176-OR: The Effect of Low-Dose Empagliflozin on Glucose Control in Suboptimally Controlled Adults with Type 1 Diabetes on a Closed-Loop Insulin Delivery System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: For some with type 1 diabetes (T1D) , hybrid closed-loop insulin therapy is insufficient to achieve glycemic targets. Low doses of SGLT2i may improve glycemia in those not able to achieve their targets. Methods: A double-blinded, cross-over, randomized controlled trial was performed in sub-optimally controlled (HbA1c 7.0-10.5%) adults with T1D who were not able to achieve a time-in-range (3.9-10.0 mmol/L) of > 70% after 14 days on closed-loop therapy. Three 14-day interventions were performed with placebo, empagliflozin 2.5 mg, or empagliflozin 5 mg, as adjunct to closed-loop therapy, with daily ketone testing. Results: 24 participants completed the study (50% male, age 33 ± 14 yrs, HbA1c 8.1 ± 0.5%) . The time in range was 59 ± 9% for placebo, 72 ± 10% for empagliflozin 2.5 mg, and 70 ± 8 for empagliflozin 5 mg (p < 0.between placebo and empagliflozin 2.5 mg, and placebo and empagliflozin 5 mg) . Empagliflozin 2.5 mg did not increase time spent below 3.9 mmol/L though empagliflozin 5 mg did (p = 0.01) . Average ketone levels were not different between arms (p=ns) . There were no serious adverse events in any intervention. Conclusion: Both empagliflozin 2.5 mg and 5 mg increased the time spent in target on hybrid closed-loop therapy by 11-13 % compared to placebo, in those who otherwise were unable to attain glycemic targets. Disclosure M.Pasqua: None. A.Jafar: None. A.Kobayati: None. M.Tsoukas: Speaker's Bureau; AstraZeneca, Bausch Health, Canada, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Johnson & Johnson, Novo Nordisk Canada Inc. A.Haidar: Consultant; Eli Lilly and Company, Research Support; ADOCIA, Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. Funding National Institutes of Health (1DP3DK106930)
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".