A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials of substituting soymilk for cow's milk and intermediate cardiometabolic outcomes: understanding the impact of dairy alternatives in the transition to plant-based diets on cardiometabolic health.

BACKGROUND: Dietary guidelines recommend a shift to plant-based diets. Fortified soymilk, a prototypical plant protein food used in the transition to plant-based diets, usually contains added sugars to match the sweetness of cow's milk and is classified as an ultra-processed food. Whether soymilk can replace minimally processed cow's milk without the adverse cardiometabolic effects attributed to added sugars and ultra-processed foods remains unclear. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials, to assess the effect of substituting soymilk for cow's milk and its modification by added sugars (sweetened versus unsweetened) on intermediate cardiometabolic outcomes. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched (through June 2024) for randomized controlled trials of ≥ 3 weeks in adults. Outcomes included established markers of blood lipids, glycemic control, blood pressure, inflammation, adiposity, renal disease, uric acid, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. Two independent reviewers extracted data and assessed risk of bias. The certainty of evidence was assessed using GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation). A sub-study of lactose versus sucrose outside of a dairy-like matrix was conducted to explore the role of sweetened soymilk which followed the same methodology. RESULTS: Eligibility criteria were met by 17 trials (n = 504 adults with a range of health statuses), assessing the effect of a median daily dose of 500 mL of soymilk (22 g soy protein and 17.2 g or 6.9 g/250 mL added sugars) in substitution for 500 mL of cow's milk (24 g milk protein and 24 g or 12 g/250 mL total sugars as lactose) on 19 intermediate outcomes. The substitution of soymilk for cow's milk resulted in moderate reductions in non-HDL-C (mean difference, - 0.26 mmol/L [95% confidence interval, - 0.43 to - 0.10]), systolic blood pressure (- 8.00 mmHg [- 14.89 to - 1.11]), and diastolic blood pressure (- 4.74 mmHg [- 9.17 to - 0.31]); small important reductions in LDL-C (- 0.19 mmol/L [- 0.29 to - 0.09]) and c-reactive protein (CRP) (- 0.82 mg/L [- 1.26 to - 0.37]); and trivial increases in HDL-C (0.05 mmol/L [0.00 to 0.09]). No other outcomes showed differences. There was no meaningful effect modification by added sugars across outcomes. The certainty of evidence was high for LDL-C and non-HDL-C; moderate for systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, CRP, and HDL-C; and generally moderate-to-low for all other outcomes. We could not conduct the sub-study of the effect of lactose versus added sugars, as no eligible trials could be identified. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence provides a good indication that replacing cow's milk with soymilk (including sweetened soymilk) does not adversely affect established cardiometabolic risk factors and may result in advantages for blood lipids, blood pressure, and inflammation in adults with a mix of health statuses. The classification of plant-based dairy alternatives such as soymilk as ultra-processed may be misleading as it relates to their cardiometabolic effects and may need to be reconsidered in the transition to plant-based diets. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT05637866.

Glycaemic target attainment in people with Type 2 diabetes treated with insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination: a post hoc analysis of the LixiLan-O and LixiLan-L trials.

AIMS: Both fasting (FPG) and postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) contribute to HbA1c levels. We investigated the relationship between achievement of American Diabetes Association (ADA) and American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) recommended FPG and/or PPG targets and glycaemic efficacy outcomes in two trials. METHODS: In this post hoc analysis, data from participants with Type 2 diabetes in the phase 3 LixiLan-O (NCT02058147) and LixiLan-L (NCT02058160) trials were evaluated to compare the relationship between achievement of society-recommended FPG and/or PPG targets and efficacy (HbA1c change, HbA1c goal attainment, weight change) and safety outcomes in the treatment groups. RESULTS: Across treatment arms, iGlarLixi achieved the highest proportion of participants meeting both ADA- and AACE-recommended FPG and PPG targets at study end in both trials. A higher proportion of participants in the iGlarLixi (fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine and lixisenatide) vs. insulin glargine alone or lixisenatide alone treatment arms achieved HbA1c goals (P < 0.001 for overall comparisons), irrespective of ADA- or AACE-defined targets. Hypoglycaemia rates [any, documented symptomatic (plasma glucose ≤ 3.9 mmol/l), and clinically important (plasma glucose < 3.0 mmol/l)] were low across all groups. Participants treated with iGlarLixi tended to show weight loss or less weight gain compared with participants receiving insulin glargine alone. No differences were observed in average daily basal insulin dose at week 30 between the two treatment arms or across the different FPG and PPG target groups. CONCLUSION: Insulin glargine and lixisenatide as a fixed-ratio combination resulted in more participants reaching both FPG and PPG targets, leading to better HbA1c target attainment.

