Type 2 DiabetesNCT02987348
Clinical Outcomes of Exenatide Versus Basal Insulin
An observational study of Type 2 Diabetes, run by AstraZeneca at 1 site in United Kingdom.
Trial summary
This is a retrospective cohort study based on Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) database analysis to compare therapy effectiveness, and cost between exenatide and basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. Read more about this study
- Who is it for?
- Any age
- Conditions the study is for
- Type 2 Diabetes
- What is being tested?
- exenatide once weekly, exenatide twice daily and basal insulin
- How many people
- 18,000 participants
- Where
- 1 siteUnited Kingdom
- Study dates
- 30 Jun 2015to 30 Jun 2015
- Phase
- Observational
- Are there results?
- None posted in the registry
Key requirements
Who can take part, as listed by the sponsor. Only the study team can confirm whether you are eligible, so take this list to your doctor.
- Ages Any age
- All sexes
- No healthy volunteers
- Child, Adult, Older adult
Study population: This is a non-interventional study based on secondary data analysis. Patients received treatment under their standard care, no intervention was given by the study investigator. Patients will be identified and included in the study if they were defined by CPRD as being of acceptable research quality and classified as having type 2 diabetes who initiated exenatide or basal insulin as monotherapy or in combination with one or more other oral glucose-lowering therapies between January 2009 and December 2014. Exenatide once weekly (Bydureon) and exenatide twice daily (Byetta) are both investigated, and compared with matched basal insulin cohort. Patients will be excluded if they had received prior injectable diabetes therapy and had less than 90 days continuous exposure to the study drugs.
Who may be able to join
- Type 2 diabetic patients who initiated therapy with exenatide or basal insulin between 2009 and 2014.
Who cannot join
- prior injectable diabetes therapy
- less than 365 days between the latter of the patient's CPRD registration date/practice up-to-standard date and study index date.
- less than 90 days continuous exposure to Exenatide or basal insulin
Trial locations and contacts
1 site in 1 country.
About this study
Official title: Evaluation of the Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated With Exenatide Versus Basal Insulin in People With Type 2 Diabetes
This is a retrospective cohort study based on Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) database analysis to compare therapy effectiveness, and cost between exenatide and basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a chronic condition characterized by elevated blood sugar levels (hyperglycaemia) that can result in an increased risk of a variety of conditions including heart disease, strokes, kidney failure, blindness and amputation. Whilst initially patients may control their blood sugar by lifestyle modification (diet and exercise), ultimately most will require therapeutic intervention with regimens that increase in complexity as T2DM progresses. Exenatide is a relatively recent anti-diabetic drug which is known to lead to weight loss as well as improved blood glucose control. It has also been associated with reduced heart attacks and strokes. In this study CPRD database will be used to compare outcomes for patients prescribed exenatide compared with those prescribed insulin; a more established treatment for T2DM. In particular changes from baseline in blood sugar control and weight will be considered as the primary outcomes. As the choice to treat with exenatide or insulin will be related to patient characteristics which may in themselves be associated with the outcomes of the study we aim to match study patients on some of these key variables and adjust for others in our analysis.
Read the detailed description
Objectives of the study To compare changes in HbA1c and weight from baseline in patients initiated exenatide based-therapy regimen with those initiated insulin-based therapy regimen among type 2 diabetes patients who were injectable naïve in primary care in UK. Health care utilization will be calculated for each of the treatment cohorts, and compared.
Data source Patients will be selected from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), a longitudinal, anonymized research database derived from nearly 700 primary-care practices in the UK. These practices are considered representative of the UK as a whole. The primary-care dataset (CPRD GOLD) comprises data on demographics, diagnoses, hospital referrals, prescriptions emanating in primary care, and other aspects of patient care. Approximately 60% of practices participate in a linkage scheme, by which their patient records are linked to other data sources, including the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) dataset which provides data on all inpatient and outpatient contacts occurring within National Health Service hospitals in England, and the Office for National Statistics (ONS) mortality dataset. Diagnostic information in the CPRD primary-care dataset is recorded using the Read code classification a UK primary-care practice standard. HES inpatient data are recorded using the International Classification of Disease codes, 10th revision (ICD-10); ONS mortality data are recorded using the ICD-10 and ICD-9 classifications.
