Estimation of individual beneficial and adverse effects of intensive glucose control for patients with type 2 diabetes

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Intensive glucose control reduces the risk of vascular complications while increasing the risk of severe hypoglycaemia at a group level. We sought to estimate individual beneficial and adverse effects of intensive glucose control in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We performed a post hoc analysis of the Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation (ADVANCE) trial, a randomised controlled trial evaluating standard vs intensive glucose control (HbA1c target ≤6.5% [48 mmol/mol]). In 11,140 participants, we estimated the individual 5 year absolute risk reduction (ARR) for the composite outcome of major micro- and macrovascular events and absolute risk increase (ARI) for severe hypoglycaemia for intensive vs standard glucose control. Predictions were based on competing risks models including clinical characteristics and randomised treatment. RESULTS: Based on these models, 76% of patients had a substantial estimated 5 year ARR for major vascular events (>1%, 5 year number-needed-to-benefit [NNTB5] 200). Similarly, 36% of patients had a substantial estimated ARI for severe hypoglycaemia (5 year number-needed-to-harm [NNTH5] 200). When assigning similar or half the weight to severe hypoglycaemia compared with a major vascular event, net benefit was positive in 85% or 99% of patients, respectively. Limiting intensive treatment to the 85% patient subgroup had no significant effect on the overall incidence of major vascular events and severe hypoglycaemia compared with treating all patients. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Taking account of the effects of intensive glucose control on major micro- and macrovascular events and severe hypoglycaemia for individual patients, the estimated net benefit was positive in the majority of the participants in the ADVANCE trial. The estimated individual effects can inform treatment decisions once individual weights assigned to positive and adverse effects have been specified. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00145925

The influence of baseline risk on the relation between HbA1c and risk for new cardiovascular events and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes and symptomatic cardiovascular disease.

Background Strict glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes has proven to have microvascular benefits while the effects on CVD and mortality are less clear, especially in high risk patients. Whether strict glycaemic control would reduce the risk of future CVD or mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes and pre-existing CVD, is unknown. This study aims to evaluate whether the relation between baseline HbA1c and new cardiovascular events or mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes and pre-existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) is modified by baseline vascular risk. Methods A cohort of 1096 patients with type 2 diabetes and CVD from the Second Manifestations of ARTerial Disease (SMART) study was followed. The relation between HbA1c at baseline and future vascular events (composite of myocardial infarction, stroke and vascular mortality) and all-cause mortality was evaluated with Cox proportional hazard analyses in a population that was stratified for baseline risk for vascular events as calculated with the SMART risk score. The mean follow-up duration was 6.9 years for all-cause mortality and 6.4 years for vascular events, in which period 243 and 223 cases were reported, respectively. Results A 1 % increase in HbA1c was associated with a higher risk for all-cause mortality (HR 1.18, 95 % CI 1.06–1.31). This association was also found in the highest SMART risk quartile (HR 1.33, 95 % CI 1.11–1.60). There was no relation between HbA1c and the occurrence of cardiovascular events during follow-up (HR 1.03, 95 % CI 0.91–1.16). The interaction term between HbA1c and SMART risk score was not significantly related to any of the outcomes. Conclusion In patients with type 2 diabetes and CVD, HbA1c is related to the risk of all-cause mortality, but not to the risk of cardiovascular events. The relation between HbA1c and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes and vascular disease is not dependent on baseline vascular risk

The Effects of Secondary Cardiovascular Prevention on Cancer Risk in Patients With Manifest Vascular Disease

Item does not contain fulltex

Cholesteryl Ester Transfer Protein Inhibitor Torcetrapib and Off-Target Toxicity A Pooled Analysis of the Rating Atherosclerotic Disease Change by Imaging With a New CETP Inhibitor (RADIANCE) Trials

Background-Torcetrapib, an inhibitor of cholesteryl ester transfer protein, has been shown to increase the cardiovascular event rate despite conferring a significant high-density lipoprotein cholesterol increase. Using data from the Rating Atherosclerotic Disease Change by Imaging with a New CETP Inhibitor (RADIANCE) trials, which assessed the impact of torcetrapib on carotid intima-media thickness (cIMT), we sought to explore potential mechanisms underlying this adverse outcome. Methods and Results-Data from the RADIANCE 1 and 2 studies, which examined cIMT in 904 subjects with familial hypercholesterolemia and in 752 subjects with mixed dyslipidemia, were pooled. Subjects were randomized to either atorvastatin or torcetrapib combined with atorvastatin. Mean common cIMT progression was increased in subjects receiving torcetrapib plus atorvastatin compared with subjects receiving atorvastatin alone (0.0076 +/- 0.0011 versus 0.0025 +/- 0.0011 mm/y; P = 0.0014). Subjects treated with torcetrapib plus atorvastatin displayed higher postrandomization systolic blood pressure and plasma sodium and bicarbonate levels in conjunction with lower potassium levels. The decrease in potassium levels was associated with the blood pressure increase. Markedly, the use of renin-angiotensinaldosterone system inhibitors tended to aggravate the blood pressure increase. Subjects receiving torcetrapib plus atorvastatin with the strongest low-density lipoprotein cholesterol reduction showed the smallest cIMT progression, whereas subjects with the highest systolic blood pressure increase showed the largest cIMT progression. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol increase was not associated with cIMT change. Conclusions-These analyses support mineralocorticoid-mediated off-target toxicity in patients receiving torcetrapib as a contributing factor to an adverse outcome. The absence of an inverse relationship between high-density lipoprotein cholesterol change and cIMT progression suggests that torcetrapib-induced high-density lipoprotein cholesterol increase does not mediate atheroprotection. Future studies with cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitors without off-target toxicity are needed to settle this issue. (Circulation. 2008; 118: 2515-2522.

Distribution of estimated 10-year risk of recurrent vascular events and residual risk in a secondary prevention population

BACKGROUND: -Among patients with clinically manifest vascular disease, the risk of recurrent vascular events is likely to vary. We assessed the distribution of estimated 10-year risk of recurrent vascular events in a secondary prevention population. We also estimated the potential risk reduction, as well as the residual risk, that can be achieved if patients reach guideline-recommended risk factor targets. METHODS: -The SMART (Second Manifestations of ARTerial disease) score for 10-year risk of myocardial infarction, stroke or vascular death was applied to 6,904 patients with vascular disease. The risk score was externally validated in 18,436 patients with various manifestations of vascular disease from the TNT, IDEAL, SPARCL and CAPRIE trials. The residual risk at guideline- recommended targets was estimated by applying relative risk reductions from meta-analyses to the estimated risk for targets for systolic blood pressure, LDL-cholesterol, smoking, physical activity and use of antithrombotic agents. RESULTS: -The external performance of the SMART risk score was reasonable, apart from overestimation of risk in patients with 10-year risk >40%. In patients with various manifestations of vascular disease, median 10-year risk of a recurrent major vascular event was 17% (IQR 11-28%), varying from 30% in 22% of the patients. If risk factors were at guideline- recommended targets, the residual 10-year risk would be 30% in 9% of the patients (median 11% (IQR 7-17%)). CONCLUSIONS: -Among patients with vascular disease, there is very substantial variation in estimated 10-year risk of recurrent vascular events. If all modifiable risk factors were at guideline- recommended targets, half of the patients would have a 10-year risk of 20% and even >30% 10-year risk, clearly delineating an area of substantial unmet medical need