diabetes mellitus, type 2

Psyllium fiber improves glycemic control proportional to loss of glycemic control: a meta-analysis of data in euglycemic subjects, patients at risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus, and patients being treated for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Author/s: 
Gibb, Roger D., McRorie, Johnson W., Russell, Darrell A., Hasselblad, Vic, D'Alessio, David A.

BACKGROUND:

A number of health benefits are associated with intake of soluble, viscous, gel-forming fibers, including reduced serum cholesterol and the attenuation of postprandial glucose excursions.

OBJECTIVE:

We assess the effects of psyllium, which is a soluble, gel-forming, nonfermented fibersupplement, on glycemic control in patients who were being treated for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and in patients who were at risk of developing T2DM.

DESIGN:

A comprehensive search was performed of available published literature (Scopus scientific database) and clinical records stored by Procter & Gamble with the use of key search terms to identify clinical studies that assessed the glycemic effects of psyllium in nondiabetic, pre-T2DM, and T2DM patients.

RESULTS:

We identified 35 randomized, controlled, clinical studies that spanned 3 decades and 3 continents. These data were assessed in 8 meta-analyses. In patients with T2DM, multiweek studies (psyllium dosed before meals) showed significant improvement in both the fasting blood glucose (FBG) concentration (-37.0 mg/dL; P < 0.001) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) [-0.97% (-10.6 mmol/mol); P = 0.048]. Glycemic effects were proportional to baseline FBG; no significant glucose lowering was observed in euglycemic subjects, a modest improvement was observed in subjects with pre-T2DM, and the greatest improvement was observed in subjects who were being treated for T2DM.

CONCLUSIONS:

These data indicate that psyllium would be an effective addition to a lifestyle-intervention program. The degree of psyllium's glycemic benefit was commensurate with the loss of glycemic control. Because the greatest effect was seen in patients who were being treated for T2DM, additional studies are needed to determine how best to incorporate psyllium into existing prevention and treatment algorithms with concomitant hypoglycemic medications.

Primary care-led weight management for remission of type 2 diabetes (DiRECT): an open-label, cluster-randomised trial

Author/s: 
Lean, Michael E.J., Leslie, Wilma S., Barnes, Alison C., Brosnahan, Naomi, Thom, George, McCombie, Louise, Peters, Carl, Zhyzhneuskaya, Sviatlana, Al-Mrabeh, Ahmad, Hollingsworth, Kieren G., Rodrigues, Angela M., Rehackova, Lucia, Adamson, Ashley J., Sniehotta, Falko F., Mathers, John C., Ross, Hazel M., McIlvenna, Yvonne, Stefanetti, Renae, Trenell, Michael, Welsh, Paul, Kean, Sharon, Ford, Ian, McConnachie, Alex, Sattar, Naveed, Taylor, Roy

BACKGROUND:

Type 2 diabetes is a chronic disorder that requires lifelong treatment. We aimed to assess whether intensive weight management within routine primary care would achieve remission of type 2 diabetes.

METHODS:

We did this open-label, cluster-randomised trial (DiRECT) at 49 primary care practices in Scotland and the Tyneside region of England. Practices were randomly assigned (1:1), via a computer-generated list, to provide either a weight management programme (intervention) or best-practice care by guidelines (control), with stratification for study site (Tyneside or Scotland) and practice list size (>5700 or ≤5700). Participants, carers, and research assistants who collected outcome data were aware of group allocation; however, allocation was concealed from the study statistician. We recruited individuals aged 20-65 years who had been diagnosed with type 2 diabetes within the past 6 years, had a body-mass index of 27-45 kg/m2, and were not receiving insulin. The intervention comprised withdrawal of antidiabetic and antihypertensive drugs, total diet replacement (825-853 kcal/day formula diet for 3-5 months), stepped food reintroduction (2-8 weeks), and structured support for long-term weight loss maintenance. Co-primary outcomes were weight loss of 15 kg or more, and remission of diabetes, defined as glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of less than 6·5% (<48 mmol/mol) after at least 2 months off all antidiabetic medications, from baseline to 12 months. These outcomes were analysed hierarchically. This trial is registered with the ISRCTN registry, number 03267836.

