MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4395034924 · doi:10.1161/circ.144.suppl_1.9392

Abstract 9392: Cardiovascular, Metabolic and Safety Outcomes With Semaglutide by Age: A <i>Post Hoc</i> Analysis of SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6

2021· article· en· W4395034924 on OpenAlexaff
Mark C. Petrie, Stephen C. Bain, Søren T. Hoff, Nicklas J. Johansen, Søren Rasmussen, T Vilsboell, Mansoor Husain

Bibliographic record

VenueCirculation · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsTed Rogers Centre for Heart Research
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineSemaglutidePost-hoc analysisPost hocGerontologyInternal medicineEndocrinologyDiabetes mellitusType 2 diabetesLiraglutide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: For older patients with type 2 diabetes, treatments that minimize the risk of hypoglycemia and provide benefits in terms of comorbidities, while optimizing glycemic control, are particularly important. Semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist available as a once-weekly (OW) subcutaneous and once-daily oral formulation, reduces HbA 1c and body weight with a low risk of hypoglycemia. In addition, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) were reduced in SUSTAIN 6 (OW semaglutide; significant) and PIONEER 6 (oral semaglutide; not significant) vs placebo. The aim of this post hoc analysis was to evaluate cardiovascular (CV), metabolic and safety outcomes with semaglutide according to age. Methods: Subgroup analyses for semaglutide vs placebo by age as quartiles (≤60 years; >60 years to ≤65; >65 years to ≤70 years; >70 years) were performed for pooled SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6 data in relation to: CV (3-point and individual MACE components), metabolic (change in HbA 1c , body weight) and safety (severe hypoglycemia, serious adverse events [SAEs]) outcomes. Results: In patients treated with semaglutide (n=3,239) vs placebo (n=3,241), the reduction in MACE and individual components of MACE was consistent across age subgroups (p interaction >0.05 for all; Table ). Minor heterogeneity for change in HbA 1c from baseline was observed with semaglutide vs placebo across the four age subgroups (p interaction =0.01). Weight reduction with semaglutide vs placebo did not differ across age subgroups. Semaglutide (vs placebo) did not result in an increase in severe hypoglycemia or SAEs in any of the age subgroups ( Table ). Conclusions: This post hoc combined analysis of SUSTAIN 6 and PIONEER 6 indicates that the CV and metabolic benefits and the safety profile of semaglutide (vs placebo) align with the drug class and were consistent across age subgroups.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.048

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0060.013
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 venueCirculation→Same topicDiabetes Treatment and Management→French-language works237,207→