Glycemia Reduction in Type 2 Diabetes - Microvascular and Cardiovascular Outcomes.

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.).

Glycemia Reduction in Type 2 Diabetes - Glycemic Outcomes.

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.).

Cost-Efficient Multiply Matched Case-Control Study Designs.

In multiply matched case-control studies, a number of cases and controls may be included in each matched set. However, when per-participant costs between cases and controls differ, investigators should be aware of how the numbers of cases and controls per matched set affect the overall total study cost. Traditional statistical approaches to designing case-control studies do not account for study costs. Given an effect size, the power to detect differences is typically a function of the numbers of cases and controls within each matched set. Therefore, the same level of statistical power will be achieved based on various combinations of the numbers of cases and controls. Typical matched case-control studies match a case to a number of controls by levels of 1 or more known factors. Several authors have shown that for study designs with 1 case per matched set, the optimal number of controls within each matched set that minimizes the total study cost is the square root of the ratio of the cost of a case to the cost of a control. Herein, we extend this result to the setting of a multiply matched case-control study design, when 1 or more cases are matched to controls within each matched set. A Shiny web application implementation of the proposed methods is presented.

Refractive Error and Retinopathy Outcomes in Type 1 Diabetes: The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Study.

PURPOSE: To determine the relationship between refractive error and diabetic retinopathy (DR). DESIGN: Clinical trial. PARTICIPANTS: Type I diabetes individuals with serial refractive error and DR stage measurements over 30 years in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) and Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) follow-up study. METHODS: Stage of DR was measured every 6 months from standard fundus photographs, and refractive error was measured annually during the 6.5 years of DCCT; then, both were staggered every fourth year during EDIC with the full cohort measured at EDIC years 4 and 10. Outcomes of DR were 2- or 3-step progression, presence of proliferative DR (PDR), clinically significant macular edema (CSME), diabetic macular edema (DME), or ocular surgery. Myopia, emmetropia, and hyperopia were defined as a spherical equivalent of ≤-0.5, >-0.5 and <0.5, and ≥0.5, respectively. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For each outcome separately, Cox proportional hazard (PH) models assessed the association between the refractive error status and the subsequent risk of that outcome, both without and with adjustment for potential risk factors. RESULTS: Hyperopia was associated with a higher risk of 2-step progression (hazard ratio [HR], 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.05-1.59), 3-step progression (HR, 1.35; 95% CI, 1.05-1.73), and PDR (HR, 1.40; 95% CI, 1.02-1.92) compared with emmetropia in unadjusted models. These associations remained significant after adjustment for DCCT treatment group, cohort, age, sex, smoking, duration of diabetes, systolic and diastolic blood pressures, pulse, low-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, triglycerides, albumin excretion rate, and DCCT/EDIC mean updated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (2-step progression: HR, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.03-1.58; 3-step progression: HR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.00-1.68; PDR: HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.00-1.90). Myopia was not associated with any of the 5 DR outcomes in the unadjusted models and only marginally associated with 2-step progression (HR, 1.11; 95% CI, 1.00-1.24) in the adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS: Myopia is not associated with DR progression risk. Hyperopia is an independent risk factor for 2-step and 3-step DR progression and PDR.

Cost-efficient clinical studies with continuous time survival outcomes.

Time-to-event outcomes are common in clinical studies. For example, the time to a first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE, defined as CVD death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke) is a commonly used outcome in cardiovascular outcome trials. Owing to the lengthy time frame and other factors, the high costs of conducting such studies has been identified as one of the major obstacles in conducting clinical trials in the United States. However, typical approaches for designing clinical trials with time-to-event outcomes do not consider study costs. For a given effect size (eg, hazard ratio), the power to detect differences between two groups is typically a function of the total number of events observed in the study. Therefore, the same level of power will be achieved based on various combinations of the total number of participants, length of enrollment and total follow-up times, and group allocation probability. Herein, we provide a general framework for designing cost-efficient studies comparing treatments with respect to continuous time-to-event outcomes. Among the various designs that achieve the desired level of power to detect a given effect size for a fixed type-I error level, the optimal cost-efficient design is the design that minimizes the expected total study cost. The method is general and can be used for Cox proportional hazards models or Aalen additive models, and under various recruitment and censoring assumptions. The proposed approach for designing cost-efficient studies is illustrated for a Weibull time-to-event outcome with uniform recruitment and exponentially distributed censoring time. The case of an additive hazards model is also described. A Shiny web application implementation of the proposed methods is presented.

Models to Assess the Association of a Semiquantitative Exposure With Outcomes.