Patient identification and Method
Patients defined by CPRD as being of acceptable research quality will be classified as having type 2 diabetes if they had a Read code indicative of diabetes and at least one of the following selection criteria applies:
- more than one diagnostic record exclusively for type 2 diabetes,
- prescriptions for two or more different classes of non-insulin glucose-lowering therapy,
- a diagnostic code indicative of type 2 diabetes (regardless of conflicting diagnoses of type 1 or nonspecific diabetes) plus a prescription for a non-insulin glucose lowering therapy.
Two groups of cases will be defined as patients receiving exenatide as monotherapy or in combination with one or more other oral glucose-lowering therapies based on therapy codes recorded within CPRD. The groups will be:
- exenatide once weekly formulation (Bydureon),
- exenatide twice daily formulation (Byetta). Patients will be excluded if they had received
- prior injectable diabetes therapy 2. less than 90 days continuous exposure to the exenatide therapy Control patients will be selected from the pool of type 2 diabetes patients who had a prescription for basal insulin as monotherapy or in combination with one or more other oral glucose-lowering therapies. The same exclusion criteria as that applied to cases was applied, that is
- prior injectable diabetes therapy
- less than 90 days continuous exposure to basal insulin
Matching will be performed by direct matching and by propensity score matching at a ratio of 1:1 based on the following criteria:
- age (±5 years)
- gender,
- year of index exposure (±1 year),
- diabetes duration (±2 years),
- BMI (±3 kg/),
- HbA1c [±1% (±11 mmol/mol)
- Concurrent glucose-lowering medication.
Index date is the initiation of the study drugs between January 2009 and December 2014.
Primary care and secondary contacts will be ascertained from the CPRD GOLD and HES databases respectively. Admissions will be described by number, length of stay and cost. Healthcare resource groups (HRGs) will be assigned to each patient spell and processed using HRG 4 grouper software (National Casemix Office, Winchester, UK). The allocated HRG will then linked to the 2014 National Tariff adjusted for nature of the admission (elective admissions versus emergency) and excess length of stay. Primary care costs were derived from the Units costs of Health and Social Care 2014 Baseline characteristics of patients initiated on either Bydureon/Byetta and basal insulin will be presented for all patients and for those included in the direct matched and propensity score matched analyses. Differences between characteristics will be tested using the t-test for continuous variables and Pearson chi-square test for categorical variables.
Outcomes All patients received standard care, no interventions were given by the study investigator.
The primary outcome will be HbA1c and weight change. Baseline measures will be defined as any measurement between -180 days and baseline. Change will be measured from baseline to 6 months and 12 - 24 months (± 90 days) for those patients remaining on their index regimen.
HbA1c change from baseline at 6 months and 12-24 months will be calculated and differences between treatment groups compared. The proportion of patients for whom HbA1c falls below 7.0% will also be compared.
Weight change from baseline at 6 months and 12-24 months will be calculated and differences between treatment groups compared. Differences will considered as both an absolute and relative change from baseline.
Two composite end points will be considered based on the proportion of patients:
- reaching a target of HbA1c<=7.0%% with weight reduction
- reaching a target of HbA1c<=7.0%% with weight reduction ≥5% The proportion of patients reaching these endpoints were compared by chi-square test. Analyses will be performed for all patients and those matched directly and matched by propensity score.
Secondary outcomes - Health service utilisation Rates and costs of health service contacts will be calculated and compared between treatment groups using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Follow up will be defined as time from index date to last prescription date + 90 days.
- Conditions
- Type 2 Diabetes
- Being tested
- exenatide once weekly, exenatide twice daily, basal insulin
- Keywords
- type 2 diabetes
- Medical subject headings
- Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2
What participants receive
What participants receive. In a randomised study each person is assigned to one group by chance.
exenatide once weeklyDrug
Also called long_acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist
patients received exenatide once weekly treatment under their standard care, no intervention was given by the study investigator
exenatide twice dailyDrug
Also called short-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist
patients with exenatide twice daily treatment under their standard care, no intervention was given by the study investigator.
