The risk of sudden cardiac arrest and ventricular arrhythmia with rosiglitazone versus pioglitazone: real-world evidence on thiazolidinedione safety.

BACKGROUND: The low cost of thiazolidinediones makes them a potentially valuable therapeutic option for the > 300 million economically disadvantaged persons worldwide with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Differential selectivity of thiazolidinediones for peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors in the myocardium may lead to disparate arrhythmogenic effects. We examined real-world effects of thiazolidinediones on outpatient-originating sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) and ventricular arrhythmia (VA). METHODS: We conducted population-based high-dimensional propensity score-matched cohort studies in five Medicaid programs (California, Florida, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania | 1999-2012) and a commercial health insurance plan (Optum Clinformatics | 2000-2016). We defined exposure based on incident rosiglitazone or pioglitazone dispensings; the latter served as an active comparator. We controlled for confounding by matching exposure groups on propensity score, informed by baseline covariates identified via a data adaptive approach. We ascertained SCA/VA outcomes precipitating hospital presentation using a validated, diagnosis-based algorithm. We generated marginal hazard ratios (HRs) via Cox proportional hazards regression that accounted for clustering within matched pairs. We prespecified Medicaid and Optum findings as primary and secondary, respectively; the latter served as a conceptual replication dataset. RESULTS: The adjusted HR for SCA/VA among rosiglitazone (vs. pioglitazone) users was 0.91 (0.75-1.10) in Medicaid and 0.88 (0.61-1.28) in Optum. Among Medicaid but not Optum enrollees, we found treatment effect heterogeneity by sex (adjusted HRs = 0.71 [0.54-0.93] and 1.16 [0.89-1.52] in men and women respectively, interaction term p-value = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Rosiglitazone and pioglitazone appear to be associated with similar risks of SCA/VA.

Consensus Statement by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology on the Management of Dyslipidemia and Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease Algorithm - 2020 Executive Summary.

The treatment of lipid disorders begins with lifestyle therapy to improve nutrition, physical activity, weight, and other factors that affect lipids. Secondary causes of lipid disorders should be addressed, and pharmacologic therapy initiated based on a patient's risk for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Patients at extreme ASCVD risk should be treated with high-intensity statin therapy to achieve a goal low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) of <55 mg/dL, and those at very high ASCVD risk should be treated to achieve LDL-C <70 mg/dL. Treatment for moderate and high ASCVD risk patients may begin with a moderate-intensity statin to achieve an LDL-C <100 mg/dL, while the LDL-C goal is <130 mg/dL for those at low risk. In all cases, treatment should be intensified, including the addition of other LDL-C-lowering agents (i.e., proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors, ezetimibe, colesevelam, or bempedoic acid) as needed to achieve treatment goals. When targeting triglyceride levels, the desirable goal is <150 mg/dL. Statin therapy should be combined with a fibrate, prescription-grade omega-3 fatty acid, and/or niacin to reduce triglycerides in all patients with triglycerides ≥500 mg/dL, and icosapent ethyl should be added to a statin in any patient with established ASCVD or diabetes with ≥2 ASCVD risk factors and triglycerides between 135 and 499 mg/dL to prevent ASCVD events. Management of additional risk factors such as elevated lipoprotein(a) and statin intolerance is also described.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY 2018 POSITION STATEMENT ON INTEGRATION OF INSULIN PUMPS AND CONTINUOUS GLUCOSE MONITORING IN PATIENTS WITH DIABETES MELLITUS.

