MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4281677688 · doi:10.2337/db22-248-or

248-OR: MiTy Kids: Follow-Up of Offspring Exposed to Metformin In-Utero in Mothers with Type 2 Diabetes in the MiTy Trial

2022· article· en· W4281677688 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
DENICE FEIG, J. JOHANNA SANCHEZ, KELLIE MURPHY, Elizabeth Asztalos, Bernard Zinman, David Simmons, Andrea M. Haqq, IVAN G. FANTUS, LORRAINE LIPSCOMBE, Anthony Armson, JON F.R. BARRETT, LOIS E. DONOVAN, PAUL KARANICOLAS, GAIL KLEIN, SIOBHAN TOBIN, KATHRYN MANGOFF, George Tomlinson, Jill Hamilton

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicGestational Diabetes Research and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetforminMedicineOffspringType 2 diabetesPlaceboConfoundingBody mass indexAnthropometryIn uteroInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusGestational diabetesPregnancyObesityEndocrinologyObstetricsGestationFetus

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Offspring of mothers with T2D are at increased risk of obesity and diabetes. In the MiTy trial [pregnant T2D randomized to metformin vs. placebo], infants exposed to metformin were lighter, had lower fat-mass and risk of large-for-gestational-age, but at higher risk of small-for-gestational-age. There are questions on the long-term effects of in-utero exposure to metformin on offspring of women with T2D. Aim: To examine adiposity in children of women with T2D, with and without exposure to metformin, up to 24 months. Methods: We included infants of women who participated in MiTy. Anthropometric measurements were made at 3, 6, 12, 18 and 24 months of age. At 24 months, t-tests and linear regression were used to estimate differences in BMI z-score and sum of skinfolds by metformin group, adjusted for confounders. Comparisons over time used longitudinal models, with fractional polynomials for growth trajectories. Results: Of the 465 eligible children from MiTy, 283 (60.8%) participated in MiTy Kids. At 24 months, there was no difference in BMI z-score (0·84±1·52 in metformin vs. 0·91±1·38 in placebo (p=0.72)) or sum of skinfolds (23·0±5·2 in metformin vs. 23·8±5·3 in placebo (p=0.31)) between groups. There was no difference in BMI trajectory by treatment overall but in males, treatment had significantly different trajectories (p=0.048) ; the metformin BMI was higher from 8 to 24 months. At 24 months, reduced sleep time (p=0.0125) and increased screen time (p=0.0549) were associated with increased BMI z-score. Offspring of women with T2D were approximately 1 SD heavier than the WHO reference population. Conclusion: Offspring of women with T2D with and without exposure to metformin in-utero had similar anthropometrics overall. In males, metformin led to higher BMI growth trajectory between 8 and 24 months. Future follow-up is needed to see if these findings continue. Disclosure D.Feig: Advisory Panel; Novo Nordisk, Research Support; Apotex. A.Armson: None. J.F.R.Barrett: None. L.E.Donovan: Other Relationship; Dexcom, Inc., Inner Analytics, Medtronic, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. P.Karanicolas: Research Support; Baxter. G.Klein: None. S.Tobin: None. K.Mangoff: None. G.Tomlinson: None. J.Hamilton: Advisory Panel; Novo Nordisk Canada Inc., Research Support; Mead Johnson & Company, LLC. J.Sanchez: None. K.Murphy: None. E.Asztalos: None. B.Zinman: Advisory Panel; Abbott Diabetes, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk Canada Inc., Sanofi K.K. D.Simmons: Other Relationship; Elsevier, Research Support; Abbott, Hitachi, Ltd., Novo Nordisk, Speaker's Bureau; Sanofi. A.Haqq: None. I.G.Fantus: None. L.Lipscombe: n/a. Funding Canadian Health Institute for Research

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.287
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Citations4
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicGestational Diabetes Research and ManagementFrench-language works237,207