The changing cost to prevent diabetes: A retrospective analysis of the Diabetes Prevention Program

A Systematic Approach to Treating Early Metabolic Disease and Prediabetes

At least 70% of US adults have metabolic disease. However, less is done to address early disease (e.g., overweight, obesity, prediabetes) versus advanced disease (e.g., type 2 diabetes mellitus, coronary artery disease). Given the burden of advanced metabolic disease and the burgeoning pandemics of obesity and prediabetes a systematic response is required. To accomplish this, we offer several recommendations: (A) Patients with overweight, obesity, and/or prediabetes must be consistently diagnosed with these conditions in medical records to enable population health initiatives. (B) Patients with early metabolic disease should be offered in-person or virtual lifestyle interventions commensurate with the findings of the Diabetes Prevention Program. (C) Patients unable to participate in or otherwise failing lifestyle intervention must be screened to assess if they require pharmacotherapy. (D) Patients not indicated for, refusing, or failing pharmacotherapy must be screened to assess if they need bariatric surgery. (E) Regardless of treatment approach or lack of treatment, patients must be consistently screened for the progression of early metabolic disease to advanced disease to enable early control. Progression of metabolic disease from an overweight yet otherwise healthy person includes the development of prediabetes, obesity ± prediabetes, dyslipidemia, hypertension, type 2 diabetes, chronic kidney disease, coronary artery disease, and heart failure. Systematic approaches in health systems must be deployed with clear protocols and supported by streamlined technologies to manage their population's metabolic health from early through advanced metabolic disease. Additional research is needed to identify and validate optimal system-level interventions. Future research needs to identify strategies to roll out systematic interventions for the treatment of early metabolic disease and to improve the metabolic health among the progressively younger patients being impacted by obesity and diabetes.

Association between prediabetes and risk of all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease: updated meta-analysis

Objective

To evaluate the associations between prediabetes and the risk of all cause mortality and incident cardiovascular disease in the general population and in patients with a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

Design

Updated meta-analysis.

Data sources

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar) up to 25 April 2020.

Review methods

Prospective cohort studies or post hoc analysis of clinical trials were included for analysis if they reported adjusted relative risks, odds ratios, or hazard ratios of all cause mortality or cardiovascular disease for prediabetes compared with normoglycaemia. Data were extracted independently by two investigators. Random effects models were used to calculate the relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. The primary outcomes were all cause mortality and composite cardiovascular disease. The secondary outcomes were the risk of coronary heart disease and stroke.

Results

A total of 129 studies were included, involving 10 069 955 individuals for analysis. In the general population, prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality (relative risk 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 1.17), composite cardiovascular disease (1.15, 1.11 to 1.18), coronary heart disease (1.16, 1.11 to 1.21), and stroke (1.14, 1.08 to 1.20) in a median follow-up time of 9.8 years. Compared with normoglycaemia, the absolute risk difference in prediabetes for all cause mortality, composite cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke was 7.36 (95% confidence interval 9.59 to 12.51), 8.75 (6.41 to 10.49), 6.59 (4.53 to 8.65), and 3.68 (2.10 to 5.26) per 10 000 person years, respectively. Impaired glucose tolerance carried a higher risk of all cause mortality, coronary heart disease, and stroke than impaired fasting glucose. In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality (relative risk 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.54), composite cardiovascular disease (1.37, 1.23 to 1.53), and coronary heart disease (1.15, 1.02 to 1.29) in a median follow-up time of 3.2 years, but no difference was seen for the risk of stroke (1.05, 0.81 to 1.36). Compared with normoglycaemia, in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the absolute risk difference in prediabetes for all cause mortality, composite cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke was 66.19 (95% confidence interval 38.60 to 99.25), 189.77 (117.97 to 271.84), 40.62 (5.42 to 78.53), and 8.54 (32.43 to 61.45) per 10 000 person years, respectively. No significant heterogeneity was found for the risk of all outcomes seen for the different definitions of prediabetes in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (all P>0.10).

Conclusions

Results indicated that prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease in the general population and in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Screening and appropriate management of prediabetes might contribute to primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Association between prediabetes and risk of all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease: updated meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the associations between prediabetes and the risk of all cause mortality and incident cardiovascular disease in the general population and in patients with a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

DESIGN

Updated meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar) up to 25 April 2020.

REVIEW METHODS

Prospective cohort studies or post hoc analysis of clinical trials were included for analysis if they reported adjusted relative risks, odds ratios, or hazard ratios of all cause mortality or cardiovascular disease for prediabetes compared with normoglycaemia. Data were extracted independently by two investigators. Random effects models were used to calculate the relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. The primary outcomes were all cause mortality and composite cardiovascular disease. The secondary outcomes were the risk of coronary heart disease and stroke.

