Subcutaneous weekly semaglutide with automated insulin delivery in type 1 diabetes: a double-blind, randomized, crossover trial
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Efforts to improve glycemic control in type 1 diabetes are ongoing. We performed a randomized, double-blind, crossover trial to assess semaglutide as adjunct to automated insulin delivery therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes. At each intervention, participants were titrated up to 1 mg or the maximum tolerated dose of semaglutide or placebo over 11 weeks, followed by the use of an automated insulin delivery system for 4 weeks. The primary outcome was the percentage of time spent in the target glucose range of 3.9–10.0 mmol l−1 during the last 4 weeks of each intervention. Twenty-eight participants were randomized and 24 completed the trial. The primary endpoint was met. Compared to placebo, semaglutide increased time in the target range by a mean 4.8 (s.d. = 7.6) percentage points (P = 0.006), without increasing the time spent below 3.9 mmol l−1 (P = 0.19) or below 3.0 mmol l−1 (P = 0.65). While no diabetic ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia occurred during any of the interventions, there were two episodes of recurrent euglycemic ketosis without acidosis during semaglutide use. We conclude that semaglutide improves glycemic control with automated insulin delivery compared to placebo. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT05205928 In a crossover trial evaluating semaglutide versus placebo as an add-on to automated insulin delivery therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes, the use of semaglutide was associated with an increased percentage of time spent within the target glucose range, along with reduced insulin requirements.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".