Cardiovascular Outcomes in GRADE (Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Type 2 Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study).

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. The effects of glucose-lowering medications on cardiovascular outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes and low cardiovascular risk are unclear. We investigated cardiovascular outcomes by treatment group in participants randomly assigned to insulin glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin, added to baseline metformin, in GRADE (Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Type 2 Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study). METHODS: A total of 5047 participants with a mean±SD age of 57.2±10.0 years, type 2 diabetes duration of 4.0±2.7 years, and low baseline prevalence of cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, 5.1%; cerebrovascular accident, 2.0%) were followed for a median of 5 years. Prespecified outcomes included between-group time-to-first event analyses of MACE-3 (composite of major adverse cardiovascular events: cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke), MACE-4 (MACE-3+unstable angina requiring hospitalization or revascularization), MACE-5 (MACE-4+coronary revascularization), MACE-6 (MACE-5+hospitalization for heart failure), and the individual components. MACE outcomes and hospitalization for heart failure in the liraglutide-treated group were compared with the other groups combined using Cox proportional hazards models. MACE-6 was also analyzed as recurrent events using a proportional rate model to compare all treatment groups. RESULTS: We observed no statistically significant differences in the cumulative incidence of first MACE-3, MACE-4, MACE-5, or MACE-6, or their individual components, by randomized treatment group. However, when compared with the other treatment groups combined, the liraglutide-treated group had a significantly lower risk of MACE-5 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.54-0.91]; P=0.021), MACE-6 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.55-0.90]; P=0.021), and hospitalization for heart failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28-0.86]; P=0.022). Compared with the liraglutide group, significantly higher rates of recurrent MACE-6 events occurred in the groups treated with glimepiride (rate ratio, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.13-2.29]) or sitagliptin (rate ratio 1.75; [95% CI, 1.24-2.48]). CONCLUSIONS: This comparative effectiveness study of a contemporary cohort of adults with type 2 diabetes, largely without established cardiovascular disease, suggests that liraglutide treatment may reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients at relatively low risk compared with other commonly used glucose-lowering medications. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01794143.

Evaluation of polygenic risk scores to differentiate between type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

Polygenic risk scores (PRS) quantify the genetic liability to disease and are calculated using an individual's genotype profile and disease-specific genome-wide association study (GWAS) summary statistics. Type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D) diabetes both are determined in part by genetic loci. Correctly differentiating between types of diabetes is crucial for accurate diagnosis and treatment. PRS have the potential to address possible misclassification of T1D and T2D. Here we evaluated PRS models for T1D and T2D in European genetic ancestry participants from the UK Biobank (UKB) and then in the Michigan Genomics Initiative (MGI). Specifically, we investigated the utility of T1D and T2D PRS to discriminate between T1D, T2D, and controls in unrelated UKB individuals of European ancestry. We derived PRS models using external non-UKB GWAS. The T1D PRS model with the best discrimination between T1D cases and controls (area under the receiver operator curve [AUC] = 0.805) also yielded the best discrimination of T1D from T2D cases in the UKB (AUC = 0.792) and separation in MGI (AUC = 0.686). In contrast, the best T2D model did not discriminate between T1D and T2D cases (AUC = 0.527). Our analysis suggests that a T1D PRS model based on independent single nucleotide polymorphisms may help differentiate between T1D, T2D, and controls in individuals of European genetic ancestry.

