ArticleDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2026
Estimating the risk of cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes: Validation of the UKPDS outcomes model using TECOS and EXSCEL data.
Article in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Estimating the risk of cardiovascular outcomes and all-cause mortality in individuals with type 2 diabetes: Validation of the UKPDS outcomes model using TECOS and EXSCEL data.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsTo evaluate United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model version 2 (UKPDS-OM2) cardiovascular risk estimates for people with type 2 diabetes using TECOS and EXSCEL data. MATERIALS AND
methodsWe compared model-simulated and TECOS and EXSCEL observed event rates for the composite outcome of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI) or stroke, each component, and all-cause mortality. Risk factors analysed were age, sex, race/ethnicity, height, diabetes duration, atrial fibrillation, albuminuria, and baseline plus annual measures of smoking, HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, weight, systolic blood pressure, HbA
resultsMedian follow-up was 3.0 and 3.2 years for the 14 671 TECOS and 14 752 EXSCEL participants, respectively. The primary outcome occurred in TECOS for 839 (11.4%) and 851 (11.6%) sitagliptin and placebo group participants, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 0.98, 95%CI 0.89-1.08), compared with UKPDS-OM2 simulated events of 776 (10.6%) and 778 (10.6%), respectively (relative risk 1.00). The primary outcome occurred in EXSCEL for 839 (11.4%) and 905 (12.2%) once-weekly exenatide and placebo group participants, respectively (HR 0.92, 95%CI 0.84-1.01), compared with UKPDS-OM2-simulated events of 579 (7.9%) and 593 (8.0%), respectively (relative risk 0.98).
conclusionsUKPDS-OM2 accurately simulated relative risks between randomized groups in both trials. The proportion of participants with the primary outcome was accurately estimated in both TECOS arms but underestimated by around one-third in both EXSCEL arms.
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.