FINDINGS:

Between July 25, 2014, and Aug 5, 2017, we recruited 306 individuals from 49 intervention (n=23) and control (n=26) general practices; 149 participants per group comprised the intention-to-treat population. At 12 months, we recorded weight loss of 15 kg or more in 36 (24%) participants in the intervention group and no participants in the control group (p<0·0001). Diabetes remission was achieved in 68 (46%) participants in the intervention group and six (4%) participants in the control group (odds ratio 19·7, 95% CI 7·8-49·8; p<0·0001). Remission varied with weight loss in the whole study population, with achievement in none of 76 participants who gained weight, six (7%) of 89 participants who maintained 0-5 kg weight loss, 19 (34%) of 56 participants with 5-10 kg loss, 16 (57%) of 28 participants with 10-15 kg loss, and 31 (86%) of 36 participants who lost 15 kg or more. Mean bodyweight fell by 10·0 kg (SD 8·0) in the intervention group and 1·0 kg (3·7) in the control group (adjusted difference -8·8 kg, 95% CI -10·3 to -7·3; p<0·0001). Quality of life, as measured by the EuroQol 5 Dimensions visual analogue scale, improved by 7·2 points (SD 21·3) in the intervention group, and decreased by 2·9 points (15·5) in the control group (adjusted difference 6·4 points, 95% CI 2·5-10·3; p=0·0012). Nine serious adverse events were reported by seven (4%) of 157 participants in the intervention group and two were reported by two (1%) participants in the control group. Two serious adverse events (biliary colic and abdominal pain), occurring in the same participant, were deemed potentially related to the intervention. No serious adverse events led to withdrawal from the study.

INTERPRETATION:

Our findings show that, at 12 months, almost half of participants achieved remission to a non-diabetic state and off antidiabetic drugs. Remission of type 2 diabetes is a practical target for primary care.

Prediction of individual life-years gained without cardiovascular events from lipid, blood pressure, glucose, and aspirin treatment based on data of more than 500 000 patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus

Author/s: 
Berkelmans, Gijs F N, Gudbjörnsdottir, Soffia, Visseren, Frank L J, Wild, Sarah H, Franzen, Stefan, Chalmers, John, Davis, Barry R, Poulter, Neil R, Spijkerman, Annemieke M, Woodward, Mark, Pressel, Sara L, Gupta, Ajay K, van der Schouw, Yvonne T, Svensson, Ann-Marie

AIMS:

Although group-level effectiveness of lipid, blood pressure, glucose, and aspirin treatment for prevention of cardiovascular disease (CVD) has been proven by trials, important differences in absolute effectiveness exist between individuals. We aim to develop and validate a prediction tool for individualizing lifelong CVD prevention in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) predicting life-years gained without myocardial infarction or stroke.

METHODS AND RESULTS:

We developed and validated the Diabetes Lifetime-perspective prediction (DIAL) model, consisting of two complementary competing risk adjusted Cox proportional hazards functions using data from people with T2DM registered in the Swedish National Diabetes Registry (n = 389 366). Competing outcomes were (i) CVD events (vascular mortality, myocardial infarction, or stroke) and (ii) non-vascular mortality. Predictors were age, sex, smoking, systolic blood pressure, body mass index, haemoglobin A1c, estimated glomerular filtration rate, non- high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, albuminuria, T2DM duration, insulin treatment, and history of CVD. External validation was performed using data from the ADVANCE, ACCORD, ASCOT and ALLHAT-LLT-trials, the SMART and EPIC-NL cohorts, and the Scottish diabetes register (total n = 197 785). Predicted and observed CVD-free survival showed good agreement in all validation sets. C-statistics for prediction of CVD were 0.83 (95% confidence interval: 0.83-0.84) and 0.64-0.65 for internal and external validation, respectively. We provide an interactive calculator at www.U-Prevent.com that combines model predictions with relative treatment effects from trials to predict individual benefit from preventive treatment.

CONCLUSION:

Cardiovascular disease-free life expectancy and effects of lifelong prevention in terms of CVD-free life-years gained can be estimated for people with T2DM using readily available clinical characteristics. Predictions of individual-level treatment effects facilitate translation of trial results to individual patients.

Choosing Wisely - 5 Things Physicians & Patients Should Question

Author/s: 
Subramanian, Usha, Burger, Alfred, Bailey, Jim, Gleason, Nathaniel, Pahwa, Amit

Don’t recommend daily home finger glucose testing in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus not using insulin.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is an integral part of patient self-management in maintaining safe and target-driven glucose control in type 1 diabetes mellitus. However, daily finger glucose testing has no benefit in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are not on insulin or medications associated with hypoglycemia, and small, but significant, patient harms are associated with daily glucose testing. SMBG should be reserved for patients during the titration of their medication doses or during periods of changes in patients’ diet and exercise routines.

