Dataset Information

Impaired insulin secretion predicting unstable glycemic variability and time below range in type 2 diabetes patients regardless of glycated hemoglobin or diabetes treatment.

ABSTRACT:

Aims/introduction

To identify the coefficient of variation (CV) threshold for unstable glucose variability (GV) and hypoglycemia, and to characterize a patient population with unstable GV and hypoglycemia.

Materials and methods

This was an observational study that enrolled 284 Japanese outpatients with type 2 diabetes who underwent continuous glucose monitoring. The C-peptide index (CPI = [(fasting serum C-peptide) / (plasma glucose)] × 100) was used as a marker of endogenous insulin secretion. The CV threshold between stable and unstable GV was defined as the upper limit of the CV distribution in the subgroup of patients who did not receive insulin nor insulin secretagogues (relatively stable GV subgroup, n = 104). The optimal CV range corresponding to time below target range ≥4% was determined for all patients using receiver operating characteristic curve analysis. Various characteristics of patients with unstable GV and hypoglycemia were extracted using multivariate logistic regression analysis.

Results

The upper limit of the CV in the relatively stable GV subgroup was 40. The optimal CV range corresponding to time below target range ≥4% was also defined as CV ≥40 (area under the curve 0.85) for all patients. The CPI was an independent risk for CV ≥40 (odds ratio 0.17, 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.50, P < 0.01). The optimal cut-off point for CPI to predict a CV cut-off value of 40 was equivalent to 0.81 (area under the curve 0.80).

Conclusions

A CV of 40 discriminates unstable GV and hypoglycemia from stable GV in Japanese outpatients with type 2 diabetes. Impaired insulin secretion might affect the stability of GV.

SUBMITTER: Miya A

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8089015 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Fasting glucose is the standard measure used to diagnose diabetes in the United States. Recently, glycated hemoglobin was also recommended for this purpose. METHODS:We compared the prognostic value of glycated hemoglobin and fasting glucose for identifying adults at risk for diabetes or cardiovascular disease. We measured glycated hemoglobin in whole-blood samples from 11,092 black or white adults who did not have a history of diabetes or cardiovascular disease and who attended the second visit (occurring in the 1990-1992 period) of the Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) study. RESULTS:The glycated hemoglobin value at baseline was associated with newly diagnosed diabetes and cardiovascular outcomes. For glycated hemoglobin values of less than 5.0%, 5.0 to less than 5.5%, 5.5 to less than 6.0%, 6.0 to less than 6.5%, and 6.5% or greater, the multivariable-adjusted hazard ratios (with 95% confidence intervals) for diagnosed diabetes were 0.52 (0.40 to 0.69), 1.00 (reference), 1.86 (1.67 to 2.08), 4.48 (3.92 to 5.13), and 16.47 (14.22 to 19.08), respectively. For coronary heart disease, the hazard ratios were 0.96 (0.74 to 1.24), 1.00 (reference), 1.23 (1.07 to 1.41), 1.78 (1.48 to 2.15), and 1.95 (1.53 to 2.48), respectively. The hazard ratios for stroke were similar. In contrast, glycated hemoglobin and death from any cause were found to have a J-shaped association curve. All these associations remained significant after adjustment for the baseline fasting glucose level. The association between the fasting glucose levels and the risk of cardiovascular disease or death from any cause was not significant in models with adjustment for all covariates as well as glycated hemoglobin. For coronary heart disease, measures of risk discrimination showed significant improvement when glycated hemoglobin was added to models including fasting glucose. CONCLUSIONS:In this community-based population of nondiabetic adults, glycated hemoglobin was similarly associated with a risk of diabetes and more strongly associated with risks of cardiovascular disease and death from any cause as compared with fasting glucose. These data add to the evidence supporting the use of glycated hemoglobin as a diagnostic test for diabetes.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:The treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on basal insulin and oral glucose-lowering drugs was investigated previously in the LixiLan-L trial. In the LixiLan-L trial, patients experienced a 6-week run-in with insulin glargine U100 (iGlar) as part of the screening phase, followed by treatment with a fixed-ratio combination of iGlar + lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) or iGlar alone over 30 weeks. In the study reported here, we investigated the achievement of glycemic control in those who completed the 30-week LixiLan-L trial, as assessed by change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels from screening, both for the overall category and for screening HbA1c subcategories. METHODS:This post hoc analysis of the LixiLan-L trial included both the screening phase and the treatment period for 30-week completers and evaluated the change in HbA1c from screening to Week 30, patients reaching HbA1c < 7% at Week 30, and iGlar and lixisenatide (Lixi) doses at Week 30 overall and according to HbA1c subcategory at screening (HbA1c ≤ 8%, 8% < HbA1c ≤ 9%, and HbA1c > 9%). Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia during the treatment period was also assessed. RESULTS:HbA1c reductions (least squares mean) from screening to Week 30 were greater for iGlarLixi than iGlar, both overall (- 1.7 vs. - 1.1%) and in all subgroups (HbA1c ≤ 8%, 8% < HbA1c ≤ 9%, and HbA1c > 9%): - 1.1, - 1.4, - 2.4 (iGlarLixi) vs. - 0.5, - 1.0, - 1.8% (iGlar), respectively (all p < 0.0001). The end-of-treatment mean HbA1c level for iGlarLixi across all groups was < 7%. More patients achieved an HbA1c of < 7% with iGlarLixi than with iGlar, both overall (59.9 vs. 31.2%) and within each subgroup [74.2, 54.7, 52.2 (iGlarLixi) vs. 37.2, 31.6, 23.5% (iGlar), respectively]. A higher initial screening HbA1c corresponded with a greater mean reduction in HbA1c for both treatment strategies. In all HbA1c screening categories, the risk of hypoglycemia was not increased with iGlarLixi versus iGlar during the treatment phase. CONCLUSION:iGlarLixi controlled HbA1c levels more effectively than iGlar across all HbA1c screening subgroups and in the overall study population without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02058160. FUNDING:Sanofi.