Emulating real-world GLP-1 efficacy in type 2 diabetes through causal learning and virtual patients.

IF 7.7
PLOS digital health Pub Date : 2025-07-21 eCollection Date: 2025-07-01 DOI:10.1371/journal.pdig.0000927
Calum Robert MacLellan, Hristo Petkov, Conor McKeag, Feng Dong, David John Lowe, Roma Maguire, Sotiris Moschoyiannis, Jo Armes, Simon Skene, Alastair Finlinson, Christopher Sainsbury
{"title":"Emulating real-world GLP-1 efficacy in type 2 diabetes through causal learning and virtual patients.","authors":"Calum Robert MacLellan, Hristo Petkov, Conor McKeag, Feng Dong, David John Lowe, Roma Maguire, Sotiris Moschoyiannis, Jo Armes, Simon Skene, Alastair Finlinson, Christopher Sainsbury","doi":"10.1371/journal.pdig.0000927","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain the benchmark for assessing treatment effects but are limited to phenotypically narrow populations by design. We introduce a novel generative artificial intelligence (AI) driven emulation method that infers effect size through virtual clinical trials, which can emulate the RCT process and potentially extrapolate into wider populations. We validate the virtual trials by comparing the predicted impact of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists on HbA1c in type-2 diabetes (T2DM) with its true efficacy established in the LEAD-5 trial. Our emulation model learns treatment effects from real-world evidence data by a combined generative AI and causal learning approach. Training data comprised pre- and post-treatment outcomes for 5,476 people with T2DM. We considered three treatment arms: GLP-1 (Liraglutide), basal insulin (glargine), and placebo. After training, virtual trials were conducted by sampling 232 virtual patients per arm (according to the LEAD-5 inclusion criteria) and predicting post-treatment outcomes. We used difference-in-differences (DiD) for pairwise comparisons between arms. Our goal was to emulate LEAD-5 by demonstrating a significant DiD in post-treatment HbA1c reduction for GLP-1 compared to basal insulin and placebo. We found significant differences in HbA1c reduction for GLP-1 vs basal insulin (-1.21 mmol/mol (-0.11%); p < 0.001) and GLP-1 vs placebo (-2.58 mmol/mol (-0.24%); p < 0.001) in our virtual populations, consistent with LEAD-5 (Liraglutide vs glargine: -2.62mmol/mol (-0.24%); p = 0.0015, Liraglutide vs placebo: -11.91 mmol/mol (-1.09%); p < 0.0001). The causal AI-powered clinical trials can emulate LEAD-5 in important measurements for T2DM. Our algorithm is specialty agnostic and can explore counterfactual questions, making it suitable for further study in the generalizability of RCT results in real-world populations to support clinical decision-making and policy recommendations.</p>","PeriodicalId":74465,"journal":{"name":"PLOS digital health","volume":"4 7","pages":"e0000927"},"PeriodicalIF":7.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12279107/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PLOS digital health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pdig.0000927","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/7/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) remain the benchmark for assessing treatment effects but are limited to phenotypically narrow populations by design. We introduce a novel generative artificial intelligence (AI) driven emulation method that infers effect size through virtual clinical trials, which can emulate the RCT process and potentially extrapolate into wider populations. We validate the virtual trials by comparing the predicted impact of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists on HbA1c in type-2 diabetes (T2DM) with its true efficacy established in the LEAD-5 trial. Our emulation model learns treatment effects from real-world evidence data by a combined generative AI and causal learning approach. Training data comprised pre- and post-treatment outcomes for 5,476 people with T2DM. We considered three treatment arms: GLP-1 (Liraglutide), basal insulin (glargine), and placebo. After training, virtual trials were conducted by sampling 232 virtual patients per arm (according to the LEAD-5 inclusion criteria) and predicting post-treatment outcomes. We used difference-in-differences (DiD) for pairwise comparisons between arms. Our goal was to emulate LEAD-5 by demonstrating a significant DiD in post-treatment HbA1c reduction for GLP-1 compared to basal insulin and placebo. We found significant differences in HbA1c reduction for GLP-1 vs basal insulin (-1.21 mmol/mol (-0.11%); p < 0.001) and GLP-1 vs placebo (-2.58 mmol/mol (-0.24%); p < 0.001) in our virtual populations, consistent with LEAD-5 (Liraglutide vs glargine: -2.62mmol/mol (-0.24%); p = 0.0015, Liraglutide vs placebo: -11.91 mmol/mol (-1.09%); p < 0.0001). The causal AI-powered clinical trials can emulate LEAD-5 in important measurements for T2DM. Our algorithm is specialty agnostic and can explore counterfactual questions, making it suitable for further study in the generalizability of RCT results in real-world populations to support clinical decision-making and policy recommendations.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

通过因果学习和虚拟患者模拟现实世界GLP-1对2型糖尿病的疗效。
随机对照试验(rct)仍然是评估治疗效果的基准,但受限于设计的表型狭窄人群。我们引入了一种新的生成式人工智能(AI)驱动的仿真方法,该方法通过虚拟临床试验推断效应大小,可以模拟RCT过程并可能外推到更广泛的人群中。我们通过比较胰高血糖素样肽-1 (GLP-1)激动剂对2型糖尿病(T2DM)患者HbA1c的预测影响与其在LEAD-5试验中确定的真实疗效来验证虚拟试验。我们的仿真模型通过结合生成式人工智能和因果学习方法,从现实世界的证据数据中学习治疗效果。训练数据包括5476名T2DM患者的治疗前后结果。我们考虑了三个治疗组:GLP-1(利拉鲁肽)、基础胰岛素(甘精氨酸)和安慰剂。训练后,虚拟试验通过每组抽样232名虚拟患者(根据铅-5纳入标准)进行,并预测治疗后的结果。我们使用差中差(DiD)进行两组间的两两比较。我们的目标是通过与基础胰岛素和安慰剂相比,证明GLP-1治疗后HbA1c降低的显着DiD来模拟铅-5。我们发现GLP-1与基础胰岛素在HbA1c降低方面存在显著差异(-1.21 mmol/mol (-0.11%);p
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信