A semiquantitative risk factor has 2 components: any exposure (yes/no) and the quantitative amount of exposure (if exposed). We describe the statistical properties of alternative analyses with such a risk factor using linear, logistic, or Cox proportional hazards models. Often analyses employ the amount exposed as a single quantitative covariate, including the nonexposed with value zero. However, this analysis provides a biased estimate of the exposure coefficient (slope) and we describe the magnitude of the bias. This bias can be eliminated by adding a binary covariate for exposed versus not to the model. This 2-factor analysis captures the full risk-factor effect on the outcome. However, the coefficient for any exposure versus not does not have a meaningful interpretation. Alternatively, when exposure values among those exposed are centered (by subtracting the mean), the estimate of this coefficient represents the difference in the outcome between those exposed versus not in aggregate. We also show that the biased model provides biased estimates of the coefficients for other covariates added to the model. Proper analysis of a semiquantitative risk factor should start with a 2-factor model, with centering, to assess the joint contributions of the 2 components of the risk-factor exposure. Properties of models were illustrated using data from a multisite study in North America (1983-2019).

Frequency of Evidence-Based Screening for Retinopathy in Type 1 Diabetes.

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 .).

The minimum intensity of a mixed exposure that increases the risk of an outcome.

Semi-quantitative exposures, such as smoking and alcohol consumption, are common in clinical studies. Their association with outcomes is captured using either a single quantitative variable that includes nonexposed with a value of zero, or using two variables by adding an additional binary variable exposed versus not exposed. Herein, we propose two approaches to determine a lower bound on the amount of such an exposure (eg, number of cigarettes smoked per day) that significantly increases the risk of outcomes. Using smoking as illustration, the first approach consists of sequentially testing the effect of 1, 2, and so on, cigarettes per day, which requires an adjustment for multiplicity to protect the overall type-I error. An alternative gatekeeping approach is also described. The proposed methods are illustrated for the association of smoking with clinically confirmed neuropathy in a logistic regression model, and for the association of smoking with the risk of CVD in a Cox PH regression model.

Closed testing of each group versus the others combined in a multiple group analysis.

BACKGROUND: Many studies, such as a study of comparative effectiveness, entail a comparison of the beneficial and adverse effects of multiple K> 2 competing therapies. Often, the analysis consists of a comparison of the K groups using an omnibus (T2-like) test for any difference among the groups followed by pairwise comparisons with adjustments for multiple tests. METHODS: We evaluate the properties of an analysis strategy in which each group is compared to the average of the others in hopes of establishing the overall superiority (or harm) of at least one of the therapies. Testing of one-versus-others can be accomplished for virtually any model using simple tests, and the type I error probability α can be controlled by conducting such tests under the closed testing principle. Testing using linear models, the family of generalized linear models, and Cox proportional hazards models is described with examples. RESULTS: Since each tested hypothesis compares one treatment to the average of the others, the K-level null hypothesis in the tree of closed testing is equivalent to any of the (K-1)-level tests, thus reducing the number of tests required. This applies to linear, generalized linear, and Cox proportional hazards models. While the Bonferroni, Holm, and Hommel procedures preserve the desired level α, all are conservative relative to closed one-versus-others testing and closed testing in general provides greater power. CONCLUSION: Testing each of the multiple treatments versus the average of the others is readily and efficiently conducted under the closed testing principle and may be especially useful in the assessment of studies of comparative effectiveness.

Empagliflozin and Clinical Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, Established Cardiovascular Disease, and Chronic Kidney Disease.

BACKGROUND: Empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and established cardiovascular disease in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial (Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients). Urinary glucose excretion with empagliflozin decreases with declining renal function, resulting in less potency for glucose lowering in patients with kidney disease. We investigated the effects of empagliflozin on clinical outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, established cardiovascular disease, and chronic kidney disease. METHODS: Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, established cardiovascular disease, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥30 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2 at screening were randomized to receive empagliflozin 10 mg, empagliflozin 25 mg, or placebo once daily in addition to standard of care. We analyzed cardiovascular death, hospitalization for heart failure, all-cause hospitalization, and all-cause mortality in patients with prevalent kidney disease (defined as eGFR <60 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2 and/or urine albumin-creatinine ratio >300 mg/g) at baseline. Additional analyses were performed in subgroups by baseline eGFR (<45, 45-<60, 60-<90, ≥90 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2) and baseline urine albumin-creatinine ratio (>300, 30-≤300, <30 mg/g). RESULTS: Of 7020 patients treated, 2250 patients had prevalent kidney disease at baseline, of whom 67% had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes mellitus for >10 years, 58% were receiving insulin, and 84% were taking angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. In patients with prevalent kidney disease at baseline, empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular death by 29% compared with placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.71; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.52-0.98), the risk of all-cause mortality by 24% (HR, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.99), the risk of hospitalization for heart failure by 39% (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.42-0.87), and the risk of all-cause hospitalization by 19% (HR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.72-0.92). Effects of empagliflozin on these outcomes were consistent across categories of eGFR and urine albumin-creatinine ratio at baseline and across the 2 doses studied. The adverse event profile of empagliflozin in patients with eGFR <60 mL·min-1·1.73 m-2 was consistent with the overall trial population. CONCLUSIONS: Empagliflozin improved clinical outcomes and reduced mortality in vulnerable patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, established cardiovascular disease, and chronic kidney disease. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01131676.

Empagliflozin and Progression of Kidney Disease in Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes confers an increased risk of adverse cardiovascular and renal events. In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial, empagliflozin, a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, reduced the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events. We wanted to determine the long-term renal effects of empagliflozin, an analysis that was a prespecified component of the secondary microvascular outcome of that trial. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and an estimated glomerular filtration rate of at least 30 ml per minute per 1.73 m(2) of body-surface area to receive either empagliflozin (at a dose of 10 mg or 25 mg) or placebo once daily. Prespecified renal outcomes included incident or worsening nephropathy (progression to macroalbuminuria, doubling of the serum creatinine level, initiation of renal-replacement therapy, or death from renal disease) and incident albuminuria. RESULTS: Incident or worsening nephropathy occurred in 525 of 4124 patients (12.7%) in the empagliflozin group and in 388 of 2061 (18.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the empagliflozin group, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 0.70; P<0.001). Doubling of the serum creatinine level occurred in 70 of 4645 patients (1.5%) in the empagliflozin group and in 60 of 2323 (2.6%) in the placebo group, a significant relative risk reduction of 44%. Renal-replacement therapy was initiated in 13 of 4687 patients (0.3%) in the empagliflozin group and in 14 of 2333 patients (0.6%) in the placebo group, representing a 55% lower relative risk in the empagliflozin group. There was no significant between-group difference in the rate of incident albuminuria. The adverse-event profile of empagliflozin in patients with impaired kidney function at baseline was similar to that reported in the overall trial population. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, empagliflozin was associated with slower progression of kidney disease and lower rates of clinically relevant renal events than was placebo when added to standard care. (Funded by the Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly and Company Diabetes Alliance; EMPA-REG OUTCOME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01131676.).

Optimal screening schedules for disease progression with application to diabetic retinopathy.

Clinical management of chronic diseases requires periodic evaluations. Subjects transition between various levels of severity of a disease over time, one of which may trigger an intervention that requires treatment. For example, in diabetic retinopathy, patients with type 1 diabetes are evaluated yearly for either the onset of proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) or clinically significant macular edema (CSME) that would require immediate treatment to preserve vision. Herein, we investigate methods for the selection of personalized cost-effective screening schedules and compare them with a fixed visit schedule (e.g., annually) in terms of both cost and performance. The approach is illustrated using the progression of retinopathy in the DCCT/EDIC study.

Screening eye exams in youth with type 1 diabetes under 18 years of age: Once may be enough?

Case series and registry data suggest that diabetic retinopathy requiring treatment is rare in youth with type 1 diabetes (T1D) prior to 18 years of age. We evaluated this question in the standardized clinical trial setting by retrospectively reviewing diabetic retinopathy examinations from participants in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) who were 13 to <18 years of age at randomization. Standardized stereoscopic 7-field fundus photographs were obtained every 6 months during DCCT (1983-1993). Photographs were graded centrally using the Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) scale. Transitions in diabetic retinopathy status over time were described. A total of 195 participants with median baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) of 9.3% (103 in the conventional and 92 in the intensive treatment groups) had an average of 5.3 diabetic retinopathy assessments during 2.3 years of follow-up (range 1-11) while under 18 years of age during the DCCT. No participant developed severe non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy or proliferative diabetic retinopathy and only one participant (in the intensive group) reached clinically significant macular edema (CSME) while less than 18 years of age. In this incident case, baseline characteristics included diabetes duration 9.3 years, HbA1c 10.3%, LDL 131 mg/dL, and mild non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (35/35 ETDRS scale); CSME resolved without treatment. Similar analyses using age cut-offs of <19, 20, or 21 years showed a slight rise in diabetic retinopathy requiring treatment over late adolescence. Clinical trial evidence suggests that frequent eye exams may not be universally necessary in youth <18 years of age with T1D.

RISK FACTORS FOR HEARING IMPAIRMENT IN TYPE 1 DIABETES.

Objective: Studies have demonstrated that glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is a significant predictor of hearing impairment in type 1 diabetes. We identified additional factors associated with hearing impairment in participants with type 1 diabetes from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial and its observational follow-up, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) study. Methods: A total of 1,150 DCCT/EDIC participants were recruited for the Hearing Study. A medical history, physical measurements, and a self-administered hearing questionnaire were obtained. Audiometry was performed by study-certified personnel and assessed centrally. Logistic regression models assessed the association of risk factors and comorbidities with speech- and high-frequency hearing impairment. Results: Mean age was 55 ± 7 years, duration of diabetes 34 ± 5 years, and DCCT/EDIC HbA1c 7.9 ± 0.9% (63 mmol/mol). In multivariable models, higher odds of speech-frequency impairment were significantly associated with older age, higher HbA1c, history of noise exposure, male sex, and higher triglycerides. Higher odds of high-frequency impairment were associated with older age, male sex, history of noise exposure, higher skin intrinsic florescence (SIF) as a marker of tissue glycation, higher HbA1c, nonprofessional/nontechnical occupations, sedentary activity, and lower low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol. Among participants who previously completed computed tomography and carotid ultrasonography, coronary artery calcification (CAC) >0 and carotid intima-medial thickness were significantly associated with high-but not speech-frequency impairment. Conclusion: Consistent with previous reports, male sex, age, several metabolic factors, and noise exposure are independently associated with hearing impairment. The association with SIF further emphasizes the importance of glycemia-as a modifiable risk factor-over time. In addition, the macrovascular contribution of CAC is novel and important. Abbreviations: AER = albumin excretion rate; CAC = coronary artery calcification; CVD = cardiovascular disease; DCCT/EDIC = Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications; eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate; ETDRS = Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study; HbA1c = glycated hemoglobin; HDL = high-density lipoprotein; IMT = intima-media thickness; LDL = low-density lipoprotein; NHANES = National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; OR = odds ratio; SIF = skin intrinsic fluorescence; T1D = type 1 diabetes.

Epigenomic profiling reveals an association between persistence of DNA methylation and metabolic memory in the DCCT/EDIC type 1 diabetes cohort.

We examined whether persistence of epigenetic DNA methylation (DNA-me) alterations at specific loci over two different time points in people with diabetes are associated with metabolic memory, the prolonged beneficial effects of intensive vs. conventional therapy during the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) on the progression of microvascular outcomes in the long-term follow-up Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) Study. We compared DNA-me profiles in genomic DNA of whole blood (WB) isolated at EDIC Study baseline from 32 cases (DCCT conventional therapy group subjects showing retinopathy or albuminuria progression by EDIC Study year 10) vs. 31 controls (DCCT intensive therapy group subjects without complication progression by EDIC year 10). DNA-me was also profiled in blood monocytes (Monos) of the same patients obtained during EDIC Study years 16-17. In WB, 153 loci depicted hypomethylation, and 225 depicted hypermethylation, whereas in Monos, 155 hypomethylated loci and 247 hypermethylated loci were found (fold change ≥1.3; P < 0.005; cases vs. controls). Twelve annotated differentially methylated loci were common in both WB and Monos, including thioredoxin-interacting protein (TXNIP), known to be associated with hyperglycemia and related complications. A set of differentially methylated loci depicted similar trends of associations with prior HbA1c in both WB and Monos. In vitro, high glucose induced similar persistent hypomethylation at TXNIP in cultured THP1 Monos. These results show that DNA-me differences during the DCCT persist at certain loci associated with glycemia for several years during the EDIC Study and support an epigenetic explanation for metabolic memory.

Effects of empagliflozin on risk for cardiovascular death and heart failure hospitalization across the spectrum of heart failure risk in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME® trial.

