Impact of diabetes on COVID-19 prognosis beyond comorbidity burden: the CORONADO initiative.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Diabetes has been recognised as a pejorative prognostic factor in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Since diabetes is typically a disease of advanced age, it remains unclear whether diabetes remains a COVID-19 risk factor beyond advanced age and associated comorbidities. We designed a cohort study that considered age and comorbidities to address this question. METHODS: The Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and Diabetes Outcomes (CORONADO) initiative is a French, multicentric, cohort study of individuals with (exposed) and without diabetes (non-exposed) admitted to hospital with COVID-19, with a 1:1 matching on sex, age (±5 years), centre and admission date (10 March 2020 to 10 April 2020). Comorbidity burden was assessed by calculating the updated Charlson comorbidity index (uCCi). A predefined composite primary endpoint combining death and/or invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV), as well as these two components separately, was assessed within 7 and 28 days following hospital admission. We performed multivariable analyses to compare clinical outcomes between patients with and without diabetes. RESULTS: A total of 2210 pairs of participants (diabetes/no-diabetes) were matched on age (mean±SD 69.4±13.2/69.5±13.2 years) and sex (36.3% women). The uCCi was higher in individuals with diabetes. In unadjusted analysis, the primary composite endpoint occurred more frequently in the diabetes group by day 7 (29.0% vs 21.6% in the no-diabetes group; HR 1.43 [95% CI 1.19, 1.72], p<0.001). After multiple adjustments for age, BMI, uCCi, clinical (time between onset of COVID-19 symptoms and dyspnoea) and biological variables (eGFR, aspartate aminotransferase, white cell count, platelet count, C-reactive protein) on admission to hospital, diabetes remained associated with a higher risk of primary composite endpoint within 7 days (adjusted HR 1.42 [95% CI 1.17, 1.72], p<0.001) and 28 days (adjusted HR 1.30 [95% CI 1.09, 1.55], p=0.003), compared with individuals without diabetes. Using the same adjustment model, diabetes was associated with the risk of IMV, but not with risk of death, within 28 days of admission to hospital. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Our results demonstrate that diabetes status was associated with a deleterious COVID-19 prognosis irrespective of age and comorbidity status. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04324736.

Predictors of hospital discharge and mortality in patients with diabetes and COVID-19: updated results from the nationwide CORONADO study.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: This is an update of the results from the previous report of the CORONADO (Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 and Diabetes Outcomes) study, which aims to describe the outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with diabetes hospitalised for coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: The CORONADO initiative is a French nationwide multicentre study of patients with diabetes hospitalised for COVID-19 with a 28-day follow-up. The patients were screened after hospital admission from 10 March to 10 April 2020. We mainly focused on hospital discharge and death within 28 days. RESULTS: We included 2796 participants: 63.7% men, mean age 69.7 ± 13.2 years, median BMI (25th-75th percentile) 28.4 (25.0-32.4) kg/m2. Microvascular and macrovascular diabetic complications were found in 44.2% and 38.6% of participants, respectively. Within 28 days, 1404 (50.2%; 95% CI 48.3%, 52.1%) were discharged from hospital with a median duration of hospital stay of 9 (5-14) days, while 577 participants died (20.6%; 95% CI 19.2%, 22.2%). In multivariable models, younger age, routine metformin therapy and longer symptom duration on admission were positively associated with discharge. History of microvascular complications, anticoagulant routine therapy, dyspnoea on admission, and higher aspartate aminotransferase, white cell count and C-reactive protein levels were associated with a reduced chance of discharge. Factors associated with death within 28 days mirrored those associated with discharge, and also included routine treatment by insulin and statin as deleterious factors. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In patients with diabetes hospitalised for COVID-19, we established prognostic factors for hospital discharge and death that could help clinicians in this pandemic period. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT04324736.

Relationship between obesity and severe COVID-19 outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes: Results from the CORONADO study.

