Disparities in prevalence and treatment of diabetes, cardiovascular and chronic kidney diseases - Recommendations from the taskforce of the guideline workshop

There is a mounting clinical, psychosocial, and socioeconomic burden worldwide as the prevalence of diabetes, cardiovascular disease (CVD), and chronic kidney disease (CKD) continues to rise. Despite the introduction of therapeutic interventions with demonstrated efficacy to prevent the development or progression of these common chronic diseases, many individuals have limited access to these innovations due to their race/ethnicity, and/or socioeconomic status (SES). However, practical guidance to providers and healthcare systems for addressing these disparities is often lacking. In this article, we review the prevalence and impact of healthcare disparities derived from the above-mentioned chronic conditions and present broad-based recommendations for improving access to quality care and health outcomes within the most vulnerable populations.

CVOT Summit Report 2023: new cardiovascular, kidney, and metabolic outcomes

The 9th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit: Congress on Cardiovascular, Kidney, and Metabolic Outcomes was held virtually on November 30-December 1, 2023. This reference congress served as a platform for in-depth discussions and exchange on recently completed outcomes trials including dapagliflozin (DAPA-MI), semaglutide (SELECT and STEP-HFpEF) and bempedoic acid (CLEAR Outcomes), and the advances they represent in reducing the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), improving metabolic outcomes, and treating obesity-related heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF). A broad audience of endocrinologists, diabetologists, cardiologists, nephrologists and primary care physicians participated in online discussions on guideline updates for the management of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in diabetes, heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD); advances in the management of type 1 diabetes (T1D) and its comorbidities; advances in the management of CKD with SGLT2 inhibitors and non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (nsMRAs); and advances in the treatment of obesity with GLP-1 and dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonists. The association of diabetes and obesity with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH; metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis, MASH) and cancer and possible treatments for these complications were also explored. It is generally assumed that treatment of chronic diseases is equally effective for all patients. However, as discussed at the Summit, this assumption may not be true. Therefore, it is important to enroll patients from diverse racial and ethnic groups in clinical trials and to analyze patient-reported outcomes to assess treatment efficacy, and to develop innovative approaches to tailor medications to those who benefit most with minimal side effects. Other keys to a successful management of diabetes and comorbidities, including dementia, entail the use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) technology and the implementation of appropriate patient-physician communication strategies. The 10th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit will be held virtually on December 5-6, 2024 ( http://www.cvot.org ).

Cardio-renal-metabolic disease in primary care setting

In the primary care setting providers have more tools available than ever before to impact positively obesity, diabetes, and their complications, such as renal and cardiac diseases. It is important to recognise what is available for treatment taking into account diabetes heterogeneity. For those who develop type 2 diabetes (T2DM), effective treatments are available that for the first time have shown a benefit in reducing mortality and macrovascular complications, in addition to the well-established benefits of glucose control in reducing microvascular complications. Some of the newer medications for treating hyperglycaemia have also a positive impact in reducing heart failure (HF). Technological advances have also contributed to improving the quality of care in patients with diabetes. The use of technology, such as continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGM), has improved significantly glucose and glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values, while limiting the frequency of hypoglycaemia. Other technological support derives from the use of predictive algorithms that need to be refined to help predict those subjects who are at great risk of developing the disease and/or its complications, or who may require care by other specialists. In this review we also provide recommendations for the optimal use of the new medications; sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and Glucagon-like peptide-receptor agonists 1 (GLP1RA) in the primary care setting considering the relevance of these drugs for the management of T2DM also in its early stage.

Guideline Development for Medical Device Technology: Issues for Consideration

Advances in the development of innovative medical devices and telehealth technologies create the potential to improve the quality and efficiency of diabetes care through collecting, aggregating, and interpreting relevant health data in ways that facilitate more informed decisions among all stakeholder groups. Although many medical societies publish guidelines for utilizing these technologies in clinical practice, we believe that the methodologies used for the selection and grading of the evidence should be revised. In this article, we discuss the strengths and limitations of the various types of research commonly used for evidence selection and grading and present recommendations for modifying the process to more effectively address the rapid pace of device and technology innovation and new product development.