Comparative Effects of Glucose-Lowering Medications on Kidney Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes: The GRADE Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is the leading cause of kidney disease in the US. It is not known whether glucose-lowering medications differentially affect kidney function. Objective: To evaluate kidney outcomes in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) trial comparing 4 classes of glucose-lowering medications added to metformin for glycemic management in individuals with T2D. Design, Setting, and Participants: A randomized clinical trial was conducted at 36 sites across the US. Participants included adults with T2D for less than 10 years, a hemoglobin A1c level between 6.8% and 8.5%, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) greater than or equal to 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 who were receiving metformin treatment. A total of 5047 participants were enrolled between July 8, 2013, and August 11, 2017, and followed up for a mean of 5.0 years (range, 0-7.6 years). Data were analyzed from February 21, 2022, to March 27, 2023. Interventions: Addition of insulin glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin to metformin, with the medication combination continued until the HbA1c was greater than 7.5%; thereafter, insulin was added to maintain glycemic control. Main Outcomes and Measures: Chronic eGFR slope (change in eGFR between year 1 and trial end) and a composite kidney disease progression outcome (albuminuria, dialysis, transplant, or death due to kidney disease). Secondary outcomes included incident eGFR less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, 40% decrease in eGFR to less than 60 mL/min/1.73 m2, doubling of urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) to 30 mg/g or greater, and progression of Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes stage. Analyses were intention-to-treat. Results: Of the 5047 participants, 3210 (63.6%) were men. Baseline characteristics were mean (SD) age 57.2 (10.0) years; HbA1c 7.5% (0.5%); diabetes duration, 4.2 (2.7) years; body mass index, 34.3 (6.8); blood pressure 128.3/77.3 (14.7/9.9) mm Hg; eGFR 94.9 (16.8) mL/min/1.73 m2; and median UACR, 6.4 (IQR 3.1-16.9) mg/g; 2933 (58.1%) were treated with renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors. Mean chronic eGFR slope was -2.03 (95% CI, -2.20 to -1.86) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year for patients receiving sitagliptin; glimepiride, -1.92 (95% CI, -2.08 to -1.75) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year; liraglutide, -2.08 (95% CI, -2.26 to -1.90) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year; and insulin glargine, -2.02 (95% CI, -2.19 to -1.84) mL/min/1.73 m2 per year (P = .61). Mean composite kidney disease progression occurred in 135 (10.6%) patients receiving sitagliptin; glimepiride, 155 (12.4%); liraglutide, 152 (12.0%); and insulin glargine, 150 (11.9%) (P = .56). Most of the composite outcome was attributable to albuminuria progression (98.4%). There were no significant differences by treatment assignment in secondary outcomes. There were no adverse kidney events attributable to medication assignment. Conclusions and Relevance: In this randomized clinical trial, among people with T2D and predominantly free of kidney disease at baseline, no significant differences in kidney outcomes were observed during 5 years of follow-up when a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, sulfonylurea, glucagonlike peptide 1 receptor agonist, or basal insulin was added to metformin for glycemic control. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01794143.

Maternally and zygotically provided Cdx2 have novel and critical roles for early development of the mouse embryo.

Divisions of polarised blastomeres that allocate polar cells to outer and apolar cells to inner positions initiate the first cell fate decision in the mouse embryo. Subsequently, outer cells differentiate into trophectoderm while inner cells retain pluripotency to become inner cell mass (ICM) of the blastocyst. Elimination of zygotic expression of trophectoderm-specific transcription factor Cdx2 leads to defects in the maintenance of the blastocyst cavity, suggesting that it participates only in the late stage of trophectoderm formation. However, we now find that mouse embryos also have a maternally provided pool of Cdx2 mRNA. Moreover, depletion of both maternal and zygotic Cdx2 from immediately after fertilization by three independent approaches, dsRNAi, siRNAi and morpholino oligonucleotides, leads to developmental arrest at much earlier stages than expected from elimination of only zygotic Cdx2. This developmental arrest is associated with defects in cell polarisation, reflected by expression and localisation of cell polarity molecules such as Par3 and aPKC and cell compaction at the 8- and 16-cell stages. Cells deprived of Cdx2 show delayed development with increased cell cycle length, irregular cell division and increased incidence of apoptosis. Although some Cdx2-depleted embryos initiate cavitation, the cavity cannot be maintained. Furthermore, expression of trophectoderm-specific genes, Gata3 and Eomes, and also the trophectoderm-specific cytokeratin intermediate filament, recognised by Troma1, are greatly reduced or undetectable. Taken together, our results indicate that Cdx2 participates in two steps leading to trophectoderm specification: appropriate polarisation of blastomeres at the 8- and 16-cell stage and then the maintenance of trophectoderm lineage-specific differentiation.

Relationship between HbA1c and hypoglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with different insulin regimens in combination with metformin.

BACKGROUND: To examine the relationship between glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin (Met) and either insulin lispro mixtures, given twice or thrice daily (LM + Met), or insulin glargine, given once daily (G + Met). METHODS: Data from three randomized clinical trials were pooled to compare effects of LM + Met with G + Met. RESULTS: The LM + Met group achieved lower mean HbA(1c) (mean+/-SE, 7.2+/-0.1 vs. 7.7+/-0.1%, p<0.0001) and all meals combined post-prandial blood glucose (BG) (8.9+/-0.1 vs. 10.2+/-0.1 mmol/L, p<0.0001) compared with the G + Met group, but had higher fasting blood glucose (8.1+/-0.1 vs. 6.8+/-0.1 mmol/L, p<0.0001) and insulin requirement (0.7+/-0.01 vs. 0.6+/-0.01 U/kg, p<0.0001). Over the entire study period, daytime hypoglycaemia was higher for the LM + Met group (10.3 vs. 3.5 episodes/patient/year, p<0.0001) than for the G + Met group; however, nocturnal hypoglycaemia was lower (3.4 vs. 6.6 episodes/patient/year, p=0.003). At endpoint, daytime hypoglycaemia was higher for the LM + Met group (6.2 vs. 1.4 episodes/patient/year, p<0.0001); however, nocturnal hypoglycaemia was similar in both groups (1.9 vs. 3.0 episodes/patient/year). An inverse relationship was observed between all confirmed hypoglycaemia and HbA(1c) at endpoint; for every 1% reduction in HbA(1c), the increase (in slope) was 1.4 episodes/patient/year (p=0.04). Patients with confirmed hypoglycaemia had lower HbA(1c) than patients without hypoglycaemia (7.39 vs. 7.64%, respectively; decrement=0.26%, p=0.026). CONCLUSIONS: These studies demonstrated an inverse relationship between HbA(1c) and 24-h and daytime hypoglycaemia. Lispro insulin mixtures provided lower HbA(1c) and post-prandial blood glucose values than glargine, but caused more daytime hypoglycaemia. Frequency of nocturnal hypoglycaemia was similar and severe hypoglycaemia was rare with both insulin regimens.