This document represents the official position of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology. Where there are no randomized controlled trials or specific U.S. FDA labeling for issues in clinical practice, the participating clinical experts utilized their judgment and experience. Every effort was made to achieve consensus among the committee members. Position statements are meant to provide guidance, but they are not to be considered prescriptive for any individual patient and cannot replace the judgment of a clinician. AACE/ACE Task Force on Integration of Insulin Pumps and Continuous Glucose Monitoring in the Management of Patients With Diabetes Mellitus Chair George Grunberger, MD, FACP, FACE Task Force Members Yehuda Handelsman, MD, FACP, FNLA, MACE Zachary T. Bloomgarden, MD, MACE Vivian A. Fonseca, MD, FACE Alan J. Garber, MD, PhD, FACE Richard A. Haas, MD, FACE Victor L. Roberts, MD, MBA, FACP, FACE Guillermo E. Umpierrez, MD, CDE, FACP, FACE Abbreviations: AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists ACE = American College of Endocrinology A1C = glycated hemoglobin BGM = blood glucose monitoring CGM = continuous glucose monitoring CSII = continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion DM = diabetes mellitus FDA = Food & Drug Administration MDI = multiple daily injections T1DM = type 1 diabetes mellitus T2DM = type 2 diabetes mellitus SAP = sensor-augmented pump SMBG = self-monitoring of blood glucose STAR 3 = Sensor-Augmented Pump Therapy for A1C Reduction phase 3 trial.

AACE/ACE POSITION STATEMENT ON THE USE OF FOLLOW-ON BIOLOGICS AND BIOSIMILARS FOR ENDOCRINE DISEASES.

This document represents the official position of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and American College of Endocrinology. Where there were no randomized controlled trials or specific U.S. FDA labeling for issues in clinical practice, the participating clinical experts utilized their judgment and experience. Every effort was made to achieve consensus among the committee members. Position and consensus statements are meant to provide guidance, but they are not to be considered prescriptive for any individual patient and cannot replace the judgment of a clinician. ABBREVIATIONS: BPCIA = Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act; FDA = Food and Drug Administration; FFDC = Federal Food Drug and Cosmetics Act; PHS = Public Health Services Act; TE = therapeutic equivalence.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY GUIDELINES FOR MANAGEMENT OF DYSLIPIDEMIA AND PREVENTION OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE.