RESULTS

A total of 129 studies were included, involving 10 069 955 individuals for analysis. In the general population, prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality (relative risk 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 1.17), composite cardiovascular disease (1.15, 1.11 to 1.18), coronary heart disease (1.16, 1.11 to 1.21), and stroke (1.14, 1.08 to 1.20) in a median follow-up time of 9.8 years. Compared with normoglycaemia, the absolute risk difference in prediabetes for all cause mortality, composite cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke was 7.36 (95% confidence interval 9.59 to 12.51), 8.75 (6.41 to 10.49), 6.59 (4.53 to 8.65), and 3.68 (2.10 to 5.26) per 10 000 person years, respectively. Impaired glucose tolerance carried a higher risk of all cause mortality, coronary heart disease, and stroke than impaired fasting glucose. In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality (relative risk 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.54), composite cardiovascular disease (1.37, 1.23 to 1.53), and coronary heart disease (1.15, 1.02 to 1.29) in a median follow-up time of 3.2 years, but no difference was seen for the risk of stroke (1.05, 0.81 to 1.36). Compared with normoglycaemia, in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the absolute risk difference in prediabetes for all cause mortality, composite cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke was 66.19 (95% confidence interval 38.60 to 99.25), 189.77 (117.97 to 271.84), 40.62 (5.42 to 78.53), and 8.54 (32.43 to 61.45) per 10 000 person years, respectively. No significant heterogeneity was found for the risk of all outcomes seen for the different definitions of prediabetes in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (all P>0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicated that prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease in the general population and in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Screening and appropriate management of prediabetes might contribute to primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Association between prediabetes and risk of all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease: updated meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the associations between prediabetes and the risk of all cause mortality and incident cardiovascular disease in the general population and in patients with a history of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

DESIGN

Updated meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Electronic databases (PubMed, Embase, and Google Scholar) up to 25 April 2020.

REVIEW METHODS

Prospective cohort studies or post hoc analysis of clinical trials were included for analysis if they reported adjusted relative risks, odds ratios, or hazard ratios of all cause mortality or cardiovascular disease for prediabetes compared with normoglycaemia. Data were extracted independently by two investigators. Random effects models were used to calculate the relative risks and 95% confidence intervals. The primary outcomes were all cause mortality and composite cardiovascular disease. The secondary outcomes were the risk of coronary heart disease and stroke.

RESULTS

A total of 129 studies were included, involving 10 069 955 individuals for analysis. In the general population, prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality (relative risk 1.13, 95% confidence interval 1.10 to 1.17), composite cardiovascular disease (1.15, 1.11 to 1.18), coronary heart disease (1.16, 1.11 to 1.21), and stroke (1.14, 1.08 to 1.20) in a median follow-up time of 9.8 years. Compared with normoglycaemia, the absolute risk difference in prediabetes for all cause mortality, composite cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke was 7.36 (95% confidence interval 9.59 to 12.51), 8.75 (6.41 to 10.49), 6.59 (4.53 to 8.65), and 3.68 (2.10 to 5.26) per 10 000 person years, respectively. Impaired glucose tolerance carried a higher risk of all cause mortality, coronary heart disease, and stroke than impaired fasting glucose. In patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality (relative risk 1.36, 95% confidence interval 1.21 to 1.54), composite cardiovascular disease (1.37, 1.23 to 1.53), and coronary heart disease (1.15, 1.02 to 1.29) in a median follow-up time of 3.2 years, but no difference was seen for the risk of stroke (1.05, 0.81 to 1.36). Compared with normoglycaemia, in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, the absolute risk difference in prediabetes for all cause mortality, composite cardiovascular disease, coronary heart disease, and stroke was 66.19 (95% confidence interval 38.60 to 99.25), 189.77 (117.97 to 271.84), 40.62 (5.42 to 78.53), and 8.54 (32.43 to 61.45) per 10 000 person years, respectively. No significant heterogeneity was found for the risk of all outcomes seen for the different definitions of prediabetes in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (all P>0.10).