Spectrum of immune checkpoint inhibitors-induced endocrinopathies in cancer patients: a scoping review of case reports.

BACKGROUND: Since 2011 six immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have been approved to treat patients with many advanced solid tumor and hematological malignancies to improve their prognosis. Case reports of their endocrine immune-related adverse events [irAEs]) are increasingly published as more real-world patients with these malignancies are treated with these drugs. They alert physicians of a drug's AEs (which may change during a drug's life cycle) and contribute to post-marketing safety surveillance. Using a modified framework of Arksey and O'Malley, we conducted a scoping review of the spectrum and characteristics of ICI-induced endocrinopathies case reports before and after ICIs are marketed. METHODS: In July 2017, we searched, without date and language restrictions, 4 citation databases for ICI-induced endocrinopathies. We also hand-searched articles' references, contents of relevant journals, and ran supplemental searches to capture recent reports through January 2018. For this study, a case should have information on type of cancer, type of ICI, clinical presentation, biochemical tests, treatment plus temporal association of ICI initiation with endocrinopathies. Two endocrinologists independently extracted the data which were then summarized and categorized. RESULTS: One hundred seventy nine articles reported 451 cases of ICI-induced endocrinopathies - 222 hypopituitarism, 152 thyroid disorders, 66 diabetes mellitus, 6 primary adrenal insufficiencies, 1 ACTH-dependent Cushing's syndrome, 1 hypoparathyroidism and 3 diabetes insipidus cases. Their clinical presentations reflect hormone excess or deficiency. Some were asymptomatic and others life-threatening. One or more endocrine glands could be affected. Polyglandular endocrinopathies could present simultaneously or in sequence. Many occur within 5 months of therapy initiation; a few occurred after ICI was stopped. Mostly irreversible, they required long-term hormone replacement. High dose steroids were used when non-endocrine AEs coexisted or as therapy in adrenal insufficiency. There was variability of information in the case reports but all met the study criteria to make a diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: The spectrum of ICI-induced endocrinopathies is wide (5 glands affected) and their presentation varied (12 endocrinopathies). Clinical reasoning integrating clinical, biochemical and treatment information is needed to properly diagnose and manage them. Physicians should be vigilant for their occurrence and be able to diagnose, investigate and manage them appropriately at onset and follow-up.

Diabetes Care Program of Nova Scotia: Celebrating 25 Years of Improving Diabetes Care in Nova Scotia.

The Diabetes Care Program of Nova Scotia (DCPNS)'s mission is "to improve, through leadership and partnerships, the health of Nova Scotians living with, affected by, or at risk of developing diabetes." Working together with local, provincial and national partners, the DCPNS has improved and standardized diabetes care in Nova Scotia over the past 25 years by developing and deploying a resourceful and collaborative program model. This article describes the model and highlights its key achievements. With balanced representation from frontline providers through to senior decision makers in health care, the DCPNS works across the age continuum, supporting the implementation of national clinical practice guidelines and, when necessary, developing provincial guidelines to meet local needs. The development and implementation of standardized documentation and data collection tools in all diabetes centres created a robust opportunity for the development and expansion of the DCPNS registry. This registry provides useful clinical and statistical information to staff, providers within the circle of care, management and senior leadership. Data are used to support individual care, program planning, quality improvement and business planning at both the local and the provincial levels. The DCPNS supports the sharing of new knowledge and advances through continuous education for providers. The DCPNS's ability to engage diabetes educators and key physician champions has ensured balanced perspectives in the creation of tools and resources that can be effective in real-world practice. The DCPNS has evolved to become an illustrative example of the chronic care model in action.

Patient Perceptions and Preferences for a Mealtime Insulin Delivery Patch.

