MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3175702793 · doi:10.2337/db21-896-p

896-P: Demographic and Glycemic Parameters across Global Regions in Youth with T2D in Clinical Trials of Sitagliptin

2021· article· en· W3175702793 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Muhammad Yazid Jalaludin, Asma Deeb, Philip Zeitler, Raymundo Garcia, Ron S. Newfield, Ю. Г. Самойлова, Carmen A. Rosario, Naim Shehadeh, Chandan Saha, Yilong Zhang, Zhi Jin Xu, Lynn W. Scherer, Samuel S. Engel, Keith D. Kaufman, R. Ravi Shankar

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSitagliptinGlycemicDemographyInternal medicineType 2 diabetesClinical trialMetforminEthnic groupDiabetes mellitusEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives: To compare baseline characteristics of 10-17 yr old patients (pts) with T2D from different regions in clinical trials of sitagliptin as initial oral therapy (IOT, NCT01485614) or as add-on to metformin therapy (AMT, NCT01472367, NCT01760447).Methods: Demographic and baseline glycemic parameters of pts randomized in the US or Canada (NA), Latin America (LA), Europe or the Middle East (EM), or Asia Pacific (AP) were summarized by region (Table).Results: The proportion of males varied by region. While racial and ethnic distributions were generally reflective of region, the proportion of Whites in NA was higher than in other reports (e.g., ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3038479). AP pts were youngest. Consistent with age, pts in AP were shorter, with lower weight and BMI across trials; however, median BMI percentile was >98% across regions and trial types. Median A1C and FPG ranged from 7.1-7.4% and 118-130.5 mg/dL (IOT) and 7.7-7.9% and 125.5-143.5 mg/dL (AMT). Despite having the lowest FPG, pts in AP (IOT) had the highest A1C.Conclusions: Despite regional differences in race, sex, and anthropometrics, pts were uniformly obese. Baseline glycemic parameters by region were generally comparable, although the younger age (all trials) and lower FPG and higher A1C (IOT) in AP pts may reflect a difference in the pathophysiology of T2D, with greater post-meal rather than fasting dysglycemia.View largeDownload slideView largeDownload slide DisclosureM. Y. Jalaludin: Advisory Panel; Self; Novo Nordisk, Research Support; Self; Novo Nordisk. Y. Zhang: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc., Stock/Shareholder; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. Z. Xu: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc., Stock/Shareholder; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. L. W. Scherer: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc., Stock/Shareholder; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. S. S. Engel: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc., Stock/Shareholder; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. K. D. Kaufman: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc., Stock/Shareholder; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. R. Shankar: Employee; Self; AstraZeneca, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. A. Deeb: None. P. Zeitler: Consultant; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly and Company, Janssen Research & Development, LLC, Merck & Co., Inc. R. Garcia: None. R. S. Newfield: Consultant; Self; Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. Y. Samoilova: None. C. A. Rosario: None. N. Shehadeh: Advisory Panel; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Research Support; Self; Novo Nordisk, Speaker’s Bureau; Self; AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi. C. K. Saha: None.FundingMerck & Co., Inc.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.071
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.294 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207