basal insulinDrug
Also called long-acting insulins
patients with basal insulin treatment under their standard care, no intervention was given by the study investigator
| Study group | Role | What they receive |
|---|---|---|
| exenatide once weekly | type 2 diabetes patients who were first prescribed with exenatide once weekly in the index period identified from CPRD database of UK primary care Receives: Drug: exenatide once weekly | |
| basal insulin_1 | type 2 diabetes patients who were first prescribed with basal insulin in the index period and matched with exenatide once weekly group identified from CPRD database of UK primary care Receives: Drug: basal insulin | |
| exenatide twice daily | type 2 diabetes patients who were first prescribed with exenatide twice daily in the index period identified from CPRD database of UK primary care Receives: Drug: exenatide twice daily | |
| basal insulin_2 | type 2 diabetes patients who were first prescribed with basal insulin in the index period and matched with exenatide twice daily group identified from CPRD database of UK primary care Receives: Drug: basal insulin |
What is being measured
The primary outcome is the main question the study is designed to answer.
Changes from baseline in HbA1c (%)
Changes in HbA1c at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months after initiation of the treatment with exenatide and basal insulin will be calculated and compared.
Measured: 6, 12 and 24 months
Changes from baseline in weight (kg)
Changes in weight at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months after initiation of the treatment with exenatide and basal insulin will be calculated and compared.
Measured: 6, 12 and 24 months
Changes from baseline in composite outcomes of HbA1c<=7.0% and weight reduction
Changes in composite outcome of HbA1c<=7.0% and any weight reduction or HbA1c<=7.0% and weight reduction>=5% at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months after initiation of the treatment with exenatide and basal insulin will be calculated and compared.
Measured: 6, 12 and 24 months
Secondary outcomes (1)
Health care utilization
Costs of health service contacts after initiation of therapy with exenatide and basal insulin will be calculated and compared using the Mann-Whitney U-test.
Measured: 12 months
Timeline
From the start of the study to its completion; the mark is today. Estimated dates are the sponsor’s plan.
- First posted8 Dec 2016 (estimated)
- Study start30 Jun 2015
- Primary completion30 Jun 2015
- Study completion30 Jun 2015
Resources
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govThe registry entry this page is built from, with its full change history.
- Publications (1)Papers the sponsor has linked to this study.
- Other trials for Type 2 DiabetesStudies of the same condition, open and under way.
- More trials run by AstraZenecaThe sponsor's other registered studies.
- What the trial phases meanHow a treatment moves from first tests in people to approval.
More details
For doctors and researchers: how the study is designed, who runs it, and its registry IDs.
Study design
- Study type
- Observational
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Enrolment
- 18,000 participants (actual)
Sponsor and investigators
- Lead sponsor
- AstraZeneca
- Sponsor type
- Industry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Responsible party
- Sponsor
- Investigators
- Craig Currie, Ph.D, Principal investigator, Pharmatelligence, UK
IDs, dates and publications
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02987348
- Sponsor's protocol ID
- D5551R00010
- Status last verified
- Mar 2017
- First submitted
- 24 Nov 2016
- Last updated
- 29 Mar 2017
- Results posted
- No
- Data monitoring committee
- Yes
Publications
Holden SE, Morgan CL, Qiao Q, Jenkins-Jones S, Berni ER, Currie CJ. Healthcare resource utilization and related financial costs associated with glucose lowering with either exenatide or basal insulin: A retrospective cohort study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017 Aug;19(8):1097-1105. doi: 10.1111/dom.12916. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
PubMed 28218819
Study at a glance
From the registry record, last updated by the sponsor on 29 Mar 2017. Recruitment status is as the sponsor reported it: confirm with the study team.
- Official title
- Evaluation of the Clinical and Economic Outcomes Associated With Exenatide Versus Basal Insulin in People With Type 2 Diabetes
- ClinicalTrials.gov ID
- NCT02987348
- Acronym / sponsor ID
- D5551R00010
- Conditions
- Type 2 Diabetes
- Keywords
- type 2 diabetes
- Study type
- Observational
- Recruitment status
- Completed
- Enrolment
- 18,000 participants (actual)
- Lead sponsor
- AstraZenecaIndustry (pharma, biotech, devices)
- Study start
- 30 Jun 2015 (actual)
- Primary completion
- 30 Jun 2015 (actual)
- Study completion
- 30 Jun 2015 (actual)
- First posted
- 8 Dec 2016 (estimated)
- Results
- Not posted in the source record
Clinical summary
The research question as the sponsor registered it. This describes what the study plans to test, not what it found.
