MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399685476 · doi:10.2337/db24-770-p

770-P: Efficacy and Safety of Tirzepatide in Participants Who Achieved Fasting Serum Glucose Targets at 52 Weeks in SURPASS-3 and SURPASS-4

2024· article· en· W4399685476 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
ALICE Y.Y. CHENG, Jennifer B. Green, Juan M. Maldonado, MINZHI LIU, ROSANA B. SILVA, ANITA KWAN

Bibliographic record

VenueDiabetes · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineHypoglycemiaDemographicsAdverse effectType 2 diabetesWeight lossInternal medicinePost-hoc analysisBasal (medicine)Diabetes mellitusPost hocBody weightInsulinEndocrinologyObesityDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction & Objective: In the SURPASS-3 (S-3) and -4 (S-4) trials, tirzepatide (TZP) reduced HbA1c and body weight (BW) in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) vs. basal insulin (BI). We assessed the efficacy and safety of TZP and BI in those who did or did not achieve fasting serum glucose (FSG) targets. Methods: Post hoc analysis of participants who achieved FSG <90 mg/dL (S-3) or <100 mg/dL (S-4) vs. those who did not at Week 52. Efficacy analyses included those on assigned treatment without rescue medication. Results: In S-3 and S-4, respectively, 234 (18%) and 596 (33%) participants achieved FSG targets. Baseline (BL) demographics were similar between studies, but BL FSG was lower in those achieving FSG targets. Participants achieving FSG targets had a greater reduction in HbA1c and BW at Week 52 than those who did not; HbA1c reduction was greater with TZP compared with BI in those who did or did not achieve FSG target (Figure). The percentage reporting ≥1 adverse event (AE) was similar between studies. In S-3 and S-4, across TZP doses, clinically significant hypoglycemia aggregated rate/year was 0.018-0.197 in those who achieved FSG targets, and 0.009-0.099 in those who did not. Conclusion: TZP reduced HbA1c and BW regardless of FSG target attainment, without substantial differences in AEs nor hypoglycemia. BI was associated with weight gain and less HbA1c reduction than TZP. Disclosure A.Y.Y. Cheng: Advisory Panel; Abbott. Speaker's Bureau; Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Bausch Health. Advisory Panel; Bayer Inc. Speaker's Bureau; Abbott, Bayer Inc. Research Support; Applied Therapeutics Inc. Advisory Panel; Boehringer-Ingelheim. Speaker's Bureau; Boehringer-Ingelheim, Dexcom, Inc. Advisory Panel; Dexcom, Inc., Eli Lilly and Company. Speaker's Bureau; Eli Lilly and Company. Advisory Panel; Eisai Inc. Speaker's Bureau; GlaxoSmithKline plc. Advisory Panel; HLS Therapeutics Inc. Speaker's Bureau; HLS Therapeutics Inc., Insulet Corporation. Advisory Panel; Insulet Corporation, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Speaker's Bureau; Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Medtronic. Advisory Panel; Novo Nordisk. Speaker's Bureau; Novo Nordisk. Research Support; Novo Nordisk. Speaker's Bureau; Pfizer Inc. Advisory Panel; Sanofi. Speaker's Bureau; Sanofi. Research Support; Sanofi. Advisory Panel; Takeda Canada, AstraZeneca, Sanofi. Consultant; Abbott, AstraZeneca, Bayer Inc., Boehringer-Ingelheim, Dexcom, Inc., Eisai Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, Insulet Corporation, HLS Therapeutics Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited. J.B. Green: Consultant; AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer Inc., Bayer Inc., Anji Pharmaceuticals, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Valo Health, Eli Lilly and Company, Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated. Research Support; Merck, Roche, Lilly, Boehringer Ingelheim, Bluedrop. J.M. Maldonado: None. M. Liu: Consultant; Eli Lilly and Company. R.B. Silva: None. A. Kwan: Employee; Eli Lilly and Company. Stock/Shareholder; Eli Lilly and Company.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Randomized trial · Consensus signal: Randomized trial
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designRandomized trial
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiabetesSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207