Evidence Hub

Machine Learning to Identify Predictors of Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes: An Analysis of Target HbA1c Reduction Using Empagliflozin/Linagliptin Data

A. del Parigi, Wenbo Tang, Da-Cheng Liu, Christopher Lee, R. Pratley

Pharmaceutical Medicine, 2019

1,363 participants · 22 citations

Abstract

Outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) could be optimized by identifying which treatments are likely to produce the greatest improvements in glycemic control for each patient. We aimed to identify patient characteristics associated with achieving and maintaining a target glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of ≤ 7% using machine learning methodology to analyze clinical trial data on combination therapy for T2DM. By applying a new machine learning methodology to an existing clinical dataset, the practical application of this approach was evaluated and the potential utility of this new approach to clinical decision making was assessed. Data were pooled from two phase III, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group studies of empagliflozin/linagliptin single-pill combination therapy versus each monotherapy in patients who were treatment-naïve or receiving background metformin. Descriptive analysis was used to assess univariate associations between HbA1c target categories and each baseline characteristic. After the descriptive analysis results, a machine learning analysis was performed (classification tree and random forest methods) to estimate and predict target categories based on patient characteristics at baseline, without a priori selection. In the descriptive analysis, lower mean baseline HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) were both associated with achieving and maintaining the HbA1c target. The machine learning analysis also identified HbA1c and FPG as the strongest…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a randomized trial, done in people. Its evidence level is 2 of 5 (High · randomized trial). Randomized trials of a reasonable size are the strongest single-study design. Reported size: 1,363 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free