Dataset Information

Strategies for optimizing glycemic control and cardiovascular prognosis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

ABSTRACT: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major cardiovascular (CV) risk factor and, as such, is considered a coronary artery disease risk equivalent. Although glycemic control is associated with decreased CV events epidemiologically, many prospective clinical trials have failed to conclusively demonstrate that aggressive glycemic control improves the CV prognosis of patients with type 2 DM, especially those with long-standing DM. Many therapies for type 2 DM with widely divergent mechanisms of action are available. Some of these drugs, in addition to their glucose-lowering actions, have properties that may reduce or increase CV events. Agents that lower both insulin resistance and postprandial hyperglycemia while at the same time avoiding hypoglycemia may be beneficial for CV health. This article reviews the evidence regarding the use of these agents and appropriate glycemic control targets for improving the adverse CV prognosis associated with type 2 DM. We conducted a systematic review of English articles using MEDLINE and the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (1970-2010) using the following search terms: cardiovascular disease, randomized trials, hypoglycemia, and insulin resistance.

SUBMITTER: O'Keefe JH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3031437 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Strategies for optimizing glycemic control and cardiovascular prognosis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

O'Keefe James H JH Abuannadi Mohammad M Lavie Carl J CJ Bell David S H DS

Mayo Clinic proceedings 20110126 2

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major cardiovascular (CV) risk factor and, as such, is considered a coronary artery disease risk equivalent. Although glycemic control is associated with decreased CV events epidemiologically, many prospective clinical trials have failed to conclusively demonstrate that aggressive glycemic control improves the CV prognosis of patients with type 2 DM, especially those with long-standing DM. Many therapies for type 2 DM with widely divergent mechanisms of action ...[more]

PMID: 21270290

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Poor glycemic control is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM); however, little is known about mechanisms specific to T1DM. In T1DM, myocardial injury can induce persistent cardiac autoimmunity. Chronic hyperglycemia causes myocardial injury, raising the possibility that hyperglycemia-induced cardiac autoimmunity could contribute to long-term CVD complications in T1DM. METHODS:We measured the prevalence and profiles of cardiac autoantibodies (AAbs) in longitudinal samples from the DCCT (Diabetes Control and Complications Trial) in participants with mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ?9.0% (n=83) and ?7.0% (n=83) during DCCT. We assessed subsequent coronary artery calcification (measured once during years 7-9 in the post-DCCT EDIC [Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications] observational study), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (measured during EDIC years 4-6), and CVD events (defined as nonfatal myocardial infarction, stroke, death resulting from CVD, heart failure, or coronary artery bypass graft) over a 26-year median follow-up. Cardiac AAbs were also measured in matched patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with HbA1c ?9.0% (n=70) and ?7.0% (n=140) and, as a control for cardiac autoimmunity, patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy (n=51). RESULTS:Apart from HbA1c levels, the DCCT groups shared similar CVD risk factors at the beginning and end of DCCT. The DCCT HbA1c ?9.0% group showed markedly higher cardiac AAb levels than the HbA1c ?7.0% group during DCCT, with a progressive increase and decrease in AAb levels over time in the 2 groups, respectively ( P<0.001). In the HbA1c ?9.0% group, 46%, 22%, and 11% tested positive for ?1, ?2, and ?3 different cardiac AAb types, respectively, similar to patients with Chagas cardiomyopathy, compared with 2%, 1%, and 0% in the HbA1c ?7.0% group. Glycemic control was not associated with AAb prevalence in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Positivity for ?2 AAbs during DCCT was associated with increased risk of CVD events (4 of 6; hazard ratio, 16.1; 95% CI, 3.0-88.2) and, in multivariable analyses, with detectable coronary artery calcification (13 of 31; odds ratio, 60.1; 95% CI, 8.4-410.0). Patients with ?2 AAbs subsequently also showed elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein levels (6.0 mg/L versus 1.4 mg/L in patients with ?1 AAbs; P=0.003). CONCLUSIONS:Poor glycemic control is associated with cardiac autoimmunity in T1DM. Furthermore, cardiac AAb positivity is associated with an increased risk of CVD decades later, suggesting a role for autoimmune mechanisms in the development of CVD in T1DM, possibly through inflammatory pathways.

