Comparison of Protocols to Reduce Diabetic Ketoacidosis in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Prescribed a Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitor.

OBJECTIVE | Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are approved for type 1 diabetes in Europe and Japan, with off-label use in type 1 diabetes in the United States. Although there were no consistent approaches to risk mitigation in clinical trials of these agents, protocols have been developed to try to reduce the risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). However, a validated risk mitigation strategy does not exist. We reviewed available DKA risk mitigation protocols to better understand the various strategies currently in use. METHODS | We conducted a search of the published medical literature and other medical information sources, including conference presentations, for protocols. We then categorized the information provided into guidance on patient selection, initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors, ketone monitoring, necessary patient action in the event of ketosis or DKA, and inpatient treatment of ketosis or DKA. RESULTS | Patient selection is generally similar among the protocols, although some require a minimum BMI and insulin dose. All protocols advocate routine measurement of ketones, although some insist on blood ketone tests. Although action steps for ketosis varies, all protocols advocate rapid patient intervention. The importance of evaluating ketones and acid-base balance even in the absence of hyperglycemia is emphasized by all protocols, as is the need to continue administering insulin until ketosis has resolved. CONCLUSION | DKA risk mitigation must be pursued systematically in individuals with type 1 diabetes, although the best strategy remains to be determined. Given the ongoing need for adjunctive therapies in type 1 diabetes and current use of SGLT2 inhibitors for this purpose, additional education and research are crucial, especially in the hospital environment, where DKA may not be diagnosed promptly and treated appropriately.

Continuous glucose monitoring and metrics for clinical trials: an international consensus statement.

Randomised controlled trials and other prospective clinical studies for novel medical interventions in people with diabetes have traditionally reported HbA1c as the measure of average blood glucose levels for the 3 months preceding the HbA1c test date. The use of this measure highlights the long-established correlation between HbA1c and relative risk of diabetes complications; the change in the measure, before and after the therapeutic intervention, is used by regulators for the approval of medications for diabetes. However, with the increasing use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in clinical practice, prospective clinical studies are also increasingly using CGM devices to collect data and evaluate glucose profiles among study participants, complementing HbA1c findings, and further assess the effects of therapeutic interventions on HbA1c. Data is collected by CGM devices at 1-5 min intervals, which obtains data on glycaemic excursions and periods of asymptomatic hypoglycaemia or hyperglycaemia (ie, details of glycaemic control that are not provided by HbA1c concentrations alone that are measured continuously and can be analysed in daily, weekly, or monthly timeframes). These CGM-derived metrics are the subject of standardised, internationally agreed reporting formats and should, therefore, be considered for use in all clinical studies in diabetes. The purpose of this consensus statement is to recommend the ways CGM data might be used in prospective clinical studies, either as a specified study endpoint or as supportive complementary glucose metrics, to provide clinical information that can be considered by investigators, regulators, companies, clinicians, and individuals with diabetes who are stakeholders in trial outcomes. In this consensus statement, we provide recommendations on how to optimise CGM-derived glucose data collection in clinical studies, including the specific glucose metrics and specific glucose metrics that should be evaluated. These recommendations have been endorsed by the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, the American Diabetes Association, the Association of Diabetes Care and Education Specialists, DiabetesIndia, the European Association for the Study of Diabetes, the International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes, the Japanese Diabetes Society, and the Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation. A standardised approach to CGM data collection and reporting in clinical trials will encourage the use of these metrics and enhance the interpretability of CGM data, which could provide useful information other than HbA1c for informing therapeutic and treatment decisions, particularly related to hypoglycaemia, postprandial hyperglycaemia, and glucose variability.

