Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,065

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 15 of the 15 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Oral Antihyperglycemic Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes: Scientific Review

Inzucchi, Silvio E.·2002·JAMA
DOI 10.1001/jama.287.3.360
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

CONTEXT: Care of patients with type 2 diabetes has been revolutionized throughout the past several years-first, by the realization of the importance of tight glycemic control in forestalling complications, and second, by the availability of several unique classes of oral antidiabetic agents. Deciphering which agent to use in certain clinical situations is a new dilemma facing the primary care physician. OBJECTIVE: To systematically review available data from the literature regarding the efficacy of oral antidiabetic agents, both as monotherapy and in combination. DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE search was performed to identify all English-language reports of unique, randomized controlled clinical trials involving recently available oral agents for type 2 diabetes. Bibliographies were also reviewed to find additional reports not otherwise identified. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Studies (63) were included in the analysis if they had a study period of at least 3 months; if each group contained at least 10 subjects at the study's conclusion; and if hemoglobin A(1c) was reported. When multiple dosages of a drug were tested, the results of the highest approved dosage were used. In placebo-controlled trials, hemoglobin A(1c) data are presented as the difference between the change in treated vs placebo subjects. DATA SYNTHESIS: Five distinct oral drug classes are now available for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Compared with placebo treatment, most of these agents lower hemoglobin A(1c) levels approximately 1% to 2%. Equivalent efficacy is usually demonstrated when different agents are compared with one another in the same study population. When they are used in combination, there are additional glycemic benefits. Long-term vascular risk reduction has been demonstrated only with sulfonylureas and metformin. CONCLUSIONS: With few exceptions, the available oral antidiabetic agents are equally effective at lowering glucose concentrations. Their mechanisms of action are different, however, and as a result they appear to have distinct metabolic effects. These are reflected in their adverse effect profiles and their effect on cardiovascular risk, which may influence drug choice.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1001/jama.287.3.360

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 15 references

Cited by

Metadata

Authors
Inzucchi, S. E.
Venue
JAMA
Publisher
American Medical Association (AMA)
Published
2002-01-16
Volume
287
Issue
3
Pages
360
ISSN
  • 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
  • 0098-7484
DOI
10.1001/jama.287.3.360
OpenAlex
W2069150029
Cited by
1,065
References
15
FWCI
36.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.