Study rationale and design of ADVANCE: action in diabetes and vascular disease--preterax and diamicron MR controlled evaluation.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Patients with Type II (non-insulin-dependent) diabetes mellitus are at increased risk of macrovascular and microvascular disease, both of which are reduced by controlling raised blood pressure in hypertensive patients. Intensive glycaemic control has also been shown to reduce microvascular disease but the effects on macrovascular disease remain uncertain. This study will examine the hypotheses that lowering blood pressure with an ACE inhibitor-diuretic combination and intensively controlling gylcaemia with a sulphonylurea-based regimen in high-risk patients with Type II diabetes (both hypertensive and non-hypertensive) reduces the incidence of macrovascular and microvascular disease. METHODS: The study is a 2 x 2 factorial randomised controlled trial that will include 10000 adults with Type II diabetes at high risk of vascular disease. Following 6 weeks on open label perindopril-indapamide combination, eligible patients are randomised to continued perindopril-indapamide or matching placebo, and to an intensive gliclazide MR-based glucose control regimen or usual guidelines-based therapy. Primary outcomes are, first, the composite of nonfatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction or cardiovascular death and, second, the composite of new or worsening nephropathy or diabetic eye disease. The scheduled average duration of treatment and follow-up is 4.5 years. The study will be conducted in approximately 200 centres in Australasia, Asia, Europe and North America. CONCLUSION/INTERPRETATION: ADVANCE is designed to provide reliable evidence on the balance of benefits and risks conferred by blood pressure lowering therapy and intensive glucose control therapy in high-risk diabetic patients, regardless of initial blood pressure or glucose concentrations

Association of HbA1c levels with vascular complications and death in patients with type 2 diabetes: evidence of glycaemic thresholds.

Item does not contain fulltextAIMS/HYPOTHESIS: There is conflicting evidence regarding appropriate glycaemic targets for patients with type 2 diabetes. Here, we investigate the relationship between HbA(1c) and the risks of vascular complications and death in such patients. METHODS: Eleven thousand one hundred and forty patients were randomised to intensive or standard glucose control in the Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron Modified Release Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) trial. Glycaemic exposure was assessed as the mean of HbA(1c) measurements during follow-up and prior to the first event. Adjusted risks for each HbA(1c) decile were estimated using Cox models. Possible differences in the association between HbA(1c) and risks at different levels of HbA(1c) were explored using linear spline models. RESULTS: There was a non-linear relationship between mean HbA(1c) during follow-up and the risks of macrovascular events, microvascular events and death. Within the range of HbA(1c) studied (5.5-10.5%), there was evidence of 'thresholds', such that below HbA(1c) levels of 7.0% for macrovascular events and death, and 6.5% for microvascular events, there was no significant change in risks (all p > 0.8). Above these thresholds, the risks increased significantly: every 1% higher HbA(1c) level was associated with a 38% higher risk of a macrovascular event, a 40% higher risk of a microvascular event and a 38% higher risk of death (all p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In patients with type 2 diabetes, HbA(1c) levels were associated with lower risks of macrovascular events and death down to a threshold of 7.0% and microvascular events down to a threshold of 6.5%. There was no evidence of lower risks below these levels but neither was there clear evidence of harm.1 maart 201