Data from network meta-analyses can inform clinical practice guidelines and decision-making in diabetes management: perspectives of the taskforce of the guideline workshop

In recent years, several novel agents have become available to treat individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D), such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i), tirzepatide, which is a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor agonist (GIP RA)/glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), and finerenone, a non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) that confers significant renal and cardiovascular benefits in individuals with (CKD). New medications have the potential to improve the lives of individuals with diabetes. However, clinicians are challenged to understand the benefits and potential risks associated with these new and emerging treatment options. In this article, we discuss how use of network meta-analyses (NMA) can fill this need.

Mitochondrial metabolites predict adverse cardiovascular events in individuals with diabetes

Metabolic mechanisms underlying the heterogeneity of major adverse cardiovascular (CV) event (MACE) risk in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) remain unclear. We hypothesized that circulating metabolites reflecting mitochondrial dysfunction predict incident MACE in T2D. Targeted mass-spectrometry profiling of 60 metabolites was performed on baseline plasma samples from the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS; discovery cohort) and Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL; validation cohort) biomarker substudy cohorts. A principal components analysis metabolite factor comprising medium-chain acylcarnitines (MCACs) was associated with MACE in TECOS and validated in EXSCEL, with higher levels associated with higher MACE risk. Meta-analysis showed that long-chain acylcarnitines (LCACs) and dicarboxylacylcarnitines were also associated with MACE. Metabolites remained associated with MACE in multivariate models and favorably changed with exenatide therapy. A third cohort (Cardiac Catheterization Genetics [CATHGEN]) with T2D was assessed to determine whether these metabolites improved discriminative capability of multivariate models for MACE. Nine metabolites (MCACs and LCACs and 1 dicarboxylacylcarnitine) were associated with time to MACE in the CATHGEN cohort. Addition of these metabolites to clinical models minimally improved the discriminative capability for MACE but did significantly down reclassify risk. Thus, metabolites reporting on dysregulated mitochondrial fatty acid oxidation are present in higher levels in individuals with T2D who experience subsequent MACE. These biomarkers may improve CV risk prediction models, be therapy responsive, and highlight emerging risk mechanisms.

Benefits and harms of drug treatment for type 2 diabetes: systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To compare the benefits and harms of drug treatments for adults with type 2 diabetes, adding non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (including finerenone) and tirzepatide (a dual glucose dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP)/glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist) to previously existing treatment options.

DESIGN

Systematic review and network meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Central up to 14 October 2022.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

Eligible randomised controlled trials compared drugs of interest in adults with type 2 diabetes. Eligible trials had a follow-up of 24 weeks or longer. Trials systematically comparing combinations of more than one drug treatment class with no drug, subgroup analyses of randomised controlled trials, and non-English language studies were deemed ineligible. Certainty of evidence was assessed following the GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development and evaluation) approach.

RESULTS

The analysis identified 816 trials with 471 038 patients, together evaluating 13 different drug classes; all subsequent estimates refer to the comparison with standard treatments. Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors (odds ratio 0.88, 95% confidence interval 0.83 to 0.94; high certainty) and GLP-1 receptor agonists (0.88, 0.82 to 0.93; high certainty) reduce all cause death; non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, so far tested only with finerenone in patients with chronic kidney disease, probably reduce mortality (0.89, 0.79 to 1.00; moderate certainty); other drugs may not. The study confirmed the benefits of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists in reducing cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, admission to hospital for heart failure, and end stage kidney disease. Finerenone probably reduces admissions to hospital for heart failure and end stage kidney disease, and possibly cardiovascular death. Only GLP-1 receptor agonists reduce non-fatal stroke; SGLT-2 inhibitors are superior to other drugs in reducing end stage kidney disease. GLP-1 receptor agonists and probably SGLT-2 inhibitors and tirzepatide improve quality of life. Reported harms were largely specific to drug class (eg, genital infections with SGLT-2 inhibitors, severe gastrointestinal adverse events with tirzepatide and GLP-1 receptor agonists, hyperkalaemia leading to admission to hospital with finerenone). Tirzepatide probably results in the largest reduction in body weight (mean difference -8.57 kg; moderate certainty). Basal insulin (mean difference 2.15 kg; moderate certainty) and thiazolidinediones (mean difference 2.81 kg; moderate certainty) probably result in the largest increases in body weight. Absolute benefits of SGLT-2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and finerenone vary in people with type 2 diabetes, depending on baseline risks for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes (https://matchit.magicevidence.org/230125dist-diabetes).

