Evidence mapPaperPMID 31564026Full record

ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2019

Effect of Liraglutide on Times in Glycaemic Ranges as Assessed by CGM for Type 2 Diabetes Patients Treated With Multiple Daily Insulin Injections.

Sheyda Sofizadeh, Henrik Imberg, Arndís F Ólafsdóttir, Magnus Ekelund, Sofia Dahlqvist, Irl Hirsch, Karin Filipsson, Bo Ahrén, Stefan Sjöberg, Jaako Tuomilehto and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing papers in PubMed
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

15 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Time in Range: How to Measure It, How to Report It, and Its Practical Application in Clinical Decision-Making.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2020
    Article
  15. 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

11 authors at 6 institutions in 5 countries.

Sheyda SofizadehDepartment of Medicine, NU-Hospital Group, Uddevalla, Sweden. sheyda.sofizadeh@vgregion.se.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3701-5065
Henrik ImbergStatistiska Konsultgruppen, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Arndís F ÓlafsdóttirDepartment of Medicine, NU-Hospital Group, Uddevalla, Sweden.
Magnus EkelundNovo Nordisk A/S, Vandtaarnsvej 114, 2860, Søborg, Denmark.
Sofia DahlqvistDepartment of Medicine, NU-Hospital Group, Uddevalla, Sweden.
Irl HirschSchool of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, USA.
Karin FilipssonDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Bo AhrénDepartment of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Stefan SjöbergDepartment of Medicine, Karolinska Institute, Karolinska University Hospital Huddinge, Stockholm, Sweden.
Jaako TuomilehtoDepartment of Public Health Solutions, National Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Marcus LindDepartment of Medicine, NU-Hospital Group, Uddevalla, Sweden.
NU Hospital Group · SELund University · SEChalmers University of Technology · SEKarolinska University Hospital · SEUniversity of Helsinki · FIUniversity of Washington · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionThe effects of the GLP-1 analogue liraglutide on time in hypoglycaemia, time in hyperglycaemia, and time in range for type 2 diabetes patients initially treated with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) were investigated. Variables associated with hypoglycaemia in the current population were also identified.

methodsAnalyses were based on data from a previously performed double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which 124 MDI-treated patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized to liraglutide or placebo. Masked continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was performed at baseline and week 24 in 99 participants.

resultsThe mean time in hypoglycaemia was similar for participants receiving liraglutide and those receiving placebo after 24 weeks of treatment. Mean time in target was greater in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group: 430 versus 244 min/24 h (p < 0.001) and 960 versus 695 min/24 h (p < 0.001) for the two glycaemic ranges considered, 4-7 mmol/l and 4-10 mmol/l, respectively. Mean time in hyperglycaemia was lower in the liraglutide group: 457 versus 723 min/24 h (p = 0.001) and 134 versus 264 min/24 h (p = 0.023) for the two cutoffs considered, > 10 mmol/l and > 14 mmol/l, respectively. Lower mean glucose level, lower C-peptide, and higher glucose variability were associated with an increased risk of hypoglycaemia in both treatment groups. Higher proinsulin level was associated with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia in the liraglutide group.

conclusionFor type 2 diabetes patients initially treated with MDI, introducing liraglutide had a beneficial effect on glucose profiles estimated by masked CGM. Mean glucose level, glycaemic variability, C-peptide, and proinsulin level influenced the risk of hypoglycaemia in this population.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, number (EudraCT nr: 2012-001941-42).

fundingNovo Nordisk funded this study. The Diabetes Research Unit, NU-Hospital Group funded the journal's Rapid Service Fee.

Indexed as

Continuous glucose monitoringHyperglycaemiaHypoglycaemiaLiraglutidePlaceboRandomized clinical trialTime in rangeType 2 diabetes mellitus

Identifiers

PMID31564026
PMCPMC6848584
OpenAlexW2975703062

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.