Factors associated with initiation of antihyperglycaemic medication in UK patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

AIM: To assess the factors associated with antihyperglycaemic medication initiation in UK patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort study, patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes were identified during the index period of 2003-2005. Eligible patients were ≥ 30 years old at the date of the first observed diabetes diagnosis (referred to as index date) and had at least 2 years of follow-up medical history (N = 9,158). Initiation of antihyperglycaemic medication (i.e., treatment) was assessed in the 2-year period following the index date. Adjusted Cox regression models were used to examine the association between time to medication initiation and patient age and other factors. RESULTS: Mean (SD) HbA1c at diagnosis was 8.1% (2.3). Overall, 51% of patients initiated antihyperglycaemic medication within 2 years (65%, 55%, 46% and 40% for patients in the 30- < 45, 45- < 65, 65- < 75, 75+ age groups, respectively). Among the treated patients, median (25th, 75th percentile) time to treatment initiation was 63 (8, 257) days. Of the patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.5% at diagnosis, 87% initiated treatment within 2 years. These patients with a higher HbA1c also had shorter time to treatment initiation (adjusted hazard ratio (HR) = 2.44 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.61, 3.70]; p < 0.0001). Increasing age (in years) was negatively associated with time to treatment initiation (HR = 0.98 [95% CI: 0.97, 0.99]; p < 0.001). Factors significantly associated with shorter time to treatment initiation included female gender and use of cardiovascular medications at baseline or initiated during follow up. CONCLUSIONS: In this UK cohort of patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes, only 51% had antihyperglycaemic medication initiated over a 2-year period following diagnosis. Older patients were significantly less likely to have been prescribed antihyperglycaemic medications. Elevated HbA1c was the strongest factor associated with initiating antihyperglycaemic medication in these patients.

Renal Evaluation and Protection.

Diabetes and diabetic nephropathy have become more prevalent in the elderly population. Diabetic nephropathy has become increasingly prevalent in the elderly population. The presence of this disease in an age group suffering multiple comorbidities has altered the pathophysiology and leading cause of mortality. Mortality has become linked more often to cardiovascular events rather than progression of end-stage-renal-disease, which explains the recent shift of focus of trials to improving cardiovascular-outcomes in patients with diabetes. In this chapter, we emphasize the difference in treatment modalities and goals of therapy in elderly versus young. In addition, we discuss results from recent outcome trials with regards to renal benefits of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2-inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1-receptor-agonists.

Fear of hypoglycaemia: defining a minimum clinically important difference in patients with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: To explore the concept of the Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MID) of the Worry Scale of the Hypoglycaemia Fear Survey (HFS-II) and to quantify the clinical importance of different types of patient-reported hypoglycaemia. METHODS: An observational study was conducted in Germany with 392 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with combinations of oral anti-hyperglycaemic agents. Patients completed the HFS-II, the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM), and reported on severity of hypoglycaemia. Distribution- and anchor-based methods were used to determine MID. In turn, MID was used to determine if hypoglycaemia with or without need for assistance was clinically meaningful compared to having had no hypoglycaemia. RESULTS: 112 patients (28.6%) reported hypoglycaemic episodes, with 15 patients (3.8%) reporting episodes that required assistance from others. Distribution- and anchor-based methods resulted in MID between 2.0 and 5.8 and 3.6 and 3.9 for the HFS-II, respectively. Patients who reported hypoglycaemia with (21.6) and without (12.1) need for assistance scored higher on the HFS-II (range 0 to 72) than patients who did not report hypoglycaemia (6.0). CONCLUSION: We provide MID for HFS-II. Our findings indicate that the differences between having reported no hypoglycaemia, hypoglycaemia without need for assistance, and hypoglycaemia with need for assistance appear to be clinically important in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with oral anti-hyperglycaemic agents.

International Consensus on Risk Management of Diabetic Ketoacidosis in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Treated With Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter (SGLT) Inhibitors.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter (SGLT) inhibitors are new oral antidiabetes medications shown to effectively reduce glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and glycemic variability, blood pressure, and body weight without intrinsic properties to cause hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes. However, recent studies, particularly in individuals with type 1 diabetes, have demonstrated increases in the absolute risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Some cases presented with near-normal blood glucose levels or mild hyperglycemia, complicating the recognition/diagnosis of DKA and potentially delaying treatment. Several SGLT inhibitors are currently under review by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European regulatory agencies as adjuncts to insulin therapy in people with type 1 diabetes. Strategies must be developed and disseminated to the medical community to mitigate the associated DKA risk. This Consensus Report reviews current data regarding SGLT inhibitor use and provides recommendations to enhance the safety of SGLT inhibitors in people with type 1 diabetes.