Efficacy and safety of alirocumab in people with prediabetes vs those with normoglycaemia at baseline: a pooled analysis of 10 phase III ODYSSEY clinical trials.

AIM: To assess the lipid-lowering efficacy and safety of alirocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor, in people with hypercholesterolaemia and prediabetes at baseline vs people with normoglycaemia at baseline in a pooled analysis of 10 ODYSSEY phase III trials. METHODS: People classified as having prediabetes had baseline HbA1c ≥39 mmol/mol (5.7%) and <48 mmol/mol (6.5%), or two baseline fasting plasma glucose values ≥5.6 mmol/l (100 mg/dl) but no more than one fasting plasma glucose value ≥7.0 mmol/l (126 mg/dl), or had specific terms reported in their medical history; people diagnosed with diabetes at baseline were excluded, and the remainder were classified as having normoglycaemia. Participants received alirocumab or control (placebo/ezetimibe) for 24-104 weeks, with maximally tolerated statin in most cases. The primary efficacy endpoint was LDL cholesterol reductions from baseline to week 24 in the intention-to-treat population using the mixed-effect model with a repeated measures approach. RESULTS: Reductions in LDL cholesterol from baseline to week 24 with alirocumab were 44.0-61.8% (prediabetes group) and 45.8-59.5% (normoglycaemia group). In both subgroups, LDL cholesterol reductions were generally similar in those with and without baseline triglycerides ≥1.7 mmol/l (150 mg/dl). Alirocumab was not associated with changes in HbA1c or fasting plasma glucose over time in either subgroup (up to 24 months' follow-up). Adverse event rates were generally similar in those with and without prediabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Over a mean follow-up of 24-104 weeks, alirocumab treatment resulted in significant LDL cholesterol reductions from baseline that were similar in participants with prediabetes and those with normoglycaemia at baseline, with no effect on glycaemia and a safety profile similar to that of the control.

Alirocumab safety in people with and without diabetes mellitus: pooled data from 14 ODYSSEY trials.

AIM: To evaluate the safety of the proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 (PCSK9) inhibitor alirocumab according to diabetes mellitus status. METHODS: Safety data from 14 trials (8-104-week durations) were analysed by treatment (alirocumab or placebo/ezetimibe control) and diabetes status (yes/no, defined by medical history). Adverse event data were assessed using descriptive statistics and Cox models. RESULTS: Of the 5234 trial participants, 1554 (29.7%) had diabetes. Overall, treatment-emergent adverse events were similar in the alirocumab and control groups, except for more frequent local injection site reactions with alirocumab. Fewer people with diabetes experienced local injection site reactions [alirocumab, 3.5%, control, 2.9%; hazard ratio 1.24 (95% CI 0.68-2.25)] than those without diabetes [alirocumab, 7.5%; control, 4.9%; hazard ratio 1.51 (95% CI 1.13-2.01)]. Those with diabetes reported a greater number of serious adverse events (alirocumab, 19.4%; control, 19.7%) than those without diabetes (alirocumab, 14.5%; control, 13.5%). In people with diabetes, major adverse cardiac events occurred in 2.7% of alirocumab-treated people [control, 3.3%; hazard ratio 0.74 (95% CI 0.41-1.35)]; in those without diabetes, 1.8% of alirocumab-treated people had major adverse cardiac events [control, 1.7%; hazard ratio 0.95 (95% CI 0.56-1.62)]. Overall, no increase in HbA1c or fasting plasma glucose vs control treatment groups was observed, regardless of diabetes status. CONCLUSION: This pooled analysis across 14 trials demonstrated similar safety for alirocumab vs control treatment, irrespective of diabetes status, except for more frequent local injection site reactions with alirocumab. People with diabetes reported fewer local injection site reactions than those without diabetes.

