ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the comparative effectiveness of commonly used glucose-lowering medications, when added to metformin, with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease outcomes in persons with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We assessed the comparative effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications, added to metformin, in achieving and maintaining a glycated hemoglobin level of less than 7.0% in participants with type 2 diabetes. The randomly assigned therapies were insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin. Prespecified secondary outcomes with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease included hypertension and dyslipidemia, confirmed moderately or severely increased albuminuria or an estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area, diabetic peripheral neuropathy assessed with the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument, cardiovascular events (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE], hospitalization for heart failure, or an aggregate outcome of any cardiovascular event), and death. Hazard ratios are presented with 95% confidence limits that are not adjusted for multiple comparisons. RESULTS: During a mean 5.0 years of follow-up in 5047 participants, there were no material differences among the interventions with respect to the development of hypertension or dyslipidemia or with respect to microvascular outcomes; the mean overall rate (i.e., events per 100 participant-years) of moderately increased albuminuria levels was 2.6, of severely increased albuminuria levels 1.1, of renal impairment 2.9, and of diabetic peripheral neuropathy 16.7. The treatment groups did not differ with respect to MACE (overall rate, 1.0), hospitalization for heart failure (0.4), death from cardiovascular causes (0.3), or all deaths (0.6). There were small differences with respect to rates of any cardiovascular disease, with 1.9, 1.9, 1.4, and 2.0 in the glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin groups, respectively. When one treatment was compared with the combined results of the other three treatments, the hazard ratios for any cardiovascular disease were 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 1.3) in the glargine group, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4) in the glimepiride group, 0.7 (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9) in the liraglutide group, and 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.5) in the sitagliptin group. CONCLUSIONS: In participants with type 2 diabetes, the incidences of microvascular complications and death were not materially different among the four treatment groups. The findings indicated possible differences among the groups in the incidence of any cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.).
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases , Diabetes Complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Glycated Hemoglobin , Hypoglycemic Agents , Metformin , Albuminuria/etiology , Albuminuria/prevention & control , Blood Glucose/analysis , Cardiovascular Diseases/etiology , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Comparative Effectiveness Research , Diabetes Complications/etiology , Diabetes Complications/prevention & control , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetic Neuropathies/diagnosis , Diabetic Neuropathies/etiology , Diabetic Neuropathies/prevention & control , Drug Therapy, Combination , Dyslipidemias/etiology , Dyslipidemias/prevention & control , Glomerular Filtration Rate , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Heart Failure/etiology , Heart Failure/prevention & control , Humans , Hypertension/etiology , Hypertension/prevention & control , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin Glargine/adverse effects , Insulin Glargine/therapeutic use , Liraglutide/adverse effects , Liraglutide/therapeutic use , Metformin/adverse effects , Metformin/therapeutic use , Microvessels/drug effects , Sitagliptin Phosphate/adverse effects , Sitagliptin Phosphate/therapeutic use , Sulfonylurea Compounds/adverse effects , Sulfonylurea Compounds/therapeutic useABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The comparative effectiveness of glucose-lowering medications for use with metformin to maintain target glycated hemoglobin levels in persons with type 2 diabetes is uncertain. METHODS: In this trial involving participants with type 2 diabetes of less than 10 years' duration who were receiving metformin and had glycated hemoglobin levels of 6.8 to 8.5%, we compared the effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications. We randomly assigned participants to receive insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), the sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, or sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor. The primary metabolic outcome was a glycated hemoglobin level, measured quarterly, of 7.0% or higher that was subsequently confirmed, and the secondary metabolic outcome was a confirmed glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5%. RESULTS: A total of 5047 participants (19.8% Black and 18.6% Hispanic or Latinx) who had received metformin for type 2 diabetes were followed for a mean of 5.0 years. The cumulative incidence of a glycated hemoglobin level of 7.0% or higher (the primary metabolic outcome) differed significantly among the four groups (P<0.001 for a global test of differences across groups); the rates with glargine (26.5 per 100 participant-years) and liraglutide (26.1) were similar and lower than those with glimepiride (30.4) and sitagliptin (38.1). The differences among the groups with respect to a glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5% (the secondary outcome) paralleled those of the primary outcome. There were no material differences with respect to the primary outcome across prespecified subgroups defined according to sex, age, or race or ethnic group; however, among participants with higher baseline glycated hemoglobin levels there appeared to be an even greater benefit with glargine, liraglutide, and glimepiride than with sitagliptin. Severe hypoglycemia was rare but significantly more frequent with glimepiride (in 2.2% of the participants) than with glargine (1.3%), liraglutide (1.0%), or sitagliptin (0.7%). Participants who received liraglutide reported more frequent gastrointestinal side effects and lost more weight than those in the other treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS: All four medications, when added to metformin, decreased glycated hemoglobin levels. However, glargine and liraglutide were significantly, albeit modestly, more effective in achieving and maintaining target glycated hemoglobin levels. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.).