Aims: Empagliflozin reduced the risk of cardiovascular (CV) death and heart failure (HF) hospitalizations in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and established CV disease (CVD) in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME® trial. We investigated whether the benefit of empagliflozin was observed across the spectrum of HF risk. Methods and results: Seven thousand and twenty patients with T2D (HbA1c 7-10% and eGFR > 30 mL/min/1.73 m2) were treated with empagliflozin 10 or 25 mg, or placebo once daily and followed for median 3.1 years. In patients without HF at baseline (89.9%), we derived the 5-year risk for incident HF using the 9-variable Health ABC HF Risk score [classified as low-to-average (<10%), high (10-20%), and very high (≥ 20%)]. Overall, 67.2% of the population had low-to-average, 24.2% high, and 5.1% very high 5-year HF risk. Across these groups, the effect on CV death and HF hospitalization with empagliflozin was consistent [hazard ratio 0.71 (95% confidence interval: 0.52, 0.96), 0.52 (0.36, 0.75), and 0.55 (0.30, 1.00), respectively]. Effects on CV death in the ostensibly highest HF risk group (HF at baseline and/or incident HF during the trial) in whom 37.9% of the overall CV deaths occurred, was also beneficial [0.67 (0.47, 0.97)], yet, similar benefits were seen in the lower risk patients. Conclusion: In patients with T2D and established CVD, a sizeable proportion without HF at baseline are at high or very high risk for HF outcomes, indicating the need for active case finding in this patient population. Empagliflozin consistently improved HF outcomes both in patients at low or high HF risk.

Intensive diabetes therapy and ocular surgery in type 1 diabetes.

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.).

Empagliflozin, Cardiovascular Outcomes, and Mortality in Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The effects of empagliflozin, an inhibitor of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2, in addition to standard care, on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk are not known. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients to receive 10 mg or 25 mg of empagliflozin or placebo once daily. The primary composite outcome was death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, as analyzed in the pooled empagliflozin group versus the placebo group. The key secondary composite outcome was the primary outcome plus hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: A total of 7020 patients were treated (median observation time, 3.1 years). The primary outcome occurred in 490 of 4687 patients (10.5%) in the pooled empagliflozin group and in 282 of 2333 patients (12.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the empagliflozin group, 0.86; 95.02% confidence interval, 0.74 to 0.99; P=0.04 for superiority). There were no significant between-group differences in the rates of myocardial infarction or stroke, but in the empagliflozin group there were significantly lower rates of death from cardiovascular causes (3.7%, vs. 5.9% in the placebo group; 38% relative risk reduction), hospitalization for heart failure (2.7% and 4.1%, respectively; 35% relative risk reduction), and death from any cause (5.7% and 8.3%, respectively; 32% relative risk reduction). There was no significant between-group difference in the key secondary outcome (P=0.08 for superiority). Among patients receiving empagliflozin, there was an increased rate of genital infection but no increase in other adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events who received empagliflozin, as compared with placebo, had a lower rate of the primary composite cardiovascular outcome and of death from any cause when the study drug was added to standard care. (Funded by Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly; EMPA-REG OUTCOME ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01131676.).

Effect of Sitagliptin on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the long-term effect on cardiovascular events of adding sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 14,671 patients to add either sitagliptin or placebo to their existing therapy. Open-label use of antihyperglycemic therapy was encouraged as required, aimed at reaching individually appropriate glycemic targets in all patients. To determine whether sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo, we used a relative risk of 1.3 as the marginal upper boundary. The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there was a small difference in glycated hemoglobin levels (least-squares mean difference for sitagliptin vs. placebo, -0.29 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.32 to -0.27). Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 839 patients in the sitagliptin group (11.4%; 4.06 per 100 person-years) and 851 patients in the placebo group (11.6%; 4.17 per 100 person-years). Sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09; P<0.001). Rates of hospitalization for heart failure did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P=0.98). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of acute pancreatitis (P=0.07) or pancreatic cancer (P=0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease, adding sitagliptin to usual care did not appear to increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for heart failure, or other adverse events. (Funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme; TECOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00790205.).

Properties of composite time to first event versus joint marginal analyses of multiple outcomes.

Many clinical studies (eg, cardiovascular outcome trials) investigate the effect of an intervention on multiple event time outcomes. The most common method of analysis is a so-called "composite" analysis of a composite outcome defined as the time to the first component event. Other approaches have been proposed, including the win ratio (or win difference) for ordered outcomes and the application of the Wei-Lachin test. Herein, we assess the influence of the marginal and joint distributions of the component events, and their correlation structures, on the operating characteristics of these methods for the analysis of multiple events. The operating characteristics are investigated using a bivariate exponential model with a shared frailty, under which these properties are obtained in closed form. While the composite time-to-first-event analysis provides an unbiased test of the hypothesis of equality of the distribution of the time to first event, we show that it can provide a biased test of the joint null hypothesis of equal marginal hazards when the correlation of event times differs between groups. The same applies to the win ratio. However, the operating characteristics of the Wei-Lachin or other tests of the joint equality of the marginal hazards are unaffected. Furthermore, when the correlations are equal, the Wei-Lachin test is more powerful to detect a difference in marginal hazards than the composite analysis test. Careful consideration of the properties of the various methods for analysis of composite outcome measures are in order before adopting one as primary analysis in a clinical study.