LEADER 5: prevalence and cardiometabolic impact of obesity in cardiovascular high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: baseline global data from the LEADER trial.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological data on obesity are needed, particularly in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and high cardiovascular (CV) risk. We used the baseline data of liraglutide effect and action in diabetes: evaluation of CV outcome results-A long term Evaluation (LEADER) (a clinical trial to assess the CV safety of liraglutide) to investigate: (i) prevalence of overweight and obesity; (ii) relationship of the major cardiometabolic risk factors with anthropometric measures of adiposity [body mass index (BMI) and waist circumference (WC)]; and (iii) cardiometabolic treatment intensity in relation to BMI and WC. METHODS: LEADER enrolled two distinct populations of high-risk patients with T2DM in 32 countries: (1) aged ≥50 years with prior CV disease; (2) aged ≥60 years with one or more CV risk factors. Associations of metabolic variables, demographic variables and treatment intensity with anthropometric measurements (BMI and WC) were explored using regression models (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01179048). RESULTS: Mean BMI was 32.5 ± 6.3 kg/m(2) and only 9.1 % had BMI <25 kg/m(2). The prevalence of healthy WC was also extremely low (6.4 % according to International Joint Interim Statement for the Harmonization of the Metabolic Syndrome criteria). Obesity was associated with being younger, female, previous smoker, Caucasian, American, with shorter diabetes duration, uncontrolled blood pressure (BP), antihypertensive agents, insulin plus oral antihyperglycaemic treatment, higher levels of triglycerides and lower levels of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. CONCLUSIONS: Overweight and obesity are prevalent in high CV risk patients with T2DM. BMI and WC are related to the major cardiometabolic risk factors. Furthermore, treatment intensity, such as insulin, statins or oral antihypertensive drugs, is higher in those who are overweight or obese; while BP and lipid control in these patients are remarkably suboptimal. LEADER confers a unique opportunity to explore the longitudinal effect of weight on CV risk factors and hard endpoints.

Gastrointestinal safety across the albiglutide development programme.

Gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) are the most frequently reported treatment-related AEs associated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The GI safety of albiglutide, a once-weekly GLP-1RA, was assessed using data from five phase III studies. In a pooled analysis of four placebo-controlled trials, the most common GI AEs were diarrhoea (albiglutide, 14.5% vs. placebo, 11.5%) and nausea (albiglutide, 11.9% vs. placebo, 10.3%), with most patients experiencing 1-2 events. The majority were mild or moderate in intensity and their median duration was 3-4 days. Vomiting occurred in 4.9% of patients in the albiglutide vs. 2.6% in the placebo group. For both albiglutide and placebo, serious GI AEs (2.0% vs. 1.5%) and withdrawals attributable to GI AEs (1.7% vs. 1.5%) were low. In a 32-week trial of albiglutide 50 mg weekly versus liraglutide 1.8 mg daily, nausea occurred in 9.9% of patients in the albiglutide group vs. 29.2% in the liraglutide group. Vomiting occurred in 5.0% in the albiglutide vs. 9.3% in the liraglutide group. In conclusion, albiglutide has an acceptable GI tolerability profile, with nausea and vomiting rates slightly higher than those for placebo but lower than those for liraglutide.

Long-term maintenance of efficacy of dapagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease.

AIM: To evaluate the long-term efficacy, safety and tolerability of dapagliflozin versus placebo added to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). METHODS: Data were pooled from two phase III studies (NCT01031680 and NCT01042977) in high-risk patients (N = 1887) with T2DM and CVD treated with dapagliflozin (10 mg/day) or placebo. Patients completing the double-blind treatment studies (24 weeks) entered one or two sequential double-blind, long-term (LT) extensions of 28 (LT1; n = 1649) and 52 (LT2; n = 568) weeks. RESULTS: Baseline and CVD characteristics were similar in the two groups. Patients entering LT1 and LT2 on dapagliflozin maintained a greater mean reduction in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) versus placebo at 52 weeks [LT1, -0.58% (95% confidence interval -0.68, -0.49)] and 104 weeks [LT2, -0.35% (95% confidence interval -0.59, -0.12)]. Mean body weight and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reductions versus placebo were maintained in patients entering LT1 (52 weeks; -2.23 kg and -3.25 mmHg, respectively) and LT2 (104 weeks; -3.16 kg and -2.03 mmHg, respectively). Patients on dapagliflozin had a better three-item composite endpoint of clinical benefit (glycaemia, weight and SBP) compared with placebo at week 24 (LT1, 10.1% vs. 1.1%) and week 104 (LT2, 6.7% vs. 1.4%). Genital and urinary tract infections were more frequent with dapagliflozin than with placebo. Events of hypoglycaemia, renal impairment/failure and volume depletion were similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The long-term efficacy of dapagliflozin to maintain reductions in HbA1c, SBP and body weight over 2 years, together with its tolerability profile, make dapagliflozin an appropriate option in high-risk patients with T2DM and CVD.

