MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3127915609 · doi:10.1111/dom.14339

The comparative effects of intensive glucose lowering in diabetes patients aged below or above 65 years: Results from the <scp>ADVANCE</scp> trial

2021· article· en· W3127915609 on OpenAlexaff
Toshiaki Ohkuma, John Chalmers, Mark E. Cooper, Pavel Hamet, Stephen Harrap, Michel Marre, Giuseppe Mancia, Neil R Poulter, Mark Woodward

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes Obesity and Metabolism · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsCentre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montréal
FundersNational Health and Medical Research Council
KeywordsMedicineDiabetes mellitusHazard ratioInternal medicineConfidence intervalRandomized controlled trialProportional hazards modelRelative riskClinical trialType 2 diabetesEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

AIMS: For relatively old patients with diabetes, current guidelines recommend adjustment of glycaemic goals based on patients' cognitive function, or coexisting chronic illnesses. However, the evidence which supports the efficacy and safety of intensive glucose lowering in older patients with diabetes is scarce. The objective of the present study was to compare the efficacy and safety of intensive glucose lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes stratified by age (<65 and ≥ 65 years), and examine whether the effects differ according to patients' characteristics in the older patient group. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The effects of intensive glucose lowering (to a target glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] concentration of ≤48 mmol/mol [6.5%]) on major clinical outcomes were evaluated by Cox regression models according to subgroups defined by baseline age of <65 or ≥ 65 years in the ADVANCE trial (n = 11 140). RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 5 years, intensive glucose lowering significantly decreased the risk of the composite of major macrovascular and microvascular events (hazard ratio 0.90, 95% confidence interval 0.82-0.98), with no heterogeneity in the effects across age subgroups (p for heterogeneity = 0.44). Relative effects on all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and components of major vascular events were also similar (P for heterogeneity ≥0.06), except for severe hypoglycaemia, which was of greater risk for patients aged <65 years. Absolute benefits and harms were broadly consistent across subgroups. Among patients aged ≥65 years, randomized treatment effects did not differ significantly across different levels of cognitive function or coexisting chronic illnesses. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that an intensive glycaemic control strategy to reduce HbA1c to 48 mmol/mol (6.5%) provided broadly similar benefits and harms and may be recommended for older, as well as younger, patients.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.004
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations12
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetes Obesity and MetabolismSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207