Prediabetes Management: NNT 7 — Critical Implications
Three decades of randomised trials answer a narrower question than the diagnosis implies, and that gap decides who is worth treating.
One-Minute Takeaway
- Prediabetes management has strong randomised evidence for one endpoint: delaying diabetes. In the Diabetes Prevention Program, seven people needed three years of intensive lifestyle intervention to prevent one case (NNT 6.9, 95% CI 5.4–9.5).
- Metformin performed less well (NNT 13.9, 95% CI 8.7–33.9). Across 21 years it extended median diabetes-free survival by 2.5 years, versus 3.5 years for lifestyle.
- Neither arm reduced major cardiovascular events over 21 years (lifestyle HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.87–1.50; metformin HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.78–1.37).
- Among adults aged 71–90, regression to normoglycaemia or death was more frequent than progression to diabetes over 6.5 years.
- Semaglutide 2.4 mg restored normoglycaemia in 81% versus 14% on placebo at 52 weeks, but weight partly returned once treatment stopped.
The Clinical Problem in Prediabetes Management
The CDC counts 115.2 million US adults with prediabetes — more than two in five. Among people aged 65 or older, 31.3 million (52.1%) meet the criteria. Roughly eight in ten do not know they have it.
Those numbers make prediabetes management a volume problem before it is a clinical one. A label applied to two adults in five carries a heavy false-positive cost if the underlying risk is low, and a heavy missed-opportunity cost if it is high.
The label is not one entity
Prediabetes management begins from a definition that admits three separate routes in: HbA1c 5.7–6.4%, fasting glucose 100–125 mg/dL, or a two-hour post-load glucose of 140–199 mg/dL. The same patient can satisfy one and fail another.
The ARIC analysis makes the drift concrete. In 3,412 community-dwelling adults with a mean age of 75.6 years (SD 5.2), prevalence was 29% when both HbA1c and fasting criteria were required and 73% when either sufficed. The denominator more than doubles on definition alone.
Risk that is consistent but modest
The largest synthesis to date pooled 129 prospective cohorts and post hoc trial analyses covering 10,069,955 people. Over a median 9.8 years, prediabetes was associated with higher all-cause mortality and more cardiovascular disease than normoglycaemia.
Absolute figures reframe the relative ones, and they set the ceiling on what prediabetes management can recover. The pooled excess was roughly 7 additional deaths and 8.75 additional cardiovascular events per 10,000 person-years. Impaired glucose tolerance carried higher risk than impaired fasting glucose for mortality, coronary heart disease and stroke.
These are observational associations, and adiposity travels with them. The clinical question in prediabetes management is therefore not whether the number predicts risk, because it does. It is whether acting on the number changes what happens to the patient.
Available Approaches to Prediabetes Management
Four strategies compete for the family physician’s answer in prediabetes management: a structured lifestyle programme, metformin, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, and structured surveillance with cardiovascular risk-factor treatment but no glucose-directed drug. The trials below are the ones that carry the weight.
