Relationship between baseline physical activity assessed by pedometer count and new-onset diabetes in the NAVIGATOR trial

Objective: Physical activity is related to clinical outcomes, even after adjusting for body mass, but is rarely assessed in randomized clinical trials. Research design and methods: We conducted an observational analysis of data from the Nateglinide and Valsartan in Impaired Glucose Tolerance Outcomes Research trial, in which a total of 9306 people from 40 countries with impaired glucose tolerance and either cardiovascular disease or cardiovascular risk factors were randomized to receive nateglinide or placebo, in a 2-by-2 factorial design with valsartan or placebo. All were asked to also participate in a detailed lifestyle modification programme and followed-up for a median of 6.4 years with progression to diabetes as a co-primary end point. Seven-day ambulatory activity was assessed at baseline using research-grade pedometers. We assessed whether the baseline amount of physical activity was related to subsequent development of diabetes in individuals with impaired glucose tolerance. Results: Pedometer data were obtained on 7118 participants and 35.0% developed diabetes. In an unadjusted analysis each 2000-step increment in the average number of daily steps, up to 10 000, was associated with a 5.5% lower risk of progression to diabetes (HR 0.95, 95%CI 0.92 to 0.97), with >6% relative risk reduction after adjustment. Conclusions: Physical activity should be measured objectively in pharmacologic trials as it is a significant but underappreciated contributor to diabetes outcomes. It should be a regular part of clinical practice as well. © 2018 Author(s) (or their employer(s).Peer reviewe

Comparing the efficacy, safety, and utility of intensive insulin algorithms for a primary care practice

Diabetes management is firmly based within the primary care community. Landmark randomized, controlled trials have demonstrated that even modest reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) can yield improvements in economic and medical end-points. Diabetes is a chronic, progressive disease associated with loss of pancreatic β-cell function. Therefore, most patients will eventually require insulin therapies in order to achieve their individualized targeted HbA1c as their β-cell function and mass wanes. Although clinicians understand the importance of early insulin initiation, there is little agreement as to when to introduce insulin as a therapeutic option. Once initiated, questions remain as to whether to allow the patients to self-titrate their dose or whether the dosing should be tightly regulated by the clinician. Physicians have many evidence-based basal insulin protocols from which to choose, all of which have been shown to drive HbA1c levels to the American Diabetes Association target of ≤7%. This article will discuss ways by which insulin therapies can be effectively introduced to patients within busy primary care practices. Published evidence-based basal insulin protocols will be evaluated for safety and efficacy

Blood glucose self-monitoring in type 2 diabetes: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG), either alone or with additional instruction in incorporating the results into self-care, is more effective than usual care in improving glycaemic control in non-insulin-treated diabetes. DESIGN: An open, parallel group randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 24 general practices in Oxfordshire and 24 in South Yorkshire, UK. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, aged > or = 25 years and with glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) > or = 6.2%. INTERVENTIONS: A total of 453 patients were individually randomised to one of: (1) standardised usual care with 3-monthly HbA1c (control, n = 152); (2) blood glucose self-testing with patient training focused on clinician interpretation of results in addition to usual care (less intensive self-monitoring, n = 150); (3) SMBG with additional training of patients in interpretation and application of the results to enhance motivation and maintain adherence to a healthy lifestyle (more intensive self-monitoring, n = 151). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was HBA1c at 12 months, and an intention-to-treat analysis, including all patients, was undertaken. Blood pressure, lipids, episodes of hypoglycaemia and quality of life, measured with the EuroQol 5 dimensions (EQ-5D), were secondary measures. An economic analysis was also carried out, and questionnaires were used to measure well-being, beliefs about use of SMBG and self-reports of medication taking, dietary and physical activities, and health-care resource use. RESULTS: The differences in 12-month HbA1c between the three groups (adjusted for baseline HbA1c) were not statistically significant (p = 0.12). The difference in unadjusted mean change in HbA1c from baseline to 12 months between the control and less intensive self-monitoring groups was -0.14% [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.35 to 0.07] and between the control and more intensive self-monitoring groups was -0.17% (95% CI -0.37 to 0.03). There was no evidence of a significantly different impact of self-monitoring on glycaemic control when comparing subgroups of patients defined by duration of diabetes, therapy, diabetes-related complications and EQ-5D score. The economic analysis suggested that SMBG resulted in extra health-care costs and was unlikely to be cost-effective if used routinely. There appeared to be an initial negative impact of SMBG on quality of life measured on the EQ-5D, and the potential additional lifetime gains in quality-adjusted life-years, resulting from the lower levels of risk factors achieved at the end of trial follow-up, were outweighed by these initial impacts for both SMBG groups compared with control. Some patients felt that SMBG was helpful, and there was evidence that those using more intensive self-monitoring perceived diabetes as having more serious consequences. Patients using SMBG were often not clear about the relationship between their behaviour and the test results. CONCLUSIONS: While the data do not exclude the possibility of a clinically important benefit for specific subgroups of patients in initiating good glycaemic control, SMBG by non-insulin-treated patients, with or without instruction in incorporating findings into self-care, did not lead to a significant improvement in glycaemic control compared with usual care monitored by HbA1c levels. There was no convincing evidence to support a recommendation for routine self-monitoring of all patients and no evidence of improved glycaemic control in predefined subgroups of patients

