Last updated July 12, 2026
Key finding
The least squares mean change in TIR from baseline after 24 weeks was 0.037% ± 2.506% in the cofrogliptin group.
This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of bi-weekly cofrogliptin compared to daily DPP-4 inhibitors in Chinese patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.
Quick read
The essential study design details in one scan.
EvidenceScore™
Moderate
Study type
RCTs
Follow-up
Medium-Term (3–12 mo)
Risk of bias
Some Concerns
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Plain-language summary
A plain-language read of the study’s main message and where it applies.
Study focus
This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of bi-weekly cofrogliptin compared to daily DPP-4 inhibitors in Chinese patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus.
These findings suggest that bi-weekly cofrogliptin may offer a more convenient and effective treatment option for patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, potentially improving adherence and overall management of the disease.
The study's sample size and demographic may limit generalizability. Effectiveness of cofrogliptin compared to other treatment options was not assessed. Long-term effects beyond 24 weeks were not evaluated.
Published in
Publication details and source links for this paper.
Congqing P, Hongwei J, Yi F, et al. Efficacy and Safety of Bi-Weekly Cofrogliptin Treatment as a Replacement for Daily DPP-4 Inhibitors in Chinese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism. 2025;28(2):1191-1200. doi:10.1111/dom.70305
Cofrogliptin group showed a 0.037% increase in glucose time in range (TIR) with p=0.0046.
Daily DPP-4i group experienced a -9.891% decrease in TIR.
Cofrogliptin improved treatment satisfaction by 4.84 points.
Daily DPP-4i group had a decrease in satisfaction by -2.6 points.
Evidence network
Understand where this research contributes within the broader evidence network.
This study contributes evidence to Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and Adverse events incidence, Time in range, Treatment satisfaction.
This study contributes evidence to
Primary intervention
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors
Primary outcomes
Evidence topics
Primary intervention
Primary outcomes
Intervention and outcome relationships this study adds to the evidence network.
Editorial context
See why this paper is useful beyond its individual results.
Evidence network role
This section describes how the study fits into the current evidence network. It does not determine whether an intervention works on its own.
2
Related topics
3
Evidence pairs
187
Related studies
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Evidence topic
Contributes evidence
Save studies and evidence pages, organize your personal Evidence Tracker, and keep the research you care about in one place.
Primary evidence
Evidence relationship
Related evidence
Evidence relationship
Save evidence
Evidence topic
Save evidence
Core evidence
The primary outcomes reported in this study.
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors → Adverse events incidence
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors → Adverse events incidence
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors → Time in range
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors → Time in range
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors → Treatment satisfaction
Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors → Treatment satisfaction
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Evidence Library
Save research, organize studies, and quickly find important evidence again.
Explore related studies, evidence collections, and research questions.
Relationships organized using the Dediabetes Evidence Intelligence™ framework.
This study contributes to evidence on DPP-4 Inhibitors and CGM Time in Range, DPP-4 Inhibitors and Treatment Experience.
This study contributes to the evidence on the following intervention-outcome relationships.
Medications
Medications
Curated evidence collections and hubs this study is part of.
All studies measuring CGM Time in Range
Measures CGM Time in Range as a key outcome.
All studies on DPP-4 Inhibitors
Contributes to DPP-4 Inhibitors evidence base.
All studies measuring Treatment Experience
Measures Treatment Experience as a key outcome.
Latest published studies
Published within the last 2 years.
Jump to pre-filtered views in Evidence Explorer.
2 results
2 results
2 results
2 results
2 results
Generated from the study's connected evidence using Evidence Intelligence™.
DPP-4 Inhibitors may improve CGM Time in Range.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Ranked evidence signals
Time in range
EvidenceScore™ Moderate | EvidenceScore™ 69.0 | strong positive | ConsistencyScore™ Mixed | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Limitations
DPP-4 Inhibitors may improve Treatment Experience.
ConsistencyScore™: Results are mixed and should be interpreted cautiously.
Ranked evidence signals
Treatment satisfaction
EvidenceScore™ Moderate | EvidenceScore™ 69.0 | moderate positive | ConsistencyScore™ Mixed | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is cautious because the available studies report mixed findings.
Limitations
Current evidence does not show a clear benefit of Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors for Adverse events incidence.
ConsistencyScore™: Consistency cannot yet be determined from the available evidence.
Ranked evidence signals
Adverse events incidence
EvidenceScore™ Emerging | EvidenceScore™ 59.0 | neutral | ConsistencyScore™ Unclear | 1 study
Why this answer: This answer is based on a single supporting study.
Limitations
Next steps
Choose a next path through related evidence topics, Evidence Explorer views, and research summaries.
Follow the topics this study contributes to.
Open broader Evidence Explorer views for this relationship.
Read related research summaries.
Focused on evidence, not advertising.
Your data is always protected.
New studies added every day.