| Study / Source | Design | N | Population | Comparison | Key result |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Knowler 2002 (DPP) | RCT, 2.8 y mean | 3,234 | US adults, elevated fasting and post-load glucose; mean age 51, mean BMI 34.0 | Intensive lifestyle vs metformin 850 mg BD vs placebo | Diabetes incidence −58% with lifestyle (95% CI 48–66%) and −31% with metformin (95% CI 17–43%); NNT over 3 y 6.9 (95% CI 5.4–9.5) and 13.9 (95% CI 8.7–33.9) |
| Knowler 2025 (DPP/DPPOS) | RCT, ~21 y follow-up | 3,195 | Original DPP cohort; mean baseline age 50.6 (SD 10.7), 67.9% female | Lifestyle or metformin vs placebo | Lifestyle HR 0.76 (95% CI 0.68–0.85); metformin HR 0.83 (95% CI 0.74–0.93). Median diabetes-free survival +3.5 y and +2.5 y |
| DPP Research Group 2015 (DPPOS) | RCT, 15 y mean | 2,776 | 88% of surviving DPP cohort | Lifestyle or metformin vs placebo | Diabetes HR 0.73 (95% CI 0.65–0.83) and 0.82 (95% CI 0.72–0.93); aggregate microvascular outcome not significantly different among groups (11–13%) in the total cohort |
| Goldberg 2022 (DPPOS) | RCT, 21 y median | 3,234 | DPP cohort with impaired glucose tolerance; 310 major CV events | Lifestyle or metformin vs placebo | MACE: lifestyle HR 1.14 (95% CI 0.87–1.50; p=0.34); metformin HR 1.03 (95% CI 0.78–1.37; p=0.81) |
| Salive 2026 (DPP/DPPOS) | Observational follow-up of RCT, to 2021 | 1,173 | DPP participants with Medicare claims; median age 74 (IQR 70–80), 68% female | Lifestyle or metformin vs placebo | Multimorbidity (≥2 chronic conditions): lifestyle HR 0.79 (95% CI 0.68–0.93); metformin HR 0.91 (95% CI 0.78–1.07) |
| Tuomilehto 2001 (Finnish DPS) | RCT, 3.2 y mean | 522 | Overweight adults aged 40–64 with IGT; mean age 55, mean BMI 31 | Individualised lifestyle counselling vs usual care | Diabetes incidence −58%; 4-year cumulative incidence 11% (95% CI 6–15%) vs 23% (95% CI 17–29%) |
| Gong 2019 (Da Qing, 30 y) | Cluster RCT + 30 y follow-up | 577 (540 assessed) | Chinese adults with IGT, 33 clinics, 6-year intervention | Combined diet and/or exercise vs control | Diabetes onset delayed 3.96 y (95% CI 1.25–6.67); CVD events HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.59–0.92); all-cause death HR 0.74 (95% CI 0.61–0.89); life expectancy +1.44 y (95% CI 0.20–2.68) |
| McGowan 2024 (STEP 10) | RCT, 52 wk + 28 wk off-drug | 207 | Adults with BMI ≥30 and prediabetes; 30 sites, 5 countries | Semaglutide 2.4 mg weekly vs placebo, 2:1, both with lifestyle counselling | Reversion to normoglycaemia 81% vs 14% (OR 19.8, 95% CI 8.7–45.2; p<0.0001); weight −13.9% vs −2.7% (ETD −11.2%, 95% CI −13.0 to −9.4) |
| Cai 2020 | Meta-analysis of prospective cohorts | 10,069,955 (129 studies) | General population and people with established ASCVD | Prediabetes vs normoglycaemia | All-cause mortality RR 1.13 (95% CI 1.10–1.17); composite CVD RR 1.15 (95% CI 1.11–1.18) over median 9.8 y |
| Rooney 2021 (ARIC) | Prospective cohort, 6.5 y | 3,412 | Community-dwelling US adults aged 71–90; mean age 75.6 (SD 5.2) | Natural history, no intervention | Of HbA1c-defined prediabetes, 9% progressed to diabetes, 13% regressed to normoglycaemia, 19% died; of IFG-defined, 8% / 44% / 16% |
| Ely 2017 (National DPP) | Programme evaluation, 4 y of delivery | 14,747 | US adults enrolled in CDC-recognised lifestyle change programmes | Real-world delivery vs trial benchmark | Mean weight loss 4.2% (median 3.1%); 35.5% reached the 5% goal; median 14 sessions attended |
Structured lifestyle intervention
This is the best-evidenced option in prediabetes management and the reference standard the guidelines point to. The DPP randomised 3,234 adults with elevated fasting and post-load glucose to intensive lifestyle, metformin, or placebo, targeting 7% weight loss and 150 minutes of weekly activity.
Over a mean 2.8 years, diabetes incidence fell 58% versus placebo (95% CI 48–66%), against 31% for metformin (95% CI 17–43%). Lifestyle beat metformin directly by 39% (95% CI 24–51%). Seven people had to take part for three years to prevent one case.
Replication is unusually good for a behavioural intervention. The Finnish DPS reproduced the 58% figure in 522 overweight adults with impaired glucose tolerance, with a four-year cumulative incidence of 11% against 23%.
Durability is real but decays. Across roughly 21 years of DPP follow-up, the lifestyle hazard ratio was 0.76 (95% CI 0.68–0.85), and the curves converged over time. Median diabetes-free survival was extended by 3.5 years — a delay, not an escape.