Effect of glycaemic control on cardiovascular disease in individuals with type 2 diabetes with pre-existing cardiovascular disease: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Author/s: 
Barer, Yael, Cohen, Ohad, Cukierman-Yaffe, Tali

The role of intensive glucose control in people with type 2 diabetes and pre‐existing cardiovascular disease (CVD) is controversial. The aim of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to determine in a subset of people with type 2 diabetes and pre‐existing CVD, the CV effect of intensive glucose control versus standard of care. We searched Medline, the Cochrane library, EMBASE and the National Institutes of Health Trial registration database for randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effect of intensive glucose control versus standard glucose control in people with type 2 diabetes on incident CVD. Data were extracted using a structured form. When data were not available in the publications, authors were contacted. Eight trials involving 8339 participants were included. Among adults with type 2 diabetes and pre‐existing CVD, there was no difference in the risk of CV events in those allocated to intensive glucose control compared with those in the standard care arm (relative risk 0.98, 95% confidence interval 0.87‐1.09). In conclusion, in people with diabetes and pre‐existing CVD, intensive glucose control versus standard care had a neutral effect on incident CV events.

Glucose Self-monitoring in Non–Insulin-Treated Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Primary Care Settings

Author/s: 
Young, Laura A., Buse, John B., Weaver, Mark A., Vu, Maihan B., Mitchell, C. Madeline, Blakeney, Tamara, Grimm, Kimberlea, Rees, Jennifer, Niblock, Franklin, Donahue, Katrina E.

IMPORTANCE:

The value of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) levels in patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes has been debated.

OBJECTIVE:

To compare 3 approaches of SMBG for effects on hemoglobin A1c levels and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) among people with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes in primary care practice.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS:

The Monitor Trial study was a pragmatic, open-label randomized trial conducted in 15 primary care practices in central North Carolina. Participants were randomized between January 2014 and July 2015. Eligible patients with type 2 non-insulin-treated diabetes were: older than 30 years, established with a primary care physician at a participating practice, had glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c) levels higher than 6.5% but lower than 9.5% within the 6 months preceding screening, as obtained from the electronic medical record, and willing to comply with the results of random assignment into a study group. Of the 1032 assessed for eligibility, 450 were randomized.

INTERVENTIONS:

No SMBG, once-daily SMBG, and once-daily SMBG with enhanced patient feedback including automatic tailored messages delivered via the meter.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:

Coprimary outcomes included hemoglobin A1c levels and HRQOL at 52 weeks.

RESULTS:

A total of 450 patients were randomized and 418 (92.9%) completed the final visit. There were no significant differences in hemoglobin A1c levels across all 3 groups (P = .74; estimated adjusted mean hemoglobin A1c difference, SMBG with messaging vs no SMBG, -0.09%; 95% CI, -0.31% to 0.14%; SMBG vs no SMBG, -0.05%; 95% CI, -0.27% to 0.17%). There were also no significant differences found in HRQOL. There were no notable differences in key adverse events including hypoglycemia frequency, health care utilization, or insulin initiation.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:

In patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, we observed no clinically or statistically significant differences at 1 year in glycemic control or HRQOL between patients who performed SMBG compared with those who did not perform SMBG. The addition of this type of tailored feedback provided through messaging via a meter did not provide any advantage in glycemic control.

Health Economic Benefits and Quality of Life During Improved Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Author/s: 
Testa, Marcia A., Simonson, Donald C.

CONTEXT:

Although the long-term health benefits of good glycemic control in patients with diabetes are well documented, shorter-term quality of life (QOL) and economic savings generally have been reported to be minimal or absent.

OBJECTIVE:

To examine short-term outcomes of glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM).

DESIGN:

Double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel trial.

SETTING:

Sixty-two sites in the United States.

PARTICIPANTS:

A total of 569 male and female volunteers with type 2 DM.

INTERVENTION:

After a 3-week, single-blind placebo-washout period, participants were randomized to diet and titration with either 5 to 20 mg of glipizide gastrointestinal therapeutic system (GITS) (n = 377) or placebo (n = 192) for 12 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:

Change from baseline in glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and symptom distress, QOL, and health economic indicators by questionnaires and diaries.