Effect of adding insulin degludec to treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin and liraglutide: a double-blind randomized controlled trial (BEGIN: ADD TO GLP-1 Study).

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding insulin degludec (IDeg) to treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving liraglutide and metformin and qualifying for treatment intensification because of inadequate glycaemic control. METHODS: In this 26-week, double-blind trial, patients who still had inadequate glycaemic control after a 15-week run-in period with initiation and dose escalation of liraglutide to 1.8 mg in combination with metformin (≥1500 mg) were randomized to addition of once-daily IDeg ('IDeg add-on to liraglutide' arm; n = 174) or placebo ('placebo add-on to liraglutide' arm; n = 172), with dosing of both IDeg and placebo based on titration guidelines. RESULTS: At 26 weeks, the mean change in glycated haemoglobin level was greater in the IDeg add-on to liraglutide arm (-1.04%) than in the placebo add-on to liraglutide arm (-0.16%; p < 0.0001). Similarly, the mean fasting plasma glucose reduction was greater, and self-measured plasma glucose values were lower at all eight time points, with IDeg add-on versus placebo add-on (both p < 0.0001). At 26 weeks, the IDeg dose was 51 U (0.54 U/kg). During the run-in period with liraglutide, body weight decreased by ∼3 kg in both groups. After 26 weeks, the mean change was +2.0 kg (IDeg add-on to liraglutide) and -1.3 kg (placebo add-on to liraglutide). Confirmed hypoglycaemia rates were low in both groups, although higher with IDeg than with placebo (0.57 vs. 0.12 episodes/patient-years of exposure; p = 0.0002). Nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was infrequent in both groups, with no episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, and no marked differences in adverse events with either treatment approach. CONCLUSION: The addition of liraglutide and IDeg to patients sub-optimally treated with metformin and liraglutide and requiring treatment intensification was found to be effective and well-tolerated.

Frequency of cancer events with saxagliptin in the SAVOR-TIMI 53 trial.

The Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus (SAVOR)-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 53 trial randomized trial of 16,492 patients (placebo, n = 8212; saxagliptin, n = 8280) treated and followed for a median of 2.1 years afforded an opportunity to explore whether there was any association with cancer reported as a serious adverse event. At least one cancer event was reported by 688 patients (4.1%): 362 (4.3%) and 326 (3.8%) in the placebo and saxagliptin arms, respectively (p = 0.13). There were 59 (0.6%) deaths adjudicated as malignancy deaths with placebo and 53 (0.6%) with saxagliptin. Stratification by gender, age, race and ethnicity, diabetes duration, baseline glycated haemoglobin and pharmacotherapy did not show any clinically meaningful differences between the two study arms. The overall number of cancer events and malignancy-associated mortality rates were generally balanced between the placebo and saxagliptin groups, suggesting a null relationship with saxagliptin use over the median follow-up of 2.1 years. Multivariable modelling showed that male gender, dyslipidaemia and current smoking were independent predictors of cancer. These randomized data with adequate numbers of cancer cases are reassuring but limited, by the short follow-up in a trial not designed to test this hypothesis.

