Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37438853›Full record

ArticleDiabetology & metabolic syndrome2023

Clinical utility of a novel test for assessing cardiovascular disease risk in type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial.

John W Peabody, David Paculdo, Enrico de Belen, Divya Ganesan, Isabella Cooney, Nelson Trujillo

Registry-linked trialAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05237271 (Establishing Clinical Utility Evidence to Support Coverage and Reimbursement for SomaLogic's Cardiovascular Disease in Type 2 Diabetes Test), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05237271 nacompletednot on this map

Establishing Clinical Utility Evidence to Support Coverage and Reimbursement for SomaLogic's Cardiovascular Disease in Type 2 Diabetes Test: A CPV® Randomized Controlled Trial

TypeinterventionalSponsorQure Healthcare, LLCRan2022 to 2022Enrolled251ConditionsCardiovascular Diseases, Type 2 DiabetesArmsEducational Materials on the Cardiovascular Disease in Type 2 Diabetes (CVD-T2D), Educational Materials on the CVD-T2D and Bundled Metabolic Panel
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
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

6 authors.

John W PeabodyQURE Healthcare, 450 Pacific Ave., Suite 200, San Francisco, CA, 94133, USA. jpeabody@qurehealthcare.com.
David PaculdoQURE Healthcare, 450 Pacific Ave., Suite 200, San Francisco, CA, 94133, USA.
Enrico de BelenQURE Healthcare, 450 Pacific Ave., Suite 200, San Francisco, CA, 94133, USA.
Divya GanesanQURE Healthcare, 450 Pacific Ave., Suite 200, San Francisco, CA, 94133, USA.
Isabella CooneyQURE Healthcare, 450 Pacific Ave., Suite 200, San Francisco, CA, 94133, USA.
Nelson TrujilloSomaLogic Operating Co., Inc., 2945 Wilderness Pl., Boulder, CO, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe risk for and treatment of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is often incorrect and delayed. We wished to determine if a novel test improved physicians' ability to risk stratify, diagnose, and treat patients with T2DM.

methodsIn a 2-phase randomized controlled trial comparing the clinical workup, diagnosis, and management of online, simulated patients with T2DM in a nationwide sample of cardiologists and primary care physicians, participants were randomly assigned to control or one of two intervention groups. Intervention participants had access to standard of care diagnostic tools plus a novel diagnostic CVD risk stratification test.

resultsIn control, there was no change in CV risk stratification of simulated patients between baseline and round 2 (37.1 to 38.3%, p = 0.778). Pre-post analysis showed significant improvements in risk stratification in both Intervention 1 (38.7 to 65.3%) and Intervention 2 (41.9 to 65.8%) (p < 0.01) compared to controls. Both intervention groups significantly increased prescribing SGLT2 inhibitors/GLP1 receptor agonists versus control, + 18.9% for Intervention 1 (p = 0.020) and 1 + 9.4% for Intervention 2 (p = 0.014). Non-pharmacologic treatment improved significantly compared to control (+ 30.0% in Intervention 1 (p < 0.001) and + 22.8% in Intervention 2 (p = 0.001). Finally, monitoring HgbA1C, blood pressure, and follow-up visit frequency improved by + 20.3% (p = 0.004) in Intervention 1 and + 29.8% (p < 0.001) in Intervention 2 compared with control.

conclusionUse of the novel test significantly improved CV risk stratification among T2DM patients. Statistically significant increases treatments were demonstrated, specifically SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP1 receptor antagonists and recommendations of evidence-based non-pharmacologic treatments. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT05237271.

Indexed as

Cardiometabolic diseaseClinical utilityDisease progressionDrug-drug interactionsMedication nonadherencePolypharmacyPrimary care

Identifiers

PMID37438853
PMCPMC10339653

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.