Pharmacometabolomics of sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Sulfonylureas have been a longstanding pharmacotherapy in the management of type 2 diabetes, with potential benefits beyond glycemic control. Although sulfonylureas are effective, interindividual variability exists in drug response. Pharmacometabolomics is a potent method for elucidating variations in individual drug response. Identifying unique metabolites associated with treatment response can improve our ability to predict outcomes and optimize treatment strategies for individual patients. Our objective is to identify metabolic signatures associated with good and poor response to sulfonylureas, which could enhance our capability to anticipate treatment outcome. Methods: In this cross-sectional study, clinical and metabolomics data for 137 patients with type 2 diabetes who are taking sulfonylurea as a monotherapy or a combination therapy were obtained from Qatar Biobank. Patients were empirically categorized according to their glycosylated hemoglobin levels into poor and good responders to sulfonylureas. To examine variations in metabolic signatures between the two distinct groups, we have employed orthogonal partial least squares discriminant analysis and linear models while correcting for demographic confounders and metformin usage. Results: Good responders showed increased levels of acylcholines, gamma glutamyl amino acids, sphingomyelins, methionine, and a novel metabolite 6-bromotryptophan. Conversely, poor responders showed increased levels of metabolites of glucose metabolism and branched chain amino acid metabolites. Conclusion: The results of this study have the potential to empower our knowledge of variability in patient response to sulfonylureas, and carry significant implications for advancing precision medicine in type 2 diabetes management.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".