Robert P. Byington

Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND Epidemiologic studies have shown a relationship between glycated hemoglobin levels and cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. We investigated whether intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels would reduce cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes who had either established cardiovascular disease or additional cardiovascular risk factors. METHODS In this randomized study, 10,251 patients (mean age, 62.2 years) with a median glycated hemoglobin level of 8.1% were assigned to receive intensive therapy (targeting a glycated hemoglobin level below 6.0%) or standard therapy (targeting a level from 7.0 to 7.9%). Of these patients, 38% were women, and 35% had had a previous cardiovascular event. The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The finding of higher mortality in the intensive-therapy group led to a discontinuation of intensive therapy after a mean of 3.5 years of follow-up. RESULTS At 1 year, stable median glycated hemoglobin levels of 6.4% and 7.5% were achieved in the intensive-therapy group and the standard-therapy group, respectively. During follow-up, the primary outcome occurred in 352 patients in the intensive-therapy group, as compared with 371 in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 0.90; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.78 to 1.04; P=0.16). At the same time, 257 patients in the intensive-therapy group died, as compared with 203 patients in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.46; P=0.04). Hypoglycemia requiring assistance and weight gain of more than 10 kg were more frequent in the intensive-therapy group (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy to target normal glycated hemoglobin levels for 3.5 years increased mortality and did not significantly reduce major cardiovascular events. These findings identify a previously unrecognized harm of intensive glucose lowering in high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)

Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

BACKGROUND There is no evidence from randomized trials to support a strategy of lowering systolic blood pressure below 135 to 140 mm Hg in persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus. We investigated whether therapy targeting normal systolic pressure (i.e., <120 mm Hg) reduces major cardiovascular events in participants with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events. METHODS A total of 4733 participants with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to intensive therapy, targeting a systolic pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, or standard therapy, targeting a systolic pressure of less than 140 mm Hg. The primary composite outcome was nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years. RESULTS After 1 year, the mean systolic blood pressure was 119.3 mm Hg in the intensive-therapy group and 133.5 mm Hg in the standard-therapy group. The annual rate of the primary outcome was 1.87% in the intensive-therapy group and 2.09% in the standard-therapy group (hazard ratio with intensive therapy, 0.88; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 1.06; P=0.20). The annual rates of death from any cause were 1.28% and 1.19% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.35; P=0.55). The annual rates of stroke, a prespecified secondary outcome, were 0.32% and 0.53% in the two groups, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.39 to 0.89; P=0.01). Serious adverse events attributed to antihypertensive treatment occurred in 77 of the 2362 participants in the intensive-therapy group (3.3%) and 30 of the 2371 participants in the standard-therapy group (1.3%) (P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS In patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events, targeting a systolic blood pressure of less than 120 mm Hg, as compared with less than 140 mm Hg, did not reduce the rate of a composite outcome of fatal and nonfatal major cardiovascular events. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)

Effects of Combination Lipid Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

BACKGROUND We investigated whether combination therapy with a statin plus a fibrate, as compared with statin monotherapy, would reduce the risk of cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were at high risk for cardiovascular disease. METHODS We randomly assigned 5518 patients with type 2 diabetes who were being treated with open-label simvastatin to receive either masked fenofibrate or placebo. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes. The mean follow-up was 4.7 years. RESULTS The annual rate of the primary outcome was 2.2% in the fenofibrate group and 2.4% in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the fenofibrate group, 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79 to 1.08; P=0.32). There were also no significant differences between the two study groups with respect to any secondary outcome. Annual rates of death were 1.5% in the fenofibrate group and 1.6% in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.75 to 1.10; P=0.33). Prespecified subgroup analyses suggested heterogeneity in treatment effect according to sex, with a benefit for men and possible harm for women (P=0.01 for interaction), and a possible interaction according to lipid subgroup, with a possible benefit for patients with both a high baseline triglyceride level and a low baseline level of high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (P=0.057 for interaction). CONCLUSIONS The combination of fenofibrate and simvastatin did not reduce the rate of fatal cardiovascular events, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, as compared with simvastatin alone. These results do not support the routine use of combination therapy with fenofibrate and simvastatin to reduce cardiovascular risk in the majority of high-risk patients with type 2 diabetes. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.)

Effect of lovastatin on early carotid atherosclerosis and cardiovascular events. Asymptomatic Carotid Artery Progression Study (ACAPS) Research Group.

