Patients achieving a HbA1c less than 5.7% with greater than or equal to 5% weight loss and without hypoglycaemia: A post hoc analysis of SURPASS 1 to 5
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Question What is the proportion of participants treated with tirzepatide achieving a HbA1c<5.7% [< 30 mmol/mol] with > 5% weight loss and no hypoglycemia relative to placebo and active comparators? Methodology We compared the proportion of participants achieving the triple endpoint of HbA1c<5.7% [< 30 mmol/mol], ≥ 5% weight loss, and no clinically significant or severe hypoglycemia between the TZP (5, 10, or 15mg) and respective comparator groups using the efficacy analysis dataset without rescue medication. HbA1c and weight were evaluated at the end of the treatment period at week 40 (SURPASS 1, 2, 5) or week 52 (SURPASS 3, 4). Hypoglycemia included blood glucose level<54 mg/dl with symptoms or severe hypoglycemia at any time. Results Significantly more participants treated with any dose of TZP achieved the triple endpoint compared to placebo or active comparators in SURPASS 1-5. Of the participants treated with TZP 15mg, 45%, 48%, 48%, 41% and 55% reached the triple endpoint compared to 1% with placebo, 15% with semaglutide 1mg, 2% with degludec, 1% with glargine U100, and 1% with placebo, in SURPASS 1-5, respectively. Conclusion Significantly more participants treated with TZP achieved a HbA1c<5.7% [< 30 mmol/mol] with ≥ 5% weight loss and without hypoglycemia compared to placebo, semaglutide 1mg, or basal insulin. Publication History Article published online: 02 May 2023 © 2023. Thieme. All rights reserved. Georg Thieme Verlag Rüdigerstraße 14, 70469 Stuttgart, Germany
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".