OBJECTIVE: The development of these guidelines is mandated by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) Board of Directors and American College of Endocrinology (ACE) Board of Trustees and adheres with published AACE protocols for the standardized production of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). METHODS: Recommendations are based on diligent reviews of the clinical evidence with transparent incorporation of subjective factors, according to established AACE/ACE guidelines for guidelines protocols. RESULTS: The Executive Summary of this document contains 87 recommendations of which 45 are Grade A (51.7%), 18 are Grade B (20.7%), 15 are Grade C (17.2%), and 9 (10.3%) are Grade D. These detailed, evidence-based recommendations allow for nuance-based clinical decision-making that addresses multiple aspects of real-world medical care. The evidence base presented in the subsequent Appendix provides relevant supporting information for Executive Summary Recommendations. This update contains 695 citations of which 203 (29.2 %) are EL 1 (strong), 137 (19.7%) are EL 2 (intermediate), 119 (17.1%) are EL 3 (weak), and 236 (34.0%) are EL 4 (no clinical evidence). CONCLUSION: This CPG is a practical tool that endocrinologists, other health care professionals, health-related organizations, and regulatory bodies can use to reduce the risks and consequences of dyslipidemia. It provides guidance on screening, risk assessment, and treatment recommendations for a range of individuals with various lipid disorders. The recommendations emphasize the importance of treating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in some individuals to lower goals than previously endorsed and support the measurement of coronary artery calcium scores and inflammatory markers to help stratify risk. Special consideration is given to individuals with diabetes, familial hypercholesterolemia, women, and youth with dyslipidemia. Both clinical and cost-effectiveness data are provided to support treatment decisions. ABBREVIATIONS: 4S = Scandinavian Simvastatin Survival Study A1C = glycated hemoglobin AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists AAP = American Academy of Pediatrics ACC = American College of Cardiology ACE = American College of Endocrinology ACS = acute coronary syndrome ADMIT = Arterial Disease Multiple Intervention Trial ADVENT = Assessment of Diabetes Control and Evaluation of the Efficacy of Niaspan Trial AFCAPS/TexCAPS = Air Force/Texas Coronary Atherosclerosis Prevention Study AHA = American Heart Association AHRQ = Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality AIM-HIGH = Atherothrombosis Intervention in Metabolic Syndrome With Low HDL/High Triglycerides trial ASCVD = atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease ATP = Adult Treatment Panel apo = apolipoprotein BEL = best evidence level BIP = Bezafibrate Infarction Prevention trial BMI = body mass index CABG = coronary artery bypass graft CAC = coronary artery calcification CARDS = Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study CDP = Coronary Drug Project trial CI = confidence interval CIMT = carotid intimal media thickness CKD = chronic kidney disease CPG(s) = clinical practice guideline(s) CRP = C-reactive protein CTT = Cholesterol Treatment Trialists CV = cerebrovascular CVA = cerebrovascular accident EL = evidence level FH = familial hypercholesterolemia FIELD = Secondary Endpoints from the Fenofibrate Intervention and Event Lowering in Diabetes trial FOURIER = Further Cardiovascular Outcomes Research with PCSK9 Inhibition in Subjects With Elevated Risk trial HATS = HDL-Atherosclerosis Treatment Study HDL-C = high-density lipoprotein cholesterol HeFH = heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia HHS = Helsinki Heart Study HIV = human immunodeficiency virus HoFH = homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia HPS = Heart Protection Study HPS2-THRIVE = Treatment of HDL to Reduce the Incidence of Vascular Events trial HR = hazard ratio HRT = hormone replacement therapy hsCRP = high-sensitivity CRP IMPROVE-IT = Improved Reduction of Outcomes: Vytorin Efficacy International Trial IRAS = Insulin Resistance Atherosclerosis Study JUPITER = Justification for the Use of Statins in Primary Prevention: An Intervention Trial Evaluating Rosuvastatin LDL-C = low-density lipoprotein cholesterol Lp-PLA2 = lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 MACE = major cardiovascular events MESA = Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis MetS = metabolic syndrome MI = myocardial infarction MRFIT = Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial NCEP = National Cholesterol Education Program NHLBI = National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute PCOS = polycystic ovary syndrome PCSK9 = proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 Post CABG = Post Coronary Artery Bypass Graft trial PROSPER = Prospective Study of Pravastatin in the Elderly at Risk trial QALY = quality-adjusted life-year ROC = receiver-operator characteristic SOC = standard of care SHARP = Study of Heart and Renal Protection T1DM = type 1 diabetes mellitus T2DM = type 2 diabetes mellitus TG = triglycerides TNT = Treating to New Targets trial VA-HIT = Veterans Affairs High-Density Lipoprotein Cholesterol Intervention Trial VLDL-C = very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol WHI = Women's Health Initiative.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY GUIDELINES FOR MANAGEMENT OF DYSLIPIDEMIA AND PREVENTION OF CARDIOVASCULAR DISEASE - EXECUTIVE SUMMARYComplete Appendix to Guidelines available at http://journals.aace.com.

