Trial reportArteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology2010
Pioglitazone versus glimepiride on coronary artery calcium progression in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a secondary end point of the CHICAGO study.
Trial report in Arteriosclerosis, thrombosis, and vascular biology, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions to Attenuate Cardiovascular Calcification Progression: A Systematic Review of Randomized Clinical Trials.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2023Pooled it
- Rosiglitazone improves insulin resistance but does not improve exercise capacity in individuals with impaired glucose tolerance: A randomized clinical study.Journal of investigative medicine : the official publication of the American Federation for Clinical Research · 2024Trial
- BARI 2D: A Reanalysis Focusing on Cardiovascular Events.Mayo Clinic proceedings · 2019Trial
- Review
- Diabetes and calcific aortic valve disease: implications of glucose-lowering medication as potential therapy.Frontiers in pharmacology · 2025Review
- PPARPPAR research · 2017Review
- PPAR-γ as a therapeutic target in cardiovascular disease: evidence and uncertainty.Journal of lipid research · 2012Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo compare coronary artery calcium (CAC) progression between 2 treatment groups, pioglitazone versus glimepiride. METHODS AND
resultsThe CHICAGO (Carotid Intima-Media Thickness in Atherosclerosis Using Pioglitazone) study demonstrated that pioglitazone significantly decreased carotid intima-media thickness progression compared with glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The CAC level was determined at baseline and at the end of 72 weeks of treatment in the pioglitazone (n=146) and glimepiride (n=153) treatment groups using electron beam computed tomography. There was no difference in CAC progression between the treatment groups. By using backward and forward selection models, age, race/ethnicity, and baseline apolipoprotein B level predicted CAC progression. There was no relationship between carotid intima-media thickness and CAC progression during the study.
conclusionsThere was no difference in CAC progression in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with pioglitazone or glimepiride. Age, race/ethnicity, and baseline apolipoprotein B level predicted CAC progression in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.