CONCLUSIONS

Results indicated that prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of all cause mortality and cardiovascular disease in the general population and in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. Screening and appropriate management of prediabetes might contribute to primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

Metformin for prevention or delay of type 2 diabetes mellitus and its associated complications in persons at increased risk for the development of type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The projected rise in the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) could develop into a substantial health problem worldwide. Whether metformin can prevent or delay T2DM and its complications in people with increased risk of developing T2DM is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of metformin for the prevention or delay of T2DM and its associated complications in persons at increased risk for the T2DM.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, the World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform and the reference lists of systematic reviews, articles and health technology assessment reports. We asked investigators of the included trials for information about additional trials. The date of the last search of all databases was March 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a duration of one year or more comparing metformin with any pharmacological glucose-lowering intervention, behaviour-changing intervention, placebo or standard care in people with impaired glucose tolerance, impaired fasting glucose, moderately elevated glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) or combinations of these.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors read all abstracts and full-text articles and records, assessed risk of bias and extracted outcome data independently. We used a random-effects model to perform meta-analysis and calculated risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using GRADE.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 20 RCTs randomising 6774 participants. One trial contributed 48% of all participants. The duration of intervention in the trials varied from one to five years. We judged none of the trials to be at low risk of bias in all 'Risk of bias' domains. Our main outcome measures were all-cause mortality, incidence of T2DM, serious adverse events (SAEs), cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction or stroke, health-related quality of life and socioeconomic effects.The following comparisons mostly reported only a fraction of our main outcome set. Fifteen RCTs compared metformin with diet and exercise with or without placebo: all-cause mortality was 7/1353 versus 7/1480 (RR 1.11, 95% CI 0.41 to 3.01; P = 0.83; 2833 participants, 5 trials; very low-quality evidence); incidence of T2DM was 324/1751 versus 529/1881 participants (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.65; P < 0.001; 3632 participants, 12 trials; moderate-quality evidence); the reporting of SAEs was insufficient and diverse and meta-analysis could not be performed (reported numbers were 4/118 versus 2/191; 309 participants; 4 trials; very low-quality evidence); cardiovascular mortality was 1/1073 versus 4/1082 (2416 participants; 2 trials; very low-quality evidence). One trial reported no clear difference in health-related quality of life after 3.2 years of follow-up (very low-quality evidence). Two trials estimated the direct medical costs (DMC) per participant for metformin varying from $220 to $1177 versus $61 to $184 in the comparator group (2416 participants; 2 trials; low-quality evidence). Eight RCTs compared metformin with intensive diet and exercise: all-cause mortality was 7/1278 versus 4/1272 (RR 1.61, 95% CI 0.50 to 5.23; P = 0.43; 2550 participants, 4 trials; very low-quality evidence); incidence of T2DM was 304/1455 versus 251/1505 (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.37; P = 0.42; 2960 participants, 7 trials; moderate-quality evidence); the reporting of SAEs was sparse and meta-analysis could not be performed (one trial reported 1/44 in the metformin group versus 0/36 in the intensive exercise and diet group with SAEs). One trial reported that 1/1073 participants in the metformin group compared with 2/1079 participants in the comparator group died from cardiovascular causes. One trial reported that no participant died due to cardiovascular causes (very low-quality evidence). Two trials estimated the DMC per participant for metformin varying from $220 to $1177 versus $225 to $3628 in the comparator group (2400 participants; 2 trials; very low-quality evidence). Three RCTs compared metformin with acarbose: all-cause mortality was 1/44 versus 0/45 (89 participants; 1 trial; very low-quality evidence); incidence of T2DM was 12/147 versus 7/148 (RR 1.72, 95% CI 0.72 to 4.14; P = 0.22; 295 participants; 3 trials; low-quality evidence); SAEs were 1/51 versus 2/50 (101 participants; 1 trial; very low-quality evidence). Three RCTs compared metformin with thiazolidinediones: incidence of T2DM was 9/161 versus 9/159 (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.40; P = 0.98; 320 participants; 3 trials; low-quality evidence). SAEs were 3/45 versus 0/41 (86 participants; 1 trial; very low-quality evidence). Three RCTs compared metformin plus intensive diet and exercise with identical intensive diet and exercise: all-cause mortality was 1/121 versus 1/120 participants (450 participants; 2 trials; very low-quality evidence); incidence of T2DM was 48/166 versus 53/166 (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.10 to 2.92; P = 0.49; 332 participants; 2 trials; very low-quality evidence). One trial estimated the DMC of metformin plus intensive diet and exercise to be $270 per participant compared with $225 in the comparator group (94 participants; 1 trial; very-low quality evidence). One trial in 45 participants compared metformin with a sulphonylurea. The trial reported no patient-important outcomes. For all comparisons there were no data on non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke or microvascular complications. We identified 11 ongoing trials which potentially could provide data of interest for this review. These trials will add a total of 17,853 participants in future updates of this review.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Metformin compared with placebo or diet and exercise reduced or delayed the risk of T2DM in people at increased risk for the development of T2DM (moderate-quality evidence). However, metformin compared to intensive diet and exercise did not reduce or delay the risk of T2DM (moderate-quality evidence). Likewise, the combination of metformin and intensive diet and exercise compared to intensive diet and exercise only neither showed an advantage or disadvantage regarding the development of T2DM (very low-quality evidence). Data on patient-important outcomes such as mortality, macrovascular and microvascular diabetic complications and health-related quality of life were sparse or missing.

