ReviewTherapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism2019
Diabetes: the place of new therapies.
Review in Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Flavonoids' Dual Benefits in Gastrointestinal Cancer and Diabetes: A Potential Treatment on the Horizon?Cancers · 2022Review
- Advances in the study of RNA-binding proteins in diabetic complications.Molecular metabolism · 2022Review
- Metabolites extracted from microorganisms as potential inhibitors of glycosidases (α-glucosidase and α-amylase): A review.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Review
- Trends in HbA1c and Body Mass Index Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes: Evidence from a US Database 2012-2019.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2021Article
- Review
- Sugar-Lowering Drugs for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Metabolic Syndrome-Review of Classical and New Compounds: Part-I.Pharmaceuticals (Basel, Switzerland) · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Until the discovery of insulin in 1921 there were no effective treatments for diabetes mellitus. After the advent of long-acting insulin, the first oral agents, sulfonylureas became available in the mid-1950s, quickly followed (outside of the United States) by metformin. It was then another three decades before newer agents became available, with alpha glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones and meglitinides following in the 1990s. Since the turn of the century, several new classes have also been launched. But how do these agents fit into the management of type 2 diabetes? How does one choose which drug class to use after metformin? This review looks at the agents launched since 2000 and how and when they can be used. It also deals with some of the controversies that have arisen and how decisions have changed as a result, in particular moving away from the use of HbA1c as the driver for decision, but rather the cardiovascular safety of these agents and their use in the prevention of premature cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. Now that some of these agents have shown cardiovascular benefit, will this lead to a change in the treatment paradigm?
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
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.