ArticleBMJ open2025
Association between glycaemic status and the risk of acromegaly: a nationwide population-based cohort study.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAlthough evidence suggests that the overall prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) was already higher in the acromegaly group than in the general population several years before diagnosis, the effect of glycaemic status on the risk of developing acromegaly remains unclear.
designRetrospective cohort study.
settingData were obtained from the National Health Insurance Services in Korea. Baseline glycaemic status was defined based on fasting plasma glucose levels and prescription records, and it was classified into three categories: normal fasting glucose (NFG), impaired fasting glucose (IFG) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) or five categories: NFG, IFG, new-onset T2DM, well-controlled T2DM and poorly controlled T2DM.
participantsA total of 9 707 487 adults without acromegaly participated in the national health screening programme in 2009 and were followed up until 2019. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The main outcome of interest was the diagnosis of incident acromegaly.
resultsOver a median follow-up period of 9.2 years, 434 people (4.5 cases per 100 000 people) developed acromegaly at least 1 year after enrolment. Participants with IFG and T2DM exhibited an increased risk of acromegaly, with hazard ratios (HR) of 2.27 (95% CI 1.84 to 2.80) and 2.45 (95% CI 1.78 to 3.39), respectively, compared with those with NFG. When participants were categorised into five glycaemic status groups, an increased risk of acromegaly was observed in those with new-onset T2DM (HR 2.18, 95% CI 1.38 to 3.43) and well-controlled T2DM (HR 2.29, 95% CI 1.28 to 4.09), similar to individuals with IFG, with the highest risk found in individuals with poorly controlled T2DM (HR 3.07, 95% CI 1.88 to 5.01). These associations are persistent across various subgroups, regardless of age, sex, lifestyle factors and the presence of comorbidities.
conclusionsThe results of this study supported that alterations in glucose metabolism, including IFG and T2DM, are associated with an increased risk of acromegaly.
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.