Treatment escalation and rise in HbA1c following successful initial metformin therapy.

OBJECTIVE: To describe secondary failure of initial metformin therapy in patients who achieved initial HbA(1c) (A1C) <8% and to identify predictors of failure. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We identified 1,288 patients who achieved A1C <8% within 1 year of initiating metformin as their first-ever antihyperglycemic drug. Subjects were followed until they added/switched antihyperglycemics, they terminated health plan membership, or 31 December 2004. We defined secondary failure using two separate but overlapping approaches: 1) addition/switch to another antihyperglycemic drug or 2) first A1C measurement >8.0% after at least 6 months on metformin. RESULTS: The best A1C achieved within 1 year of metformin initiation was the most powerful predictor of avoiding secondary failure. Approximately 50% of subjects whose best A1C was 7-7.9% added/switched antihyperglycemic drugs within 36 months, whereas it took >60 months for those in the 6-6.9% A1C category to reach a 50% failure rate. Those who achieved an A1C <6% did not reach a 50% rate of adding/switching drugs until 84 months. For the alternative secondary failure outcome, about half of those whose best A1C was 7.0-7.9% reached an A1C >8% within 24 months. Only approximately 25% of subjects in the 6-6.9% category failed by 48 months, and >80% of subjects in the <6% category remained below 8% through 60 months. CONCLUSIONS: Whether defined by adding/switching to another drug or by reaching an A1C of 8%, secondary failure is inversely associated with the reduction of A1C achieved within the 1st year of metformin monotherapy.

The impact of losartan on the lifetime incidence of end-stage renal disease and costs in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy.

INTRODUCTION: The RENAAL (Reduction of Endpoints in Non-insulin dependent diabetes with the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan) study demonstrated that, in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and nephropathy, treatment with losartan plus conventional antihypertensive therapy (CT) reduced the relative risk of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) by 29% versus placebo over the time span of the study (mean patient follow-up of 3.4 years). The objective of this study was to project the effect of losartan compared with placebo on the lifetime incidence of ESRD and associated costs (from a US healthcare system perspective). METHODS: To estimate lifetime incidence of ESRD, we used a competing risks method to account for the risk of death without ESRD. We estimated the cost (US dollars, year 2002 values) associated with ESRD by combining the cumulative incidence of ESRD with the lifetime cost associated with ESRD. Total cost was estimated as the sum of the cost associated with ESRD, the cost of losartan study therapy and other costs (non-ESRD/non-losartan) expected for patients with type 2 diabetes. Survival was estimated by weighting the life expectancies with and without ESRD by the cumulative risk of ESRD. Costs and outcomes were discounted by 3% per annum. RESULTS: We projected a lower lifetime incidence of ESRD for losartan patients (66%) compared with placebo patients (83%). This reduction in ESRD resulted in a decrease in cost associated with ESRD of US dollars 31,803 per patient and a gain of 0.99 life-years per patient (0.70 discounted). After accounting for the cost of losartan and the additional cost associated with greater survival, we projected that treatment with losartan would result in a lifetime net saving of US dollars 24,632 per patient. CONCLUSION: Treatment with losartan plus CT in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy reduced the within-trial incidence of ESRD and is projected to result in lifetime reductions in ESRD and associated costs, and increased survival, versus placebo.

Trends in lipid management among patients with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine trends in lipid management (cholesterol testing, treatment, and goal attainment) among patients with diabetes and to analyze the factors associated with initiation of lipid-lowering therapy. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal, retrospective study of patients with diabetes identified during a 24-month baseline period (January 1, 1995, to December 31, 1996) and for whom follow-up was continued for 5 years (1997 to 2001). Generalized estimating equations were used to test for time trend effects in lipid management. We modeled the days from baseline to the first lipid-lowering prescription fill date with a multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression model. RESULTS: Rates of lipid testing, treatment, and goal attainment significantly improved (P<0.001) during the 5-year study period: from 37% to 67% for lipid testing; from 19% to 41% for treatment with a lipid-lowering agent; from 22% to 37% for achievement of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels < 100 mg/dL; and from 54% to 75% for achievement of LDL-C levels < 130 mg/dL. The relative likelihood (hazard rate) of treatment with lipid-lowering agents was greater for patients with LDL-C levels > or = 100 mg/dL relative to patients with LDL-C concentrations < 100 mg/dL. Treatment with lipid-lowering agents of patients with a cardiovascular event during follow-up was approximately 3 times more likely relative to those without such an event. CONCLUSION: We found that rates of lipid testing, treatment, and goal attainment improved significantly between 1997 and 2001. Nevertheless, ample room for improvement of these rates continues to exist. Particular attention may be warranted to ensure that patients with diabetes receive lipid-lowering agents not only after a cardiovascular event but also before such an event occurs.

Employer-paid nonmedical costs for patients with diabetes and end-stage renal disease.

INTRODUCTION: Disease conditions such as end-stage renal disease (ESRD), which have severe consequences of disability and mortality, can generate substantial costs for large employers providing life insurance and disability insurance benefits. This study is the first to examine such disease-related nonmedical costs for employers and models the following employer-paid costs for ESRD in patients with diabetes: 1) life insurance benefits, 2) disability benefits, and 3) cost of replacing a worker. METHODS: We simulated a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 individuals with the age and sex distribution of a typical employee population in the United States. Data sources for the model parameters included the United States Renal Data System and proprietary life insurance and disability insurance claims databases. In addition, we used published information to identify the structures of typical employee benefits programs and annual salary information and to estimate the cost of replacing lost workers. RESULTS: The study estimated that employers may incur life insurance costs of 55,055 dollars per ESRD-related death, disability insurance costs of 31,671 dollars per ESRD-related disability, and worker replacement costs of 27,869 dollars per ESRD-related lost worker. Overall, the total monthly cost per employee with ESRD and diabetes was 5439 dollars. CONCLUSION: Our study finds that, other than the large direct medical costs documented in literature, ESRD onset also results in substantial nonmedical costs for employers. As employers continue to debate changes in the structure of future health plan benefits to reduce health care costs, they should consider potential indirect cost savings of providing affordable access to medical care that prevents or delays disability and mortality in their workers.

Glycemic control continues to deteriorate after sulfonylureas are added to metformin among patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To describe the course and predictors of glycemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes after sulfonylureas (SUs) are added to metformin (MF). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients (n = 2,220) treated with MF monotherapy for >90 days before initiating MF plus SU combination therapy between January 1998 and March 2004 were studied in a retrospective analysis of electronic medical records from U.K. primary care practices using the General Practice Research Database. Median glycoslyated hemoglobin A(1c) (A1C) before and after SU initiation was described, and patient characteristics were evaluated as predictors of time until A1C > or =8.0% or glucose-lowering therapy was intensified (by starting insulin or adding a third oral agent). RESULTS: At 6 months post-SU initiation, median A1C resumed deteriorating at a somewhat comparable rate to that observed on MF monotherapy. Higher pre-SU A1C, younger age, female sex, shorter diabetes duration, higher serum creatinine, and being an ex-smoker predicted time until A1C > or =8.0% or glucose-lowering therapy was intensified in various analyses. Median A1C was 9.5% when therapy was intensified. A1C > or =8.0% was estimated to occur in 85% of patients 4 years after SU initiation and in 68% 4 years after initially achieving A1C <7% on MF plus SU therapy. CONCLUSIONS: In this population, glycemic control is improved following the addition of SUs to MF, but deterioration resumes as early as 6 months. The high proportion of patients remaining on MF plus SU therapy despite having A1C > or =8.0% suggests that there are significant barriers to starting insulin or adding a third agent when treatment goals are not achieved with this combination.

NCEP-defined metabolic syndrome, diabetes, and prevalence of coronary heart disease among NHANES III participants age 50 years and older.

Although the individual components of the metabolic syndrome are clearly associated with increased risk for coronary heart disease (CHD), we wanted to quantify the increased prevalence of CHD among people with metabolic syndrome. The Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES III) was used to categorize adults over 50 years of age by presence of metabolic syndrome (National Cholesterol Education Program [NCEP] definition) with or without diabetes. Demographic and risk factor information was determined for each group, as well as the proportion of each group meeting specific criteria for metabolic syndrome. The prevalence of CHD for each group was then determined. Metabolic syndrome is very common, with approximately 44% of the U.S. population over 50 years of age meeting the NCEP criteria. In contrast, diabetes without metabolic syndrome is uncommon (13% of those with diabetes). Older Americans over 50 years of age without metabolic syndrome regardless of diabetes status had the lowest CHD prevalence (8.7% without diabetes, 7.5% with diabetes). Compared with those with metabolic syndrome, people with diabetes without metabolic syndrome did not have an increase in CHD prevalence. Those with metabolic syndrome without diabetes had higher CHD prevalence (13.9%), and those with both metabolic syndrome and diabetes had the highest prevalence of CHD (19.2%) compared with those with neither. Metabolic syndrome was a significant univariate predictor of prevalent CHD (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.66-2.59). However, blood pressure, HDL cholesterol, and diabetes, but not presence of metabolic syndrome, were significant multivariate predictors of prevalent CHD. The prevalence of CHD markedly increased with the presence of metabolic syndrome. Among people with diabetes, the prevalence of metabolic syndrome was very high, and those with diabetes and metabolic syndrome had the highest prevalence of CHD. Among all individuals with diabetes, prevalence of CHD was increased compared with those with metabolic syndrome without diabetes. However, individuals with diabetes without metabolic syndrome had no greater prevalence of CHD compared with those with neither.

Estimating cholesterol treatment rates among individuals with multiple risk factors and without coronary heart disease.

This retrospective study examined lipid-lowering therapy treatment rates from 2000 to 2001 using the Ingenix LabRx Database. Patients with multiple risk factors without coronary heart disease were identified based on the presence of >/=2 of the following: men >/=45 years, women >/=55 years, hypertension, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol <40 mg/dl, total cholesterol >/=200 mg/dl, or obesity. Lipid treatment rates were estimated among those needing therapy (defined as low-density lipoprotein cholesterol >/=130 mg/dl or currently receiving lipid-lowering therapy). The overall lipid-lowering therapy treatment rate was 38% and the estimated lipid treatment gap (percent needing treatment who were not receiving it) was 62%.

Macrovascular risk factors in patients with diabetes: physician treatment strategies and extent of control.

OBJECTIVE: To describe current approaches used by physicians to address macrovascular risk factors among patients with diabetes and their effect on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), blood pressure, and cholesterol (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C]) goal attainment. METHODS: Newly referred or diagnosed patients with diabetes (N = 1,808) under the care of 133 community physicians were enrolled in a 12-month prospective multi-center observational study. The invited physicians treat a large number of patients with diabetes and included endocrinologists, internists, and primary care physicians. Patient and physician characteristics, physician ranking of treatment strategy priority, and patient ranking of diabetes-related complications of greatest concern were recorded at enrollment. Follow-up treatment rates and goal attainment rates for glucose (HbA1c <7%), cholesterol (LDL-C <100 mg/dL), and blood pressure (less than 130/80 mm Hg) were examined, both overall and for the most frequently occurring treatment strategies. RESULTS: After evaluating the metabolic profiles of patients enrolled in the study, physicians assigned the highest treatment priority to glucose control for 67.6% of patients. Treatment rates during the 12-month follow-up were highest for glycemic control (87.2%), followed by blood pressure management (77.9%), and lipid control (63.9%). Among treated patients, goal attainment for HbA1c, LDL-C, and blood pressure was 57.6%, 47.7%, and 22.8%, respectively. Regardless of treatment strategy, follow-up goal attainment was the highest for HbA1c (54.8% to 72.3%), followed by LDL-C (41.7% to 48.4%), and lowest for blood pressure (12.0% to 37.1%). CONCLUSION: These findings suggest the need for strategies that emphasize combined glucose, blood pressure, and cholesterol treatment in order to achieve more effective control of microvascular and macrovascular risk factors among patients with diabetes.

Cholesterol levels and statin use in patients with coronary heart disease treated in primary care settings.

INTRODUCTION: Therapy with 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A (HMG-CoA) reductase inhibitors, or statins, has proven to be effective in the treatment of lipid disorders. However, statin therapy continues to be underused, even though statins are a relatively safe and well-tolerated class of agents. In this study, we assessed trends in lipid control in patients with heart disease who receive most of their health care in primary care clinics. The objective was to determine whether systems of care implemented within a large medical group are associated with improved treatment and control of dyslipidemia in a high-risk group of coronary heart disease patients. METHODS: All adults with heart disease in a Minnesota medical group (N = 2947) were identified using diagnosis and procedure codes related to coronary heart disease (sensitivity = 0.85; positive predictive value = 0.89) in 1996. Study subjects were observed from 1995 to 1998. Subjects had a baseline and follow-up test for low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Changes between baseline and follow-up measurements and trends in the use of statins and other lipid-active agents among the study subjects were analyzed. RESULTS: Among 1388 subjects with two or more eligible lipid measurements, mean low-density lipoprotein cholesterol improved from 137.6 mg/dL to 111.0 mg/dL (P < .001), and mean high-density lipoprotein cholesterol improved from 42.3 mg/dL to 46.3 mg/dL (P < .001). The percentage of patients with low-density lipoprotein cholesterol < or = 100 mg/dL rose from 12.5% to 39.8% (P < .001), and the percentage with high-density lipoprotein cholesterol > or = 40 mg/dL rose from 52.5% to 67.6% (P < .001). In multivariate models, statin use was identified as the main factor that contributed to the improvement in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P < .001). Men had greater decreases in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol than women after adjusting for other variables (P < .001). Statin use rose from 24.3% at baseline to 69.6% at follow-up. The statin discontinuation rate was 8.3% for baseline statin users and 12.2% for subjects who used statins at any time during the study period. CONCLUSION: Investment in better heart disease care for patients in primary care clinics led to major improvement in lipid control over 30 months, primarily due to increased statin use. Improvements in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol were sufficient to substantially reduce risk of subsequent major cardiovascular events.

End-stage renal disease-associated managed care costs among patients with and without diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the direct costs of care before and after onset of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) for patients with and without diabetes based on analyses of retrospective healthcare claims data. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients with onset of ESRD between January 1998 though June 2002 were identified based on use of dialysis, renal transplantation, or other ESRD-related services. Continuous health plan enrollment > or =12 months before and > or =1 month after ESRD onset was required. The costs calculated include both observed and adjusted estimates; the latter were calculated using generalized linear models, controlling for demographic and clinical characteristics, "onset" period, and duration of follow-up. Analyses focus on the diabetic ESRD patient and include a comparison with ESRD patients without diabetes. RESULTS: The study included 2,020 patients with diabetes and 2,170 without diabetes; 63% of patients were >50 years of age. Average costs were relatively stable before ESRD ($1,535 to $4,357 for diabetes, $1,082 to $2,447 for no diabetes) but more than doubled in the month preceding onset ($9,152 and $8,211, respectively). Postonset, average monthly per-patient costs escalated sharply in the 1st month ($26,507 and $26,789), declined steadily through month 6, and remained flat but elevated thereafter. Adjusted annual costs per patient pre- and postonset of ESRD were significantly higher for diabetes (P <0.0001); annual costs were 69% ($38,041 vs. $22,538) and 79% ($96,014 vs. $53,653) higher pre- and postonset, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The economic burden of ESRD in the year after onset is substantial, particularly among patients with diabetes.

Trends in lipid management among patients with coronary artery disease: has diabetes received the attention it deserves?

OBJECTIVE: To examine lipid management trends for coronary artery disease (CAD) patients with and without diabetes in order to determine whether those with diabetes are beginning to receive aggressive lipid management consistent with their elevated risk. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used outpatient medical record data from 47,813 CAD patients seen at 295 medical practices participating in the Quality Assurance Program II between 1996 and 1998. Lipid testing rates, lipid treatment rates, and serum lipid concentrations are described for CAD patients with and without diabetes within strata of office visit date. RESULTS: Lipid testing and treatment rates increased and mean lipid levels decreased markedly over time. Those with diabetes were 26% less likely to have a lipid profile and 17% less likely to receive a lipid-lowering medication than their nondiabetic counterparts, and this disparity did not diminish over time. Among treated patients, mean non-HDL cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and LDL cholesterol (LDL-C) declined less rapidly over time for patients with than without diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Although impressive progress was made in the outpatient lipid management of CAD patients, lipid management for CAD patients with diabetes improved no more rapidly, and in some cases less rapidly, than for nondiabetic patients. Given their higher risk, more effort is needed to ensure that CAD patients with diabetes receive aggressive lipid management.

Losartan reduces the costs associated with diabetic end-stage renal disease: the RENAAL study economic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the within-trial effect of losartan and conventional antihypertensive therapy (CT) compared with placebo and CT on the economic cost associated with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Reduction of End Points in Type 2 Diabetes With the Angiotensin II Antagonist Losartan (RENAAL) study was a multinational double-blind randomized placebo-controlled clinical trial designed to evaluate the renal protective effects of losartan on a background of CT (excluding ACE inhibitors and angiotensin II receptor agonists [AIIAs]) in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. The primary composite end point was doubling of serum creatinine, ESRD, or death. Data on the duration of ESRD were used to estimate the economic benefits of slowing the progression of nephropathy. The cost associated with ESRD was estimated by combining the days each patient experienced ESRD with the cost of ESRD over time. The cost of ESRD for individuals with diabetes was estimated using data from the U.S. Renal Data System. Total cost was estimated as the sum of the cost associated with ESRD and the cost of study therapy. RESULTS-We estimated that losartan and CT compared with placebo and CT reduced the number of days with ESRD by 33.6 per patient over 3.5 years (P = 0.004, 95% CI 10.9-56.3). This reduction in ESRD days resulted in a decrease in cost associated with ESRD of 5144 US dollars per patient (P = 0.003, 95% CI 1701 to 8587 US dollars). After accounting for the cost of losartan, the reduction in ESRD days resulted in a net savings of 3522 US dollars per patient over 3.5 years (P = 0.041, 143 to 6900 US dollars). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with losartan in patients with type 2 diabetes and nephropathy not only reduced the incidence of ESRD, but also resulted in substantial cost savings.

Adequacy of glycemic, lipid, and blood pressure management for patients with diabetes in a managed care setting.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the adequacy of glycemic, lipid, and blood pressure (BP) management for diabetic patients in a managed care organization (MCO). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients aged > or =18 years with diabetes (n=7,114) were retrospectively identified over a 2-year period from the MCO's administrative database based on the Health Plan Employer Data and Information Set 2000 selection criteria using pharmacy, laboratory, and encounter data. Analyses examined demographics and percentages of patients tested and meeting American Diabetes Association goals for HbA1c, lipids, and BP, both overall and for those receiving medication treatment versus no treatment. RESULTS: Testing rates for A1C, LDL cholesterol, and BP were 77, 54, and 95%, respectively. The percentage of patients tested who were at goal were 37% for A1C, 23% for LDL cholesterol, and 41% for systolic BP. Of the patients in our sample, 72% were treated for glycemic control, 64% were treated for BP control, and only 28% were treated for lipid control. Of the patients who received medication treatment, less than one-third were at goal for A1C (29%) and LDL cholesterol (32%), whereas 40% were at goal for systolic BP. CONCLUSIONS: We found that although a large percentage of diabetic patients were tested for A1C, LDL cholesterol, and systolic BP, a much smaller percentage had reached their respective goals. More aggressive glycemic, lipid, and BP management appears to be needed to improve care for these patients.