INTRODUCTION: A basal-bolus insulin regimen is needed to achieve glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) below 7.0% in people with type 1 (T1D) or type 2 (T2D) diabetes who have significant loss of beta-cell function. Nonadherence to therapy is common and negatively affects the ability to reach treatment goals. We examined patient assessment of a new, wearable mealtime insulin-delivery system (patch) relative to their current mealtime insulin-delivery system (syringe, pen, or pump). The patch is designed to deliver only boluses of fast-acting insulin (no basal insulin), mechanically controlled by the patient. METHODS: Adults (n = 101) with T1D or T2D assessed their current mealtime insulin-delivery system and then assessed simulated (no active medication) patch use over a 3-day period. Participants evaluated mealtime insulin-delivery systems using eight measures from five domains (convenience, interference with daily activities, diabetes-related worry, psychological well-being, and overall satisfaction/preference) on the self-administered Insulin Delivery System Rating Questionnaire. User ratings of their current insulin-delivery systems (syringe, pen, pump) were compared with those for the patch by repeated measure analysis of variance and one-sample t tests. RESULTS: Participants had significant (p < 0.05) preference for patch over syringe in all eight comparisons, and over pen in five out of eight comparisons, with no significant preference for pen. Although there was a preference for patch over pump in six out of eight comparisons, only one showed a significant preference for patch, and one for pump. Significantly more participants reported that they would like to switch to the patch than continue using a syringe (78% vs 22%) or pen (76% vs 24%) but this difference was not significant for the group using a pump (52% vs 48%). CONCLUSIONS: Participants preferred using the patch over pens and syringes. Its ease of use and discreet method of insulin delivery may contribute to improved patient adherence to mealtime insulin regimens among people currently using injection devices. FUNDING: Calibra Medical.

Laboratory and Benchtop Performance of a Mealtime Insulin-Delivery System.

BACKGROUND: A basal bolus insulin regimen requires multiple daily insulin injections, which might discourage patient adherence. As a potential solution, a mealtime insulin-delivery system-a 3-day wearable bolus-only patch-was designed to manually administer mealtime insulin discreetly by actuating buttons through clothing, without the need for multiple needle sticks. METHOD: Extensive functional testing of the patch included dose accuracy (from initial fill of the device to empty), pressure-vacuum leak testing, last-dose lockout and occlusion detection (safety alert features that lock the dosing buttons when no insulin is delivered), assessments of insulin drug stability, toxicological risk (including chemical testing), and system biocompatibility. RESULTS: Dosing accuracy was 2 units ±10% (with U-100 insulin) over a range of environmental conditions, with ≥95% reliability and confidence. The fluid seal performance and the safety alert features performed with ≥95% reliability and ≥95% confidence. The system met acceptable standards for insulin (U-100 lispro and aspart) stability for its intended 3-day use, in addition to the operational requirements. The toxicological risk assessment and demonstrated biocompatibility suggested that the patch is safe for human use. CONCLUSIONS: Benchtop performance showed that the bolus-only patch is a safe, accurate, and reliable device for mealtime insulin delivery.

Prandial premixed insulin analogue regimens versus basal insulin analogue regimens in the management of type 2 diabetes: an evidence-based comparison.

