Denise E. Bonds

The association between symptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia and mortality in type 2 diabetes: retrospective epidemiological analysis of the ACCORD study

Objective To determine whether there is a link between hypoglycaemia and mortality among participants in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial. Design Retrospective epidemiological analysis of data from the ACCORD trial. Setting Diabetes clinics, research clinics, and primary care clinics. Participants Patients were eligible for the ACCORD study if they had type 2 diabetes, a glycated haemoglobin (haemoglobin A1C) concentration of 7.5% or more during screening, and were aged 40-79 years with established cardiovascular disease or 55-79 years with evidence of subclinical disease or two additional cardiovascular risk factors. Intervention Intensive (haemoglobin A1C <6.0%) or standard (haemoglobin A1C 7.0-7.9%) glucose control. Outcome measures Symptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia, manifest as either blood glucose concentration of less than 2.8 mmol/l (<50 mg/dl) or symptoms that resolved with treatment and that required either the assistance of another person or medical assistance, and all cause and cause specific mortality, including a specific assessment for involvement of hypoglycaemia. Results 10 194 of the 10 251 participants enrolled in the ACCORD study who had at least one assessment for hypoglycaemia during regular follow-up for vital status were included in this analysis. Unadjusted annual mortality among patients in the intensive glucose control arm was 2.8% in those who had one or more episodes of hypoglycaemia requiring any assistance compared with 1.2% for those with no episodes (53 deaths per 1924 person years and 201 deaths per 16 315 person years, respectively; adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.41, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.93). A similar pattern was seen among participants in the standard glucose control arm (3.7% (21 deaths per 564 person years) v 1.0% (176 deaths per 17 297 person years); adjusted HR 2.30, 95% CI 1.46 to 3.65). On the other hand, among participants with at least one hypoglycaemic episode requiring any assistance, a non-significantly lower risk of death was seen in those in the intensive arm compared with those in the standard arm (adjusted HR 0.74, 95% 0.46 to 1.23). A significantly lower risk was observed in the intensive arm compared with the standard arm in participants who had experienced at least one hypoglycaemic episode requiring medical assistance (adjusted HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.99). Of the 451 deaths that occurred in ACCORD up to the time when the intensive treatment arm was closed, one death was adjudicated as definitely related to hypoglycaemia. Conclusion Symptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia was associated with an increased risk of death within each study arm. However, among participants who experienced at least one episode of hypoglycaemia, the risk of death was lower in such participants in the intensive arm than in the standard arm. Symptomatic, severe hypoglycaemia does not appear to account for the difference in mortality between the two study arms up to the time when the ACCORD intensive glycaemia arm was discontinued. Trial registration NCT00000620.

Effect of Structured Physical Activity on Prevention of Major Mobility Disability in Older Adults: The LIFE Study Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE In older adults reduced mobility is common and is an independent risk factor for morbidity, hospitalization, disability, and mortality. Limited evidence suggests that physical activity may help prevent mobility disability; however, there are no definitive clinical trials examining whether physical activity prevents or delays mobility disability. OBJECTIVE To test the hypothesis that a long-term structured physical activity program is more effective than a health education program (also referred to as a successful aging program) in reducing the risk of major mobility disability. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders (LIFE) study was a multicenter, randomized trial that enrolled participants between February 2010 and December 2011, who participated for an average of 2.6 years. Follow-up ended in December 2013. Outcome assessors were blinded to the intervention assignment. Participants were recruited from urban, suburban, and rural communities at 8 centers throughout the United States. We randomized a volunteer sample of 1635 sedentary men and women aged 70 to 89 years who had physical limitations, defined as a score on the Short Physical Performance Battery of 9 or below, but were able to walk 400 m. INTERVENTIONS Participants were randomized to a structured, moderate-intensity physical activity program (n = 818) conducted in a center (twice/wk) and at home (3-4 times/wk) that included aerobic, resistance, and flexibility training activities or to a health education program (n = 817) consisting of workshops on topics relevant to older adults and upper extremity stretching exercises. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was major mobility disability objectively defined by loss of ability to walk 400 m. RESULTS Incident major mobility disability occurred in 30.1% (246 participants) of the physical activity group and 35.5% (290 participants) of the health education group (hazard ratio [HR], 0.82 [95% CI, 0.69-0.98], P = .03).Persistent mobility disability was experienced by 120 participants (14.7%) in the physical activity group and 162 participants (19.8%) in the health education group (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.57-0.91]; P = .006). Serious adverse events were reported by 404 participants (49.4%) in the physical activity group and 373 participants (45.7%) in the health education group (risk ratio, 1.08 [95% CI, 0.98-1.20]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE A structured, moderate-intensity physical activity program compared with a health education program reduced major mobility disability over 2.6 years among older adults at risk for disability. These findings suggest mobility benefit from such a program in vulnerable older adults. TRIAL REGISTRATION clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01072500.