Associations between metformin use and vitamin B12 levels, anemia, and neuropathy in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Metformin is first-line therapy for patients with diabetes. However, it may lower vitamin B₁₂ concentrations, which could have hematological or neurological implications. This meta-analyses reviewed all available studies on associations between metformin use and vitamin B₁₂ levels, anemia, and neuropathy in diabetic patients.

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Knowledge, Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched to identify all relevant studies published in English prior to March 2018. Pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated for dichotomous outcomes and pooled mean differences (MDs) and 95% CIs were calculated for continuous outcomes.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies were included in the meta-analyses. Compared with diabetic patients not taking metformin, patients taking metformin had a significantly higher risk of vitamin B₁₂ deficiency (RR 2.09; 95% CI 1.49, 2.93; P < 0.0001; I²  = 64%) and significantly lower serum vitamin B₁₂ concentrations (MD -63.70; 95% CI -74.35, -53.05] pM; P < 0.00001; I²  = 87%), which depended on dose and duration of treatment. Metformin use was also associated with significantly greater percentage decrease in serum vitamin B₁₂ concentrations from baseline in diabetic patients (MD -14.68%; 95% CI -17.98%, -11.39%; P < 0.00001; I²  = 33%). Analyses revealed no significant association between metformin use and the prevalence of anemia or neuropathy.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin use led to significantly lowered vitamin B₁₂ concentrations and significantly higher risk of vitamin B₁₂ deficiency in diabetic patients. More quality studies are needed to explore the associations between metformin use and anemia and neuropathy in these patients. Annual vitamin B₁₂ assessment in diabetic patients taking metformin is recommended.

Ambulatory Care Pharmacists' Perception of Prediabetes

INTRODUCTION

Eighty-four million patients in the United States have prediabetes yet evidence-based interventions to prevent diabetes are infrequently used. The concept of prediabetes is contentious, although preventive interventions are guideline supported. Team-based care models incorporating pharmacists for prediabetes have been proposed; however, pharmacist perception regarding prediabetes has not been assessed. This study's objective was to assess ambulatory care pharmacists' perception of recommendations for prediabetes.

METHODS

An anonymous survey was electronically distributed through the American College of Clinical Pharmacy Ambulatory Care Practice and Research Network. The primary outcome was the proportion of respondents who reported supporting 3 main recommendations related to prediabetes (ie, screening, evidence-based lifestyle-intervention, metformin). The study was approved by the University of South Florida Institutional Review Board. Data collection and analysis occurred in 2017.

RESULTS

The survey was distributed to approximately 2209 potential participants. One hundred thirty-three surveys were completed. The American Diabetes Association guideline was the most common primarily supported guideline related to prediabetes (89%). Of the respondents, 87% supported all 3 main recommendations regarding prediabetes. Qualitative feedback demonstrated the full range of opinions; programs for prediabetes, limited intervention for prediabetes, and against prediabetes as a concept.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of ambulatory care pharmacists responding supported all main recommendations related to prediabetes and therefore may be practicable for disseminating diabetes prevention interventions. However, barriers to implementation should be expected.

Metformin's impact on statin-associated muscle symptoms: An analysis of ACCORD study data and research materials from the NHLBI Biologic Specimen and Data Repository Information Coordinating Center

Statins are widely prescribed, yet statin muscle pain limits their use, leading to increased cardiovascular risk. No validated therapy for statin muscle pain exists. The goal of the study was to assess whether metformin was associated with reduced muscle pain. A secondary analysis of data from the ACCORD trial was performed. An ACCORD sub-study assessed patients for muscle cramps and leg/calve pain while walking, typical non-severe statin muscle pain symptoms. We compared muscle pain between patients using a statin (n = 445) or both a statin and metformin (n = 869) at baseline. Overall patient characteristics were balanced between groups. Unadjusted analysis showed fewer reports of muscle cramps (35%) and leg/calve pain while walking (40%) with statins and metformin compared to statin only (muscle cramps, 42%; leg/calve pain while walking, 47%). Multivariable regression demonstrated a 22% odds reduction for muscle cramps (P = 0.049) and a 29% odds reduction for leg/calve pain while walking (P = 0.01). Metformin appears to reduce the risk of non-severe statin muscle pain and additional research is needed to confirm the findings and assess metformin's impact on statin adherence and related cardiovascular outcomes.