ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2022
Using Glycated Albumin and Stimulated C-Peptide to Define Partial Remission in Type 1 Diabetes.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To propose a new definition of partial remission (PR) for patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) of all-ages using insulin dose and glycated albumin (GA), and find the optimal cut-off values for stimulated C-peptide to diagnose PR in different age-groups. Research Design and Methods: Patients with newly diagnosed T1D (n=301) were included. GA/insulin dose was used to diagnose PR, and insulin dose-adjusted glycated albumin (IDAGA) was proposed to facilitate clinical application. The optimal diagnostic levels of IDAGA and stimulated C-peptide were determined in different age-groups (≤ 12y, 12-18y and ≥ 18y). Furthermore, the diagnostic consistency between different PR definitions was studied. Results: GA≤ 23%/insulin dose ≤ 0.5u/kg/day was used to define PR, and IDAGA (GA (%) + 40 * insulin dose(u/kg/day)) ≤ 40 was feasible in all age-groups. Whereas, the optimal diagnostic level showed difference for stimulated C-peptide (265.5, 449.3 and 241.1 pmol/L for the ≤ 12y, 12-18y and ≥ 18y age-group, respectively). About 40% of patients met the PR definition by stimulated C-peptide but not GA/insulin dose or IDAGA, who showed dyslipidemia and higher insulin resistance. Conclusions: A new definition of the PR phase is proposed using GA/insulin dose, and the calculated IDAGA≤ 40 applies to all age-groups. The stimulated C-peptide to diagnose PR is the highest in the 12-18y age-group, which reflects the effect of puberty on metabolism. For patients with insulin resistance, it is not recommended to use stimulated C-peptide alone to diagnose PR.
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.