The effects of baseline characteristics, glycaemia treatment approach, and glycated haemoglobin concentration on the risk of severe hypoglycaemia: post hoc epidemiological analysis of the ACCORD study

Objectives To investigate potential determinants of severe hypoglycaemia, including baseline characteristics, in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial and the association of severe hypoglycaemia with levels of glycated haemoglobin (haemoglobin A1C) achieved during therapy. Design Post hoc epidemiological analysis of a double 2×2 factorial, randomised, controlled trial. Setting Diabetes clinics, research clinics, and primary care clinics. Participants 10 209 of the 10 251 participants enrolled in the ACCORD study with type 2 diabetes, a haemoglobin A1C concentration of 7.5% or more during screening, and aged 40-79 years with established cardiovascular disease or 55-79 years with evidence of significant atherosclerosis, albuminuria, left ventricular hypertrophy, or two or more additional risk factors for cardiovascular disease (dyslipidaemia, hypertension, current smoker, or obese). Interventions Intensive (haemoglobin A1C <6.0%) or standard (haemoglobin A1C 7.0-7.9%) glucose control. Main outcome measures Severe hypoglycaemia was defined as episodes of “low blood glucose” requiring the assistance of another person and documentation of either a plasma glucose less than 2.8 mmol/l (<50 mg/dl) or symptoms that promptly resolved with oral carbohydrate, intravenous glucose, or glucagon. Results The annual incidence of hypoglycaemia was 3.14% in the intensive treatment group and 1.03% in the standard glycaemia group. We found significantly increased risks for hypoglycaemia among women (P=0.0300), African-Americans (P<0.0001 compared with non-Hispanic whites), those with less than a high school education (P<0.0500 compared with college graduates), aged participants (P<0.0001 per 1 year increase), and those who used insulin at trial entry (P<0.0001). For every 1% unit decline in the haemoglobin A1C concentration from baseline to 4 month visit, there was a 28% (95% CI 19% to 37%) and 14% (4% to 23%) reduced risk of hypoglycaemia requiring medical assistance in the standard and intensive groups, respectively. In both treatment groups, the risk of hypoglycaemia requiring medical assistance increased with each 1% unit increment in the average updated haemoglobin A1C concentration (standard arm: hazard ratio 1.76, 95% CI 1.50 to 2.06; intensive arm: hazard ratio 1.15, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21). Conclusions A greater drop in haemoglobin A1C concentration from baseline to the 4 month visit was not associated with an increased risk for hypoglycaemia. Patients with poorer glycaemic control had a greater risk of hypoglycaemia, irrespective of treatment group. Identification of baseline subgroups with increased risk for severe hypoglycaemia can provide guidance to clinicians attempting to modify patient therapy on the basis of individual risk. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00000620.

Disparities in HbA1c levels between African-American and non-Hispanic white adults with diabetes: a meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE—Among individuals with diabetes, a comparison of HbA1c (A1C) levels between African Americans and non-Hispanic whites was evaluated. Data sources included PubMed, Web of Science, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, the Cochrane Library, the Combined Health Information Database, and the Education Resources Information Center. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—We executed a search for articles published between 1993 and 2005. Data on sample size, age, sex, A1C, geographical location, and study design were extracted. Cross-sectional data and baseline data from clinical trials and cohort studies for African Americans and non-Hispanic whites with diabetes were included. Diabetic subjects aged <18 years and those with pre-diabetes or gestational diabetes were excluded. We conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the difference in the mean values of A1C for African Americans and non-Hispanic whites. RESULTS—A total of 391 studies were reviewed, of which 78 contained A1C data. Eleven had data on A1C for African Americans and non-Hispanic whites and met selection criteria. A meta-analysis revealed the standard effect to be 0.31 (95% CI 0.39–0.25). This standard effect correlates to an A1C difference between groups of ∼0.65%, indicating a higher A1C across studies for African Americans. Grouping studies by study type (cross-sectional or cohort), method of data collection for A1C (chart review or blood draw), and insurance status (managed care or nonmanaged care) showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS—The higher A1C observed in this meta-analysis among African Americans compared with non-Hispanic whites may contribute to disparity in diabetes morbidity and mortality in this population.

