Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 449

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A randomized double-blind trial of acarbose in type 2 diabetes shows improved glycemic control over 3 years (U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study 44)

Holman, R R, Cull, C A, Turner, R C·1999·Diabetes Care

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the degree to which alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, with their unique mode of action primarily reducing postprandial hyperglycemia, offer an additional therapeutic approach in the long-term treatment of type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We studied 1,946 patients (63% men) who were previously enrolled in the U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS). The patients were randomized to acarbose (n = 973), titrating to a maximum dose of 100 mg three times per day, or to matching placebo (n = 973). Mean +/- SD age was 59 +/- 9 years, body weight 84 +/- 17 kg, diabetes duration 7.6 +/- 2.9 years, median (interquartile range) HbA1c 7.9% (6.7-9.5), and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) 8.7 mmol/l (6.8-11.1). Fourteen percent of patients were treated with diet alone, 52% with monotherapy, and 34% with combined therapy. Patients were monitored in UKPDS clinics every 4 months for 3 years. The main outcome measures were HbA1c, FPG, body weight, compliance with study medication, incidence of side effects, and frequency of major clinical events. RESULTS: At 3 years, a lower proportion of patients were taking acarbose compared with placebo (39 vs. 58%, P < 0.0001), the main reasons for noncompliance being flatulence (30 vs. 12%, P < 0.0001) and diarrhea (16 vs. 8%, P < 0.05). Analysis by intention to treat showed that patients allocated to acarbose, compared with placebo, had 0.2% significantly lower median HbA1c at 3 years (P < 0.001). In patients remaining on their allocated therapy, the HbA1c difference at 3 years (309 acarbose, 470 placebo) was 0.5% lower median HbA1c (8.1 vs. 8.6%, P < 0.0001). Acarbose appeared to be equally efficacious when given in addition to diet alone; in addition to monotherapy with a sulfonylurea, metformin, or insulin; or in combination with more complex treatment regimens. No significant differences were seen in FPG, body weight, incidence of hypoglycemia, or frequency of major clinical events. CONCLUSIONS: Acarbose significantly improved glycemic control over 3 years in patients with established type 2 diabetes, irrespective of concomitant therapy for diabetes. Careful titration of acarbose is needed in view of the increased noncompliance rate seen secondary to the known side effects.

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 · 10.2337/diacare.22.6.960

Cites

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

Cited by

See all 449

Metadata

Authors
Holman, R. R., Cull, C. A., & Turner, R. C.
Venue
Diabetes Care
Published
1999-06-01
Volume
22
Issue
6
Pages
960-964
ISSN
  • 0149-5992 (ISSN-L)
  • 1935-5548
OpenAlex
W2100076167
Cited by
449
References
0
FWCI
11.28
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A randomized double-blind trial of acarbose in type 2 diabetes shows improved glycemic control over 3 years (U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study 44). https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2337/diacare.22.6.960
The paper
Holman, R. R., Cull, C. A., & Turner, R. C. (1999). A randomized double-blind trial of acarbose in type 2 diabetes shows improved glycemic control over 3 years (U.K. Prospective Diabetes Study 44). Diabetes Care. https://doi.org/10.2337/diacare.22.6.960

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.