ArticlePloS one2025
Association between estimated glucose disposal rate and major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Article in PloS one, 2025. 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.
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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundEstimated glucose disposal rate (eGDR) is associated with risk of adverse outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, whether eGDR affects long-term glycemic management in patients with type 2 diabetes remains unclear. This study aimed to investigate the relationships between eGDR, long-term visit-to-visit HbA1c variability, and adverse outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes.
methodsThis post-hoc analysis of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes study (ACCORD) included 10,129 type 2 diabetes patients with high cardiovascular risk. Participants were divided into tertiles based on eGDR values. HbA1c variability was assessed using the HbA1c Variability Score (HVS). Primary outcome was major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, and death from cardiovascular causes. Weibull accelerated failure-time models and causal mediation analyses were employed to evaluate relationships between variables.
resultsDuring a median follow-up of 4.75 years, compared to T1, T3 showed significantly higher risks of MACEs (HR 1.56, 95% CI: 1.27-1.91) and all-cause mortality (HR 1.81, 95% CI: 1.40-2.32) in fully adjusted models. Restricted cubic spline analysis revealed nonlinear relationships between eGDR and outcomes, with risk declining rapidly as eGDR increased until approximately 5 mg/kg/min, after which the curve flattened. A significant negative correlation was observed between HVS and eGDR (β -2.30; 95% CI: -2.65 to -1.95), following a similar nonlinear pattern. In mediation analysis, HVS explained 37.8% of eGDR's effect on MACEs risk and 21.53% of its effect on all-cause mortality.
conclusionIn type 2 diabetes patients with high cardiovascular risk, lower eGDR was associated with higher risk of MACEs and all-cause mortality, with HbA1c variability playing an important mediating role in this relationship.
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.