This is a retrospective cohort study based on Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) database analysis to compare therapy effectiveness, and cost between exenatide and basal insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a chronic condition characterized by elevated blood sugar levels (hyperglycaemia) that can result in an increased risk of a variety of conditions including heart disease, strokes, kidney failure, blindness and amputation. Whilst initially patients may control their blood sugar by lifestyle modification (diet and exercise), ultimately most will require therapeutic intervention with regimens that increase in complexity as T2DM progresses. Exenatide is a relatively recent anti-diabetic drug which is known to lead to weight loss as well as improved blood glucose control. It has also been associated with reduced heart attacks and strokes. In this study CPRD database will be used to compare outcomes for patients prescribed exenatide compared with those prescribed insulin; a more established treatment for T2DM. In particular changes from baseline in blood sugar control and weight will be considered as the primary outcomes. As the choice to treat with exenatide or insulin will be related to patient characteristics which may in themselves be associated with the outcomes of the study we aim to match study patients on some of these key variables and adjust for others in our analysis.
Detailed description
Objectives of the study To compare changes in HbA1c and weight from baseline in patients initiated exenatide based-therapy regimen with those initiated insulin-based therapy regimen among type 2 diabetes patients who were injectable naïve in primary care in UK. Health care utilization will be calculated for each of the treatment cohorts, and compared.
Data source Patients will be selected from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD), a longitudinal, anonymized research database derived from nearly 700 primary-care practices in the UK. These practices are considered representative of the UK as a whole. The primary-care dataset (CPRD GOLD) comprises data on demographics, diagnoses, hospital referrals, prescriptions emanating in primary care, and other aspects of patient care. Approximately 60% of practices participate in a linkage scheme, by which their patient records are linked to other data sources, including the Hospital Episode Statistics (HES) dataset which provides data on all inpatient and outpatient contacts occurring within National Health Service hospitals in England, and the Office for National Statistics (ONS) mortality dataset. Diagnostic information in the CPRD primary-care dataset is recorded using the Read code classification a UK primary-care practice standard. HES inpatient data are recorded using the International Classification of Disease codes, 10th revision (ICD-10); ONS mortality data are recorded using the ICD-10 and ICD-9 classifications.
Patient identification and Method
Patients defined by CPRD as being of acceptable research quality will be classified as having type 2 diabetes if they had a Read code indicative of diabetes and at least one of the following selection criteria applies:
- more than one diagnostic record exclusively for type 2 diabetes,
- prescriptions for two or more different classes of non-insulin glucose-lowering therapy,
- a diagnostic code indicative of type 2 diabetes (regardless of conflicting diagnoses of type 1 or nonspecific diabetes) plus a prescription for a non-insulin glucose lowering therapy.
Two groups of cases will be defined as patients receiving exenatide as monotherapy or in combination with one or more other oral glucose-lowering therapies based on therapy codes recorded within CPRD. The groups will be:
- exenatide once weekly formulation (Bydureon),
- exenatide twice daily formulation (Byetta). Patients will be excluded if they had received
- prior injectable diabetes therapy 2. less than 90 days continuous exposure to the exenatide therapy Control patients will be selected from the pool of type 2 diabetes patients who had a prescription for basal insulin as monotherapy or in combination with one or more other oral glucose-lowering therapies. The same exclusion criteria as that applied to cases was applied, that is
- prior injectable diabetes therapy
- less than 90 days continuous exposure to basal insulin
Matching will be performed by direct matching and by propensity score matching at a ratio of 1:1 based on the following criteria:
- age (±5 years)
- gender,
- year of index exposure (±1 year),
- diabetes duration (±2 years),
- BMI (±3 kg/),
- HbA1c [±1% (±11 mmol/mol)
- Concurrent glucose-lowering medication.
Index date is the initiation of the study drugs between January 2009 and December 2014.