CONCLUSIONS

This network meta-analysis extends knowledge beyond confirming the substantial benefits with the use of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists in reducing adverse cardiovascular and kidney outcomes and death by adding information on finerenone and tirzepatide. These findings highlight the need for continuous assessment of scientific progress to introduce cutting edge updates in clinical practice guidelines for people with type 2 diabetes.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42022325948.

CVOT Summit 2022 Report: new cardiovascular, kidney, and glycemic outcomes

The 8th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit on Cardiovascular, Kidney, and Glycemic Outcomes was held virtually on November 10-12, 2022. Following the tradition of previous summits, this reference congress served as a platform for in-depth discussion and exchange on recently completed outcomes trials as well as key trials important to the cardiovascular (CV) field. This year's focus was on the results of the DELIVER, EMPA-KIDNEY and SURMOUNT-1 trials and their implications for the treatment of heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and obesity with glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists. A broad audience of primary care physicians, diabetologists, endocrinologists, cardiologists, and nephrologists participated online in discussions on new consensus recommendations and guideline updates on type 2 diabetes (T2D) and CKD management, overcoming clinical inertia, glycemic markers, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), novel insulin preparations, combination therapy, and reclassification of T2D. The impact of cardiovascular outcomes on the design of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) trials, as well as the impact of real-world evidence (RWE) studies on the confirmation of CVOT outcomes and clinical trial design, were also intensively discussed. The 9th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit will be held virtually on November 23-24, 2023 ( http://www.cvot.org ).

Development and validation of a model to predict cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease

Background

Among individuals with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is common and confers increased risk for morbidity and mortality. Differentiating risk is key to optimize efficiency of treatment selection. Our objective was to develop and validate a model to predict risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) comprising the first event of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke for individuals with both T2DM and ASCVD.

Methods

Using data from the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS), we used Cox proportional hazards models to predict MACE among participants with T2DM and ASCVD. All baseline covariates collected in the trial were considered for inclusion, although some were excluded immediately because of large missingness or collinearity. A full model was developed using stepwise selection in each of 25 imputed datasets, and comprised candidate variables selected in 20 of the 25 datasets. A parsimonious model with a maximum of 10 degrees of freedom was created using Cox models with least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO), where the adjusted R-square was used as criterion for selection. The model was then externally validated among a cohort of participants with similar criteria in the ACCORD (Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes) trial. Discrimination of both models was assessed using Harrell’s C-index and model calibration by the Greenwood-Nam-D’Agostino statistic based on 4-year event rates.

Results

Overall, 1491 (10.2%) of 14,671 participants in TECOS and 130 (9.3%) in the ACCORD validation cohort (n = 1404) had MACE over 3 years’ median follow-up. The final model included 9 characteristics (prior stroke, age, chronic kidney disease, prior MI, sex, heart failure, insulin use, atrial fibrillation, and microvascular complications). The model had moderate discrimination in both the internal and external validation samples (C-index = 0.65 and 0.61, respectively). The model was well calibrated across the risk spectrum—from a cumulative MACE rate of 6% at 4 years in the lowest risk quintile to 26% in the highest risk quintile.

Conclusion

Among patients with T2DM and prevalent ASCVD, this 9-factor risk model can quantify the risk of future ASCVD complications and inform decision making for treatments and intensity.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12933-022-01603-8.

Report from the CVOT Summit 2021: new cardiovascular, renal, and glycemic outcomes

The 7th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit on Cardiovascular, Renal, and Glycemic Outcomes, was held virtually on November 18–19, 2021. Pursuing the tradition of the previous summits, this reference congress served as a platform for in-depth discussion and exchange on recently completed CVOTs. This year’s focus was placed on the outcomes of EMPEROR-Preserved, FIGARO-DKD, AMPLITUDE-O, SURPASS 1–5, and STEP 1–5. Trial implications for diabetes and obesity management and the impact on new treatment algorithms were highlighted for endocrinologists, diabetologists, cardiologists, nephrologists, and general practitioners. Discussions evolved from outcome trials using SGLT2 inhibitors as therapy for heart failure, to CVOTs with nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists and GLP-1 receptor agonists. Furthermore, trials for glycemic and overweight/obesity management, challenges in diabetes management in COVID-19, and novel guidelines and treatment strategies were discussed.