The effect of a dietary portfolio compared to a DASH-type diet on blood pressure.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: Compared to a DASH-type diet, an intensively applied dietary portfolio reduced diastolic blood pressure at 24 weeks as a secondary outcome in a previous study. Due to the importance of strategies to reduce blood pressure, we performed an exploratory analysis pooling data from intensively and routinely applied portfolio treatments from the same study to assess the effect over time on systolic, diastolic and mean arterial pressure (MAP), and the relation to sodium (Na(+)), potassium (K(+)), and portfolio components. METHODS AND RESULTS: 241 participants with hyperlipidemia, from four academic centers across Canada were randomized and completed either a DASH-type diet (control n = 82) or a dietary portfolio that included, soy protein, viscous fibers and nuts (n = 159) for 24 weeks. Fasting measures and 7-day food records were obtained at weeks 0, 12 and 24, with 24-h urines at weeks 0 and 24. The dietary portfolio reduced systolic, diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure compared to the control by 2.1 mm Hg (95% CI, 4.2 to -0.1 mm Hg) (p = 0.056), 1.8 mm Hg (CI, 3.2 to 0.4 mm Hg) (p = 0.013) and 1.9 mm Hg (CI, 3.4 to 0.4 mm Hg) (p = 0.015), respectively. Blood pressure reductions were small at 12 weeks and only reached significance at 24 weeks. Nuts, soy and viscous fiber all related negatively to change in mean arterial pressure (ρ = -0.15 to -0.17, p ≤ 0.016) as did urinary potassium (ρ = -0.25, p = 0.001), while the Na(+)/K(+) ratio was positively associated (ρ = 0.20, p = 0.010). CONCLUSIONS: Consumption of a cholesterol-lowering dietary portfolio also decreased blood pressure by comparison with a healthy DASH-type diet. CLINICAL TRIAL REG. NO.: NCT00438425, clinicaltrials.gov.

A comparison of the assessment and management of cardiometabolic risk in patients with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus in Canadian primary care.

AIM: To investigate the cardiometabolic risk (CMR) assessment and management patterns for individuals with and without type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Canadian primary care practices. METHODS: Between April 2011 and March 2012, physicians from 9 primary care teams and 88 traditional non-team practices completed a practice assessment on the management of 2461 patients >40 years old with no clinical evidence of cardiovascular disease and diagnosed with at least one of the following risk factor-T2DM, dyslipidaemia or hypertension. RESULTS: There were 1304 individuals with T2DM and 1157 without. Pharmacotherapy to manage hyperglycaemia, dyslipidaemia and hypertension was widely prescribed. Fifty-eight percent of individuals with T2DM had a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≤7.0%. Amongst individuals with dyslipidaemia, median low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) was 1.8 mmol/l for those with T2DM and 2.8 mmol/l for those without. Amongst individuals with hypertension, 30% of those with T2DM achieved the <130/80 mmHg target, whereas 60% of those without met the <140/90 mmHg target. The composite glycaemic, LDL-C and blood pressure (BP) target outcome was achieved by 12% of individuals with T2DM. Only 17% of individuals with T2DM and 11% without were advised to increase their physical activity. Dietary modifications were recommended to 32 and 10% of those with and without T2DM, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients at elevated CMR were suboptimally managed in the primary care practices surveyed. There was low attainment of recommended therapeutic glycaemic, lipid and BP targets. Advice on healthy lifestyle changes was infrequently dispensed, representing a missed opportunity to educate patients on the long-term benefits of lifestyle modification.

Altering source or amount of dietary carbohydrate has acute and chronic effects on postprandial glucose and triglycerides in type 2 diabetes: Canadian trial of Carbohydrates in Diabetes (CCD).

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Nutrition recommendations for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are partly guided by the postprandial responses elicited by diets varying in carbohydrate (CHO). We aimed to explore whether long-term changes in postprandial responses on low-glycemic-index (GI) or low-CHO diets were due to acute or chronic effects in T2DM. METHODS AND RESULTS: Subjects with diet-alone-treated T2DM were randomly assigned to high-CHO/high-GI (H), high-CHO/low-GI (L), or low-CHO/high-monounsaturated-fat (M) diets for 12-months. At week-0 (Baseline) postprandial responses after H-meals (55% CHO, GI = 61) were measured from 0800 h to 1600 h. After 12 mo subjects were randomly assigned to H-meals or study diet meals (L, 57% CHO, GI = 50; M, 44% CHO, GI = 61). This yielded 5 groups: H diet with H-meals (HH, n = 34); L diet with H- (LH, n = 17) or L-meals (LL, n = 16); and M diet with H- (MH, n = 18) or M meals (MM, n = 19). Postprandial glucose fluctuations were lower in LL than all other groups (p < 0.001). Changes in postprandial-triglycerides differed among groups (p < 0.001). After 12 mo in HH and MM both fasting- and postprandial-triglycerides were similar to Baseline while in MH postprandial-triglycerides were significantly higher than at Baseline (p = 0.028). In LH, triglycerides were consistently (0.18-0.34 mmol/L) higher than Baseline throughout the day, while in LL the difference from Baseline varied across the day from 0.04 to 0.36 mmol/L (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Low-GI and low-CHO diets have both acute and chronic effects on postprandial glucose and triglycerides in T2DM subjects. Thus, the composition of the acute test-meal and the habitual diet should be considered when interpreting the nutritional implications of different postprandial responses.