OBJECTIVE: The development of these guidelines is mandated by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) Board of Directors and American College of Endocrinology (ACE) Board of Trustees and adheres with published AACE protocols for the standardized production of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs). METHODS: Each Recommendation is based on a diligent review of the clinical evidence with transparent incorporation of subjective factors. RESULTS: The Executive Summary of this document contains 87 Recommendations of which 45 are Grade A (51.7%), 18 are Grade B (20.7%), 15 are Grade C (17.2%), and 9 (10.3%) are Grade D. These detailed, evidence-based recommendations allow for nuance-based clinical decision making that addresses multiple aspects of real-world medical care. The evidence base presented in the subsequent Appendix provides relevant supporting information for Executive Summary Recommendations. This update contains 695 citations of which 202 (29.1 %) are evidence level (EL) 1 (strong), 137 (19.7%) are EL 2 (intermediate), 119 (17.1%) are EL 3 (weak), and 237 (34.1%) are EL 4 (no clinical evidence). CONCLUSION: This CPG is a practical tool that endocrinologists, other healthcare professionals, regulatory bodies and health-related organizations can use to reduce the risks and consequences of dyslipidemia. It provides guidance on screening, risk assessment, and treatment recommendations for a range of patients with various lipid disorders. These recommendations emphasize the importance of treating low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in some individuals to lower goals than previously recommended and support the measurement of coronary artery calcium scores and inflammatory markers to help stratify risk. Special consideration is given to patients with diabetes, familial hypercholesterolemia, women, and pediatric patients with dyslipidemia. Both clinical and cost-effectiveness data are provided to support treatment decisions. ABBREVIATIONS: A1C = hemoglobin A1C ACE = American College of Endocrinology ACS = acute coronary syndrome AHA = American Heart Association ASCVD = atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease ATP = Adult Treatment Panel apo = apolipoprotein BEL = best evidence level CKD = chronic kidney disease CPG = clinical practice guidelines CVA = cerebrovascular accident EL = evidence level FH = familial hypercholesterolemia HDL-C = high-density lipoprotein cholesterol HeFH = heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia HIV = human immunodeficiency virus HoFH = homozygous familial hypercholesterolemia hsCRP = high-sensitivity C-reactive protein LDL-C = low-density lipoprotein cholesterol Lp-PLA2 = lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A2 MESA = Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis MetS = metabolic syndrome MI = myocardial infarction NCEP = National Cholesterol Education Program PCOS = polycystic ovary syndrome PCSK9 = proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 T1DM = type 1 diabetes mellitus T2DM = type 2 diabetes mellitus TG = triglycerides VLDL-C = very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY POSITION STATEMENT ON THE ASSOCIATION OF SGLT-2 INHIBITORS AND DIABETIC KETOACIDOSIS.

ABBREVIATIONS: AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists ACE = American College of Endocrinology DKA = diabetic ketoacidosis EMA = European Medicines Agency FDA = U.S. Food and Drug Administration SGLT-2 = sodium glucosecotransporter 2 T1D = type 1 diabetes T2D = type 2 diabetes.

CONSENSUS STATEMENT BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY ON THE COMPREHENSIVE TYPE 2 DIABETES MANAGEMENT ALGORITHM--2015 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.

This document represents the official position of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the American College of Endocrinology. Where there were no randomized controlled trials or specific U.S. FDA labeling for issues in clinical practice, the participating clinical experts utilized their judgment and experience. Every effort was made to achieve consensus among the committee members. Position statements are meant to provide guidance, but they are not to be considered prescriptive for any individual patient and cannot replace the judgment of a clinician.

Association Between Age at Diabetes Diagnosis and Subsequent Incidence of Cancer: A Longitudinal Population-Based Cohort.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes presenting at a younger age has a more aggressive nature. We aimed to explore the association of age at type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) diagnosis with subsequent cancer incidence in a large Chinese population. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The prospective population-based longitudinal cohort included 428,568 newly diagnosed T2DM patients from 2011 to 2018. Participants were divided into six groups according to their age at diagnosis: 20-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70-74, and ≥75 years. The incidence of overall and 14 site-specific cancers was compared with the Shanghai general population including 100,649,346 person-years. RESULTS: A total of 18,853 and 582,643 overall cancer cases were recorded in the T2DM cohort and the general population. The age-standardized rate of overall cancer in T2DM patients was 501 (95% CI: 491, 511) per 100,000 person-years, and the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) was 1.10 (1.09, 1.12). Younger age at T2DM diagnosis was associated with higher incidence of overall and site-specific cancers. SIRs for overall cancer with T2DM diagnosis at ages 20-54, 55-59, 60-64, 65-69, 70-74, and ≥75 years were 1.48 (1.41, 1.54), 1.30 (1.25, 1.35), 1.19 (1.15, 1.23), 1.16 (1.12, 1.20), 1.06 (1.02, 1.10), and 0.86 (0.84, 0.89), respectively. Similar trends were observed for site-specific cancers, including respiratory, colorectum, stomach, liver, pancreatic, bladder, central nervous system, kidney, and gallbladder cancer and lymphoma among both males and females. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the necessity of stratifying management for T2DM according to age of diagnosis. As with a range of vascular outcomes, age-standardized cancer risks are greater in earlier compared with later onset T2DM.