Trial registration The 8th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit will be held virtually on November 10–11, 2022 (http://www.cvot.org)

Heart failure in type 2 diabetes: current perspectives on screening, diagnosis and management

Type 2 diabetes is one of the most relevant risk factors for heart failure, the prevalence of which is increasing worldwide. The aim of the review is to highlight the current perspectives of the pathophysiology of heart failure as it pertains to type 2 diabetes. This review summarizes the proposed mechanistic bases, explaining the myocardial damage induced by diabetes-related stressors and other risk factors, i.e., cardiomyopathy in type 2 diabetes. We highlight the complex pathology of individuals with type 2 diabetes, including the relationship with chronic kidney disease, metabolic alterations, and heart failure. We also discuss the current criteria used for heart failure diagnosis and the gold standard screening tools for individuals with type 2 diabetes. Currently approved pharmacological therapies with primary use in type 2 diabetes and heart failure, and the treatment-guiding role of NT-proBNP are also presented. Finally, the influence of the presence of type 2 diabetes as well as heart failure on COVID-19 severity is briefly discussed.

Towards living guidelines on cardiorenal outcomes in diabetes: A pilot project of the Taskforce of the Guideline Workshop 2020

In June 2020, the Taskforce of the Guideline Workshop 2019 convened via teleconferencing to initiate a pilot project that demonstrates the various processes and considerations involved in developing high-quality, evidence-based clinical practice guidelines for the medical management of individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and its associated comorbidities, including cardiovascular disease (CVD) and chronic kidney disease (CKD). The goal of the pilot project was to create evidence-based guidelines for use of sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors (SGLT2-I) when managing very high risk T2D patients, evidenced by the presence of both CVD and CKD. For this purpose the Taskforce represented a guideline panel and made use of synthesized evidence from an ongoing BMJ Rapid Recommendations project on SGLT2-I and GLP-1 receptor agonists. Results from the Taskforce pilot project demonstrated the value, feasibility and utility of using a step-wise approach to identifying and grading evidence and then developing actionable recommendations for utilizing SGLT2-I in this at-risk T2D population. This report describes the various steps involved in the process and explains how it can be utilized to rapidly develop recommendations in a format that is easy to use and can be quickly updated as new evidence becomes available, also within the emerging concept of living guidelines.

Heart failure outcomes and Covid-19

Pre-existing heart failure (HF) in diagnosed patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is associated with a close to two-fold increased mortality rate compared to COVID-19 patients without prior HF history. Moreover, based both on biomarker as well as imaging findings, widespread endothelial and cardiac injury seems to be present in many patients presenting with COVID-19, associated with adverse outcomes including new onset HF. Systematic echocardiographic studies in patients with COVID-19 indicate that the most common cardiac pathology is right ventricular (RV) dilatation (39%) over and above both left ventricular (LV) diastolic dysfunction (16%) and LV systolic dysfunction (10%). In addition, myocardial injury, assessed by magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), is observed in some 55% to 70% of patients recently recovered from COVID-19 even in those who didn't get very sick during the acute illness. These observations seem to indicate a potentially rather high risk of clinical HF emerging in patients post-COVID-19, warranting close long-term monitoring of patients during recovery. On the other hand, given the established adverse prognostic role that pre-existing HF plays as a comorbidity in the context of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, it not only seems important in the still ongoing COVID-19 pandemic that all patients with known HF should proactively be well controlled and treated according to current guidelines, but also additionally be considered for priority vaccination against the SARS-CoV-2 infection if not yet vaccinated.

Report from the CVOT Summit 2020: new cardiovascular and renal outcomes

The 6th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit “Cardiovascular and Renal Outcomes 2020” was the first to be held virtually on October 29–30, 2020. As in previous years, this summit served as reference meeting for in-depth discussions on the topic of recently completed and presented major outcome trials. This year, focus was placed on the outcomes of VERTIS-CV, EMPEROR-Reduced, DAPA-CKD, and FIDELIO-DKD. Trial implications for diabetes management and the impact on new treatment algorithms were highlighted for diabetologists, cardiologists, endocrinologists, nephrologists, and general practitioners. Discussion evolved from major outcome trials using SGLT-2 inhibitors for treatment and prevention of heart failure and chronic kidney disease in people with and without diabetes, to additional therapy options for chronic kidney disease with a novel mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist. Furthermore, challenges in diabetes management like COVID-19 and obesity, as well as novel treatment strategies and guidelines, were discussed.