Poor achievement of guidelines-recommended targets in type 2 diabetes: findings from a contemporary prospective cohort study.

AIMS: To prospectively evaluate diabetes management in the primary care setting and explore factors related to guideline-recommended triple target achievement [blood pressure (BP) ≤ 130/80 mmHg, A1C ≤ 7% and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol < 2.5 mmol/l]. METHODS: Baseline, 6 and 12 month data on clinical and laboratory parameters were measured in 3002 patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled as part of a prospective quality enhancement research initiative in Canada. A generalised estimating equation model was fitted to assess variables associated with triple target achievement. RESULTS: At baseline, 54%, 53% and 64% of patients, respectively, had BP, A1C and LDL-cholesterol at target; all three goals were met by 19% of patients. The percentage of individuals achieving these targets significantly increased during the study [60%, 57%, 76% and 26%, respectively, at the final visit, p < 0.0001 except for A1C, p = 0.27]. A much smaller proportion of patients had adequate control during the entire study period [30%, 39%, 53% and 7%, respectively]. In multivariable analysis, women, patients younger than 65 years and patients of Afro-Canadian origin were less likely to achieve the triple target. DISCUSSION: As part of a quality enhancement research initiative, we observed important improvements in the attainment of guidelines-recommended targets in patients with type 2 diabetes followed for a 12-month period in the primary care setting; however, many individuals still failed to achieve and especially maintain optimal goals for therapy, particularly the triple target. Results of the multivariable analysis reinforce the need to address barriers to improve diabetes care, particularly in more susceptible groups.

The relation of low glycaemic index fruit consumption to glycaemic control and risk factors for coronary heart disease in type 2 diabetes.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Sugar has been suggested to promote obesity, diabetes and coronary heart disease (CHD), yet fruit, despite containing sugars, may also have a low glycaemic index (GI) and all fruits are generally recommended for good health. We therefore assessed the effect of fruit with special emphasis on low GI fruit intake in type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This secondary analysis involved 152 type 2 diabetic participants treated with glucose-lowering agents who completed either 6 months of high fibre or low GI dietary advice, including fruit advice, in a parallel design. RESULTS: Change in low GI fruit intake ranged from -3.1 to 2.7 servings/day. The increase in low GI fruit intake significantly predicted reductions in HbA(1c) (r = -0.206, p =0.011), systolic blood pressure (r = -0.183, p = 0.024) and CHD risk (r = -0.213, p = 0.008). Change in total fruit intake ranged from -3.7 to 3.2 servings/day and was not related to study outcomes. In a regression analysis including the eight major carbohydrate foods or classes of foods emphasised in the low GI diet, only low GI fruit and bread contributed independently and significantly to predicting change in HbA(1c). Furthermore, comparing the highest with the lowest quartile of low GI fruit intake, the percentage change in HbA(1c) was reduced by -0.5% HbA(1c) units (95% CI 0.2-0.8 HbA(1c) units, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Low GI fruit consumption as part of a low GI diet was associated with lower HbA(1c), blood pressure and CHD risk and supports a role for low GI fruit consumption in the management of type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00438698.

Persistent lipid abnormalities in statin-treated patients with diabetes mellitus in Europe and Canada: results of the Dyslipidaemia International Study.

AIM: To assess the prevalence of persistent lipid abnormalities in statin-treated patients with diabetes with and without the metabolic syndrome. METHODS: This was a cross-sectional study of 22,063 statin-treated outpatients consecutively recruited by clinicians in Canada and 11 European countries. Patient cardiovascular risk factors, risk level, lipid measurements and lipid-modifying medication regimens were recorded. RESULTS: Of the 20,129 subjects who had documented diabetes and/or metabolic syndrome status, 41% had diabetes (of whom 86.8% also had the metabolic syndrome). Of those with diabetes, 48.1% were not at total cholesterol target compared with 58% of those without diabetes. Amongst those with diabetes, 41.6 and 41.3% of those with and without the metabolic syndrome, respectively, were not at their LDL cholesterol goal relative to 54.2% of those with metabolic syndrome and without diabetes, and 52% of those with neither condition. Twenty per cent of people with diabetes but without the metabolic syndrome were not at the optimal HDL cholesterol level compared with 9% of those with neither condition. Of people with diabetes and the metabolic syndrome, 49.9% were not at optimal triglyceride level relative to 13.5% of people with neither diabetes nor the metabolic syndrome. Simvastatin was the most commonly prescribed statin (>45%) and the most common statin potency was 20-40 mg/day (simvastatin equivalent). Approximately 14% of patients were taking ezetimibe alone or in combination with a statin. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence supporting the benefits of lipid modification and international guideline recommendations, statin-treated patients with diabetes had a high prevalence of persistent lipid abnormalities. There is frequently room to optimize therapy through statin dose up-titration and/or addition of other lipid-modifying therapies.