Da Qing is the one trial that followed people far enough to see hard outcomes. It ran a six-year intervention in 577 Chinese adults with IGT, then tracked them for 30 years.
The intervention group had fewer cardiovascular events (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.59–0.92) and fewer deaths from any cause (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.61–0.89). Life expectancy was 1.44 years longer (95% CI 0.20–2.68).
A 2026 analysis added a different endpoint. Among 1,173 DPP participants with Medicare claims through 2021, lifestyle assignment was associated with lower multimorbidity risk (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.68–0.93), and the association held when diabetes itself was removed from the definition. This is observational follow-up of randomised groups, so it supports association rather than causation.
The catch is delivery. Across 14,747 adults in CDC-recognised programmes, mean weight loss reached 4.2%, against 7.2% at year one in the trial.
Roughly a third reached the 5% weight-loss goal, and participants attended a median of 14 sessions. Attendance is the dose.
Metformin
Metformin’s case in prediabetes management is narrower than its popularity suggests. It reduced diabetes incidence by 31% in the DPP (95% CI 17–43%) — roughly half the lifestyle effect — and held an HR of 0.83 (95% CI 0.74–0.93) across 21 years.
Beyond the glucose endpoint, the signal thins. Metformin showed no reduction in major cardiovascular events (HR 1.03, 95% CI 0.78–1.37) and no association with lower multimorbidity (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.78–1.07).
ADA guidance is correspondingly selective. The 2026 Standards suggest considering metformin in adults at high risk, as typified by the DPP.
They name the subgroup: adults aged 25–59 years with BMI ≥35 kg/m², higher fasting plasma glucose (e.g., ≥110 mg/dL) and higher A1C (e.g., ≥6.0%) — and, separately, people with prior gestational diabetes.
Adherence decays in the direction the effect size does. Study metformin use in the DPP fell from 77% at the end of the trial to 41% at the most recent assessment, while out-of-study metformin rose in all three original groups. A prescription written for prevention is not a prevention delivered — and prediabetes is not an approved indication for metformin, so this remains off-label use.
Two practical items travel with long-term metformin. The 2026 Standards suggest periodic vitamin B12 assessment in people on chronic therapy, particularly with anaemia or peripheral neuropathy. Gastrointestinal intolerance was the commonest reason for stopping in the trial.
GLP-1 receptor agonists
STEP 10 is the first phase 3 trial run exclusively in people with obesity and prediabetes. It randomised 207 adults 2:1 to semaglutide 2.4 mg weekly or placebo for 52 weeks, both with diet and activity counselling, followed by 28 weeks off treatment.
Reversion to normoglycaemia reached 81% versus 14% (OR 19.8, 95% CI 8.7–45.2). Weight fell 13.9% versus 2.7%, an estimated treatment difference of 11.2% (95% CI −13.0 to −9.4). Effects on this scale are not available from any other option in prediabetes management.
Three caveats belong next to those figures. The endpoint is a glucose category, not a diabetes diagnosis or an event. Weight partly returned during the off-treatment period, leaving a mean deficit of 7.9% from baseline at week 80, against 1.3% on placebo.
The trial was funded by Novo Nordisk, and prediabetes is not an approved indication for semaglutide.
Surveillance without pharmacotherapy
The comparator in prediabetes management is rarely stated as a strategy, but it is one — and in older adults the natural history argues for it. In the ARIC cohort of 3,412 adults aged 71–90, 9% of those with HbA1c-defined prediabetes progressed to diabetes over 6.5 years, while 13% regressed to normoglycaemia and 19% died.
The fasting-glucose definition performed worse still: 8% progressed, 44% reverted, 16% died. The authors concluded that prediabetes may not be a robust diagnostic entity in older age. A published correction to the paper affected reported incidence rates, not these proportions or the interpretation.
Surveillance is not doing nothing. The 2026 Standards recommend monitoring for progression and, separately, note that prediabetes carries heightened cardiovascular risk, so screening for and treating modifiable cardiovascular risk factors is suggested. The USPSTF gives screening in adults aged 35–70 with overweight or obesity a B recommendation, with referral of those found to have prediabetes to effective preventive interventions.
