated with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is unclear. Consequently, we assessed the relationship between glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and cardiovascular outcomes in a placebo-controlled randomized trial which demonstrated no cardiovascular effect of sitagliptin in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease. Methods and results Secondary analysis of 14 656 TECOS participants with time to event analyses using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. During a median 3.0 (interquartile range 2.3–3.8) year follow-up, 456 (3.1% of 14 656) patients had first hospitalization for heart failure (HF), 1084 (11.5%) died, 1406 (9.6%) died or were hospitalized for HF, and 1689 (11.5%) had a non-HF cardiovascular event (cardiovascular death, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina). Associations between baseline or time-varying HbA1c and cardiovascular outcomes were U-shaped, with the lowest risk when HbA1c was around 7%. Each one-unit increase in the time-varying HbA1c above 7% was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11–1.33] for first HF hospitalization, 1.11 (1.03–1.21) for all-cause death, 1.18 (1.09–1.26) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.10 (1.02–1.17) for non-HF cardiovascular events. Each one-unit decrease in the time-varying HbA1c below 7% was associated with an adjusted HR of 1.35 (95% CI 1.12–1.64) for first HF hospitalization, 1.37 (1.16–1.61) for death, 1.42 (1.23–1.64) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.22 (1.06–1.41) for non-HF cardiovascular events. Conclusion Glycated haemogobin exhibits a U-shaped association with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease, with nadir around 7%. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00790205.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Meta-analysis · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0030.004
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.225 · 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 designMeta-analysis
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

Citations39
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Heart FailureSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207