AIM: To assess the relationship between body mass index (BMI) classes and early COVID-19 prognosis in inpatients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: From the CORONAvirus-SARS-CoV-2 and Diabetes Outcomes (CORONADO) study, we conducted an analysis in patients with T2D categorized by four BMI subgroups according to the World Health Organization classification. Clinical characteristics and COVID-19-related outcomes (i.e. intubation for mechanical ventilation [IMV], death and discharge by day 7 [D7]) were analysed according to BMI status. RESULTS: Among 1965 patients with T2D, 434 (22.1%) normal weight (18.5-24.9 kg/m2 , reference group), 726 (36.9%) overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2 ) and 805 (41.0%) obese subjects were analysed, including 491 (25.0%) with class I obesity (30-34.9 kg/m2 ) and 314 (16.0%) with class II/III obesity (≥35 kg/m2 ). In a multivariable-adjusted model, the primary outcome (i.e. IMV and/or death by D7) was significantly associated with overweight (OR 1.65 [1.05-2.59]), class I (OR 1.93 [1.19-3.14]) and class II/III obesity (OR 1.98 [1.11-3.52]). After multivariable adjustment, primary outcome by D7 was significantly associated with obesity in patients aged younger than 75 years, while such an association was no longer found in those aged older than 75 years. CONCLUSIONS: Overweight and obesity are associated with poor early prognosis in patients with T2D hospitalized for COVID-19. Importantly, the deleterious impact of obesity on COVID-19 prognosis was no longer observed in the elderly, highlighting the need for specific management in this population.

Effect of adding vildagliptin to insulin in haemodialysed patients with type 2 diabetes: The VILDDIAL study, a randomized, multicentre, prospective study.

AIM: To evaluate the effect of adding the dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitor vildagliptin to insulin on the glycaemic control of patients with type 2 diabetes undergoing haemodialysis. METHODS: Overall, 65 insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes undergoing haemodialysis (HbA1c: 7.3% ± 1.1%; age: 70.5 ± 8.5 years) were randomized (1:1) either to receive vildagliptin 50 mg/day in addition to insulin (vildagliptin-insulin group) or to pursue their usual insulin regimen (insulin-only group). Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was performed for 48 ± 6 hours at baseline and at week 12. The primary study endpoint was change from baseline in mean interstitial glucose using CGM. The secondary endpoints included other CGM variables and glucose control markers. RESULTS: After 12 weeks, a greater reduction in mean CGM glucose from baseline was observed in the vildagliptin-insulin group compared with the insulin-only group, although the between-treatment difference was not statistically significant (mean difference [CI 95%]: -0.96 mmol/L [-2.09; 0.18] vs. -0.29 mmol/L [-1.29; 0.76], P = 0.32). However, a significant decrease from baseline in HbA1c, glycated albumin and insulin daily doses was observed in the vildagliptin-insulin group versus the insulin-only group (-0.6% [-1.19; -0.1], P < 0.01), in the vildagliptin-insulin group versus no change in the insulin-only group (-130.6 µmol/L [-271; 10.7] vs. +36.2 µmol/L [-164.4; 236.9], P = 0.04 and - 5.9 IU/day [-1.8; 7.1] vs. +1.1 IU/day [-14.5; 16.6], P = 0.01, respectively). There was no significant difference in the percentage of time spent in hypoglycaemia using CGM, occurrence of severe hypoglycaemia or number of adverse events. CONCLUSION: In this study, vildagliptin added to insulin improved glycaemic control with an associated insulin-sparing effect in patients with type 2 diabetes undergoing haemodialysis and was well tolerated.

An Effective Intervention for Diabetic Lipohypertrophy: Results of a Randomized, Controlled, Prospective Multicenter Study in France.

BACKGROUND: Lipohypertrophy (LH) is highly prevalent and is potentially harmful to insulin-injecting patients. METHODS: In this study, we assessed the impact of injection technique (IT) education, including use of a 4-mm pen needle on insulin-treated patients with clinically observed LH in a randomized, controlled, prospective multicenter study in France with follow-up of 6 months. Intensive education and between-visit reinforcement were given to the intervention group. Control patients received similar messages at study outset. RESULTS: A total of 123 patients were recruited (age 52.1 ± 15.7 years; men 70.7%; body mass index >30 kg/m2: 34.2%; type 1: 53.7%; years with diabetes mellitus: 18.1 ± 10.5), of which 109 patients were included in the final analysis. The intervention group (n = 53) showed a significant decrease of total daily dose of insulin (average at baseline: 54.1 IU) at 3 months (T-3) and 6 months (T-6), reaching just over 5 IU versus baseline (P = 0.035). Corresponding, although not significant, decreases occurred in controls (n = 56); between-group differences were not significant. There were significant decreases in HbA1c (up to 0.5%) at T-3 and T-6 in both groups, with no significant differences between groups. A significant number of intervention patients improved their IT habits; about half achieved ideal IT habits by T-3 versus a quarter of control patients. By T-6, 2/3 of intervention patients achieved either ideal or acceptable IT habits, while only 1/3 of control patients did. CONCLUSIONS: Our intervention was effective in both study arms, however, to a greater degree and more rapidly in the intervention group. Widespread application of this intervention could be highly cost-effective.