Association between glycated haemoglobin levels and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease: a secondary analysis of the TECOS randomized clinical trial

Aims: Whether glycaemic control is associated with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is unclear. Consequently, we assessed the relationship between glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and cardiovascular outcomes in a placebo-controlled randomized trial which demonstrated no cardiovascular effect of sitagliptin in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease. Methods and results: Secondary analysis of 14 656 TECOS participants with time to event analyses using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. During a median 3.0 (interquartile range 2.3–3.8) year follow-up, 456 (3.1% of 14 656) patients had first hospitalization for heart failure (HF), 1084 (11.5%) died, 1406 (9.6%) died or were hospitalized for HF, and 1689 (11.5%) had a non-HF cardiovascular event (cardiovascular death, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina). Associations between baseline or time-varying HbA1c and cardiovascular outcomes were U-shaped, with the lowest risk when HbA1c was around 7%. Each one-unit increase in the time-varying HbA1c above 7% was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11–1.33] for first HF hospitalization, 1.11 (1.03–1.21) for all-cause death, 1.18 (1.09–1.26) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.10 (1.02–1.17) for non-HF cardiovascular events. Each one-unit decrease in the time-varying HbA1c below 7% was associated with an adjusted HR of 1.35 (95% CI 1.12–1.64) for first HF hospitalization, 1.37 (1.16–1.61) for death, 1.42 (1.23–1.64) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.22 (1.06–1.41) for non-HF cardiovascular events. Conclusion: Glycated haemogobin exhibits a U-shaped association with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease, with nadir around 7%. Clinical Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00790205

Confirming the bidirectional nature of the association between severe hypoglycemic and cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes: Insights from Exscel

OBJECTIVE We sought to confirm a bidirectional association between severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs) and cardiovascular (CV) event risk and to characterize individuals at dual risk. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In a post hoc analysis of 14,752 Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) participants, we examined time-dependent associations between SHEs and subsequent major adverse cardiac events (CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI] or stroke), fatal/nonfatal MI, fatal/nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (hACS), hospitalization for heart failure (hHF), and all-cause mortality (ACM), as well as time-dependent associations between nonfatal CV events and subsequent SHEs. RESULTS SHEs were uncommon and not associated with once-weekly exenatide therapy (hazard ratio 1.13 [95% CI 0.94–1.36], P 5 0.179). In fully adjusted models, SHEs were associated with an increased risk of subsequent ACM (1.83 [1.38–2.42], P < 0.001), CV death (1.60 [1.11–2.30], P 5 0.012), and hHF (2.09 [1.37–3.17], P 5 0.001), while nonfatal MI (2.02 [1.35–3.01], P 5 0.001), nonfatal stroke (2.30 [1.25–4.23], P 5 0.007), hACS (2.00 [1.39–2.90], P < 0.001), and hHF (3.24 [1.98–5.30], P < 0.001) were all associated with a subsequent increased risk of SHEs. The elevated bidirectional time-dependent hazards linking SHEs and a composite of all CV events were approximately constant over time, with those individuals at dual risk showing higher comorbidity scores compared with those without. CONCLUSIONS These findings, showing greater risk of SHEs after CV events as well as greater risk of CV events after SHEs, validate a bidirectional relationship between CV events and SHEs in patients with high comorbidity scores

Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Peripheral Artery Disease: Results from the EXSCEL Trial

Background: Recent trials have identified anti-diabetes mellitus agents that lower major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE) rates, although some increase rates of lower-extremity amputation (LEA). Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) have greater incidence of diabetes mellitus and risk for LEA, prompting this investigation of clinical outcomes in patients with diabetes mellitus and PAD in the EXSCEL trial (Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering). Methods: EXSCEL evaluated the effects of once-weekly exenatide (a GLP-1 [glucagon-like peptide-1] receptor agonist) versus placebo on the rates of the primary composite MACE end point (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. In this post hoc analysis, we assessed the association of baseline PAD with rates of MACE, LEA, and the effects of exenatide versus placebo in patients with and without PAD. Results: EXSCEL included 2800 patients with PAD (19% of the trial population). These individuals had higher unadjusted and adjusted rates of MACE compared with patients without PAD (13.6% versus 11.4%, respectively) as well as a higher adjusted hazard ratio (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.13 [95% CI, 1.00-1.27]; P=0.047). Patients with PAD had higher all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio 1.38 [95% CI, 1.20-1.60]; P<0.001) and more frequent LEA (adjusted hazard ratio 5.48 [95% CI, 4.16-7.22]; P<0.001). Patients treated with exenatide or placebo had similar rates of MACE and LEA, regardless of PAD status. Conclusions: EXSCEL participants with PAD had higher rates of all-cause mortality and LEA compared with those without PAD. There were no differences in MACE or LEA rates with exenatide versus placebo. Clinical Trial Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT01144338

Hypertension Control in Adults with Diabetes Mellitus and Recurrent Cardiovascular Events: Global Results from the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin

Systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment targets for adults with diabetes mellitus remain unclear. SBP levels among 12 275 adults with diabetes mellitus, prior cardiovascular disease, and treated hypertension were evaluated in the TECOS (Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes With Sitagliptin) randomized trial of sitagliptin versus placebo. The association between baseline SBP and recurrent cardiovascular disease was evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling with restricted cubic splines, adjusting for clinical characteristics. Kaplan-Meier curves by baseline SBP were created to assess time to cardiovascular disease and 2 potential hypotension-related adverse events: worsening kidney function and fractures. The association between time-updated SBP and outcomes was examined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Overall, 42.2% of adults with diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and hypertension had an SBP ≥140 mm Hg. The association between SBP and cardiovascular disease risk was U shaped, with a nadir ≈130 mm Hg. When the analysis was restricted to those with baseline SBP of 110 to 150 mm Hg, the adjusted association between SBP and cardiovascular disease risk was flat (hazard ratio per 10-mm Hg increase, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.02). There was no association between SBP and risk of fracture. Above 150 mm Hg, higher SBP was associated with increasing risk of worsening kidney function (hazard ratio per 10-mm Hg increase, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.18). Many patients with diabetes mellitus have uncontrolled hypertension. The U-shaped association between SBP and cardiovascular disease events was largely driven by those with very high or low SBP, with no difference in cardiovascular disease risk between 110 and 150 mm Hg. Lower SBP was not associated with higher risks of fractures or worsening kidney function

Exploring the Possible Impact of Unbalanced Open-Label Drop-In of Glucose-Lowering Medications on EXSCEL Outcomes

