MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4417497606 · doi:10.1056/nejmoa2505928

Cardiovascular Outcomes with Tirzepatide versus Dulaglutide in Type 2 Diabetes

2025· article· en· W4417497606 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen J. Nicholls, Imre Pávó, Deepak L. Bhatt, John B. Buse, Stefano Del Prato, Steven E. Kahn, A. Michael Lincoff, Darren K. McGuire, Debra L. Miller, Michael A. Nauck, Hiroshi Nishiyama, Steven E. Nissen, Naveed Sattar, Govinda Weerakkody, Russell J. Wiese, Bernard Zinman, Sophia Zoungas, Jan Basile, Melanie J Davies, Francesco Giorgino, Monika Kellerer, Linong Ji, Tamás Várkonyi, Venu Menon, Jonathan Broder, Alan Herschtal, David A. D’Alessio

Bibliographic record

VenueNew England Journal of Medicine · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes Treatment and Management
Canadian institutionsLunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research InstituteUniversity of Toronto
FundersEli Lilly and Company
KeywordsDulaglutideType 2 diabetesDiabetes mellitusHeart failureBlood pressureNatriuretic peptide

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: Tirzepatide, a dual incretin agonist of the glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptors, has favorable effects on glycemic control and body weight. The effects on cardiovascular outcomes are uncertain. METHODS: We conducted an active-comparator-controlled, double-blind, noninferiority trial in which patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive a weekly subcutaneous injection of tirzepatide (up to 15 mg) or dulaglutide (1.5 mg), an agent that has been shown to reduce the incidence of cardiovascular events. The primary end point was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke and was tested for noninferiority of tirzepatide to dulaglutide with a margin of 1.05 for the upper limit of the 95.3% confidence interval for the hazard ratio. An upper limit of less than 1.00 was considered to indicate superiority of tirzepatide to dulaglutide. RESULTS: A total of 13,299 patients underwent randomization; 134 were subsequently excluded because they did not meet inclusion criteria. The modified intention-to-treat population thus included 6586 patients in the tirzepatide group and 6579 in the dulaglutide group. The mean (±SD) age of the patients was 64.1±8.8 years, 29.0% were women, the mean body-mass index (the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) was 32.6±5.5, the mean glycated hemoglobin level was 8.4±0.9%, and the mean duration of diabetes was 14.7±8.8 years. A primary end-point event occurred in 801 patients (12.2%) in the tirzepatide group and 862 (13.1%) in the dulaglutide group (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95.3% confidence interval, 0.83 to 1.01; P = 0.003 for noninferiority; P = 0.09 for superiority). The incidence of adverse events appeared to be similar in the two groups, although more gastrointestinal adverse events were observed in the tirzepatide group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, tirzepatide was noninferior to dulaglutide with respect to a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, or stroke. (Funded by Eli Lilly; SURPASS-CVOT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04255433.).

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.299
Threshold uncertainty score0.342

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 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

Citations87
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew England Journal of MedicineSame topicDiabetes Treatment and ManagementFrench-language works237,207