BACKGROUND HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (or statins), a new class of lipid-lowering compounds, have raised expectations for more widespread use than that of the older lipid-lowering drugs. Not only are they more effective in lowering LDL cholesterol, but they are better tolerated as well. No data exist concerning the effect of statins on early carotid atherosclerosis and clinical events in men and women who have moderately elevated LDL cholesterol levels but are free of symptomatic cardiovascular disease. METHODS AND RESULTS Lovastatin (20 to 40 mg/d) or its placebo was evaluated in a double-blind, randomized clinical trial with factorial design along with warfarin (1 mg/d) or its placebo. This report is limited to the lovastatin component of the trial. Daily aspirin (81 mg/d) was recommended for everyone. Enrollment included 919 asymptomatic men and women, 40 to 79 years old, with early carotid atherosclerosis as defined by B-mode ultrasonography and LDL cholesterol between the 60th and 90th percentiles. The 3-year change in mean maximum intimal-medial thickness (IMT) in 12 walls of the carotid arteries was the primary outcome; change in single maximum IMT and incidence of major cardiovascular events were secondary outcomes. LDL cholesterol fell 28%, from 156.6 mg/dL at baseline to 113.1 mg/dL at 6 months (P < .0001), in the lovastatin groups and was largely unchanged in the lovastatin-placebo groups. Among participants not on warfarin, regression of the mean maximum IMT was seen after 12 months in the lovastatin group compared with the placebo group; the 3-year difference was statistically significant (P = .001). A larger favorable effect of lovastatin was observed for the change in single maximum IMT but was not statistically significant (P = .12). Five lovastatin-treated participants suffered major cardiovascular events--coronary heart disease mortality, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or stroke--versus 14 in the lovastatin-placebo groups (P = .04). One lovastatin-treated participant died, compared with eight on lovastatin-placebo (P = .02). CONCLUSIONS In men and women with moderately elevated LDL cholesterol, lovastatin reverses progression of IMT in the carotid arteries and appears to reduce the risk of major cardiovascular events and mortality. Results from ongoing large-scale clinical trials may further establish the clinical benefit of statins.

Outcome Results of the Fosinopril Versus Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Randomized Trial (FACET) in Patients With Hypertension and NIDDM

OBJECTIVE ACE inhibitors and calcium antagonists may favorably affect serum lipids and glucose metabolism. The primary aim of the Fosinopril Versus Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Randomized Trial (FACET) was to compare the effects of fosinopril and amlodipine on serum lipids and diabetes control in NIDDM patients with hypertension. Prospectively defined cardiovascular events were assessed as secondary outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Inclusion criteria included a diagnosis of NIDDM and hypertension (systolic blood pressure of >140 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure of >90 mmHg). Exclusion criteria included a history of coronary heart disease or stroke, serum creatinine >1.5 mg/dl, albuminuria >40 μg/min, and use of lipid-lowering drugs, aspirin, or antihypertensive agents other than beta-blockers or diuretics. A total of 380 hypertensive diabetics were randomly assigned to open-label fosinopril (20 mg/day) or amlodipine (10 mg/day) and followed for up to 3.5 years. If blood pressure was not controlled, the other study drug was added. RESULTS Both treatments were effective in lowering blood pressure. At the end of followup, between the two groups there was no significant difference in total serum cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, HbA1c, fasting serum glucose, or plasma insulin. The patients receiving fosinopril had a significantly lower risk of the combined outcome of acute myocardial infarction, stroke, or hospitalized angina than those receiving amlodipine (14/189 vs. 27/191; hazards ratio = 0.49, 95% CI = 0.26–0.95). CONCLUSIONS Fosinopril and amlodipine had similar effects on biochemical measures, but the patients randomized to fosinopril had a significantly lower risk of major vascular events, compared with the patients randomized to amlodipine.

Long-Term Effects of Intensive Glucose Lowering on Cardiovascular Outcomes

BACKGROUND Intensive glucose lowering has previously been shown to increase mortality among persons with advanced type 2 diabetes and a high risk of cardiovascular disease. This report describes the 5-year outcomes of a mean of 3.7 years of intensive glucose lowering on mortality and key cardiovascular events. METHODS We randomly assigned participants with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease or additional cardiovascular risk factors to receive intensive therapy (targeting a glycated hemoglobin level below 6.0%) or standard therapy (targeting a level of 7 to 7.9%). After termination of the intensive therapy, due to higher mortality in the intensive-therapy group, the target glycated hemoglobin level was 7 to 7.9% for all participants, who were followed until the planned end of the trial. RESULTS Before the intensive therapy was terminated, the intensive-therapy group did not differ significantly from the standard-therapy group in the rate of the primary outcome (a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes) (P=0.13) but had more deaths from any cause (primarily cardiovascular) (hazard ratio, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02 to 1.44) and fewer nonfatal myocardial infarctions (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.95). These trends persisted during the entire follow-up period (hazard ratio for death, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.03 to 1.38; and hazard ratio for nonfatal myocardial infarction, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.96). After the intensive intervention was terminated, the median glycated hemoglobin level in the intensive-therapy group rose from 6.4% to 7.2%, and the use of glucose-lowering medications and rates of severe hypoglycemia and other adverse events were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS As compared with standard therapy, the use of intensive therapy for 3.7 years to target a glycated hemoglobin level below 6% reduced 5-year nonfatal myocardial infarctions but increased 5-year mortality. Such a strategy cannot be recommended for high-risk patients with advanced type 2 diabetes. (Funded by the National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00000620.).