Comparative Analysis
Rank the four prediabetes management strategies on diabetes incidence and the order is settled: lifestyle, then metformin. A GLP-1 receptor agonist produces the largest glycaemic movement, but on a surrogate endpoint in a 207-person trial.
Rank them on outcomes patients feel, and the picture fractures.
The macrovascular contradiction
Two long-term trials disagree. Da Qing found fewer cardiovascular events, fewer deaths and longer life expectancy after 30 years. DPPOS, tracking 310 major cardiovascular events over 21 years, found nothing for either arm.
The differences are structural rather than mysterious. Da Qing enrolled Chinese adults with IGT in 1986, intervened for six years, and followed a cohort with high background risk and sparse preventive therapy. DPPOS ran a three-year intervention in a US cohort with extensive out-of-study statin and antihypertensive use.
The DPPOS investigators offered that explanation themselves: contamination by effective background prevention, a diluted lifestyle intervention after year three, and rising out-of-study metformin use. A trial cannot show benefit from preventing a risk factor when the downstream risk is already being treated hard.
Where the effects concentrate
The 21-year DPP analysis reported heterogeneity worth acting on. Absolute lifestyle benefit was larger in participants with higher baseline fasting glucose, HbA1c and composite risk scores. Metformin’s absolute benefit was larger in younger participants.
That maps onto the ADA’s metformin subgroups and onto the ARIC natural history from the opposite direction. Risk-concentrated patients gain most; low-risk older patients face competing mortality and spontaneous regression instead.
The most defensible sentence to say in clinic is that intensive lifestyle change buys a median of about 3.5 years without diabetes, and metformin about 2.5, in people who resemble the DPP cohort. What no trial has yet shown in a contemporary US-style population is that either buys fewer heart attacks or strokes.
The four prediabetes management approaches also differ in who bears the cost. Lifestyle programmes shift effort to the patient and depend on attendance.
Metformin is cheap and passive but under-delivers. Semaglutide is potent, expensive, and reverses on discontinuation.
Quality and Consistency of the Evidence
Evidence quality in prediabetes management splits by endpoint rather than by intervention. The glycaemic evidence is strong and replicated; the outcome evidence is not.
- Diabetes incidence reduction with intensive lifestyle — high. Strong evidence supports this. Three independent randomised trials on three continents produced concordant effect sizes, with tight confidence intervals and a large absolute effect.
- Diabetes incidence reduction with metformin — high. Strong evidence supports a real but roughly half-sized effect, anchored in a large blinded RCT with 21 years of follow-up and a consistent hazard ratio.
- Durability of benefit to 15–21 years — moderate. Evidence suggests persistence with decay. It rests on long-term follow-up of one unmasked cohort, with treatment crossover, a diluted intervention after year three, and converging curves.
- Reversion to normoglycaemia with semaglutide — moderate. Evidence suggests a large short-term effect. One dedicated 207-person industry-funded trial reported a surrogate endpoint, supported by prespecified and post hoc analyses of the wider STEP programme.
- Macrovascular benefit from treating prediabetes — insufficient. Insufficient evidence to determine. The only adequately powered cardiovascular endpoint trial was null; the one positive dataset comes from a different population, era and intervention length.
- Microvascular benefit — insufficient. Insufficient evidence to determine. DPPOS found no overall reduction in the aggregate microvascular outcome at 15 years, with a signal confined to women in a subgroup analysis.
- Natural history in adults over 70 — moderate. Evidence suggests progression is uncommon and regression frequent. It rests on one large well-characterised cohort, subject to a published correction affecting incidence rates.
What the Evidence Does Not Show
The gaps in prediabetes management cluster around outcomes and populations, not mechanisms. Each item below is a specific unanswered question, not a call for unspecified further work.
- That treating prediabetes prevents cardiovascular events in a contemporary primary-care population. DPPOS was null at 21 years for both arms, including on an extended cardiovascular outcome.
- That preventing diabetes prevents microvascular disease. The aggregate microvascular outcome at 15 years did not differ between groups overall.
- That GLP-1 therapy in prediabetes reduces diabetes incidence or cardiovascular events. No trial in a prediabetes-only cohort has used either as an endpoint; STEP 10 measured glycaemic category and weight at 52 weeks.