Subject(s)
Blood Glucose , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Glycated Hemoglobin , Hypoglycemic Agents , Blood Glucose/analysis , Comparative Effectiveness Research , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors/adverse effects , Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Drug Therapy, Combination , Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor/agonists , Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor/therapeutic use , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin Glargine/adverse effects , Insulin Glargine/therapeutic use , Liraglutide/adverse effects , Liraglutide/therapeutic use , Metformin/adverse effects , Metformin/therapeutic use , Sitagliptin Phosphate/adverse effects , Sitagliptin Phosphate/therapeutic use , Sulfonylurea Compounds/adverse effects , Sulfonylurea Compounds/therapeutic use , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The prevalence of type 2 diabetes in youth is increasing, but little is known regarding the occurrence of related complications as these youths transition to adulthood. METHODS: We previously conducted a multicenter clinical trial (from 2004 to 2011) to evaluate the effects of one of three treatments (metformin, metformin plus rosiglitazone, or metformin plus an intensive lifestyle intervention) on the time to loss of glycemic control in participants who had onset of type 2 diabetes in youth. After completion of the trial, participants were transitioned to metformin with or without insulin and were enrolled in an observational follow-up study (performed from 2011 to 2020), which was conducted in two phases; the results of this follow-up study are reported here. Assessments for diabetic kidney disease, hypertension, dyslipidemia, and nerve disease were performed annually, and assessments for retinal disease were performed twice. Complications related to diabetes identified outside the study were confirmed and adjudicated. RESULTS: At the end of the second phase of the follow-up study (January 2020), the mean (±SD) age of the 500 participants who were included in the analyses was 26.4±2.8 years, and the mean time since the diagnosis of diabetes was 13.3±1.8 years. The cumulative incidence of hypertension was 67.5%, the incidence of dyslipidemia was 51.6%, the incidence of diabetic kidney disease was 54.8%, and the incidence of nerve disease was 32.4%. The prevalence of retinal disease, including more advanced stages, was 13.7% in the period from 2010 to 2011 and 51.0% in the period from 2017 to 2018. At least one complication occurred in 60.1% of the participants, and at least two complications occurred in 28.4%. Risk factors for the development of complications included minority race or ethnic group, hyperglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. No adverse events were recorded during follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Among participants who had onset of type 2 diabetes in youth, the risk of complications, including microvascular complications, increased steadily over time and affected most participants by the time of young adulthood. Complications were more common among participants of minority race and ethnic group and among those with hyperglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01364350 and NCT02310724.).
Subject(s)
Diabetes Complications/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Adolescent , Child , Diabetes Complications/ethnology , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Dyslipidemias/complications , Dyslipidemias/epidemiology , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Hypertension/complications , Hypertension/epidemiology , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Male , Metformin/therapeutic use , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The reduction in cardiovascular disease (CVD) events with edetate disodium (EDTA) in the Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy (TACT) suggested that chelation of toxic metals might provide novel opportunities to reduce CVD in patients with diabetes. Lead and cadmium are vasculotoxic metals chelated by EDTA. We present baseline characteristics for participants in TACT2, a randomized, double-masked, placebo-controlled trial designed as a replication of the TACT trial limited to patients with diabetes. METHODS: TACT2 enrolled 1,000 participants with diabetes and prior myocardial infarction, age 50 years or older between September 2016 and December 2020. Among 959 participants with at least one infusion, 933 had blood and/or urine metals measured at the Centers for Diseases Control and Prevention using the same methodology as in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). We compared metal levels in TACT2 to a contemporaneous subset of NHANES participants with CVD, diabetes and other inclusion criteria similar to TACT2's participants. RESULTS: At baseline, the median (interquartile range, IQR) age was 67 (60, 72) years, 27% were women, 78% reported white race, mean (SD) BMI was 32.7 (6.6) kg/m2, 4% reported type 1 diabetes, 46.8% were treated with insulin, 22.3% with GLP1-receptor agonists or SGLT-2 inhibitors, 90.2% with aspirin, warfarin or P2Y12 inhibitors, and 86.5% with statins. Blood lead was detectable in all participants; median (IQR) was 9.19 (6.30, 13.9) µg/L. Blood and urine cadmium were detectable in 97% and median (IQR) levels were 0.28 (0.18, 0.43) µg/L and 0.30 (0.18, 0.51) µg/g creatinine, respectively. Metal levels were largely similar to those in the contemporaneous NHANES subset. CONCLUSIONS: TACT2 participants were characterized by high use of medication to treat CVD and diabetes and similar baseline metal levels as in the general US population. TACT2 will determine whether chelation therapy reduces the occurrence of subsequent CVD events in this high-risk population. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov. Identifier: NCT02733185. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02733185.