RESULTS:

After 12 weeks, mean (+/-SE) HbA1c and fasting blood glucose levels decreased with active therapy (glipizide GITS) vs placebo (7.5% 0.1% vs 9.3%+/-0.1% and 7.0+/-0.1 mmol/L [126+/-2 mg/dL] vs 9.3+/-0.2 mmol/L [168+/-4 mg/ dL], respectively; P<.001). Quality-of-life treatment differences (SD units) for symptom distress (+0.59; P<.001), general perceived health (+0.36; P= .004), cognitive functioning (+0.34; P=.005), and the overall visual analog scale (VAS) (+0.24; P=.04) were significantly more favorable for active therapy. Subscales of acuity (+0.38; P=.002), VAS emotional health (+0.35; P=.003), general health (+0.27; P=.01), sleep (+0.26; P=.04), depression (+0.25; P=.05), disorientation and detachment (+0.23; P= .05), and vitality (+0.22; P=.04) were most affected. Favorable health economic outcomes for glipizide GITS included higher retained employment (97% vs 85%; P<.001), greater productive capacity (99% vs 87%; P<.001), less absenteeism (losses = $24 vs $115 per worker per month; P<.001), fewer bed-days (losses = $1539 vs $1843 per 1000 person-days; P=.05), and fewer restricted-activity days (losses = $2660 vs $4275 per 1000 person-days; P=.01).

CONCLUSIONS:

Improved glycemic control of type 2 DM is associated with substantial short-term symptomatic, QOL, and health economic benefits.

Association Between Use of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibitors, Glucagon-like Peptide 1 Agonists, and Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitors With All-Cause Mortality in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

Author/s: 
Zheng, Sean L., Roddick, Alistair J., Aghar-Jaffar, Rochan, Shun-Shin, Matthew J., Francis, Darrel, Oliver, Nick, Meeran, Karim

IMPORTANCE:

The comparative clinical efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists, and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors for treatment of type 2 diabetes is unknown.

OBJECTIVE:

To compare the efficacies of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists, and DPP-4 inhibitors on mortality and cardiovascular end points using network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES:

MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library Central Register of Controlled Trials, and published meta-analyses from inception through October 11, 2017.

STUDY SELECTION:

Randomized clinical trials enrolling participants with type 2 diabetes and a follow-up of at least 12 weeks were included, for which SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 agonists, and DPP-4 inhibitors were compared with either each other or placebo or no treatment.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS:

Data were screened by 1 investigator and extracted in duplicate by 2 investigators. A Bayesian hierarchical network meta-analysis was performed.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES:

The primary outcome: all-cause mortality; secondary outcomes: cardiovascular (CV) mortality, heart failure (HF) events, myocardial infarction (MI), unstable angina, and stroke; safety end points: adverse events and hypoglycemia.

RESULTS:

This network meta-analysis of 236 trials randomizing 176 310 participants found SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute risk difference [RD], -1.0%; hazard ratio [HR], 0.80 [95% credible interval {CrI}, 0.71 to 0.89]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.6%; HR, 0.88 [95% CrI, 0.81 to 0.94]) were associated with significantly lower all-cause mortality than the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, -0.9%; HR, 0.78 [95% CrI, 0.68 to 0.90]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.5%; HR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.96]) were associated with lower mortality than were DPP-4 inhibitors. DPP-4 inhibitors were not significantly associated with lower all-cause mortality (absolute RD, 0.1%; HR, 1.02 [95% CrI, 0.94 to 1.11]) than were the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, -0.8%; HR, 0.79 [95% CrI, 0.69 to 0.91]) and GLP-1 agonists (absolute RD, -0.5%; HR, 0.85 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.94]) were significantly associated with lower CV mortality than were the control groups. SGLT-2 inhibitors were significantly associated with lower rates of HF events (absolute RD, -1.1%; HR, 0.62 [95% CrI, 0.54 to 0.72]) and MI (absolute RD, -0.6%; HR, 0.86 [95% CrI, 0.77 to 0.97]) than were the control groups. GLP-1 agonists were associated with a higher risk of adverse events leading to trial withdrawal than were SGLT-2 inhibitors (absolute RD, 5.8%; HR, 1.80 [95% CrI, 1.44 to 2.25]) and DPP-4 inhibitors (absolute RD, 3.1%; HR, 1.93 [95% CrI, 1.59 to 2.35]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE:

In this network meta-analysis, the use of SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1 agonists was associated with lower mortality than DPP-4 inhibitors or placebo or no treatment. Use of DPP-4 inhibitors was not associated with lower mortality than placebo or no treatment.

Subscribe to diabetes mellitus, type 2