Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27076180›Full record

ReviewCurrent diabetes reports2016

Novel Therapeutics for Diabetes: Uptake, Usage Trends, and Comparative Effectiveness.

Vishal Ahuja, Chia-Hung Chou

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Current diabetes reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
3.5field-weighted citation impact, top 7% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 28 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The place of DPP-4 inhibitors in the treatment algorithm of diabetes type 2: a systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies.The European journal of health economics : HEPAC : health economics in prevention and care · 2017
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Diabetes in Cushing Disease.Current diabetes reports · 2017
    Review
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Vishal AhujaCox School of Business, Southern Methodist University, PO Box 750333, Dallas, TX, 75275, USA. vahuja@smu.edu.
Chia-Hung ChouDepartment of Medicine, University of Chicago, 5841 S. Maryland Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60637, USA.
Southern Methodist University · USUniversity of Chicago · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The number of available therapies for treating type 2 diabetes has grown considerably in recent years. This growth has been fueled by availability of newer medications, whose benefits and risks have not been fully established. In this study, we review and synthesize the existing literature on the uptake, efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of novel antidiabetic agents. Specifically, we focus on three drug classes that were introduced in the market recently: thiazolidinediones (TZDs), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists. Not surprisingly, we find that the usage trends reflect the efficacy and safety profile of these novel drugs. The use of TZDs increased initially but decreased after a black-box warning was issued for rosiglitazone in 2007 that highlighted the cardiovascular risks associated with using the drug. Conversely, DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists gained market shares due to their efficacy in glycemic control as an add-on treatment to metformin. DPP-4 inhibitors were the most commonly prescribed agents among the three novel drug classes, likely because they are relatively less expensive, have better safety profile, are administered orally, and are weight neutral. Sitagliptin was the most preferred DPP-4 inhibitor. The level of evidence on the comparative effectiveness, safety, and cost implications of using novel antidiabetic agents remains low and further studies with long-term follow-ups are needed.

Indexed as

AnimalsBlood GlucoseDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2HumansHypoglycemic AgentsBlood GlucoseHypoglycemic AgentsComparative effectivenessNovel antidiabetic agentsSafetyType 2 diabetes mellitusUsage trends

Identifiers

PMID27076180
OpenAlexW2337930695

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.