Subject(s)
Chelation Therapy , Humans , Female , Male , Middle Aged , Aged , Chelation Therapy/methods , Double-Blind Method , Edetic Acid/therapeutic use , Lead/blood , Lead/urine , Cadmium/urine , Cadmium/blood , Chelating Agents/therapeutic use , Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Cardiovascular Diseases/bloodABSTRACT
Importance: In 2013, the Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy (TACT) reported that edetate disodium (EDTA)-based chelation significantly reduced cardiovascular disease (CVD) events by 18% in 1708 patients with a prior myocardial infarction (MI). Objective: To replicate the finding of TACT in individuals with diabetes and previous MI. Design, Setting, and Participants: A 2 × 2 factorial, double-masked, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial at 88 sites in the US and Canada, involving participants who were 50 years or older, had diabetes, and had experienced an MI at least 6 weeks before recruitment compared the effect of EDTA-based chelation vs placebo infusions on CVD events and compared the effect of high doses of oral multivitamins and minerals with oral placebo. This article reports on the chelation vs placebo infusion comparisons. Interventions: Eligible participants were randomly assigned to 40 weekly infusions of an EDTA-based chelation solution or matching placebo and to twice daily oral, high-dose multivitamin and mineral supplements or matching placebo for 60 months. This article addresses the chelation study. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was the composite of all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina. Median follow-up was 48 months. Primary comparisons were made from patients who received at least 1 assigned infusion. Results: Of the 959 participants (median age, 67 years [IQR, 60-72 years]; 27% females; 78% White, 10% Black, and 20% Hispanic), 483 received at least 1 chelation infusion and 476 at least 1 placebo infusion. A primary end point event occurred in 172 participants (35.6%) in the chelation group and in 170 (35.7%) in the placebo group (adjusted hazard ratio [HR], 0.93; 95% CI, 0.76-1.16; P = .53). The 5-year primary event cumulative incidence rates were 45.8% for the chelation group and 46.5% for the placebo group. CV death, MI, or stroke events occurred in 89 participants (18.4%) in the chelation group and in 94 (19.7%) in the placebo group (adjusted HR, 0.89; 95% CI, 0.66-1.19). Death from any cause occurred in 84 participants (17.4%) in the chelation group and in 84 (17.6%) in the placebo group (adjusted HR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.71-1.30). Chelation reduced median blood lead levels from 9.03 µg/L at baseline to 3.46 µg/L at infusion 40 (P < .001). Corresponding levels in the placebo group were 9.3 µg/L and 8.7 µg/L, respectively. Conclusions and Relevance: Despite effectively reducing blood lead levels, EDTA chelation was not effective in reducing cardiovascular events in stable patients with coronary artery disease who have diabetes and a history of MI. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02733185.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Lifestyle intervention and metformin have been shown to prevent diabetes; however, their efficacy in preventing cardiovascular disease associated with the development of diabetes is unclear. We examined whether these interventions reduced the incidence of major cardiovascular events over a 21-year median follow-up of participants in the DPP trial (Diabetes Prevention Program) and DPPOS (Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study). METHODS: During DPP, 3234 participants with impaired glucose tolerance were randomly assigned to metformin 850 mg twice daily, intensive lifestyle or placebo, and followed for 3 years. During the next 18-year average follow-up in DPPOS, all participants were offered a less intensive group lifestyle intervention, and unmasked metformin was continued in the metformin group. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death adjudicated by standard criteria. An extended cardiovascular outcome included the primary outcome or hospitalization for heart failure or unstable angina, coronary or peripheral revascularization, coronary heart disease diagnosed by angiography, or silent myocardial infarction by ECG. ECGs and cardiovascular risk factors were measured annually. RESULTS: Neither metformin nor lifestyle intervention reduced the primary outcome: metformin versus placebo hazard ratio 1.03 (95% CI, 0.78-1.37; P = 0.81) and lifestyle versus placebo hazard ratio 1.14 (95% CI, 0.87-1.50; P = 0.34). Risk factor adjustment did not change these results. No effect of either intervention was seen on the extended cardiovascular outcome. CONCLUSIONS: Neither metformin nor lifestyle reduced major cardiovascular events in DPPOS over 21 years despite long-term prevention of diabetes. Provision of group lifestyle intervention to all, extensive out-of-study use of statin and antihypertensive agents, and reduction in the use of study metformin together with out-of-study metformin use over time may have diluted the effects of the interventions. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov; Unique identifiers: DPP (NCT00004992) and DPPOS (NCT00038727).