- That prevention works in the A1C-defined or isolated-IFG phenotypes. The 2026 Standards state that efficacy has been shown mainly in people with impaired glucose tolerance, with or without elevated fasting glucose — not in isolated impaired fasting glucose, and not in prediabetes defined by A1C. DPP, the Finnish DPS and Da Qing all enrolled on post-load glucose; STEP 10 is the exception, and it used the narrower NICE band of HbA1c 6.0–6.4%.
- How lifestyle compares with semaglutide. No head-to-head trial exists, and no trial has tested whether adding a GLP-1 receptor agonist to a structured programme beats the programme alone.
- What to do above age 70. DPP’s mean baseline age was 50.6 years. The cohort that shows frequent regression and high competing mortality was never randomised to anything.
- Whether the label itself helps or harms. No trial has measured the downstream effects of applying a prediabetes diagnosis — on insurance, anxiety, or subsequent care intensity — against not applying it.
Practical Implications
The evidence supports treating the patients in whom the trials found benefit, and watching the rest attentively. Prediabetes management is a triage problem, and the trials describe the triage.
Where the yield is highest
Absolute benefit from lifestyle intervention was greatest in those with higher baseline fasting glucose and HbA1c. Impaired glucose tolerance carried more cardiovascular risk than impaired fasting glucose in the pooled cohorts. A patient meeting several criteria is a different patient from one who scraped over a single threshold.
For metformin, the 2026 Standards name the group: adults aged 25–59 with BMI ≥35 kg/m² plus higher fasting glucose (e.g., ≥110 mg/dL) and higher A1C (e.g., ≥6.0%), and separately women with prior gestational diabetes. Outside that description, the evidence for prediabetes management with metformin is thinner than its prescribing rate implies.
What referral actually requires
The 2026 Standards recommend offering diabetes prevention programmes to adults at high risk, targeting sustained 5–7% weight reduction, and single out Mediterranean and low-carbohydrate eating patterns as having the strongest evidence. Technology-assisted delivery is endorsed where the patient prefers it.
Real-world prediabetes management programmes underperform the trial, and attendance explains much of the gap. Session count is the modifiable variable a family physician can influence at follow-up.
What the watching arm should be doing
Structured surveillance is the default arm of prediabetes management for most patients. It means annual glycaemic reassessment plus active treatment of blood pressure and lipids, which is where the 2026 Standards locate the cardiovascular work.
Statin initiation deserves a separate conversation. The Standards note that statins may raise diabetes risk in people already at high risk, and advise monitoring rather than avoidance.
In a patient over 70 with an isolated HbA1c of 5.7–6.4% and no other criterion, the honest counselling is that most such patients will not develop diabetes. Cardiovascular risk-factor control will do more for them than a glucose-directed drug.
How to frame the conversation
Quantities help. Seven patients treated intensively for three years, one case prevented; a median of about 3.5 years of diabetes-free time gained; no demonstrated reduction in heart attacks or strokes. Patients tend to receive that framing better than a warning about a disease they may never get.
For patients with obesity where prediabetes is one item on a longer cardiometabolic list, a GLP-1 receptor agonist may be justified by the obesity indication. The prediabetes reversal is a documented bonus rather than a licensed reason, and it reverses when the drug stops.
Evidence Grade and Bottom Line
Prediabetes management does not earn a single grade, because the interventions are graded on two different questions.
Evidence grade: High for delaying diabetes · Insufficient for preventing its complications
Three concordant randomised trials, one with 21 years of follow-up, support a large reduction in diabetes incidence. The only adequately powered cardiovascular endpoint analysis in this population returned null, and the microvascular analysis returned null overall.
- Intensive lifestyle intervention is the best-evidenced option in prediabetes management, and the number needed to treat over three years is 7 — an unusually strong figure for a preventive intervention.
- Metformin delivers roughly half that effect and should be reserved for the DPP-like subgroup the 2026 Standards describe. It carries no demonstrated benefit for cardiovascular events or multimorbidity.
- Benefit in prediabetes management is best described as delay. Across 21 years, lifestyle bought a median 3.5 additional diabetes-free years and metformin 2.5, with the survival curves converging.
- No trial in a modern, well-treated population has shown that preventing diabetes prevents cardiovascular events. Da Qing’s positive 30-year result came from a higher-risk cohort receiving little background prevention.
