Evidence mapPaperPMID 29893144Full record

Trial reportJournal of diabetes science and technology2018

Reduced Glucose Variability With Glucose-Dependent Versus Glucose-Independent Therapies Despite Similar Glucose Control and Hypoglycemia Rates in a Randomized, Controlled Study of Older Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.

Richard E Pratley, Julio Rosenstock, Simon R Heller, Alan Sinclair, Robert J Heine, Jacek Kiljański, Cynthia S Brusko, Ran Duan, Andreas Festa

Open access · hybridAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of diabetes science and technology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 37% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Richard E Pratley1 Florida Hospital and Sanford Burnham Prebys Translational Research Institute, Orlando, FL, USA.
Julio Rosenstock2 Dallas Diabetes and Endocrine Center at Medical City, Dallas, TX, USA.
Simon R Heller3 University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK.
Alan Sinclair4 Foundation for Diabetes Research in Older People, Diabetes Frail Limited, Worcestershire, UK.
Robert J Heine5 Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Jacek Kiljański6 Eli Lilly & Company, Warsaw, Poland.
Cynthia S Brusko7 Lilly USA, LLC, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Ran Duan7 Lilly USA, LLC, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Andreas Festa8 Eli Lilly & Company, Vienna, Austria.
Eli Lilly (United States) · USDallas Diabetes Research Center · USDiabetes UK · GBTranslational Research Institute for Metabolism and Diabetes · USUniversity of Sheffield · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundFew studies have evaluated continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) not using injectable therapy. CGM is useful for investigating hypoglycemia and glycemic variability, which is associated with complications in T2DM.

methodsA CGM substudy of Individualized treatMent aPproach for oldER patIents in a randomized trial in type 2 diabetes Mellitus (IMPERIUM)) was conducted. Patients were vulnerable (moderately ill and/or frail) older (≥65 years) individuals with suboptimally controlled T2DM. Strategy A comprised glucose-dependent therapies (n = 26) with a nonsulfonylurea oral antihyperglycemic medication (OAM) and a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist as the first injectable. Strategy B comprised non-glucose-dependent therapies (n = 21) with sulfonylurea as the preferred OAM and insulin glargine as the first injectable. Primary endpoints were duration and percentage of time spent with blood glucose (BG) ≤70 mg/dL over 24 hours at week 24.

resultsDuration and percentage of time spent with hypoglycemia at ≤70 mg/dL were similar for Strategy A and Strategy B; glycemic control improved similarly in both arms (LSM change in HbA1c at week 24; A = -1.2%, B = -1.4%). Duration and percentage time spent with euglycemia and hyperglycemia were also similar in both arms. However, Strategy A was associated with lower within-day (21.1 ± 1.2 vs 25.1 ± 1.4, P = .046) and between-day (5.4 ± 1.0 vs 9.1 ± 1.3, P = .038) BG variability (coefficient of variance [LSM ± SE]) at week 24.

conclusionsThis CGM substudy in older patients with T2DM showed lower within- and between-day BG variability with glucose-dependent therapies but similar HbA1c reductions and hypoglycemia duration with glucose-independent strategies.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAge FactorsBlood GlucoseBlood Glucose Self-MonitoringDiabetes Mellitus, Type 2FemaleFrail ElderlyGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor AgonistsGlycated HemoglobinHumansHypoglycemiaHypoglycemic AgentsIncidenceInjections, SubcutaneousInsulin GlargineBlood GlucoseGlucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor AgonistsGlycated HemoglobinHypoglycemic AgentsInsulin GlargineSulfonylurea Compoundscontinuous glucose monitoringglycemic controlglycemic variabilityhypoglycemiaoldertype 2 diabetes

Identifiers

PMID29893144
PMCPMC6232729
OpenAlexW2808638094

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.