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 , Metformin , Myocardial Infarction , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/epidemiology , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Life Style , Metformin/therapeutic use , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Outcome Assessment, Health CareABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. APPROACH: An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in screening, diagnosis, or monitoring of diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT: Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the people with diabetes measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring (CGM) devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring, genetic testing, and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed. SUMMARY: The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1 , Diabetes Mellitus , Humans , Glycated Hemoglobin , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/therapy , InsulinABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Numerous laboratory tests are used in the diagnosis and management of patients with diabetes mellitus. The quality of the scientific evidence supporting the use of these assays varies substantially. An expert committee compiled evidence-based recommendations for laboratory analysis in patients with diabetes. The overall quality of the evidence and the strength of the recommendations were evaluated. The draft consensus recommendations were evaluated by invited reviewers and presented for public comment. Suggestions were incorporated as deemed appropriate by the authors (see Acknowledgments in the full version of the guideline). The guidelines were reviewed by the Evidence Based Laboratory Medicine Committee and the Board of Directors of the American Association of Clinical Chemistry and by the Professional Practice Committee of the American Diabetes Association. CONTENT: Diabetes can be diagnosed by demonstrating increased concentrations of glucose in venous plasma or increased hemoglobin A1c (Hb A1c) in the blood. Glycemic control is monitored by the patients measuring their own blood glucose with meters and/or with continuous interstitial glucose monitoring devices and also by laboratory analysis of Hb A1c. The potential roles of noninvasive glucose monitoring; genetic testing; and measurement of ketones, autoantibodies, urine albumin, insulin, proinsulin, and C-peptide are addressed. SUMMARY: The guidelines provide specific recommendations based on published data or derived from expert consensus. Several analytes are found to have minimal clinical value at the present time, and measurement of them is not recommended.
Subject(s)
Blood Glucose , Diabetes Mellitus , Humans , United States , Glycated Hemoglobin , Blood Glucose/analysis , Blood Glucose Self-Monitoring , Diabetes Mellitus/diagnosis , Diabetes Mellitus/therapy , InsulinABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Intravenous edetate disodium-based infusions reduced cardiovascular events in a prior clinical trial. The Trial to Assess Chelation Therapy 2 (TACT2) will replicate the initial study design. METHODS: TACT2 is an NIH-sponsored, randomized, 2x2 factorial, double masked, placebo-controlled, multicenter clinical trial testing 40 weekly infusions of a multi-component edetate disodium (disodium ethylenediamine tetra-acetic acid, or Na2EDTA)-based chelation solution and twice daily oral, high-dose multivitamin and mineral supplements in patients with diabetes and a prior myocardial infarction (MI). TACT2 completed enrollment of 1000 subjects in December 2020, and infusions in December 2021. Subjects are followed for 2.5 to 5 years. The primary endpoint is time to first occurrence of all-cause mortality, MI, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina. The trial has >;85% power to detect a 30% relative reduction in the primary endpoint. TACT2 also includes a Trace Metals and Biorepository Core Lab, to test whether benefits of treatment, if present, are due to chelation of lead and cadmium from patients. Design features of TACT2 were chosen to replicate selected features of the first TACT, which demonstrated a significant reduction in cardiovascular outcomes in the EDTA chelation arm compared with placebo among patients with a prior MI, with the largest effect in patients with diabetes. RESULTS: Results are expected in 2024. CONCLUSION: TACT2 may provide definitive evidence of the benefit of edetate disodiumbased chelation on cardiovascular outcomes, as well as the clinical importance of longitudinal changes in toxic metal levels of participants.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus , Myocardial Infarction , Chelating Agents/therapeutic use , Chelation Therapy/methods , Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Double-Blind Method , Edetic Acid/therapeutic use , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/drug therapy , Myocardial Infarction/epidemiology , VitaminsABSTRACT
The introduction of insulin in the treatment of juvenile-onset, now type 1, diabetes mellitus transformed a rapidly fatal disease into a chronic degenerative one. During the insulin-treatment era, long-term microvascular and cardiovascular complications proved to be the bane of existence for people with type 1 diabetes, leading to blindness, kidney failure, amputations, cardiovascular disease (CVD) and premature mortality. The nascent understanding of the link between non-physiologically regulated glucose levels and these complications led to the development of new treatment tools in the 1970s and 1980s that facilitated the delivery of insulin to achieve glucose levels closer to non-diabetic levels. These therapeutic advances set the stage for definitive testing of the glucose hypothesis. The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT), supported by the National Institute of Diabetes Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health (NIH), definitively established the benefits and risks of intensive therapy that substantially lowered mean blood