- Semaglutide 2.4 mg produces the largest short-term glycaemic movement on record here, on a surrogate endpoint, in one 207-person industry-funded trial, with reversal on discontinuation.
- Above 70, regression and death outnumber progression. The label deserves less weight there than the cardiovascular risk factors sitting alongside it.
Article Information and References
For Educational Purposes Only. This is an original evidence synthesis informed by the studies listed below. It does not replace clinical judgement. Drug dosages should be verified against current prescribing information.
- Cai X, Zhang Y, Li M, Wu JHY, Mai L, Li J, Yang Y, Hu Y, Huang Y. Association between prediabetes and risk of all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease: updated meta-analysis. BMJ. 2020;370:m2297. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.m2297
- American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee for Diabetes. 3. Prevention or Delay of Diabetes and Associated Comorbidities: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026. Diabetes Care. 2026;49(Suppl 1):S50–S60. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2337/dc26-S003
- American Diabetes Association Professional Practice Committee for Diabetes. 2. Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2026. Diabetes Care. 2026;49(Suppl 1):S27–S49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2337/dc26-S002
- Davidson KW, Barry MJ, Mangione CM, et al; US Preventive Services Task Force. Screening for Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes: US Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement. JAMA. 2021;326(8):736–743. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.12531
- Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Fowler SE, Hamman RF, Lachin JM, Walker EA, Nathan DM; Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med. 2002;346(6):393–403. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa012512
- Knowler WC, Doherty L, Edelstein SL, et al; DPP/DPPOS Research Group. Long-term effects and effect heterogeneity of lifestyle and metformin interventions on type 2 diabetes incidence over 21 years in the US Diabetes Prevention Program randomised clinical trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2025;13(6):469–481. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(25)00022-1
- Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Long-term effects of lifestyle intervention or metformin on diabetes development and microvascular complications over 15-year follow-up: the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2015;3(11):866–875. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(15)00291-0
- Goldberg RB, Orchard TJ, Crandall JP, et al; Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group. Effects of long-term metformin and lifestyle interventions on cardiovascular events in the Diabetes Prevention Program and its Outcome Study. Circulation. 2022;145(22):1632–1641. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1161/CIRCULATIONAHA.121.056756
- Salive ME, Tjaden AH, Ames JR, et al; DPP Research Group. Lifestyle and Metformin Interventions and Risk of Multimorbidity in Adults With Prediabetes. JAMA. 2026 Jun 15. Online ahead of print. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2026.8492
- Gong Q, Zhang P, Wang J, et al; Da Qing Diabetes Prevention Study Group. Morbidity and mortality after lifestyle intervention for people with impaired glucose tolerance: 30-year results of the Da Qing Diabetes Prevention Outcome Study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2019;7(6):452–461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30093-2
- Tuomilehto J, Lindström J, Eriksson JG, et al; Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study Group. Prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus by changes in lifestyle among subjects with impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med. 2001;344(18):1343–1350. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM200105033441801
- McGowan BM, Bruun JM, Capehorn M, Pedersen SD, Pietiläinen KH, Muniraju HAK, Quiroga M, Varbo A, Lau DCW; STEP 10 Study Group. Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide 2·4 mg versus placebo in people with obesity and prediabetes (STEP 10): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre phase 3 trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2024;12(9):631–642. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(24)00182-7
- Rooney MR, Rawlings AM, Pankow JS, Echouffo Tcheugui JB, Coresh J, Sharrett AR, Selvin E. Risk of progression to diabetes among older adults with prediabetes. JAMA Intern Med. 2021;181(4):511–519. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.8774
- Errors in Data Presentation in Text, Table, and Supplement [correction to Rooney et al]. JAMA Intern Med. 2021;181(4):570. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2021.1321
- Ely EK, Gruss SM, Luman ET, Gregg EW, Ali MK, Nhim K, Rolka DB, Albright AL. A National Effort to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes: Participant-Level Evaluation of CDC’s National Diabetes Prevention Program. Diabetes Care. 2017;40(10):1331–1341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2337/dc16-2099
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report. Atlanta, GA: US Department of Health and Human Services. Available at: https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/php/data-research/index.html (official statistics report; no DOI assigned)