Skip to content

Study · Not a test of the peptide alone · 2024

6 results

Impact of Insulin Sensitivity and β-Cell Function Over Time on Glycemic Outcomes in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE): Differential Treatment Effects of Dual Therapy.

Utzschneider KM, Younes N, Butera NM, Balasubramanyam A, Bergenstal RM, Barzilay J, DeSouza C, DeFronzo RA, Elasy T, Krakoff J, Kahn SE, Rasouli N, Valencia WM, Sivitz WI

Diabetes care1 Apr 2024Cited by 5 (Europe PMC)

PMID38190619 (opens in a new tab)PMCIDPMC10973903 (opens in a new tab)DOI10.2337/dc23-1059 (opens in a new tab)PepBankPUB-38190619
Source linkPubMedAsk about this study
Jump to 6 results

Summary

The text of this summary is not shown here, because the article license does not allow reuse. Read it at the source (opens in a new tab)

Text rights: Publisher copyright. Results still quote short attributed sentences.

Results from this study6

No result from this study comes from a test of the peptide.

Studies that did not test the peptide alone6

In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. These results are not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

  1. 01HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneRandomized controlled trialOther

    In adults with type 2 diabetes on dual therapy with metformin, higher insulin sensitivity (HOMA2-%S) was associated with greater initial HbA1c lowering at 3 months, but not with the later HbA1c rise.

    In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes on two drugs, higher insulin sensitivity was linked to a larger early HbA1c fall.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    Not applicableHOMA2-%S and initial HbA1c lowering
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Outcome group
    Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Higher HOMA2-%S was associated with greater initial HbA1c lowering (3 months) but not subsequent HbA1c rise.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    GRADE participants were randomized to glimepiride (n = 1,254), liraglutide (n = 1,262), or sitagliptin (n = 1,268) added to baseline metformin and followed for mean ± SD 5.0 ± 1.3 years, with HbA1c assessed quarterly and oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years.

    In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

  2. 02HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneRandomized controlled trialOther

    In adults with type 2 diabetes on dual therapy with metformin, greater C-peptide responses were associated with a greater initial treatment response and a slower later HbA1c rise.

    In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes on two drugs, greater C-peptide responses were linked to a larger early HbA1c fall and slower later rise.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    Not applicableC-peptide responses and HbA1c course
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Outcome group
    Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Greater CP responses were associated with a greater initial treatment response and slower subsequent HbA1c rise.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    GRADE participants were randomized to glimepiride (n = 1,254), liraglutide (n = 1,262), or sitagliptin (n = 1,268) added to baseline metformin and followed for mean ± SD 5.0 ± 1.3 years, with HbA1c assessed quarterly and oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years.

    In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

  3. 03HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneRandomized controlled trialOther

    In adults with type 2 diabetes on dual therapy with metformin, higher HOMA2-%S and C-peptide responses were each associated with lower risk of primary and secondary glycemic failure outcomes.

    In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes on two drugs, higher insulin sensitivity and C-peptide responses were linked to lower glycemic failure risk.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    DecreaseRisk of glycemic failure
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Outcome group
    Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight

    Source sentences

    Summary
    Higher HOMA2-%S and CP responses were each associated with lower risk of primary and secondary outcomes.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    GRADE participants were randomized to glimepiride (n = 1,254), liraglutide (n = 1,262), or sitagliptin (n = 1,268) added to baseline metformin and followed for mean ± SD 5.0 ± 1.3 years, with HbA1c assessed quarterly and oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years.

    In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

  4. 04HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneRandomized controlled trialOther

    In adults with type 2 diabetes, insulin sensitivity and C-peptide responses had greater impact on initial HbA1c reduction in the sitagliptin group than in the glimepiride and liraglutide groups.