glucose levels, measured by HbA1c, over a mean 6.5 years of therapy. Intensive therapy in the DCCT, resulting in a mean HbA1c of ~7% (53 mmol/mol), reduced the development and progression of early microvascular and neurological complications associated with diabetes by 34-76% compared with the conventional-treatment group, which maintained an HbA1c of ~9% (75 mmol/mol). Intensive therapy was also associated with weight gain and a threefold increased risk for hypoglycaemia. At the end of the DCCT, a long-term observational follow-up study, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study, commenced. Despite the convergence of HbA1c levels between the two groups during EDIC, owing to the adoption of intensive therapy by the original DCCT conventional-treatment group and the return of all participants to their own healthcare providers for diabetes care, the development and progression of complications continued to be substantially less in the original intensive-treatment group vs the conventional-treatment group; this phenomenon was termed 'metabolic memory'. The DCCT demonstrated a major reduction in early-stage complications with intensive therapy and the metabolic memory phenomenon during EDIC contributed to a substantially lower burden of advanced complications over time. These included a 57% lower risk of CVD events and 33% lower rate of mortality in the original intensive-treatment group compared with the conventional-treatment group. DCCT/EDIC has ushered in the intensive-treatment era, which has been universally adopted and includes the goal of achieving HbA1c levels less than 7% (53 mmol/mol) for most patients. Although the challenge of making intensive therapy (with the aim of achieving normoglycaemia) as widely accessible and safe as possible remains, continuing improvements in insulin therapy 100 years after its introduction promise a brighter future for people with type 1 diabetes.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus/drug therapy , Insulin/therapeutic use , Clinical Trials as Topic , Diabetes Complications/pathology , Diabetes Complications/therapy , Diabetes Mellitus/epidemiology , Diabetes Mellitus/history , Follow-Up Studies , History, 20th Century , History, 21st Century , Humans , Insulin/history , National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (U.S.) , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , United StatesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: In patients who have had type 1 diabetes for 5 years, current recommendations regarding screening for diabetic retinopathy include annual dilated retinal examinations to detect proliferative retinopathy or clinically significant macular edema, both of which require timely intervention to preserve vision. During 30 years of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) and its longitudinal follow-up Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study, retinal photography was performed at intervals of 6 months to 4 years. METHODS: We used retinal photographs from the DCCT/EDIC study to develop a rational screening frequency for retinopathy. Markov modeling was used to determine the likelihood of progression to proliferative diabetic retinopathy or clinically significant macular edema in patients with various initial retinopathy levels (no retinopathy or mild, moderate, or severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy). The models included recognized risk factors for progression of retinopathy. RESULTS: Overall, the probability of progression to proliferative diabetic retinopathy or clinically significant macular edema was limited to approximately 5% between retinal screening examinations at 4 years among patients who had no retinopathy, 3 years among those with mild retinopathy, 6 months among those with moderate retinopathy, and 3 months among those with severe nonproliferative diabetic retinopathy. The risk of progression was also closely related to mean glycated hemoglobin levels. The risk of progression from no retinopathy to proliferative diabetic retinopathy or clinically significant macular edema was 1.0% over 5 years among patients with a glycated hemoglobin level of 6%, as compared with 4.3% over 3 years among patients with a glycated hemoglobin level of 10%. Over a 20-year period, the frequency of eye examinations was 58% lower with our practical, evidence-based schedule than with routine annual examinations, which resulted in substantial cost savings. CONCLUSIONS: Our model for establishing an individualized schedule for retinopathy screening on the basis of the patient's current state of retinopathy and glycated hemoglobin level reduced the frequency of eye examinations without delaying the diagnosis of clinically significant disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; DCCT/EDIC ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00360893 and NCT00360815 .).
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/complications , Diabetic Retinopathy/diagnosis , Macular Edema/diagnosis , Retina/pathology , Adolescent , Adult , Disease Progression , Evidence-Based Medicine , Follow-Up Studies , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Humans , Markov Chains , Photography , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Risk Factors , Visual Acuity , Young AdultABSTRACT
