MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402406906 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2403953

Insulin Efsitora versus Degludec in Type 2 Diabetes without Previous Insulin Treatment

2024· article· en· W4402406906 on OpenAlexaff
Carol Wysham, Harpreet S. Bajaj, Stefano Del Prato, Denise Reis Franco, Arihiro Kiyosue, Dominik Dahl, Chunmei Zhou, Molly C. Carr, Michael Case, LIVIA FIRMINO GONCALVES

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Management and Research
Canadian institutionsLMC Diabetes & Endocrinology (Canada)
FundersEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsInsulin degludecInsulinType 2 diabetesMedicineInternal medicineDiabetes mellitusEndocrinologyInsulin glargine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Insulin efsitora alfa (efsitora) is a new basal insulin designed for once-weekly administration. Data on safety and efficacy have been limited to small, phase 1 or phase 2 trials. METHODS: We conducted a 52-week, phase 3, parallel-design, open-label, treat-to-target trial involving adults with type 2 diabetes who had not previously received insulin. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive efsitora or degludec. The primary end point was the change in the glycated hemoglobin level from baseline to week 52; we hypothesized that efsitora would be noninferior to degludec (noninferiority margin, 0.4 percentage points). Secondary and safety end points included the change in the glycated hemoglobin level in subgroups of participants using and not using glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, the percentage of time that the glucose level was in the target range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter in weeks 48 through 52, and hypoglycemic episodes. RESULTS: A total of 928 participants underwent randomization (466 to the efsitora group and 462 to the degludec group). The mean glycated hemoglobin level decreased from 8.21% at baseline to 6.97% at week 52 with efsitora (least-squares mean change, -1.26 percentage points) and from 8.24% to 7.05% with degludec (least-squares mean change, -1.17 percentage points) (estimated treatment difference, -0.09 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.22 to 0.04), findings that showed noninferiority. Efsitora was noninferior to degludec with respect to the change in the glycated hemoglobin level in participants using and not using GLP-1 receptor agonists. The percentage of time that the glucose level was within the target range was 64.3% with efsitora and 61.2% with degludec (estimated treatment difference, 3.1 percentage points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 6.1). The rate of combined clinically significant or severe hypoglycemia was 0.58 events per participant-year of exposure with efsitora and 0.45 events per participant-year of exposure with degludec (estimated rate ratio, 1.30; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.78). No severe hypoglycemia was reported with efsitora; six episodes were reported with degludec. The incidence of adverse events was similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with type 2 diabetes who had not previously received insulin, once-weekly efsitora was noninferior to once-daily degludec in reducing glycated hemoglobin levels. (Funded by Eli Lilly; QWINT-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT05362058.).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.949
Threshold uncertainty score0.448

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
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

Citations50
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicDiabetes Management and ResearchFrench-language works237,207