Lipid-altering efficacy and safety profile of combination therapy with ezetimibe/statin vs. statin monotherapy in patients with and without diabetes: an analysis of pooled data from 27 clinical trials.

AIM: This post hoc analysis compared the lipid-altering efficacy and safety of ezetimibe 10 mg plus statin (EZE/statin) vs. statin monotherapy in hypercholesterolaemic patients with and without diabetes. METHODS: A pooled analysis of 27 previously published, randomized, double-blind, active- or placebo-controlled clinical trials comprising 21 794 adult patients with (n = 6541) and without (n = 15253) diabetes receiving EZE/statin or statin alone for 4-24 weeks evaluated percentage change from baseline in lipids and other parameters. Consistency of the treatment effect across the subgroups was tested using treatment × subgroup interaction. No multiplicity adjustments were made. RESULTS: Treatment effects within both subgroups were generally consistent with the overall population. EZE/statin was more effective than statin alone in improving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TGs), non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein (apo) B and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) in the overall population and both subgroups. Patients with diabetes achieved significantly larger reductions in LDL-C, TC and non-HDL-C compared with non-diabetic patients. Incidences of adverse events or creatine kinase elevations were similar between groups. A small but significantly higher incidence of alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase elevations was seen in patients receiving EZE/statin (0.6%) vs. statin monotherapy (0.3%) in the overall population. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with EZE/statin vs. statin monotherapy provided significantly larger reductions in LDL-C, TC, TG, non-HDL-C, apo B and hs-CRP and significantly greater increases in HDL-C, with a similar safety profile in patients with and without diabetes. Reductions in LDL-C, TC and non-HDL-C were larger in patients with diabetes than in patients without diabetes.

Ezetimibe added to atorvastatin compared with doubling the atorvastatin dose in patients at high risk for coronary heart disease with diabetes mellitus, metabolic syndrome or neither.

AIM: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and metabolic syndrome (MetS) are both associated with increased risk for atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD). Thus, it is useful to know the relative efficacy of lipid-altering drugs in these patient populations. METHODS: A double-blind, parallel group trial of adult patients with hypercholesterolaemia at high-CHD risk receiving atorvastatin 40 mg/day compared atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe 10 mg (ezetimibe) vs. doubling atorvastatin to 80 mg. This post hoc analysis reports lipid efficacy results in patients grouped by diagnosis of T2DM, MetS without T2DM or neither. Per cent change from baseline at week 6 was assessed for LDL-C, total cholesterol, HDL-C , non-HDL-C , Apo A-I, Apo B and triglycerides. Safety was monitored through clinical and laboratory adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Compared with doubling atorvastatin, atorvastatin plus ezetimibe resulted in greater reductions in LDL-C, triglycerides, Apo B, non-HDL-C, total cholesterol and lipid ratios in the T2DM, MetS and neither groups. Treatment effects were of similar magnitude across patient groups with both treatments, except triglycerides, which were slightly greater in the T2DM and MetS groups vs. neither group. Changes in HDL-C , Apo A-I and high sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) were comparable for both treatments in all three groups. Safety and tolerability profiles were generally similar between treatments and across patient groups, as were the incidence of liver and muscle AEs. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with doubling atorvastatin to 80 mg, addition of ezetimibe to atorvastatin 40 mg produced greater improvements in multiple lipid parameters in high-CHD risk patients with T2DM, MetS or neither, consistent with the significantly greater changes observed in the full study cohort (clinical trial # NCT00276484).

Practical steps to improving the management of type 1 diabetes: recommendations from the Global Partnership for Effective Diabetes Management.

