Cited by 166Diabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Post-trial monitoring of a randomised controlled trial of intensive glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes extended from 10 years to 24 years (UKPDS 91).

Open access
Adler, Amanda I, Coleman, Ruth L, Leal, Jose, Whiteley, William N, Clarke, Philip, Holman, Rury R·2024·The Lancet

Abstract

Background The 20-year UK Prospective Diabetes Study showed major clinical benefits for people with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes randomly allocated to intensive glycaemic control with sulfonylurea or insulin therapy or metformin therapy, compared with conventional glycaemic control. 10-year post-trial follow-up identified enduring and emerging glycaemic and metformin legacy treatment effects. We aimed to determine whether these effects would wane by extending follow-up for another 14 years. Methods 5102 patients enrolled between 1977 and 1991, of whom 4209 (82·5%) participants were originally randomly allocated to receive either intensive glycaemic control (sulfonylurea or insulin, or if overweight, metformin) or conventional glycaemic control (primarily diet). At the end of the 20-year interventional trial, 3277 surviving participants entered a 10-year post-trial monitoring period, which ran until Sept 30, 2007. Eligible participants for this study were all surviving participants at the end of the 10-year post-trial monitoring period. An extended follow-up of these participants was done by linking them to their routinely collected National Health Service (NHS) data for another 14 years. Clinical outcomes were derived from records of deaths, hospital admissions, outpatient visits, and accident and emergency unit attendances. We examined seven prespecified aggregate clinical outcomes (ie, any diabetes-related endpoint, diabetes-related death, death from any cause, myocardia…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(24)00537-3

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • An observational study with median 17.5 years follow-up on 1489 of 1525 surviving participants reported reductions in all-cause mortality (2.7%-4.9%), myocardial infarction (3.3%-6.2%), and microvascular disease (3.5%) in those previously randomized to receive intensive treatment vs conventional therapy (P < .05 for all comparisons).

    “An observational study that published follow-up data (median of 17.5 years [range, 0–42 years]) on 1489 (97.6%) of the 1525 surviving participants reported reductions in all-cause mortality (2.7%–4.9%), myocardial infarction (3.3%–6.2%), and microvascular disease defined as vitreous hemorrhage, retinal photocoagulation, death due to kidney disease, or kidney failure (3.5%) in those previously”

    From Diagnosis and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in Adults (2025) · cites this paper as [38]

  • Sulfonylureas are inexpensive and have high HbA1C-lowering efficacy.

    “Sulfonylureas are inexpensive and have high HbA1C-lowering efficacy.38,81”

    From Diagnosis and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in Adults (2025) · cites this paper as [38]

  • Metformin is inexpensive and widely available.

    “Metformin is effective and safe, is inexpensive and widely available, and reduces risks of microvascular complications, cardiovascular events, and death (92,94,95).”
  • Metformin is effective and safe.

    “Metformin is effective and safe, is inexpensive and widely available, and reduces risks of microvascular complications, cardiovascular events, and death (92,94,95).”
  • Metformin reduces risk of death.

    “Metformin is effective and safe, is inexpensive and widely available, and reduces risks of microvascular complications, cardiovascular events, and death (92,94,95).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Adler, A. I., Coleman, R. L., Leal, J., Whiteley, W. N., Clarke, P., & Holman, R. R.
Affiliations
  • University of Oxford (GB)
  • British Heart Foundation (GB)
  • Churchill Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Holman, Rury R
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2024-07
Volume
404
Issue
10448
Pages
145-155
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W4397039731
Cited by
166
References
7
Citations by year
2026: 61 · 2025: 81 · 2024: 24
FWCI
54.38
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Edinburgh Research Explorer (University of Edinburgh) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Funders
University of Oxford
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, tight glycemic control, post-trial follow-up, long-term outcomes, sulfonylureas, insulin therapy, diabetes mortality, myocardial infarction, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, microangiopathy, long-term follow-up, hospitalization, accident and emergency attendances
MeSH terms
Glycemic Control, Adult, Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Female, Follow-Up Studies, United Kingdom, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Insulin, Male, Metformin, Middle Aged, Sulfonylurea Compounds, Treatment Outcome

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