Project description:BackgroundCardiovascular disease (CVD) is the most common complication of diabetes mellitus (DM). To prevent morbidity and mortality among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), optimization of glycemic status and minimizing CVD risk factors is essential. As Nepal has limited data on these CVD risk parameters, we assessed the prevalence of poor glycemic control, CVD risk factors, and their clustering among patients with T2DM.MethodsUsing a cross-sectional study design, we collected data of 366 patients with T2DM. We applied a multistage cluster sampling technique and used the WHO STEPS tools. Binary logistic and Poisson regression was applied to calculate odds and prevalence ratio of clustering of risk factors, considering P< 0.05 statistically significant.ResultsThe mean age of participants was 54.5±10.7 years and 208 (57%) were male. The prevalence of poor glycemic control was 66.4% (95% C.I: 61.5-71.2). The prevalence of smoking, alcohol users, inadequate fruit and vegetables intake and physical inactivity were 18% (95% C.I:14 to 21.9), 14.8% (95% C.I:11.1 to 18.4), 98.1% (95% C.I: 96.7-99.4), and 9.8% (95% C.I:6.7-12.8), respectively. Overall, 47.3% (95% C.I: 42.1-52.4) were overweight and obese, 59% (95% C.I: 52.9-63) were hypertensive, and 68% (95% C.I: 63.2-72.7) had dyslipidemia. Clustering of two, three, four, five and more than five risk factors was 12.6%, 30%, 30%,19%, and 8.7%, respectively. Four or more risk factors clustering was significantly associated with gender, age, level of education, T2DM duration, and use of medication. Risk factors clustering was significantly higher among males and users of anti-diabetic medications with prevalence ratio of 1.14 (95% C.I:1.05-1.23) and 1.09 (95% C.I: 1.09-1.18)], respectively.ConclusionsThe majority of the patients with T2DM had poor glycemic control and CVD risk factors. Policies and programs focused on the prevention and better management of T2DM and CVD risk factors should be implemented to reduce mortality in Nepal.

Project description:Background The value of glycemic control and preexisting cardiovascular disease in determining the risk of major cardiovascular events (MACE) in type 2 diabetes mellitus is uncertain. Intensive glucose control trials suggest that the 9% lower risk of MACE associated with intensive glycemic control, as compared with conventional glycemic control, is only driven by patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus without cardiovascular disease at baseline. Methods and Results We did a meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials dividing patients with or without preexisting cardiovascular disease; we found that the lower risk of MACE is confined to patients with cardiovascular disease at baseline. Compared with placebo, the use of both glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors was associated with a significant 14% lower MACE risk in patients with preexisting cardiovascular disease and with a nonsignificant 2% higher MACE risk in those without preexisting cardiovascular disease ( P for interaction=0.021). The meta-regression analysis of all 12 trials demonstrated a significant ( P=0.002) association between reductions of glycated hemoglobin in glycated hemoglobin A1C. Accordingly, the reduction of MACE expected if all cardiovascular outcome trials had achieved a 0.9% glycated hemoglobin reduction would have been 33%. Routine clinical care data complement the results of cardiovascular outcome trials but with some differences: the lower risk of MACE with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor use is evident in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus with or without preexisting cardiovascular disease. Conclusions Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists should be included in the therapeutic plan of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and overt cardiovascular disease, with due attention paid to improvement of glycemic control, which may amplify their benefit on MACE.

Dataset Information

Strategies for optimizing glycemic control and cardiovascular prognosis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Publications

Strategies for optimizing glycemic control and cardiovascular prognosis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets