Visceral, subcutaneous abdominal adiposity and liver fat content distribution in normal glucose tolerance, impaired fasting glucose and/or impaired glucose tolerance.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the specific distribution of liver fat content, visceral and subcutaneous adiposity in normal glucose tolerance (NGT/NGT), isolated impaired fasting glucose (iIFG), isolated impaired glucose tolerance (iIGT) and combined conditions (IFG+IGT), as well as with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (nT2D). DESIGN: Multicenter, international observational study: cross-sectional analysis. SUBJECTS: Two thousand five hundred and fifteen patients (50.0% women, 54.5% non-Caucasian) without previously known diabetes were recruited from 29 countries. Abdominal fat distribution was measured by computed tomography (CT). Liver fat was estimated using the CT-liver mean attenuation. RESULTS: Compared with NGT/NGT patients, increased visceral adiposity was found in iIFG, iIGT, IFG+IGT and nT2D; estimated liver fat progressively increased across these conditions. A one-s.d. increase in visceral adiposity was associated with an increased risk of having iIFG (men: odds ratio (OR) 1.41 (95% confidence interval (CI) 1.15-1.74), women: OR 1.62 (1.29-2.04)), iIGT (men: OR 1.59 (1.15-2.01), women: OR 1.30 (0.96-1.76)), IFG+IGT (men: OR 1.64 (1.27-2.13), women: OR 1.83 (1.36-2.48)) and nT2D (men: OR 1.80 (1.35-2.42), women: OR 1.73 (1.25-2.41)). A one-s.d. increase in estimated liver fat was associated with iIGT (men: OR 1.46 (1.12-1.90), women: OR 1.81 (1.41-2.35)), IFG+IGT (men: OR 1.42 (1.14-1.77), women: OR 1.74 (1.35-2.26)) and nT2D (men: OR 1.77 (1.40-2.27), women: OR 2.38 (1.81-3.18)). Subcutaneous abdominal adipose tissue showed an inverse relationship with nT2D in women (OR 0.63 (0.45-0.88)). CONCLUSIONS: Liver fat was associated with iIGT but not with iIFG, whereas visceral adiposity was associated with both. Liver fat and visceral adiposity were associated with nT2D, whereas subcutaneous adiposity showed an inverse relationship with nT2D in women.

Patient-level meta-analysis of the EDITION 1, 2 and 3 studies: glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia with new insulin glargine 300 U/ml versus glargine 100 U/ml in people with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To conduct a patient-level meta-analysis of the EDITION 1, 2 and 3 studies, which compared the efficacy and safety of new insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) with insulin glargine 100 U/ml (Gla-100) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) on basal and mealtime insulin, basal insulin and oral antihyperglycaemic drugs, or no prior insulin, respectively. METHODS: The EDITION studies were multicentre, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, phase IIIa studies, with similar designs and endpoints. A patient-level meta-analysis of the studies enabled these endpoints to be examined over 6 months in a large population with T2DM (Gla-300, n = 1247; Gla-100, n = 1249). RESULTS: No significant study-by-treatment interactions across studies were found, enabling them to be pooled. The mean change in glycated haemoglobin was comparable for Gla-300 and Gla-100 [each -1.02 (standard error 0.03)%; least squares (LS) mean difference 0.00 (95% confidence interval (CI) -0.08 to 0.07)%]. Annualized rates of confirmed (≤3.9 mmol/l) or severe hypoglycaemia were lower with Gla-300 than with Gla-100 during the night (31% difference in rate ratio over 6 months) and at any time (24 h, 14% difference). Consistent reductions were observed in percentage of participants with ≥1 hypoglycaemic event. Severe hypoglycaemia at any time (24 h) was rare (Gla-300: 2.3%; Gla-100: 2.6%). Weight gain was low (<1 kg) in both groups, with less gain with Gla-300 [LS mean difference -0.28 kg (95% CI -0.55 to -0.01); p = 0.039]. Both treatments were well tolerated, with similar rates of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Gla-300 provides comparable glycaemic control to Gla-100 in a large population with a broad clinical spectrum of T2DM, with consistently less hypoglycaemia at any time of day and less nocturnal hypoglycaemia.

Assessment of cardiometabolic risk and prevalence of meeting treatment guidelines among patients with type 2 diabetes stratified according to their use of insulin and/or other diabetic medications: results from INSPIRE ME IAA.

AIM: Visceral adipose tissue (VAT) and liver fat (LF) are strongly associated with type 2 diabetes. It is not known, however, how diabetes treatment and/or risk factor management modulates the association between VAT, LF and diabetes. The aim was to determine the level of VAT and LF in patients with type 2 diabetes according to their treatment status and achievement of the American Diabetes Association's (ADA) diabetes management goals. METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional analysis of the baseline data of the International Study of the Prediction of Intra-Abdominal Adiposity and its Relationship with Cardiometabolic risk/Intra-Abdominal Adiposity (INSPIRE ME IAA), a 3-year prospective cardiometabolic imaging study conducted in 29 countries. Patients (n = 3991) were divided into four groups: (i) those without type 2 diabetes (noT2D n = 1003 men, n = 1027 women); (ii) those with type 2 diabetes but not treated with diabetes medications (T2Dnomeds n = 248 men, n = 198 women); (iii) those with type 2 diabetes and treated with diabetes medications but not yet using insulin (T2Dmeds-ins n = 591 men, n = 484 women) and (iv) those with type 2 diabetes and treated with insulin (T2Dmeds+ins n = 233 men, n = 207 women). Abdominal and liver adiposity were measured by computed tomography. RESULTS: Fewer patients with high VAT or LF achieved the ADA's goals for high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) or triglycerides compared to patients with low VAT or LF. Visceral adiposity (p = 0.02 men, p = 0.003 women) and LF (p = 0.0002 men, p = 0.0004 women) increased among patients who met fewer of the ADA treatment criteria, regardless of type 2 diabetes treatment. CONCLUSION: Residual cardiometabolic risk exists among patients with type 2 diabetes characterized by elevated VAT and LF.

Glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia risk with insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus glargine 100 U/mL: A patient-level meta-analysis examining older and younger adults with type 2 diabetes.

AIM: Older people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are at an increased risk of hypoglycaemia and its consequences. However, efficacy and safety data for basal insulin therapy are limited in these individuals. This patient-level meta-analysis assessed the treatment effects of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in people with T2DM ≥ 65 years old. METHODS: Data were pooled for patients randomised to receive Gla-300 or Gla-100 in the Phase 3a, treat-to-target EDITION 1, 2 and 3 trials. Glycaemic efficacy, hypoglycaemia, changes in body weight and insulin dosage and adverse events were examined over 6 months' treatment with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 for participants aged ≥ 65 and < 65 years. RESULTS: Of 2496 participants randomised, 662 were ≥ 65 years (Gla-300, n = 329; Gla-100, n = 333). Glycaemic control was comparable for Gla-300 and Gla-100 in participants ≥ 65 years (LS mean [95% CI] difference in HbA1c change from baseline to month 6: 0.00 [-0.14 to 0.15] %; 0.00 [-1.53 to 1.64] mmol/mol) and < 65 years (0.00 [-0.09 to 0.08] %; 0.00 [-0.98 to 0.87] mmol/mol). Fewer participants receiving Gla-300 versus Gla-100 experienced nocturnal confirmed (≤ 3.9 mmol/L [≤ 70 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycaemia (relative risk: ≥ 65 years: 0.70 [0.57 to 0.85]; < 65 years: 0.77 [0.68 to 0.87]). Annualised rates of nocturnal confirmed or severe hypoglycaemia were lower with Gla-300 than Gla-100 for both age groups. CONCLUSION: Gla-300 was associated with a reduced risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia versus Gla-100, accompanied by comparable glycaemic improvement, for people aged ≥ 65 and < 65 years with T2DM.