pravastatin, Lipids, and Atherosclerosis in the Carotid Arteries (PlAC-II)

We randomized 151 coronary patients to placebo or pravastatin and treated them for 3 years. B-mode ultrasound quantification of carotid artery intimal-medial thickness (IMT) was obtained at baseline and sequentially during this period. The primary outcome was the change in the mean of the maximal IMT measurements across time. Effects on individual carotid artery segments (common, bifurcation, and internal carotid) and on clinical events were also investigated. Plasma concentrations of total cholesterol were lower with active treatment than with placebo (4.80 vs 6.07 mmol/L [186 vs 235 mg/dl], respectively) as were concentrations of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (3.11 vs 4.30 mmol/L [120 vs 167 mg/dl], respectively). Plasma concentrations of high-density lipoprotein2 cholesterol were higher with active treatment (0.16 vs 0.14 mmol/L [6.1 vs 5.5 mg/dl], respectively). Active treatment resulted in a nonsignificant 12% reduction in progression of the mean-maximum IMT (from 0.068 to 0.059 mm/year) and a statistically significant 35% reduction in IMT progression in the common carotid. Active treatment was also associated with a reduction in fatal and nonfatal coronary events [corrected] (p = 0.09) and of any fatal event plus nonfatal myocardial infarction (p = 0.04).

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 Amlodipine on the Progression of Atherosclerosis and the Occurrence of Clinical Events

BackgroundThe results of angiographic studies have suggested that calcium channel–blocking agents may prevent new coronary lesion formation, the progression of minimal lesions, or both. Methods and ResultsThe Prospective Randomized Evaluation of the Vascular Effects of Norvasc Trial (PREVENT) was a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-masked clinical trial designed to test whether amlodipine would slow the progression of early coronary atherosclerosis in 825 patients with angiographically documented coronary artery disease. The primary outcome was the average 36-month angiographic change in mean minimal diameters of segments with a baseline diameter stenosis of 30%. A secondary hypothesis was whether amlodipine would reduce the rate of atherosclerosis in the carotid arteries as assessed with B-mode ultrasonography, which measured intimal-medial thicknesses (IMT). The rates of clinical events were also monitored. The placebo and amlodipine groups had nearly identical average 36-month reductions in the minimal diameter: 0.084 versus 0.095 mm, respectively (P =0.38). In contrast, amlodipine had a significant effect in slowing the 36-month progression of carotid artery atherosclerosis: the placebo group experienced a 0.033-mm increase in IMT, whereas there was a 0.0126-mm decrease in the amlodipine group (P =0.007). There was no treatment difference in the rates of all-cause mortality or major cardiovascular events, although amlodipine use was associated with fewer cases of unstable angina and coronary revascularization. ConclusionsAmlodipine has no demonstrable effect on angiographic progression of coronary atherosclerosis or the risk of major cardiovascular events but is associated with fewer hospitalizations for unstable angina and revascularization.

Effect of Pravastatin on Coronary Disease Events in Subgroups Defined by Coronary Risk Factors The Prospective Pravastatin Pooling Project

BackgroundPrevious trials have had insufficient numbers of coronary events to address definitively the effect of lipid-modifying therapy on coronary heart disease in subgroups of patients with varying baseline characteristics. Methods and ResultsThe data from 3 large randomized trials with pravastatin 40 mg were pooled and analyzed with the use of a prospectively defined protocol. Included were 19 768 patients, 102 559 person-years of follow-up, 2194 primary end points (coronary death or nonfatal myocardial infarction), and 3717 expanded end points (primary end point, CABG, or PTCA). Pravastatin significantly reduced relative risk in younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients, men and women, smokers and nonsmokers, and patients with or without diabetes or hypertension. The relative effect was smaller, but absolute risk reduction was similar in patients with hypertension compared with those without hypertension. Relative risk reduction was significant in predefined categories of baseline lipid concentrations. Tests for interaction were not significant between relative risk reduction and baseline total cholesterol (5% to 95% range 177 to 297 mg/dL, 4.6 to 7.7 mmol/L), HDL cholesterol (27 to 58 mg/dL, 0.7 to 1.5 mmol/L), and triglyceride (74 to 302 mg/dL, 0.8 to 3.4 mmol/L) concentrations, analyzed as continuous variables. However, for LDL cholesterol, the probability values for interaction were 0.068 for the prespecified primary end point and 0.019 for the expanded end point. Relative risk reduction was similar throughout most of the baseline LDL cholesterol range (125 to 212 mg/dL, 3.2 to 5.5 mmol/L) with the possible exception of the lowest quintile of CARE/LIPID (<125 mg/dL) (relative risk reduction 5%, 95% CI 19% to −12%). ConclusionsPravastatin treatment is effective in reducing coronary heart disease events in patients with high or low risk factor status and across a wide range of pretreatment lipid concentrations.