BACKGROUND: Insulin is an effective treatment for type 2 diabetes (T2D), a progressive condition in which insulin deficiency is one of the core defects. When patients with T2D are unable to achieve glycemic goals with diet and oral antihyperglycemic medications, a common starting insulin regimen consists of basal or premixed insulin added to oral antihyperglycemic medications. When glycemic goals are not achieved with the initial insulin regimen, a basal-bolus regimen is necessary. OBJECTIVE: This article reviews clinical-trial data on the efficacy and safety profile of prandial premixed insulin analogues (insulin aspart and insulin lispro) compared with basal insulin analogues (insulin glargine, insulin detemir, and insulin lispro protamine suspension), with or without a prandial insulin analogue, in the management of T2D. METHODS: A systematic search of Ovid, MEDLINE, and EMBASE (1995-2007) was performed to identify published randomized controlled trials comparing prandial premixed insulin analogues with basal insulin analogues, with or without prandial insulin, in patients with T2D. The search terms were premixed insulin analogues, premixed insulin, biphasic insulin aspart, insulin aspart 70/30, insulin aspart 50/50, premixed insulin lispro, insulin lispro 75/25, insulin lispro 50/50, glargine, and detemir. Abstracts presented at the 2005 and 2006 meetings of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes and bibliographies of the identified studies were also reviewed. Predetermined criteria for study inclusion were treatment duration of at least 12 weeks, T2D diagnosed using valid criteria, use of a basal insulin analogue (with or without rapid-acting insulin) as a study comparator, and use of well-accepted end points (eg, glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA1c], hypoglycemia, preprandial and postprandial blood glucose). RESULTS: Of the identified randomized controlled trials, 3 studies compared premixed insulin analogues containing 70% or 75% basal and 30% or 25% rapid-acting insulin analogue with basal insulin analogues only, and 3 studies evaluated premixed insulin analogues containing 50% basal and 50% rapid-acting insulin analogue with basal insulin analogues only. Use of prandial premixed insulin analogues was associated with better overall and postprandial glycemic control. In the studies that compared twice-daily premixed insulin analogues with a basal insulin analogue, changes in HbA1c ranged from -1.00% to -2.79% and from -0.42% to -2.36%, respectively (P < 0.01). In the studies that compared thrice-daily premixed insulin analogues with a basal insulin analogue, changes in HbA1c ranged from -0.72% to -1.2% and from -0.3% to -0.75%, respectively (P < 0.01). These results were achieved with some increase in overall hypoglycemia, but not in nocturnal or severe hypoglycemia. Doses of the premixed insulin analogues were adjusted during the titration period to achieve glycemic goals. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this systematic review suggest that regimens consisting of prandial premixed insulin analogues, which provide both basal and prandial insulin coverage, may be used as an initial insulin regimen in patients with T2D to enable better overall, preprandial, and postprandial glycemic control compared with a basal insulin analogue regimen alone. Premixed insulin analogues are an effective option for initiating and intensifying insulin therapy in patients with T2D.

Mealtime 50/50 basal + prandial insulin analogue mixture with a basal insulin analogue, both plus metformin, in the achievement of target HbA1c and pre- and postprandial blood glucose levels in patients with type 2 diabetes: a multinational, 24-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group comparison.

BACKGROUND: In people without diabetes, approximately 50% of daily insulin secretion is basal and the remainder is postprandial. Hence, it would be expected that insulin replacement therapy in a 50/50 ratio with each meal would mimic physiologic insulin secretion better than treatment with once-daily basal insulin in patients with diabetes mellitus. Using lispro mix (LM) 50/50 before meals may be a logical approach to achieving glycemic targets (glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(lc)] and pre- and postprandial blood glucose [BG] concentrations) in these patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to test the hypothesis that treatment with a premixed insulin analogue containing 50/50 basal + prandial insulins administered before each meal would achieve lower overall and mealtime glycemic control than once-daily basal insulin analogue, both plus metformin (Met), in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: This 24-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group trial was conducted at 38 sites across Australia, Greece, India, The Netherlands, Poland, Puerto Rico, and the United States. Male and female patients aged 35 to 75 years with type 2 diabetes mellitus and an HbA(1c) level of 6.5% to 11.0%, who were receiving metformin and/or a sulfonylurea with a stable dose of 0 to 2 daily insulin injections over the previous 3 months were eligible. Patients were randomly assigned to receive LM50/50 (50% insulin lispro protamine suspension [ILPS] and 50% lispro) TID plus metformin (to a maximally tolerated daily dosage of 500-1000 mg BID) (LM50/50 + Met) or insulin glargine QD at bedtime plus metformin (500-1000 mg BID) (G + Met) for 24 weeks. With LM50/50 + Met, the insulin dose was titrated to target a fasting BG (FBG) level of <6.7 mmol/L (<120 mg/dL) and a 2-hour post-prandial BG (PPBG) level of <8.0 mmol/L (<144 mg/dL); those who did not reach the FBG target would be switched from presupper LM50/50 to LM75/25 (75% ILPS, 25% lispro). RESULTS: A total of 315 patients were randomized and received treatment (158 women, 157 men; mean age, 57.7 years; mean body mass index, 32.1 kg/m2; LM50/50 + Met, 157 patients; G + Met, 158 patients). At 24 weeks, the mean (SD)HbA(1c) level was significantly lower in the LM50/50 + Met group than in the G + Met group (7.1% [0.9%] vs 7.5% [1.0%]; P<0.001), and the proportion who reached an HbA(1c) target of < or = 7.0% was greater (88 [56.1%] vs 63 [39.9%]; P = 0.005). The G + Met group had a lower mean (SD)FBG value (6.5 [1.6] vs 8.1 [1.8] mmol/L; P<0.001). The LM50/50 + Met group had lower mean preprandial BG levels prelunch (7.4 [1.9] vs 7.9 [2.1] mmol/L; P=0.03) and presupper (8.3 [2.0] vs 8.9 [2.8] mmol/L; P=0.04). The LM50/50 + Met group also had lower mean 2-hour PPBG values postbreakfast (8.7 [2.2] vs 9.2 [2.5] mmol/L; P=0.03), postlunch (8.4 [1.9] vs 9.8 [2.6], mmol/L; p<0.001), and postsupper (8.7 [2.2] vs 10.7 [3.2], mmol/L; P<0.001). The mean (SD) total insulin doses at study end point were 0.7 (0.3) U/kg in the LM50/50 + Met group and 0.6 (0.3) U/kg in the G + Met group (P<0.001). The mean (SD)M-value (an expression of mean glycemia and the effect of glucose swings) was statistically similar between the 2 groups at baseline but significantly lower in the LM50/50 + Met group at end point (17.3 [13.8] vs 25.1 [24.8] mmol/L; P<0.001). During the entire treatment period, mean (SD) overall and nocturnal hypoglycemia rates (episodes per patient for 30 days) were statistically similar between the 2 groups (overall, 0.8 [1.4] vs 0.5 [1.0]; nocturnal, 0.2 [0.7] vs 0.3 [0.6]). At end point, the mean (SD) nocturnal hypoglycemia rates were similar between the 2 groups (0.2 [0.9] vs 0.2 [0.6]), but the overall and non-nocturnal hypoglycemia rates were higher with LM50/50 + Met (overall, 0.7 [1.7] vs 0.3 [0.8]; P=0.02; non-nocturnal, 0.5 [1.2] vs 0.1 [0.4]; P=0.002). CONCLUSION: In these patients with type 2 diabetes, mealtime LM50/50 + Met was associated with lower overall (HbA(1c)) and preprandial BG and PPBG levels (except for FBG), with similar nocturnal hypoglycemia and less glycemic variability, compared with G + Met.