The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) led to considerable improvements in the management of type 1 diabetes, with the wider adoption of intensive insulin therapy to reduce the risk of complications. However, a large gap between evidence and practice remains, as recently shown by the Pittsburgh Epidemiology of Diabetes Complications (EDC) study, in which 30-year rates of microvascular complications in the 'real world' EDC patients were twice that of DCCT patients who received intensive insulin therapy. This gap may be attributed to the many challenges that patients and practitioners face in the day-to-day management of the disease. These barriers include reaching glycaemic goals, overcoming the reality and fear of hypoglycaemia, and appropriate insulin therapy and dose adjustment. As practitioners, the question remains: how do we help patients with type 1 diabetes manage glycaemia while overcoming barriers? In this article, the Global Partnership for Effective Diabetes Management provides practical recommendations to help improve the care of patients with type 1 diabetes.

Attainment of Canadian and European guidelines' lipid targets with atorvastatin plus ezetimibe vs. doubling the dose of atorvastatin.

BACKGROUND: Canadian and European treatment guidelines identify low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) as a primary treatment target for hypercholesterolaemia. OBJECTIVES: This post hoc analysis compared ezetimibe 10 mg (ezetimibe) added to atorvastatin vs. doubling the atorvastatin dose on achievement of the 2009 Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) and the 2007 Joint European Prevention Guidelines primary and optional secondary lipid targets and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels. METHODS: After stabilisation on atorvastatin, hypercholesterolaemic patients at moderately high risk (MHR) for coronary heart disease (CHD) not at LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/l were randomised to atorvastatin 20 mg vs. doubling their atorvastatin dose to 40 mg; and patients at high risk (HR) for CHD not at LDL-C < 1.8 mmol/l were randomised to atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe vs. doubling their atorvastatin dose to 80 mg for 6 weeks. RESULTS: When treated with atorvastatin plus ezetimibe, MHR and HR patients had greater attainment of LDL-C, most lipids and lipoproteins and/or hs-CRP targets compared with doubling their atorvastatin dose. More MHR and HR patients achieved dual targets of LDL-C and: Apolipoprotein (Apo) B, total cholesterol (total-C), total-C/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), non-HDL-C, triglycerides, Apo B/Apo A-I or hs-CRP with ezetimibe + atorvastatin treatment compared with doubling their atorvastatin dose. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrated greater achievement of single/dual treatment targets as set by Canadian and European treatment guidelines with ezetimibe added to atorvastatin 20 mg or 40 mg compared with doubling the atorvastatin dose to 40 mg or 80 mg in MHR and HR patients, respectively.

Alirocumab efficacy and safety by body mass index: A pooled analysis from 10 Phase 3 ODYSSEY trials.

AIMS: Increased body mass index (BMI) contributes to cardiovascular risk and may influence efficacy of therapeutic antibodies. We investigated the effect of baseline BMI on efficacy and safety of alirocumab, a PCSK9 monoclonal antibody. METHODS: In a post-hoc analysis, data were pooled from 10 Phase 3 trials (n=4975) of alirocumab vs. placebo/ezetimibe controls. Alirocumab dose was 150mg every 2 weeks in two trials, and 75mg every 2 weeks with possible increase to 150mg at 12 weeks (based on Week 8 low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C]) in eight trials. Efficacy/safety data were assessed in baseline BMI subgroups of≤25,>25 to 30,>30 to 35, and>35kg/m2. RESULTS: Baseline LDL-C levels were lower among patients in the higher BMI subgroups. Significant LDL-C reductions from baseline were observed at Weeks 12 and 24 for alirocumab vs. controls, of similar magnitude regardless of baseline BMI (interaction P-value=0.7119). LDL-C<1.81mmol/L (<70mg/dL) was achieved at Week 24 by 69.8-76.4% of alirocumab-treated patients and 9.7-18.4% of control-treated patients, with no pattern by BMI. A greater proportion of patients in higher vs. lower BMI subgroups required alirocumab dose increase (P=0.0343); proportions were 22.5%, 24.9%, 31.7%, and 27.2% of patients across BMI subgroups of≤25,>25 to 30,>30 to 35, and>35kg/m2, respectively. Adverse event frequencies were similar regardless of BMI; injection-site reaction frequency was higher with alirocumab (5.1-8.2% across BMI categories) vs. controls (3.6-4.8%). CONCLUSIONS: Alirocumab provided consistent LDL-C reductions, with similar safety findings across BMI subgroups.