Dyslipidemia Prevalence, Treatment, and Control in the Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) Gender, Ethnicity, and Coronary Artery Calcium

Background— To assess the implementation challenge facing the Third Report of the Adult Treatment Panel (ATP III) of the National Cholesterol Education Program, we determined the prevalence, treatment, and control of dyslipidemia, including ethnic and gender differences, in persons free of known clinical cardiovascular disease (CVD). In addition, this report provides information about the presence of coronary artery calcium (CAC) across groups defined by risk and recommendations for the use of lipid-lowering drugs. Methods and Results— The Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) is a multicenter cohort study of 6814 persons aged 45 to 84 years who were free of clinical CVD at baseline (2000–2002). Participants with complete fasting lipid profiles (n=6704) were evaluated for CVD risk and self-reported use of lipid-lowering therapy. CAC was assessed by CT. Drug treatment thresholds and goals were defined according to ATP III. Models were constructed to adjust for age, clinic site, risk factors, socioeconomic characteristics, and healthcare access variables with the use of Poisson regression. Overall, 29.3% (1964/6704) had dyslipidemia, among whom lipid-lowering drug therapy was reported by 54.0% (1060/1964). Control to ATP III goal was observed in 75.2% (797/1060) of participants with treated dyslipidemia and 40.6% (797/1964) of participants with dyslipidemia. Men were more likely than women to qualify for drug therapy and less likely to be treated and controlled. Relative to non-Hispanic whites, Chinese Americans were less likely to qualify for drug treatment, but no differences in treatment and control rates were observed. Black and Hispanic Americans had prevalence of dyslipidemia that was comparable to that of non-Hispanic whites but were less likely to be treated and controlled. Ethnic disparities were attenuated substantially by adjustment for healthcare access variables; however, the gender disparities persisted despite adjustment for risk factors, socioeconomic characteristics, and healthcare access variables. Control of dyslipidemia was achieved less commonly in the CVD high- and intermediate-risk groups than in the low-risk group. Among high-risk individuals, 19.7% of those who did not qualify for lipid-lowering drug treatment had CAC >400. The proportion of drug treatment–qualifying persons who were not treated differed by presence and severity of CAC, with 48.0%, 46.8%, and 39.6% of eligible persons with no CAC, with CAC >0 and <400, and with CAC >400 not receiving treatment, respectively (P for difference=0.04). Conclusions— Dyslipidemia is common among persons without CVD. The quality of care for dyslipidemia is suboptimal in general and variable by CVD risk group, ethnicity, and gender. The utility of incorporating CAC screening into the risk stratification and treatment process should be investigated in light of the substantial proportions of persons with CAC who are currently classified as not requiring treatment. Research and quality improvement programs are needed to optimize management of dyslipidemia.

The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders Study: Design and Methods

Background. As the number of older adults in the United States rises, maintaining functional independence among older Americans has emerged as a major clinical and public health priority. Older people who lose mobility are less likely to remain in the community; demonstrate higher rates of morbidity, mortality, and hospitalizations; and experience a poorer quality of life. Several studies have shown that regular physical activity improves functional limitations and intermediate functional outcomes, but definitive evidence showing that major mobility disability can be prevented is lacking. A Phase 3 randomized controlled trial is needed to fill this evidence gap. Methods. The Lifestyle Interventions and Independence for Elders (LIFE) Study is a Phase 3 multicenter randomized controlled trial designed to compare a supervised moderate-intensity physical activity program with a successful aging health education program in 1,600 sedentary older persons followed for an average of 2.7 years. Results. LIFEs primary outcome is major mobility disability, defined as the inability to walk 400 m. Secondary outcomes include cognitive function, serious fall injuries, persistent mobility disability, the combined outcome of major mobility disability or death, disability in activities of daily living, and cost-effectiveness. Conclusions. Results of this study are expected to have important public health implications for the large and growing population of older sedentary men and women.

Effect of Intensive Compared With Standard Glycemia Treatment Strategies on Mortality by Baseline Subgroup Characteristics: The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial

OBJECTIVE To determine if baseline subgroups in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial can be identified for whom intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment had different effects on all-cause mortality. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Exploratory post hoc intention-to-treat comparisons were made between intensive and standard glycemia groups on all-cause mortality by subgroups defined by baseline characteristics. RESULTS There were few significant interactions between baseline characteristics and effects of intensive versus standard glycemia treatment on mortality: self-reported history of neuropathy (hazard ratio [HR] 1.95, 95% CI 1.41–2.69) versus no history of neuropathy (0.99, 0.79–1.26; P value for interaction 0.0008), higher A1C (A1C >8.5%: HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.22–2.22; A1C 7.5–8.4%: 1.00, 0.75–1.34; A1C <7.5%: 1.00, 0.67–1.50; P value for interaction 0.04), and aspirin use (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.13–1.85, compared with 0.96, 0.72–1.27, in nonusers; P value for interaction 0.03). CONCLUSIONS We found a remarkable similarity of effect from intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment on mortality across most baseline subgroups. No differential effect was found in subgroups defined by variables anticipated to have an interaction: age, duration of diabetes, and previous history of cardiovascular disease. The three baseline characteristics that defined subgroups for which there was a differential effect on mortality may help identify patients with type 2 diabetes at higher risk of mortality from intensive regimens for glycemic control. Further research is warranted.