Secondary prevention of macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes in the PROactive Study (PROspective pioglitAzone Clinical Trial In macroVascular Events): a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with type 2 diabetes are at high risk of fatal and non-fatal myocardial infarction and stroke. There is indirect evidence that agonists of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor gamma (PPAR gamma) could reduce macrovascular complications. Our aim, therefore, was to ascertain whether pioglitazone reduces macrovascular morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We did a prospective, randomised controlled trial in 5238 patients with type 2 diabetes who had evidence of macrovascular disease. We recruited patients from primary-care practices and hospitals. We assigned patients to oral pioglitazone titrated from 15 mg to 45 mg (n=2605) or matching placebo (n=2633), to be taken in addition to their glucose-lowering drugs and other medications. Our primary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, non fatal myocardial infarction (including silent myocardial infarction), stroke, acute coronary syndrome, endovascular or surgical intervention in the coronary or leg arteries, and amputation above the ankle. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered as an International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial, number ISRCTN NCT00174993. FINDINGS: Two patients were lost to follow-up, but were included in analyses. The average time of observation was 34.5 months. 514 of 2605 patients in the pioglitazone group and 572 of 2633 patients in the placebo group had at least one event in the primary composite endpoint (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.80-1.02, p=0.095). The main secondary endpoint was the composite of all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke. 301 patients in the pioglitazone group and 358 in the placebo group reached this endpoint (0.84, 0.72-0.98, p=0.027). Overall safety and tolerability was good with no change in the safety profile of pioglitazone identified. 6% (149 of 2065) and 4% (108 of 2633) of those in the pioglitazone and placebo groups, respectively, were admitted to hospital with heart failure; mortality rates from heart failure did not differ between groups. INTERPRETATION: Pioglitazone reduces the composite of all-cause mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction, and stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes who have a high risk of macrovascular events.