Primary care and secondary contacts will be ascertained from the CPRD GOLD and HES databases respectively. Admissions will be described by number, length of stay and cost. Healthcare resource groups (HRGs) will be assigned to each patient spell and processed using HRG 4 grouper software (National Casemix Office, Winchester, UK). The allocated HRG will then linked to the 2014 National Tariff adjusted for nature of the admission (elective admissions versus emergency) and excess length of stay. Primary care costs were derived from the Units costs of Health and Social Care 2014 Baseline characteristics of patients initiated on either Bydureon/Byetta and basal insulin will be presented for all patients and for those included in the direct matched and propensity score matched analyses. Differences between characteristics will be tested using the t-test for continuous variables and Pearson chi-square test for categorical variables.
Outcomes All patients received standard care, no interventions were given by the study investigator.
The primary outcome will be HbA1c and weight change. Baseline measures will be defined as any measurement between -180 days and baseline. Change will be measured from baseline to 6 months and 12 - 24 months (± 90 days) for those patients remaining on their index regimen.
HbA1c change from baseline at 6 months and 12-24 months will be calculated and differences between treatment groups compared. The proportion of patients for whom HbA1c falls below 7.0% will also be compared.
Weight change from baseline at 6 months and 12-24 months will be calculated and differences between treatment groups compared. Differences will considered as both an absolute and relative change from baseline.
Two composite end points will be considered based on the proportion of patients:
- reaching a target of HbA1c<=7.0%% with weight reduction
- reaching a target of HbA1c<=7.0%% with weight reduction ≥5% The proportion of patients reaching these endpoints were compared by chi-square test. Analyses will be performed for all patients and those matched directly and matched by propensity score.
Secondary outcomes - Health service utilisation Rates and costs of health service contacts will be calculated and compared between treatment groups using the Mann-Whitney U-test. Follow up will be defined as time from index date to last prescription date + 90 days.
Study design
- Observational model
- Cohort
- Time perspective
- Retrospective
- Number of arms
- 4
| Arm | Type | Receives |
|---|---|---|
| exenatide once weekly | – | Drug: exenatide once weeklytype 2 diabetes patients who were first prescribed with exenatide once weekly in the index period identified from CPRD database of UK primary care |
| basal insulin_1 | – | Drug: basal insulintype 2 diabetes patients who were first prescribed with basal insulin in the index period and matched with exenatide once weekly group identified from CPRD database of UK primary care |
| exenatide twice daily | – | Drug: exenatide twice dailytype 2 diabetes patients who were first prescribed with exenatide twice daily in the index period identified from CPRD database of UK primary care |
| basal insulin_2 | – | Drug: basal insulintype 2 diabetes patients who were first prescribed with basal insulin in the index period and matched with exenatide twice daily group identified from CPRD database of UK primary care |
Who may qualify
- Sex
- All
- Healthy volunteers
- Not accepted
- Age groups
- Child, Adult, Older adult
- Study population
- This is a non-interventional study based on secondary data analysis. Patients received treatment under their standard care, no intervention was given by the study investigator. Patients will be identified and included in the study if they were defined by CPRD as being of acceptable research quality and classified as having type 2 diabetes who initiated exenatide or basal insulin as monotherapy or in combination with one or more other oral glucose-lowering therapies between January 2009 and December 2014. Exenatide once weekly (Bydureon) and exenatide twice daily (Byetta) are both investigated, and compared with matched basal insulin cohort. Patients will be excluded if they had received prior injectable diabetes therapy and had less than 90 days continuous exposure to the study drugs.
Key inclusion criteria (1 listed)
- Type 2 diabetic patients who initiated therapy with exenatide or basal insulin between 2009 and 2014.
Key exclusion criteria (3 listed)
- prior injectable diabetes therapy
- less than 365 days between the latter of the patient's CPRD registration date/practice up-to-standard date and study index date.
- less than 90 days continuous exposure to Exenatide or basal insulin
Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening; this overview does not establish that a patient qualifies. Full inclusion and exclusion criteria.
Interventions
| Intervention | Type | Arms |
|---|---|---|
| exenatide once weeklyAlso: long_acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonistpatients received exenatide once weekly treatment under their standard care, no intervention was given by the study investigator | Drug | exenatide once weekly |
| exenatide twice dailyAlso: short-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonistpatients with exenatide twice daily treatment under their standard care, no intervention was given by the study investigator. | Drug | exenatide twice daily |
| basal insulinAlso: long-acting insulinspatients with basal insulin treatment under their standard care, no intervention was given by the study investigator | Drug | basal insulin_1, basal insulin_2 |
Primary outcome
Changes from baseline in HbA1c (%)
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months
Changes in HbA1c at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months after initiation of the treatment with exenatide and basal insulin will be calculated and compared.