DCRM 2.0: Multispecialty practice recommendations for the management of diabetes, cardiorenal, and metabolic diseases.

The spectrum of cardiorenal and metabolic diseases comprises many disorders, including obesity, type 2 diabetes (T2D), chronic kidney disease (CKD), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), heart failure (HF), dyslipidemias, hypertension, and associated comorbidities such as pulmonary diseases and metabolism dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease and metabolism dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASLD and MASH, respectively, formerly known as nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis [NAFLD and NASH]). Because cardiorenal and metabolic diseases share pathophysiologic pathways, two or more are often present in the same individual. Findings from recent outcome trials have demonstrated benefits of various treatments across a range of conditions, suggesting a need for practice recommendations that will guide clinicians to better manage complex conditions involving diabetes, cardiorenal, and/or metabolic (DCRM) diseases. To meet this need, we formed an international volunteer task force comprising leading cardiologists, nephrologists, endocrinologists, and primary care physicians to develop the DCRM 2.0 Practice Recommendations, an updated and expanded revision of a previously published multispecialty consensus on the comprehensive management of persons living with DCRM. The recommendations are presented as 22 separate graphics covering the essentials of management to improve general health, control cardiorenal risk factors, and manage cardiorenal and metabolic comorbidities, leading to improved patient outcomes.

Association between age at diabetes onset or diabetes duration and subsequent risk of pancreatic cancer: Results from a longitudinal cohort and mendelian randomization study.

Background: The aim of the study is to estimate the incidence of pancreatic cancer among individuals with new-onset type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) and evaluate the relationship of pancreatic cancer risk with age at diabetes onset and diabetes duration. Methods: This longitudinal cohort study included 428,362 new-onset T2DM patients in Shanghai and Mendelian randomization (MR) in the east-Asian population were used to investigate the association. Incidence rates of pancreatic cancer in all patients and by subgroups were calculated and compared to the general population. Findings: A total of 1056 incident pancreatic cancer cases were identified during eight consecutive years of follow-up. The overall pancreatic cancer annual incidence rate was 55·28/100,000 person years in T2DM patients, higher than that in the general population, with a standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of 1·54 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1·45-1·64). The incidence of pancreatic cancer increased with age and a significantly higher incidence was observed in the older groups with T2DM. However, the relative pancreatic cancer risk was inversely related to age of T2DM onset, and a higher SIR of 5·73 (95%CI, 4·49-7·22) was observed in the 20-54 years old group. The risk of pancreatic cancer was elevated at any diabetes duration. Fasting blood glucose ≥10·0 mmol/L was associated with increased risk of pancreatic cancer. MR analysis indicated a positive association between T2DM and pancreatic cancer risk. Interpretation: Efforts toward early and close follow-up programs, especially in individuals with young-onset T2DM, and the improvement of glucose control might represent effective strategies for improving the detection and results of treatment of pancreatic cancer. Funding: Chinese National Natural Science Foundation.

CVD risk in non-albuminuric chronic kidney disease in hypertensive, non-diabetic subjects: A post-hoc analysis from SPRINT.

Introduction: The risks associated with non-albuminuric chronic kidney disease (CKD) have been investigated in diabetes mellitus but not in hypertensive patients. The objective of this study was to investigate the risks associated with non-albuminuric CKD in treated hypertensive patients in the Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT) population. Methods: Based on baseline albuminuria status (urine albumin/creatinine ratio [UACR], ≥30 or <30 mg/g) and the levels of estimated glomerular filtration rate ([eGFR], ≥60, 45-59, or <45 mL/min/1.73 m2), participants were classified into six subgroups to assess the risks associated with the primary outcome and mortality. The primary composite outcome was myocardial infarction, other acute coronary syndromes, stroke, heart failure, or mortality from cardiovascular causes. Results: During a median follow-up of 3.26 years in 8,866 hypertensive patients, there were 352 deaths and 547 participants with the primary outcome. In adjusted Cox regression analysis using non-CKD and non-albuminuria (eGFR ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m2 combined with UACR <30 mg/g) as reference, albuminuria whether combined with CKD or not, showed significantly higher risk of both primary outcome and all-cause mortality in the total population. Whereas, non-albuminuria only combined with eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2 showed significantly higher risk of both primary outcome and all-cause mortality in the intensive-therapy group. Discussion: Non-albuminuric CKD did have higher risk of all-cause and CVD mortality only if the eGFR <45 mL/min/1.73 m2. Increased albuminuria conferred higher risk of primary outcome and all-cause mortality irrespective the levels of eGFR. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, number: NCT01206062.