Low-Fat Dietary Pattern and Risk of Treated Diabetes Mellitus in Postmenopausal Women The Women's Health Initiative Randomized Controlled Dietary Modification Trial

BACKGROUND Decreased fat intake with weight loss and increased exercise may reduce the risk of diabetes mellitus in persons with impaired glucose tolerance. This study was undertaken to assess the effects of a low-fat dietary pattern on incidence of treated diabetes among generally healthy postmenopausal women. METHODS A randomized controlled trial was conducted at 40 US clinical centers from 1993 to 2005, including 48,835 postmenopausal women aged 50 to 79 years. Women were randomly assigned to a usual-diet comparison group (n = 29,294 [60.0%]) or an intervention group with a 20% low-fat dietary pattern with increased vegetables, fruits, and grains (n = 19,541 [40.0%]). Self-reported incident diabetes treated with oral agents or insulin was assessed. RESULTS Incident treated diabetes was reported by 1303 intervention participants (7.1%) and 2039 comparison participants (7.4%) (hazard ratio, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.03; P = .25). Weight loss occurred in the intervention group, with a difference between intervention and comparison groups of 1.9 kg after 7.5 years (P < .001). Subgroup analysis suggested that greater decreases in percentage of energy from total fat reduced diabetes risk (P for trend = .04), which was not statistically significant after adjusting for weight loss. CONCLUSIONS A low-fat dietary pattern among generally healthy postmenopausal women showed no evidence of reducing diabetes risk after 8.1 years. Trends toward reduced incidence were greater with greater decreases in total fat intake and weight loss. Weight loss, rather than macronutrient composition, may be the dominant predictor of reduced risk of diabetes.

Long-term Outcomes of Bariatric Surgery: A National Institutes of Health Symposium

IMPORTANCE The clinical evidence base demonstrating bariatric surgerys health benefits is much larger than it was when the National Institutes of Health last held a consensus panel in 1991. Still, it remains unclear whether ongoing studies will address critical questions about long-term complication rates and the sustainability of weight loss and comorbidity control. OBJECTIVE To summarize findings from a multidisciplinary workshop convened in May 2013 by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute. The workshop aimed to summarize the current state of knowledge of bariatric surgery, review research findings on the long-term outcomes of bariatric surgery, and establish priorities for future research directions. EVIDENCE REVIEW The evidence presented at the workshop was selected by the planning committee for both its quality and duration of follow-up. The data review emphasized randomized clinical trials and large observational studies with long-term follow-up, with or without a control group. FINDINGS Several small randomized clinical trials showed greater weight loss and type 2 diabetes mellitus remission compared with nonsurgical treatments within the first 2 years of follow-up after bariatric surgery. Large, long-term observational studies have shown durable (>5 years) weight loss, diabetes, and lipid improvements with bariatric surgery. Still unclear are predictors of outcomes, long-term complications, long-term survival, microvascular and macrovascular events, mental health outcomes, and costs. The studies needed to address these knowledge gaps would be expensive and logistically difficult to perform. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE High-quality evidence shows that bariatric surgical procedures result in greater weight loss than nonsurgical treatments and are more effective at inducing initial type 2 diabetes mellitus remission in obese patients. More information is needed about the long-term durability of comorbidity control and complications after bariatric procedures and this evidence will most likely come from carefully designed observational studies.

Effect of intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment strategies on mortality by baseline subgroup characteristics: The ACCORD trial

OBJECTIVE To determine if baseline subgroups in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial can be identified for whom intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment had different effects on all-cause mortality. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Exploratory post hoc intention-to-treat comparisons were made between intensive and standard glycemia groups on all-cause mortality by subgroups defined by baseline characteristics. RESULTS There were few significant interactions between baseline characteristics and effects of intensive versus standard glycemia treatment on mortality: self-reported history of neuropathy (hazard ratio [HR] 1.95, 95% CI 1.41–2.69) versus no history of neuropathy (0.99, 0.79–1.26; P value for interaction 0.0008), higher A1C (A1C >8.5%: HR 1.64, 95% CI 1.22–2.22; A1C 7.5–8.4%: 1.00, 0.75–1.34; A1C <7.5%: 1.00, 0.67–1.50; P value for interaction 0.04), and aspirin use (HR 1.45, 95% CI 1.13–1.85, compared with 0.96, 0.72–1.27, in nonusers; P value for interaction 0.03). CONCLUSIONS We found a remarkable similarity of effect from intensive compared with standard glycemia treatment on mortality across most baseline subgroups. No differential effect was found in subgroups defined by variables anticipated to have an interaction: age, duration of diabetes, and previous history of cardiovascular disease. The three baseline characteristics that defined subgroups for which there was a differential effect on mortality may help identify patients with type 2 diabetes at higher risk of mortality from intensive regimens for glycemic control. Further research is warranted.