Changes from baseline in weight (kg)
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months
Changes in weight at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months after initiation of the treatment with exenatide and basal insulin will be calculated and compared.
Changes from baseline in composite outcomes of HbA1c<=7.0% and weight reduction
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months
Changes in composite outcome of HbA1c<=7.0% and any weight reduction or HbA1c<=7.0% and weight reduction>=5% at 6 months, 12 months and 24 months after initiation of the treatment with exenatide and basal insulin will be calculated and compared.
1 secondary outcome
Health care utilization
Time frame: 12 months
Results and safety
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
Research links
- Official record on ClinicalTrials.govLast updated by the sponsor 29 Mar 2017.
- Background: PubMed 28218819Holden SE, Morgan CL, Qiao Q, Jenkins-Jones S, Berni ER, Currie CJ. Healthcare resource utilization and related financial costs associated with glucose lowering with either exenatide or basal insulin: A retrospective cohort study. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2017 Aug;19(8):1097-1105. doi: 10.1111/dom.12916. Epub 2017 Mar 31.
- CSR SynopsisLink provided by the sponsor.
Related trials for Type 2 Diabetes
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly SHR-3167 Compared With Once-Daily Insulin Glargine in Adults With Insulin-Naive Type 2 Diabetes
Type 2 Diabetes
Active, not recruiting
Digital Reinforcement of Motivational Interviewing Micro-Skills Among Primary Care Healthcare Professionals
Hypertension (Without Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus)
Recruiting
Investigating Vascular Properties of HEMI and SPG Signals in Individuals With or at Risk for Chronic Kidney Disease
Chronic Kidney Disease, Hypertension (HTN)
Not yet recruitingPhase 3
A Study to Evaluate the Effectiveness and Safety of the Drug AZD6234 for Managing Weight in Adults Who Are Obese or Overweight. These Participants May or May Not Also Have Type 2 Diabetes
Obesity, Overweight
Not yet recruiting
Impact of Endoscopic Sleeve Gastroplasty (ESG) in Obese Adults With Type 2 Diabetes (T2D)
Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2D), Obesity (BMI>30)
Referral and contact
AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals. Contact the study team or a site listed below; they decide who can take part. This study is not recruiting at the moment.
Craig Currie, Ph.D principal investigator
Pharmatelligence, UK
1 site in 1 country: see every site and its status.
Questions about this trial
What is this clinical trial studying?
An observational study of Type 2 Diabetes, run by AstraZeneca at 1 site in United Kingdom.
The full registered description is in the About this study section and the official record.
Who may be eligible to take part?
The sponsor lists 1 inclusion and 3 exclusion criteria. Eligibility is decided by the study team after screening, so read the full criteria and contact a listed site.
Is this clinical trial currently recruiting?
The record says: finished, as of the sponsor's last update on 29 Mar 2017. Status can change between updates, so confirm with the study contact before making plans.
Where is the study taking place?
The record lists 1 site in United Kingdom. Whether a site is taking part right now should be confirmed with that site. See every site.
What are the possible benefits and risks?
They depend on the study and the treatment, and no study can promise a benefit. The study team explains the known risks during informed consent, before anyone joins; the record itself does not list them.
Are results available for this study?
The study is completed, but results are not available in the source record. That does not mean the treatment did or did not work.
How can a doctor refer a patient or contact the research team?
The record lists no contact. The official record names the sponsor, who can be asked directly. AzTrials does not enrol participants or take referrals.
What does the primary outcome measure?
Changes from baseline in HbA1c (%) (time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months). The study lists 3 primary outcomes in all. It is what the study was designed to measure, not a finding.
Where can I read the original study information?
On the ClinicalTrials.gov record for NCT02987348, which also lists 1 linked publication.
Does a listing mean the treatment is approved or proven to work?
No. A listing means the study is registered. It does not show that the treatment is safe, works, or is approved by a regulator.
How often is this information updated?
AzTrials copies changed records from ClinicalTrials.gov every night and reloads the whole registry every week. The sponsor last updated this record on 29 Mar 2017.