    In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes, these markers mattered more for the early HbA1c response with sitagliptin than with glimepiride or liraglutide.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    MixedTreatment differences in associations (initial HbA1c reduction and primary outcome)
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Comparator
    Sitagliptin versus glimepiride and liraglutide
    Outcome group
    Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight

    Source sentences

    Summary
    In the sitagliptin group, HOMA2-%S and CP responses had greater impact on initial HbA1c reduction (test of heterogeneity, P = 0.009 HOMA2-%S, P = 0.018 early CP, P = 0.001 total CP)
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    GRADE participants were randomized to glimepiride (n = 1,254), liraglutide (n = 1,262), or sitagliptin (n = 1,268) added to baseline metformin and followed for mean ± SD 5.0 ± 1.3 years, with HbA1c assessed quarterly and oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years.

    In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

  5. 05HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneRandomized controlled trialOther

    In adults with type 2 diabetes, there were no differential treatment effects on the secondary outcome (HbA1c above 7.5%).

    In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes, the three added drugs did not differ in how these markers related to the secondary glycemic failure outcome.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    No significant changeDifferential treatment effects on secondary outcome
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Outcome group
    Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight

    Source sentences

    Summary
    There were no differential treatment effects on secondary outcome.
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    GRADE participants were randomized to glimepiride (n = 1,254), liraglutide (n = 1,262), or sitagliptin (n = 1,268) added to baseline metformin and followed for mean ± SD 5.0 ± 1.3 years, with HbA1c assessed quarterly and oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years.

    In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

  6. 06HumanNot a test of Liraglutide aloneRandomized controlled trialOther

    In adults with type 2 diabetes, insulin sensitivity and C-peptide responses had a lesser impact on the later HbA1c rise in the sitagliptin group than in the glimepiride and liraglutide groups.

    In plain wordsIn adults with type 2 diabetes, these markers mattered less for the later HbA1c rise with sitagliptin than with glimepiride or liraglutide.

    Peptide
    Liraglutide
    Outcome
    Not applicableTreatment differences in associations with later HbA1c rise
    Study

    n: not reported in source

    Comparator
    Glimepiride and liraglutide groups versus sitagliptin group
    Outcome group
    Glycemic control · Metabolic and weight

    Source sentences

    Summary
    but lesser impact on HbA1c rise (P = 0.175 HOMA2-%S, P = 0.006 early CP, P < 0.001 total CP) in comparisons with the glimepiride and liraglutide groups
    1 context sentence
    Summary · context
    GRADE participants were randomized to glimepiride (n = 1,254), liraglutide (n = 1,262), or sitagliptin (n = 1,268) added to baseline metformin and followed for mean ± SD 5.0 ± 1.3 years, with HbA1c assessed quarterly and oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline, 1, 3, and 5 years.

    In this study, Liraglutide was a lab tool or a carrier, part of a mix, or the subject of a lab method. This result is not evidence about taking Liraglutide.

AI wrote and checked these results. AI can make mistakes, so check important results against the source.

Registered trials1

Trials this study reports on, or that list this study as a reference. Registry data from ClinicalTrials.gov.

1 trial · 1 completed · 1 with posted results · source ClinicalTrials.gov (opens in a new tab)

CompletedPhase 3Results postedNCT01794143

A Comparative Effectiveness Study of Major Glycemia-lowering Medications for Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes

GRADE Study Groupn = 7,850May 2013 to 30 Apr 2021

Type 2 Diabetes · Comparative Effectiveness of Glycemia-lowering Medications

Trial pageClinicalTrials.govUpdated 10 Feb 2026

Version history

PepBank keeps every version of the data on this study. Status changes from Retraction Watch, Europe PMC and Crossref are listed with their source.

  1. Version 2Current

    12 Oct 2026, 11:11 UTC

    Study results updated

  2. Version 1

    9 Oct 2026, 03:05 UTC

    First added · source update from Europe PMC

Subjects

Terms as the source lists them.

PepBank is a research reference. Talk to a doctor before you use any peptide.