Comparative Safety of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors and Sudden Cardiac Arrest and Ventricular Arrhythmia: Population-Based Cohort Studies.

In vivo studies suggest that arrhythmia risk may be greater with less selective dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, but evidence from population-based studies is missing. We aimed to compare saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and linagliptin with regard to risk of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA)/ventricular arrhythmia (VA). We conducted high-dimensional propensity score (hdPS) matched, new-user cohort studies. We analyzed Medicaid and Optum Clinformatics separately. We identified new users of saxagliptin, sitagliptin (both databases), and linagliptin (Optum only). We defined SCA/VA outcomes using emergency department and inpatient diagnoses. We identified and then controlled for confounders via a data-adaptive, hdPS approach. We generated marginal hazard ratios (HRs) via Cox proportional hazards regression using a robust variance estimator while adjusting for calendar year. We identified the following matched comparisons: saxagliptin vs. sitagliptin (23,895 vs. 96,972) in Medicaid, saxagliptin vs. sitagliptin (48,388 vs. 117,383) in Optum, and linagliptin vs. sitagliptin (36,820 vs. 78,701) in Optum. In Medicaid, use of saxagliptin (vs. sitagliptin) was associated with an increased rate of SCA/VA (adjusted HR (aHR), 2.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.24-3.25). However, in Optum data, this finding was not present (aHR, 0.79, 95% CI 0.41-1.51). Further, we found no association between linagliptin (vs. sitagliptin) and SCA/VA (aHR, 0.65, 95% CI 0.36-1.17). We found discordant results regarding the association between SCA/VA with saxagliptin compared with sitagliptin in two independent datasets. It remains unclear whether these findings are due to heterogeneity of treatment effect in the different populations, chance, or unmeasured confounding.

DCRM Multispecialty Practice Recommendations for the management of diabetes, cardiorenal, and metabolic diseases.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D), chronic kidney disease (CKD), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), and heart failure (HF)-along with their associated risk factors-have overlapping etiologies, and two or more of these conditions frequently occur in the same patient. Many recent cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) have demonstrated the benefits of agents originally developed to control T2D, ASCVD, or CKD risk factors, and these agents have transcended their primary indications to confer benefits across a range of conditions. This evolution in CVOT evidence calls for practice recommendations that are not constrained by a single discipline to help clinicians manage patients with complex conditions involving diabetes, cardiorenal, and/or metabolic (DCRM) diseases. The ultimate goal for these recommendations is to be comprehensive yet succinct and easy to follow by the nonexpert-whether a specialist or a primary care clinician. To meet this need, we formed a volunteer task force comprising leading cardiologists, nephrologists, endocrinologists, and primary care physicians to develop the DCRM Practice Recommendations, a multispecialty consensus on the comprehensive management of the patient with complicated metabolic disease. The task force recommendations are based on strong evidence and incorporate practical guidance that is clinically relevant and simple to implement, with the aim of improving outcomes in patients with DCRM. The recommendations are presented as 18 separate graphics covering lifestyle therapy, patient self-management education, technology for DCRM management, prediabetes, cognitive dysfunction, vaccinations, clinical tests, lipids, hypertension, anticoagulation and antiplatelet therapy, antihyperglycemic therapy, hypoglycemia, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), ASCVD, HF, CKD, and comorbid HF and CKD, as well as a graphical summary of medications used for DCRM.