Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39230795›Full record

ArticleHormones (Athens, Greece)2025

Clinical application of cluster analysis in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

Yazhi Wang, Hui Chen

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Hormones (Athens, Greece), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. 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.

Yazhi WangThe Second School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730000, China.
Hui ChenThe Second School of Clinical Medicine, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou, Gansu, 730000, China. chenhui@lzu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0001-5651-361X

Funding

Cuiying Technology Innovation CY2018-ZD02
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimsEarly prevention and treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is still a huge challenge for patients and clinicians. Recently, a novel cluster-based diabetes classification was proposed which may offer the possibility to solve this problem. In this study, we report our performance of cluster analysis of individuals newly diagnosed with T2DM, our exploration of each subtype's clinical characteristics and medication treatment, and the comparison carried out concerning the risk for diabetes complications and comorbidities among subtypes by adjusting for influencing factors. We hope to promote the further application of cluster analysis in individuals with early-stage T2DM.

methodsIn this study, a k-means cluster algorithm was applied based on five indicators, namely, age, body mass index (BMI), glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), homeostasis model assessment-2 insulin resistance (HOMA2-IR), and homeostasis model assessment-2 β-cell function (HOMA2-β), in order to perform the cluster analysis among 567 newly diagnosed participants with T2DM. The clinical characteristics and medication of each subtype were analyzed. The risk for diabetes complications and comorbidities in each subtype was compared by logistic regression analysis.

resultsThe 567 patients were clustered into four subtypes, as follows: severe insulin-deficient diabetes (SIDD, 24.46%), age-related diabetes (MARD, 30.86%), mild obesity-related diabetes (MOD, 25.57%), and severe insulin-resistant diabetes (SIRD, 20.11%). According to the results of the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and biochemical indices, fasting blood glucose (FBG), 2-hour postprandial blood glucose (2hBG), HbA1c, total cholesterol (TC), low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and triglyceride-glucose index (TyG) were higher in SIDD and SIRD than in MARD and MOD. MOD had the highest fasting C-peptide (FCP), 2-hour postprandial C-peptide (2hCP), fasting insulin (FINS), 2-hour postprandial insulin (2hINS), serum creatinine (SCr), and uric acid (UA), while SIRD had the highest triglycerides (TGs) and TyG-BMI. Albumin transaminase (ALT) and albumin transaminase (AST) were higher in MOD and SIRD. As concerms medications, compared to the other subtypes, SIDD had a lower rate of metformin use (39.1%) and a higher rate of α-glucosidase inhibitor (AGI, 61.7%) and insulin (74.4%) use. SIRD showed the highest frequency of use of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i, 36.0%) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA, 19.3%). Concerning diabetic complications and comorbidities, the prevalence of diabetic kidney disease (DKD), cardiovascular disease (CVD), non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), dyslipidemia, and hypertension differed significantly among subtypes. Employing logistic regression analysis, after adjusting for unmodifiable (sex and age) and modifiable related influences (e.g., BMI, HbA1c, and smoking), it was found that SIRD had the highest risk of developing DKD (odds ratio, OR = 2.001, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.125-3.559) and dyslipidemia (OR = 3.550, 95% CI: 1.534-8.215). MOD was more likely to suffer from NAFLD (OR = 3.301, 95%CI: 1.586-6.870).

conclusionsPatients with newly diagnosed T2DM can be successfully clustered into four subtypes with different clinical characteristics, medication treatment, and risks for diabetes-related complications and comorbidities, the cluster-based diabetes classification possibly being beneficial both for prevention of secondary diabetes and for establishment of a theoretical basis for precision medicine.

Indexed as

Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2AdultAgedBlood GlucoseBody Mass IndexCluster AnalysisFemaleGlycated HemoglobinHumansInsulin ResistanceMaleMiddle AgedBlood GlucoseGlycated Hemoglobinhemoglobin A1c protein, humanClinical applicationCluster analysisComorbiditiesComplicationsMedicationType 2 diabetes

Identifiers

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.