Saul M Genuth1, Helen Vlachos2, Maria Mori Brooks3, John P Bantle4, Bernard R Chaitman5, Jennifer Green6, Sheryl F Kelsey2, Spencer B King7, Robert McBane8, Edward Y Sako9, David J Schneider10, Michael Steffes4, Robert L Frye8. 1. Division of Clinical and Molecular Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH. 2. Epidemiology Data Center, University of Pittsburgh, PA. 3. Epidemiology Data Center, University of Pittsburgh, PA. Electronic address: mbrooks@pitt.edu. 4. Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis; Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. 5. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, St. Louis University, MO. 6. Division of Endocrinology, Department of Medicine, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC. 7. Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA. 8. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN. 9. Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery, University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio. 10. Department of Medicine, University of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To reanalyze the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes trial using a new composite cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcome to determine how best to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and stable coronary artery disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 1, 2001, to November 30, 2008, 2368 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and angiographically proven coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to insulin-sensitizing (IS) or insulin-providing (IP) therapy and simultaneously to coronary revascularization (REV) or no or delayed REV (intensive medical therapy [MED]), with all patients receiving intensive medical treatment. The outcome of this analysis was a composite of 8 CVD events. RESULTS: Four-year Kaplan-Meier rates for the composite CVD outcome were 35.8% (95% CI, 33.1%-38.5%) with IS therapy and 41.6% (95% CI, 38.7%-44.5%) with IP therapy (P=.004). Much of this difference was associated with lower in-trial levels of fibrinogen, C-reactive protein, and hemoglobin A1c with IS therapy. Four-year composite CVD rates were 32.7% (95% CI, 30.0%-35.4%) with REV and 44.7% (95% CI, 41.8%-47.6%) with MED (P<.001). A beneficial effect of IS vs IP therapy was present with REV (27.7%; 95% CI, 24.0%-31.4% vs 37.5%; 95% CI, 33.6%-41.4%; P<.001), but not with MED (43.6%; 95% CI, 39.5%-47.7% vs 45.7%; 95% CI, 41.6%-49.8%; P=.37) (homogeneity, P=.05). This interaction between IS therapy and REV was limited to participants preselected for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The lowest composite CVD rates occurred in patients preselected for CABG and assigned to IS therapy and REV (17.3%; 95% CI, 11.8%-22.8%). CONCLUSION: In the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes trial, the IS treatment strategy and the REV treatment strategy each reduces cardiovascular events. The combination of IS drugs and CABG results in the lowest risk of subsequent CVD events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00006305.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To reanalyze the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes trial using a new composite cardiovascular disease (CVD) outcome to determine how best to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and stable coronary artery disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From January 1, 2001, to November 30, 2008, 2368 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and angiographically proven coronary artery disease were randomly assigned to insulin-sensitizing (IS) or insulin-providing (IP) therapy and simultaneously to coronary revascularization (REV) or no or delayed REV (intensive medical therapy [MED]), with all patients receiving intensive medical treatment. The outcome of this analysis was a composite of 8 CVD events. RESULTS: Four-year Kaplan-Meier rates for the composite CVD outcome were 35.8% (95% CI, 33.1%-38.5%) with IS therapy and 41.6% (95% CI, 38.7%-44.5%) with IP therapy (P=.004). Much of this difference was associated with lower in-trial levels of fibrinogen, C-reactive protein, and hemoglobin A1c with IS therapy. Four-year composite CVD rates were 32.7% (95% CI, 30.0%-35.4%) with REV and 44.7% (95% CI, 41.8%-47.6%) with MED (P<.001). A beneficial effect of IS vs IP therapy was present with REV (27.7%; 95% CI, 24.0%-31.4% vs 37.5%; 95% CI, 33.6%-41.4%; P<.001), but not with MED (43.6%; 95% CI, 39.5%-47.7% vs 45.7%; 95% CI, 41.6%-49.8%; P=.37) (homogeneity, P=.05). This interaction between IS therapy and REV was limited to participants preselected for coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). The lowest composite CVD rates occurred in patients preselected for CABG and assigned to IS therapy and REV (17.3%; 95% CI, 11.8%-22.8%). CONCLUSION: In the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes trial, the IS treatment strategy and the REV treatment strategy each reduces cardiovascular events. The combination of IS drugs and CABG results in the lowest risk of subsequent CVD events. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00006305.
Authors: Andreas Pfützner; Nikolaus Marx; Georg Lübben; Matthias Langenfeld; Daniel Walcher; Thomas Konrad; Thomas Forst Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2005-06-21 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Shadi Yaghi; Karen L Furie; Catherine M Viscoli; Hooman Kamel; Mark Gorman; Jennifer Dearborn; Lawrence H Young; Silvio E Inzucchi; Anne M Lovejoy; Scott E Kasner; Robin Conwit; Walter N Kernan Journal: Circulation Date: 2017-10-30 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Gilles R Dagenais; Jiang Lu; David P Faxon; Kenneth Kent; Rodrigo M Lago; Carlos Lezama; Whady Hueb; Melvin Weiss; James Slater; Robert L Frye Journal: Circulation Date: 2011-03-28 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: M R Langenfeld; T Forst; C Hohberg; P Kann; G Lübben; T Konrad; S D Füllert; C Sachara; A Pfützner Journal: Circulation Date: 2005-05-09 Impact factor: 29.690