Comparison of effect of pioglitazone with metformin or sulfonylurea (monotherapy and combination therapy) on postload glycemia and composite insulin sensitivity index during an oral glucose tolerance test in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Pioglitazone, metformin, and gliclazide lower HbA(1c) and fasting plasma glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes. We compared the effects of these three drugs, used as monotherapy and in combination, on postload glycemia and composite insulin sensitivity index (CISI) in these patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Postload glycemia and CISI were analyzed for 940 patients who had oral glucose tolerance tests (OGTTs) in four multicenter, randomized, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel group clinical trials (pioglitazone versus metformin, pioglitazone versus gliclazide, pioglitazone plus sulfonylurea versus metformin plus sulfonylurea, and pioglitazone plus metformin versus gliclazide plus metformin). Plasma glucose and insulin were determined during the 3-h OGTT performed at baseline and after 1 year of therapy. Incremental area under the curve for glucose was the surrogate for postload glycemia. CISI was calculated using the formula {10,000/ radical of [(fasting glucose x fasting insulin) x (mean glucose x mean insulin)]} during the OGTT. RESULTS: In monotherapy, pioglitazone reduced postload glycemia and enhanced CISI more than metformin and gliclazide. In combination therapy, pioglitazone plus sulfonylurea reduced postload glycemia and increased CISI more than metformin plus sulfonylurea. Pioglitazone plus metformin also decreased postload glycemia and increased CISI more than gliclazide plus metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone improves postload glycemia and CISI more than metformin or gliclazide when used as monotherapy or in combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Comparison of pioglitazone and gliclazide in sustaining glycemic control over 2 years in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The hypothesis that pioglitazone treatment is superior to gliclazide treatment in sustaining glycemic control for up to 2 years in patients with type 2 diabetes was tested. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a randomized, multicenter, double-blind, double-dummy, parallel-group, 2-year study. Approximately 600 patients from 98 centers participated. Eligible patients had completed a previous 12-month study and consented to continue treatment for a further year. To avoid selection bias, all patients from all centers were included in the primary analysis (a comparison of the time-to-failure distributions of the two groups by using a log-rank test) regardless of whether they continued treatment for a 2nd year. By using repeated-measures ANOVA, time course of least square means of HbA(1c) and homeostasis model of assessment (HOMA) indexes (HOMA-%S and HOMA-%B) were analyzed. RESULTS: A greater proportion of patients treated with pioglitazone maintained HbA(1c) <8% over the 2-year period than those treated with gliclazide. A difference between the Kaplan-Meier curves was apparent as early as week 32 and widened at each time point thereafter, becoming statistically significant from week 52 onward. At week 104, 129 (47.8%) of 270 pioglitazone-treated patients and 110 (37.0%) of 297 gliclazide-treated patients maintained HbA(1c) <8%. Compared with gliclazide treatment, pioglitazone treatment produced a larger decrease in HbA(1c), a larger increase in HOMA-%S, and a smaller increase in HOMA-%B during the 2nd year of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone is superior to gliclazide in sustaining glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes during the 2nd year of treatment.

A comparison of lipid and glycemic effects of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidemia.

OBJECTIVE: Published reports suggest that pioglitazone and rosiglitazone have different effects on lipids in patients with type 2 diabetes. However, these previous studies were either retrospective chart reviews or clinical trials not rigorously controlled for concomitant glucose- and lipid-lowering therapies. This study examines the lipid and glycemic effects of pioglitazone and rosiglitazone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We enrolled subjects with a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (treated with diet alone or oral monotherapy) and dyslipidemia (not treated with any lipid-lowering agents). After a 4-week placebo washout period, subjects randomly assigned to the pioglitazone arm (n = 400) were treated with 30 mg once daily for 12 weeks followed by 45 mg once daily for an additional 12 weeks, whereas subjects randomly assigned to rosiglitazone (n = 402) were treated with 4 mg once daily followed by 4 mg twice daily for the same intervals. RESULTS: Triglyceride levels were reduced by 51.9 +/- 7.8 mg/dl with pioglitazone, but were increased by 13.1 +/- 7.8 mg/dl with rosiglitazone (P < 0.001 between treatments). Additionally, the increase in HDL cholesterol was greater (5.2 +/- 0.5 vs. 2.4 +/- 0.5 mg/dl; P < 0.001) and the increase in LDL cholesterol was less (12.3 +/- 1.6 vs. 21.3 +/- 1.6 mg/dl; P < 0.001) for pioglitazone compared with rosiglitazone, respectively. LDL particle concentration was reduced with pioglitazone and increased with rosiglitazone (P < 0.001). LDL particle size increased more with pioglitazone (P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone and rosiglitazone have significantly different effects on plasma lipids independent of glycemic control or concomitant lipid-lowering or other antihyperglycemic therapy. Pioglitazone compared with rosiglitazone is associated with significant improvements in triglycerides, HDL cholesterol, LDL particle concentration, and LDL particle size.

Metformin: From Research to Clinical Practice.

Metformin is the recommended first-line oral glucose-lowering drug initiated to control hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus. It acts in the liver, small intestines, and skeletal muscles with its major effect on decreasing hepatic gluconeogenesis. It is safe, inexpensive, and weight neutral and can be associated with weight loss. It can reduce microvascular complication risk and its use is associated with a lower cardiovascular mortality compared with sulfonylurea therapy. It is also used to delay the onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus, in treating gestational diabetes, and in women with polycystic ovary syndrome.

Design, development and deployment of a Diabetes Research Registry to facilitate recruitment in clinical research.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: A major challenge in conducting clinical trials/studies is the timely recruitment of eligible subjects. Our aim is to develop a Diabetes Research Registry (DRR) to facilitate recruitment by matching potential subjects interested in research with approved clinical studies using study entry criteria abstracted from their electronic health records (EHR). METHOD: A committee with expertise in diabetes, quality improvement, information technology, and informatics designed and developed the DRR. Using a hybrid approach, we identified and consented patients interested in research, abstracted their EHRs to assess common eligibility criteria, and contacted them about their interest in participating in specific studies. Investigators submit their requests with study entry criteria to the DRR which then provides a list of potential subjects who may be directly contacted for their study. The DRR meets all local, regional and federal regulatory requirements. RESULTS: After 5 years, the DRR has over 5000 registrants. About 30% have type 1 diabetes and 70% have type 2 diabetes. There are almost equal proportions of men and women. During this period, 31 unique clinical studies from 19 unique investigators requested lists of potential subjects for their studies. Eleven grant applications from 10 unique investigators used aggregated counts of potentially eligible subjects in their applications. CONCLUSION: The DRR matches potential subjects interested in research with approved clinical studies using study entry criteria abstracted from their EHR. By providing large lists of potentially eligible study subjects quickly, the DRR facilitated recruitment in 31 clinical studies.

Hyperglycemia and its effect after acute myocardial infarction on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (HEART2D) Study design.

OBJECTIVE: Cardiovascular (CV) disease is the major cause of death in patients with diabetes. Up to 40% of patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who survive an initial myocardial infarction (MI) suffer a recurrent event within 2 years, the majority of which are fatal. One independent risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD) may be postprandial blood glucose (PPBG) excursions. The HEART2D study seeks to determine the effect that PPBG control has on cardiovascular outcomes in patients who suffered an MI within the 21 days before study enrollment. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Approximately 1355 patients with T2DM with recent MI will be entered in this multicenter study of about 3.0-year duration. Using infarct severity and peri-infarct treatment as randomization factors, patients will be assigned to one of two insulin treatment strategies: (1) postprandial strategy: premeal insulin lispro with basal insulin at bedtime if needed (NPH insulin), targeting 2-h PPBG < or = 7.5 mmol/l or (2) basal strategy: insulin (NPH insulin twice daily or insulin glargine once daily; or premixed human insulin (70% NPH/30% regular; 30/70) twice daily), targeting fasting and premeal blood glucose (BG; < or = 6.7 mmol/l). Both groups will aim for a target hemoglobin AlC (AlC) of < 7%. ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The anticipated difference in PPBG (approximately 2.0 to 2.5 mM) between strategies is expected to demonstrate a 15% to 18.5% relative risk reduction in CV events for the postprandial strategy. CONCLUSION: This study may provide practical insights into the clinical management of patients with diabetes who have an increased risk of recurrent CV events and death.

Narrative review: hepatobiliary disease in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Diabetes mellitus is the fifth leading cause of death in the United States; 17 million people are affected. Liver disease is one of the leading causes of death in persons with type 2 diabetes. The standardized mortality rate for death from liver disease is greater than that for cardiovascular disease. The spectrum of liver disease in type 2 diabetes ranges from nonalcoholic fatty liver disease to cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma. The incidence of hepatitis C and acute liver failure is also increased. Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease is now considered part of the metabolic syndrome, and, with alcohol and hepatitis C, is the most common cause of chronic liver disease in the United States. Weight reduction and exercise are the mainstays of treatment for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, but there are promising results with the new thiazolidinediones (pioglitazone and rosiglitazone) as well as metformin and 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A inhibitors.

Using registries to recruit subjects for clinical trials.

AIM: We studied the use of patient/disease registries to recruit potential subjects for prospective clinical trials - describing the number, types and major benefits of using this approach. METHODS: In December 2013, we conducted a focused database search in PubMed, EMBASE, and Web of Science for studies (English language only) that used registries to recruit subjects for clinical trials published in 2004-2013. Of the 233 unique citations identified, 21 used registries to recruit subjects - 10 papers and 11 abstracts. Pearling and search for subsequent full papers of the abstracts identified 4 more papers. RESULTS: Our analysis, based on these 25 citations, showed that 14 are related to cancer, 3 to diabetes mellitus, 1 each to stroke, asthma, and celiac disease and 5 are disease neutral. Many types of registries (population-based cancer, quality improvement, disease-specific, web-based disease-neutral registries, local general practice registers, and national health database) are used to recruit subjects for clinical trials and uncover new knowledge. Overall, 16 registries are in the US, 4 in UK, 1 each in Canada, Spain, and Australia and 1 involved in many countries. Registries can identify very large number of subjects for screening for eligibility for clinical trials, especially in very large trials, rare disease trials, and trials involving minority patients. CONCLUSIONS: Registries can retrospectively identify very large numbers of potential subjects for screening for eligibility and enrollment in prospective clinical trials. This matching can lead to more timely recruitment and help solve a major problem in conducting clinical trials.