Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 83 out of 100. Drug development

Topic: Drug trials: efficacy and safety

Objective Type 2 diabetes is associated with cognitive dysfunction and an increased dementia risk, particularly in individuals with concomitant cardiovascular and/or kidney disease. Incretin therapies may modulate this risk via glycemic and nonglycemic pathways. We explored if the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor linagliptin could prevent cognitive decline in people with type 2 diabetes with cardiorenal disease. Research design and methods The CArdiovascular and Renal Microvascular outcomE study with LINAgliptin (CARMELINA)-COG substudy was an integral part of CARMELINA (NCT01897532) that randomized participants with cardiorenal disease to linagliptin 5 mg or placebo once daily (1:1), in addition to standard of care. The primary cognitive outcome was the occurrence of accelerated cognitive decline at the end of treatment, defined as a regression-based index score ≤16th percentile on the Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) or a composite measure of attention and executive functioning and analyzed in participants with a baseline MMSE ≥24. Effects across subgroups by baseline factors, as well as absolute cognitive changes, were also assessed. Results Of the 6,979 participants in CARMELINA, CARMELINA-COG included 1,545 (mean ± SD age, 68 ± 8 years; MMSE, 28.3 ± 1.7; estimated glomerular filtration rate, 52 ± 23 mL/min/1.73 m 2 ; and HbA 1c , 7.8 ± 0.9% [61.4 ± 10.1 mmol/mol]). Over a median treatment duration of 2.5 years, accelerated cognitive decline occurred in 28.4% (linagliptin) vs. 29.3% (placebo) (odds ratio 0.96 [95% CI 0.77, 1.19]). Consistent effects were observed across subgroups by baseline characteristics. Absolute cognitive performance changes were also similar between treatment groups. Conclusions In a large international cardiovascular outcome trial in people with type 2 diabetes and cardiorenal disease, linagliptin did not modulate cognitive decline over 2.5 years.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 83/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 11 of 12; Strength of evidence 5 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 2 of 5; Sample size 3 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 1 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 48 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 83 of 100. Total 83 of 100.48 of the 58 points we could judge = 83 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a randomised controlled trial. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 48 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 83 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Diabetes care)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 11 / 12 A randomised controlled trial (from PubMed type “Randomized Controlled Trial”)
Strength of evidence 5 / 5 Rated “high” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 2 / 5 2019 — within 10 year(s) of the newest study here
Sample size 3 / 4 1,545 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 1 / 2 Randomised (as stated in the record)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 31399442)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 48 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 48 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 83 out of 100.
Total 83 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. The record's author list ends in “et al.”, so not every author is named. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Biessels, G. J., Verhagen, C., Janssen, J., van den Berg, E., Zinman, B., Rosenstock, J., et al. (2019). Effect of Linagliptin on Cognitive Performance in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiorenal Comorbidities: The CARMELINA Randomized Trial. Diabetes care. https://doi.org/10.2337/dc19-0783

Vancouver

Biessels GJ, Verhagen C, Janssen J, van den Berg E, Zinman B, Rosenstock J, et al. Effect of Linagliptin on Cognitive Performance in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiorenal Comorbidities: The CARMELINA Randomized Trial. Diabetes care. 2019. doi:10.2337/dc19-0783. PMID: 31399442.

BibTeX

@article{biessels2019-31399442,
  author  = {Biessels, G. J. and Verhagen, C. and Janssen, J. and van den Berg, E. and Zinman, B. and Rosenstock, J. and George, J. T. and Passera, A. and others},
  title   = {{Effect of Linagliptin on Cognitive Performance in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Cardiorenal Comorbidities: The CARMELINA Randomized Trial}},
  journal = {Diabetes care},
  year    = {2019},
  doi     = {10.2337/dc19-0783},
  pmid    = {31399442},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.2337/dc19-0783}
}

Related studies in Drug development

Also tagged “metabolic-syndrome”

304 studies in the library carry the topic tag “metabolic-syndrome”; these are this study's neighbours in a fixed, alphabetical-by-hash tour of them, not the closest in content. All 304 tagged studies.

Similar studies

More on Drug development

See all studies in Drug development →