Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26470692›Full record

ArticleDiabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders2015

Use of V-Go

Rosemarie Lajara, Dianne A Fetchick, Tracy L Morris, Carla Nikkel

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 13% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Addressing the Burden of Multiple Daily Insulin Injections in Type 2 Diabetes with Insulin Pump Technology: A Narrative Review.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2024
    Review
  3. Article
  4. Evaluation of Clinical Outcomes With the V-Go Wearable Insulin Delivery Device in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2021
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Effectiveness of V-GoDrugs - real world outcomes · 2020
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Key Features of Insulin Delivery Devices for Type 2 Diabetes: Type 2.0 Booth Survey.Clinical diabetes : a publication of the American Diabetes Association · 2020
    Article
  10. Observational
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. The Clinical and Economic Impact of the V-GoDrugs - real world outcomes · 2016
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Rosemarie LajaraDiabetes America, Plano, TX, USA.
Dianne A FetchickDiabetes America, San Antonio, TX, USA.
Tracy L MorrisDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Central Oklahoma, Edmond, OK, USA.
Carla NikkelValeritas Inc., Bridgewater, NJ, USA. cnikkel@valeritas.com.
University of Central Oklahoma · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionTight glycemic control and timely treatment can improve outcomes in patients with diabetes yet many remain sub-optimally controlled. The objective of the current study was to evaluate the effect of switching patients with sub-optimally controlled diabetes to the V-Go

methodsA retrospective analysis of electronic medical records was conducted to assess patients with sub-optimal glycemic control defined as a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) >7%, switched to V-Go. Blood glucose control defined as change from baseline in HbA1c, prescribed insulin doses, body weight, concomitant anti-hyperglycemic agents, and reported hypoglycemia were collected prior to switching to V-Go and during V-Go use.

resultsTwo-hundred and four patients were evaluated during the study period. Overall, there was a significant decrease in HbA1c after switching to V-Go at the 14- and 27-week follow-up visits. The least-squares mean (LSM) change in HbA1c (95% confidence interval) from baseline to 14 weeks was -1.53% (-1.69% to -1.37%; P < 0.001), and from baseline to 27 weeks was -1.79% (-1.97% to -1.61%; P < 0.001). Significant reductions in mean HbA1c were achieved at both visits in all patient subsets: Patients with type 2 and type 1/latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA); patients using insulin at baseline and patients naïve to insulin at baseline. Patients administering insulin at baseline required significantly less insulin on V-Go (86-99 LSM units/day at baseline to 58 LSM units/day at 27 weeks; P < 0.001). Across all patients, reported hypoglycemic events were no more frequent on V-Go than on previous therapy.

conclusionV-Go is safe and effective in patients with sub-optimally controlled diabetes requiring insulin therapy. Glycemic control improved significantly, less insulin was required, and hypoglycemic events were similar after patients switched to insulin delivery by V-Go.

fundingValeritas, Inc.

Indexed as

Basal-bolusDiabetesHyperglycemiaInsulinIntensifiedMealtimePrandialV-Go®

Identifiers

PMID26470692
PMCPMC4674471
OpenAlexW2166190536

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.