Literature DB >> 20008761

Comorbidity affects the relationship between glycemic control and cardiovascular outcomes in diabetes: a cohort study.

Sheldon Greenfield1, John Billimek, Fabio Pellegrini, Monica Franciosi, Giorgia De Berardis, Antonio Nicolucci, Sherrie H Kaplan.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Recent studies have shown mixed results regarding the effectiveness of intensive glucose-lowering therapy in reducing risk for cardiovascular events.
OBJECTIVE: To determine whether attaining hemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) targets of 6.5% or less or 7.0% or less for glycemic control at baseline provides differential benefits for patients with high versus low-to-moderate levels of comorbidity.
DESIGN: 5-year longitudinal observational study of patients with type 2 diabetes. Patients were categorized into high and low-to-moderate comorbidity subgroups by using the Total Illness Burden Index (TIBI), a validated patient-reported measure of comorbidity.
SETTING: 101 diabetes outpatient clinics and 103 general practitioners' clinics in Italy. PATIENTS: 2613 (83%) of 3074 patients with type 2 diabetes, sampled randomly from diabetes outpatient clinic rosters and recruited consecutively from general practitioners' clinics, who completed the baseline questionnaire. MEASUREMENTS: TIBI score, total mortality, and incident cardiovascular events. Hazard ratios (HRs) were adjusted for age and sex.
RESULTS: Attaining an HbA(1c) level of 6.5% or less at baseline was associated with lower 5-year incidence of cardiovascular events in the low-to-moderate comorbidity subgroup (adjusted HR, 0.60 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.85]; P = 0.005) but not in the high comorbidity subgroup (adjusted HR, 0.92 [CI, 0.68 to 1.25]; P = 0.61; P for subgroup by HbA(1c) interaction = 0.048). Similarly, attaining a baseline HbA(1c) level of 7.0% predicted fewer cardiovascular events in the low-to-moderate comorbidity subgroup (adjusted HR, 0.61 (CI, 0.44 to 0.83; P = 0.001) but not in the high comorbidity subgroup (adjusted HR, 0.88 [CI, 0.66 to 1.17]; P = 0.38; P for subgroup by HbA(1c) interaction = 0.093). LIMITATIONS: The observational nature of the study does not allow causal inference. The length of the data collection period was limited. Information on clinical management was not available.
CONCLUSION: Patients with the high levels of comorbidity common in type 2 diabetes may receive diminished cardiovascular benefit from intensive blood glucose control. Comorbidity should be considered when tailoring glucose-lowering therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Pfizer of Italy.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2009        PMID: 20008761     DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-151-12-200912150-00005

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Ann Intern Med        ISSN: 0003-4819            Impact factor:   25.391


  69 in total

1.  Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centered approach. Position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

Authors:  S E Inzucchi; R M Bergenstal; J B Buse; M Diamant; E Ferrannini; M Nauck; A L Peters; A Tsapas; R Wender; D R Matthews
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2012-04-20       Impact factor: 10.122

2.  Intensified glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes: time for a bolder reappraisal.

Authors:  L Czupryniak; E Szymańska-Garbacz; M Pawłowski; M Saryusz-Wolska; J Loba
Journal:  Diabetologia       Date:  2010-12-15       Impact factor: 10.122

3.  Pre-morbid glycemic control modifies the interaction between acute hypoglycemia and mortality.

Authors:  Moritoki Egi; James S Krinsley; Paula Maurer; Devendra N Amin; Tomoyuki Kanazawa; Shruti Ghandi; Kiyoshi Morita; Michael Bailey; Rinaldo Bellomo
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2016-02-03       Impact factor: 17.440

4.  Intensive glucose lowering and cardiovascular disease prevention in diabetes: reconciling the recent clinical trial data.

Authors:  Theodore Mazzone
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2010-11-23       Impact factor: 29.690

5.  Who can respond to treatment? Identifying patient characteristics related to heterogeneity of treatment effects.

Authors:  Sherrie H Kaplan; John Billimek; Dara H Sorkin; Quyen Ngo-Metzger; Sheldon Greenfield
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2010-06       Impact factor: 2.983

6.  Older Adults Reporting More Diabetes Mellitus Care Have Greater 9-Year Survival.

Authors:  Benjamin H Han; Caroline S Blaum; Rosie E Ferris; Lillian C Min; Pearl G Lee
Journal:  J Am Geriatr Soc       Date:  2015-12-11       Impact factor: 5.562

7.  Intensive Treatment and Severe Hypoglycemia Among Adults With Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  Rozalina G McCoy; Kasia J Lipska; Xiaoxi Yao; Joseph S Ross; Victor M Montori; Nilay D Shah
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2016-07-01       Impact factor: 21.873

Review 8.  Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease: Is intensive glucose control beneficial or deadly? Lessons from ACCORD, ADVANCE, VADT, UKPDS, PROactive, and NICE-SUGAR.

Authors:  Guntram Schernthaner
Journal:  Wien Med Wochenschr       Date:  2010-01

9.  Consideration of comorbidity in risk stratification prior to prostate biopsy.

Authors:  Michael A Liss; John Billimek; Kathryn Osann; Jane Cho; Ross Moskowitz; Adam Kaplan; Richard J Szabo; Sherrie H Kaplan; Sheldon Greenfield; Atreya Dash
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2013-04-25       Impact factor: 6.860

10.  Cardiovascular disease and glycemic treatment.

Authors:  Zachary T Bloomgarden
Journal:  Diabetes Care       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 19.112

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.