In the United States, 9.4% of all adults-and 25% of those older than 65 years-have diabetes. Diabetes is the leading cause of blindness and end-stage renal disease and contributes to both microvascular and macrovascular complications. The management of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a common and important activity in primary care internal medicine practice. Measurement of hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) provides an estimate of mean blood sugar levels and glycemic control. The optimal HbA1c target level among various persons with T2D is a subject of controversy. Guidelines regarding HbA1c targets have yielded differing recommendations. In 2018, the American College of Physicians (ACP) published a guideline on HbA1c targets for nonpregnant adults with T2D. In addition to a recommendation to individualize HbA1c target levels, the ACP proposed a level between 7% and 8% for most patients. The ACP also advised deintensification of therapy for patients who have an HbA1c level lower than 6.5% and avoidance of HbA1c-targeted treatment for patients with a life expectancy of less than 10 years. This guidance contrasts with a recommendation from the American Diabetes Association to aim for HbA1c levels less than 7% for many nonpregnant adults and to consider a target of 6.5% if it can be achieved safely. Here, 2 experts, a diabetologist and a general internist, discuss how to apply the divergent guideline recommendations to a patient with long-standing T2D and a current HbA1c level of 7.8%.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/complications , Female , Guideline Adherence , Humans , Hypoglycemia/chemically induced , Hypoglycemic Agents/adverse effects , Middle Aged , Obesity/complications , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Risk Assessment , Teaching RoundsABSTRACT
The global epidemic of type 2 diabetes has prompted numerous studies and public health efforts to reduce its development. A variety of interventions, including lifestyle modifications and pharmacological agents directed at ameliorating the major risk factors for type 2 diabetes, are of proven efficacy in reducing the development of type 2 diabetes in people with impaired glucose tolerance. While prevention of the hyperglycaemia characteristic of diabetes is arguably an important, clinically relevant outcome, a more compelling outcome with greater clinical significance is the prevention or reduction of the relatively diabetes-specific microvascular and less-specific cardiovascular disease (CVD) complications associated with diabetes. These complications cause the majority of morbidity and excess mortality associated with diabetes. Any reduction in diabetes should, logically, also reduce the occurrence of its long-term complications; however, most diabetes prevention trials have not been of sufficient duration to allow such an evaluation. The limited long-term data, largely from the Da Qing Diabetes Prevention Study (DQDPS) and the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) and their respective follow-up studies (DQDPOS and DPPOS), suggest a reduction in microvascular complications and amelioration of CVD risk factors. Only the DQDPOS and Study to Prevent Non-Insulin-Dependent Diabetes Mellitus (STOP-NIDDM) studies have shown a reduction in CVD events and only DQDPOS has demonstrated a decrease in CVD and overall mortality. While these limited data are promising, whether diabetes prevention directly reduces complication-related morbidity and mortality remains unclear. Longer follow-up of prevention studies is needed to supplement the limited current clinical trial data, to help differentiate the effects of diabetes prevention itself from the means used to reduce diabetes development and to understand the balance among benefits, risks and costs of prevention.
Subject(s)
Cardiovascular Diseases/prevention & control , Diabetes Complications/prevention & control , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/prevention & control , Preventive Medicine/methods , Atherosclerosis/drug therapy , Cardiovascular Diseases/complications , Cardiovascular Diseases/drug therapy , Clinical Trials as Topic , Cost-Benefit Analysis , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/drug therapy , Follow-Up Studies , Glucose Intolerance/complications , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Life Style , Metformin/therapeutic use , Microcirculation , Preventive Medicine/economics , Ramipril/therapeutic use , Risk Factors , Rosiglitazone/therapeutic use , Treatment OutcomeABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) showed a beneficial effect of 6.5 years of intensive glycemic control on retinopathy in patients with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Between 1983 and 1989, a total of 1441 patients with type 1 diabetes in the DCCT were randomly assigned to receive either intensive diabetes therapy or conventional therapy aimed at preventing hyperglycemic symptoms. They were treated and followed until 1993. Subsequently, 1375 of these patients were followed in the observational Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study. The self-reported history of ocular surgical procedures was obtained annually. We evaluated the effect of intensive therapy as compared with conventional therapy on the incidence and cost of ocular surgery during these two studies. RESULTS: Over a median follow-up of 23 years, 130 ocular operations were performed in 63 of 711 patients assigned to intensive therapy (8.9%) and 189 ocular operations in 98 of 730 patients assigned to conventional therapy (13.4%) (P<0.001). After adjustment for DCCT baseline factors, intensive therapy was associated with a reduction in the risk of any diabetes-related ocular surgery by 48% (95% confidence interval [CI], 29 to 63; P<0.001) and a reduction in the risk of all such ocular procedures by 37% (95% CI, 12 to 55; P=0.01). Forty-two patients who received intensive therapy and 61 who received conventional therapy underwent cataract extraction (adjusted risk reduction with intensive therapy, 48%; 95% CI, 23 to 65; P=0.002); 29 patients who received intensive therapy and 50 who received conventional therapy underwent vitrectomy, retinal-detachment surgery, or both (adjusted risk reduction, 45%; 95% CI, 12 to 66; P=0.01). The costs of surgery were 32% lower in the intensive-therapy group. The beneficial effects of intensive therapy were fully attenuated after adjustment for mean glycated hemoglobin levels over the entire follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Intensive therapy in patients with type 1 diabetes was associated with a substantial reduction in the long-term risk of ocular surgery. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; DCCT/EDIC ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT00360893 and NCT00360815.).
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Diabetic Retinopathy/surgery , Glaucoma/surgery , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin/therapeutic use , Ophthalmologic Surgical Procedures/statistics & numerical data , Adolescent , Adult , Cataract/etiology , Cataract Extraction , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/complications , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Glaucoma/etiology , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Humans , Male , Ophthalmologic Surgical Procedures/economics , Proportional Hazards Models , Vitrectomy/statistics & numerical data , Young AdultABSTRACT
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Chronic hyperglycaemia, as measured by HbA1c levels, is a major risk factor for atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease (CVD) in type 1 diabetes. Our aim was to describe the degree to which the effect of HbA1c on the risk of CVD is mediated by its effect on traditional risk factors over time, and how these mediation pathways change over time. METHODS: The DCCT and its observational follow-up study, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC), followed 1441 participants for a mean of 27 years, with periodic measurement of HbA1c and risk factors over time. We assessed the proportion of the HbA1c effect on risk of CVD that was mediated through its effects on systolic BP (SBP), pulse rate, triacylglycerols and LDL-cholesterol (LDLc) levels, and how the proportion mediated changed over time. RESULTS: The association of HbA1c with CVD outcomes was stable over time, while that of traditional risk factors (SBP, pulse rate, triacylglycerols and LDLc) increased. At 10 years of follow-up, the effect of HbA1c on 10 year CVD risk was minimally mediated by SBP (2.7%), increasing to 26% at 20 years. Likewise, from 10 year follow-up to 20 year follow-up, the proportion of HbA1c effect mediated through pulse rate increased from 6.3% to 29.3%, through triacylglycerols from 2.2% to 22.4%, and through LDLc from 9.2% to 30.7%. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: As participants age, the predictive association of mean HbA1c on subsequent CVD events is increasingly mediated by its effect on standard risk factors. Thus, management of traditional non-glycaemic CVD risk factors may have increasing benefits in an ageing type 1 diabetes population with longstanding hyperglycaemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00360893 and NCT00360815.
Subject(s)
Blood Glucose/metabolism , Cardiovascular Diseases/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/blood , Hyperglycemia/blood , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Female , Glycated Hemoglobin/analysis , Humans , Hyperglycemia/drug therapy , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Male , Models, Theoretical , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
The largest and longest clinical trial of metformin for the prevention of diabetes is the Diabetes Prevention Program/Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study (DPP/DPPOS). In this review, we summarise data from the DPP/DPPOS, focusing on metformin for diabetes prevention, as well as its long-term glycaemic and cardiometabolic effects and safety in people at high-risk of developing diabetes. The DPP (1996-2001) was a RCT of 3234 adults who, at baseline, were at high-risk of developing diabetes. Participants were assigned to masked placebo (n = 1082) or metformin (n = 1073) 850 mg twice daily, or intensive lifestyle intervention (n = 1079). The masked metformin/placebo intervention phase ended approximately 1 year ahead of schedule because of demonstrated efficacy. Primary outcome was reported at 2.8 years. At the end of the DPP, all participants were offered lifestyle education and 88% (n = 2776) of the surviving DPP cohort continued follow-up in the DPPOS. Participants originally assigned to metformin continued to receive metformin, unmasked. The DPP/DPPOS cohort has now been followed for over 15 years with prospective assessment of glycaemic, cardiometabolic, health economic and safety outcomes. After an average follow-up of 2.8 years, metformin reduced the incidence of diabetes by 31% compared with placebo, with a greater effect in those who were more obese, had a higher fasting glucose or a history of gestational diabetes. The DPPOS addressed the longer-term effects of metformin, showing a risk reduction of 18% over 10 and 15 years post-randomisation. Metformin treatment for diabetes prevention was estimated to be cost-saving. At 15 years, lack of progression to diabetes was associated with a 28% lower risk of microvascular complications across treatment arms, a reduction that was no different among treatment groups. Recent findings suggest metformin may reduce atherosclerosis development in men. Originally used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, metformin, now proven to prevent or delay diabetes, may serve as an important tool in battling the growing diabetes epidemic. Long-term follow-up, currently underway in the DPP/DPPOS, is now evaluating metformin's potential role, when started early in the spectrum of dysglycaemia, on later-stage comorbidities, including cardiovascular disease and cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00038727 and NCT00004992.
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/prevention & control , Humans , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Metformin/therapeutic use , Prediabetic State/prevention & controlABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The safety and effectiveness of automated glycemic management have not been tested in multiday studies under unrestricted outpatient conditions. METHODS: In two random-order, crossover studies with similar but distinct designs, we compared glycemic control with a wearable, bihormonal, automated, "bionic" pancreas (bionic-pancreas period) with glycemic control with an insulin pump (control period) for 5 days in 20 adults and 32 adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. The automatically adaptive algorithm of the bionic pancreas received data from a continuous glucose monitor to control subcutaneous delivery of insulin and glucagon. RESULTS: Among the adults, the mean plasma glucose level over the 5-day bionic-pancreas period was 138 mg per deciliter (7.7 mmol per liter), and the mean percentage of time with a low glucose level (<70 mg per deciliter [3.9 mmol per liter]) was 4.8%. After 1 day of automatic adaptation by the bionic pancreas, the mean (±SD) glucose level on continuous monitoring was lower than the mean level during the control period (133±13 vs. 159±30 mg per deciliter [7.4±0.7 vs. 8.8±1.7 mmol per liter], P<0.001) and the percentage of time with a low glucose reading was lower (4.1% vs. 7.3%, P=0.01). Among the adolescents, the mean plasma glucose level was also lower during the bionic-pancreas period than during the control period (138±18 vs. 157±27 mg per deciliter [7.7±1.0 vs. 8.7±1.5 mmol per liter], P=0.004), but the percentage of time with a low plasma glucose reading was similar during the two periods (6.1% and 7.6%, respectively; P=0.23). The mean frequency of interventions for hypoglycemia among the adolescents was lower during the bionic-pancreas period than during the control period (one per 1.6 days vs. one per 0.8 days, P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: As compared with an insulin pump, a wearable, automated, bihormonal, bionic pancreas improved mean glycemic levels, with less frequent hypoglycemic episodes, among both adults and adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01762059 and NCT01833988.).
Subject(s)
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/therapy , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Insulin/therapeutic use , Pancreas, Artificial , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Bionics , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Child , Cross-Over Studies , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1/drug therapy , Female , Humans , Hypoglycemia/etiology , Insulin Infusion Systems , Male , Middle Aged , Monitoring, Physiologic , Pancreas, Artificial/adverse effects , Treatment Outcome , Young AdultABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: We examined associations between body weight and plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration (25OHD) in prediabetes and sought to estimate the impact of adiposity on these associations. METHODS: The study was conducted in the placebo (n = 1082) and intensive lifestyle (n = 1079) groups of the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP), a multicenter trial to prevent type 2 diabetes in adults with prediabetes. Weight and 25OHD were measured at baseline, month 6, years 1 and 2. In a subset (n = 584), visceral (VAT) and subcutaneous (SAT) adiposity were assessed by computed tomography at baseline and year 1. RESULTS: In cross-sectional analyses, baseline body weight, total fat, VAT, and SAT were inversely associated with plasma 25OHD concentration after multivariable adjustment. VAT accounted for 40 % [95 % CI 11, 69] of the association of body weight with plasma 25OHD concentration. There was no significant contribution by total fat or SAT. Two-year changes in plasma 25OHD concentration varied inversely with changes in body weight (p < 0.0001). One-year changes in total fat, VAT, or SAT were not significant mediators of the association between change in plasma 25OHD concentration and body weight. CONCLUSION: Our study found an inverse association between body weight and plasma 25OHD concentration at baseline and over a 2-year period in adults with prediabetes. These findings in the DPP, a weight loss intervention study, raise the possibility that weight loss increases plasma 25OHD concentration. Whether adiposity mediates this association remains inconclusive.
Subject(s)
Body Composition , Body Weight , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/blood , Vitamin D/analogs & derivatives , Adiposity , Adult , Body Mass Index , Cross-Sectional Studies , Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2/prevention & control , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Intra-Abdominal Fat/metabolism , Life Style , Linear Models , Longitudinal Studies , Male , Middle Aged , Obesity/blood , Prediabetic State/blood , Prediabetic State/drug therapy , Seasons , Subcutaneous Fat, Abdominal/metabolism , Vitamin D/blood , Waist CircumferenceABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Diabetes is a risk factor for dementia. It is unknown whether higher glucose levels increase the risk of dementia in people without diabetes. METHODS: We used 35,264 clinical measurements of glucose levels and 10,208 measurements of glycated hemoglobin levels from 2067 participants without dementia to examine the relationship between glucose levels and the risk of dementia. Participants were from the Adult Changes in Thought study and included 839 men and 1228 women whose mean age at baseline was 76 years; 232 participants had diabetes, and 1835 did not. We fit Cox regression models, stratified according to diabetes status and adjusted for age, sex, study cohort, educational level, level of exercise, blood pressure, and status with respect to coronary and cerebrovascular diseases, atrial fibrillation, smoking, and treatment for hypertension. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 6.8 years, dementia developed in 524 participants (74 with diabetes and 450 without). Among participants without diabetes, higher average glucose levels within the preceding 5 years were related to an increased risk of dementia (P=0.01); with a glucose level of 115 mg per deciliter (6.4 mmol per liter) as compared with 100 mg per deciliter (5.5 mmol per liter), the adjusted hazard ratio for dementia was 1.18 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.04 to 1.33). Among participants with diabetes, higher average glucose levels were also related to an increased risk of dementia (P=0.002); with a glucose level of 190 mg per deciliter (10.5 mmol per liter) as compared with 160 mg per deciliter (8.9 mmol per liter), the adjusted hazard ratio was 1.40 (95% CI, 1.12 to 1.76). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that higher glucose levels may be a risk factor for dementia, even among persons without diabetes. (Funded by the National Institutes of Health.)