Background: EXSCEL (Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering) assessed the impact of once-weekly exenatide 2 mg versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, while aiming for glycemic equipoise. Consequently, greater drop-in of open-label glucose-lowering medications occurred in the placebo group. Accordingly, we explored the potential effects of their unbalanced use on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), defined as cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke, and all-cause mortality (ACM), given that some of these agents are cardioprotective. Methods: Cox hazard models were performed by randomized treatment for drug classes where >5% open-label drop-in glucose-lowering medication occurred, and for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs; 3.0%) using three methodologies: drop-in visit right censoring, inverse probability for treatment weighting (IPTW), and applying drug class risk reductions. Results: Baseline glucose-lowering medications for the 14 752 EXSCEL participants (73.1% with previous cardiovascular disease) did not differ between treatment groups. During median 3.2 years follow-up, open-label drop-in occurred in 33.4% of participants, more frequently with placebo than exenatide (38.1% versus 28.8%), with metformin (6.1% versus 4.9%), sulfonylurea (8.7% versus 6.9%), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (10.6% versus 7.5%), SGLT-2i (10.3% versus 8.1%), GLP-1 RA (3.4% versus 2.4%), and insulin (13.8% versus 9.4%). The MACE effect size was not altered meaningfully by right censoring, but the favorable HR for exenatide became nominally significant in the sulfonylurea and any glucose-lowering medication groups, while the ACM HR and p-values were essentially unchanged. IPTW decreased the MACE HR from 0.91 (P=0.061) to 0.85 (P=0.008) and the ACM HR from 0.86 (P=0.016) to 0.81 (P=0.012). Application of literature-derived risk reductions showed no meaningful changes in MACE or ACM HRs or P values, although simulations of substantially greater use of drop-in cardioprotective glucose-lowering agents demonstrated blunting of signal detection. Conclusions: EXSCEL-observed HRs for MACE and ACM remained robust after right censoring or application of literature-derived risk reductions, but the exenatide versus placebo MACE effect size and statistical significance were increased by IPTW. Effects of open-label drop-in cardioprotective medications need to be considered carefully when designing, conducting, and analyzing cardiovascular outcome trials of glucose-lowering agents under the premise of glycemic equipoise. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01144338

Emerging role of insulin with incretin therapies for management of type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a progressive disease warranting intensification of treatment, as beta-cell function declines over time. Current treatment algorithms recommend metformin as the first-line agent, while advocating the addition of either basal-bolus or premixed insulin as the final level of intervention. Incretin therapy, including incretin mimetics or enhancers, are the latest group of drugs available for treatment of T2DM. These agents act through the incretin axis, are currently recommended as add-on agents either as second-or third-line treatment, without concurrent use of insulin. Given the novel role of incretin therapy in terms of reducing postprandial hyperglycemia, and favorable effects on weight with reduced incidence of hypoglycemia, we explore alternative options for incretin therapy in T2DM management. Furthermore, as some evidence alludes to incretins potentially increasing betacell mass and altering disease progression, we propose introducing these agents earlier in the treatment algorithm. In addition, we suggest the concurrent use of incretins with insulin, given the favorable effects especially in relation to weight gain

Sitagliptin and risk of fractures in type 2 diabetes: Results from the TECOS trial

Aim: To examine fracture incidence among participants in the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS). Research design and methods: We used data from 14 671 participants in the TECOS study who were randomized double-blind to sitagliptin (n = 7332) or placebo (n = 7339). Cumulative fracture incidence rates were calculated and their association with study treatment assignment was examined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression. Results: The baseline mean (standard deviation) participant age was 65.5 (8.0) years, diabetes duration was 11.6 (8.1) years and glycated haemoglobin level was 7.2 (0.5)% [55.2 (5.5) mmol/mol], and 29.3% of participants were women and 32.1% were non-white. During 43 222 person-years’ follow-up, 375 (2.6%; 8.7 per 1000 person-years) had a fracture; 146 were major osteoporotic fractures (hip, n = 34; upper extremity, n = 81; and clinical spine, n = 31). Adjusted analyses showed fracture risk increased independently with older age (P <.001), female sex (P <.001), white race (P <.001), lower diastolic blood pressure (P <.001) and diabetic neuropathy (P =.003). Sitagliptin, compared with placebo, was not associated with a higher fracture risk [189 vs 186 incident fractures: unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.01, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.82 to 1.23, P =.944; adjusted HR 1.03, P =.745], major osteoporotic fractures (P =.673) or hip fractures (P =.761). Insulin therapy was associated with a higher fracture risk (HR 1.40, 95% CI 1.02-1.91; P =.035), and metformin with a lower risk (HR 0.76, 95% CI 0.59-0.98; P =.035). Conclusion: Fractures were common among people with diabetes in the TECOS study, but were not related to sitagliptin therapy. Insulin and metformin treatment were associated with higher and lower fracture risks, respectively