MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381377638 · doi:10.2337/db23-799-p

799-P: Predictors of Glycemic Control by Derived Time in Range for People with Type 2 Diabetes Advancing with iGlarLixi—A Pooled Analysis

2023· article· en· W4381377638 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Irene Hramiak, Juan P. Frías, Felipe Lauand, LYDIE MELAS-MELT, ELISABETH SOUHAMI, MARTIN HALUZIK, JULIO ROSENSTOCK

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlycemicType 2 diabetesMedicineHypoglycemiaPost-hoc analysisLogistic regressionInternal medicineMealDiabetes mellitusInsulinEndocrinology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This post-hoc, pooled analysis of 3 randomized controlled trials aimed to identify factors associated with achieving a derived Time in Range (dTIR) ≥70% at the end of treatment (EOT) with iGlarLixi in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). dTIR was calculated from 7-point self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) profiles and assessed at baseline (BL) and EOT for people with T2D advancing from oral (LixiLan-O), insulin (LixiLan-L), or GLP-1 RA (LixiLan-G) therapy to once-daily iGlarLixi. Participants at EOT were classified as either achieving or not achieving dTIR ≥70%, and corresponding predictive BL characteristics were analyzed with univariable and multivariable stepwise logistic regression. Analyses (N=880) showed that 86% of participants achieved dTIR ≥70% with iGlarLixi; T2D duration and HbA1c at BL were greater in those with dTIR <70% (mean [SD] 11.35 [7.31] years and 8.26 [0.68] %) than those with dTIR ≥70% (10.40 [6.51] years and 7.96 [0.68] %), respectively. Post-meal SMPG at BL was higher in those not achieving dTIR ≥70%. Lower BL HbA1c (p=0.0205), BL insulin dose (p<0.0001), and hypoglycemia level 2 frequency (p=0.0139 for 1-3 vs 0 events; p=0.0172 for ≥4 vs 0) were predictors of attaining dTIR ≥70% (Table). HbA1c, insulin dose, and hypoglycemia frequency at BL were predictors of achieving target dTIR ≥70% in people with T2D advancing therapy with iGlarLixi. Disclosure I.Hramiak: Research Support; Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Speaker's Bureau; Canadian Medical & Surgical Knowledge Translation Research Group (CMS), Insulet Corporation, Medtronic, Merck & Co., Inc., Bayer Inc. J.P.Frias: Advisory Panel; Becton, Dickinson and Company, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Consultant; Akero Therapeutics, Inc., 89bio, Inc., Aimmune, Boehringer Ingelheim Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Carmot Therapeutics, Inc., Echosens, Merck & Co., Inc., Metacrine, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Employee; Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Research Support; Akero Therapeutics, Inc., 89bio, Inc., Altimmune, Axcella Health Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Intercept Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Carmot Therapeutics, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Madrigal Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Metacrine, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Oramed Pharmaceuticals, Novartis, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Speaker's Bureau; Eli Lilly and Company, Sanofi. H.Aydin: Advisory Panel; Sanofi, Novo Nordisk, Boehringer Ingelheim Inc., Speaker's Bureau; Novo Nordisk. F.Lauand: Employee; Sanofi. L.Melas-melt: None. E.Souhami: Employee; Sanofi, Stock/Shareholder; Sanofi. M.Haluzik: Advisory Panel; Novo Nordisk, Lilly Diabetes, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Research Support; Sanofi, Speaker's Bureau; Abbott, AstraZeneca. J.Rosenstock: Advisory Panel; Applied Therapeutics Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk, Oramed Pharmaceuticals, Sanofi, Zealand Pharma A/S, Intarcia Therapeutics, Inc., Hanmi Pharm. Co., Ltd., Research Support; Applied Therapeutics Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Merck & Co., Inc., Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Inc., Sanofi, Intarcia Therapeutics, Inc. Funding Sanofi

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)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0080.034
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.201 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207