The 7th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit will be held virtually on November, 18–19, 2021 (http://www.cvot.org).

Predicting heart failure events in patients with coronary heart disease and impaired glucose tolerance: Insights from the Acarbose Cardiovascular Evaluation (ACE) trial

AIMS

Heart failure is a fatal complication of type 2 diabetes but little is known about its incidence in people with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). We used Acarbose Cardiovascular Evaluation (ACE) trial data to identify predictors of hospitalisation for heart failure (hHF) or cardiovascular (CV) death in patients with coronary heart disease (CHD) and IGT randomised to acarbose or placebo.

METHODS

Independent hHF/CV death risk factors were determined using Cox proportional hazards models, with participants censored at first hHF event, CV death, or end of follow-up.

RESULTS

During median 5-year follow-up, the composite outcome of hHF/CV death occurred in 393 (6.0%) participants. Significant hHF/CV death multivariate predictors were higher age and plasma creatinine, and prior heart failure (HF), myocardial infarction (MI), atrial fibrillation (AF) and stroke. Acarbose, compared with placebo, did not reduce hHF/CV death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.89, 95% CI 0.64-1.24, P = 0.48) or hHF (HR 0.90, 95% CI 0.74-1.10, P = 0.32).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with CHD and IGT at greater risk of hHF/CV death were older with higher plasma creatinine, prior HF, MI, AF or stroke. Addition of acarbose to optimised CV therapy to reduce post-prandial glucose excursions did not reduce the risk of hHF/CV death or hHF.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00829660, and the International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number registry, number ISRCTN91899513.

Hypoglycaemia and its management in primary care setting

Hypoglycaemia is common in patients with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes and constitutes a major limiting factor in achieving glycaemic control among people with diabetes. While hypoglycaemia is defined as a blood glucose level under 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L), symptoms may occur at higher blood glucose levels in individuals with poor glycaemic control. Severe hypoglycaemia is defined as an episode requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or take other corrective actions to assure neurologic recovery. Hypoglycaemia is the most important safety outcome in clinical studies of glucose lowering agents. The American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care recommends that a management protocol for hypoglycaemia should be designed and implemented by every hospital, along with a clear prevention and treatment plan. A tailored approach, using clinical and pathophysiologic disease stratification, can help individualize glycaemic goals and promote new therapies to improve quality of life of patients. Data from recent large clinical trials reported low risk of hypoglycaemic events with the use of newer anti-diabetic drugs. Increased hypoglycaemia risk is observed with the use of insulin and/or sulphonylureas. Vulnerable patients with T2D at dual risk of severe hypoglycaemia and cardiovascular outcomes show features of "frailty." Many of such patients may be better treated by the use of GLP-1 receptor agonists or SGLT2 inhibitors rather than insulin. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) should be considered for all individuals with increased risk for hypoglycaemia, impaired hypoglycaemia awareness, frequent nocturnal hypoglycaemia and with history of severe hypoglycaemia. Patients with impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia benefit from real-time CGM. The diabetes educator is an invaluable resource and can devote the time needed to thoroughly educate the individual to reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia and integrate the information within the entire construct of diabetes self-management. Conversations about hypoglycaemia facilitated by a healthcare professional may reduce the burden and fear of hypoglycaemia among patients with diabetes and their family members. Optimizing insulin doses and carbohydrate intake, in addition to a short warm up before or after the physical activity sessions may help avoiding hypoglycaemia. Several therapeutic considerations are important to reduce hypoglycaemia risk during pregnancy including administration of rapid-acting insulin analogues rather than human insulin, pre-conception initiation of insulin analogues, and immediate postpartum insulin dose reduction.

Targets for blood glucose: What have the trials told us

The challenges of diabetes treatment are to prevent or delay microangiopathic complications and macrovascular disease. Early, effective and sustained glycaemic control is advocated by all diabetes guidelines to mitigate the risks of prolonged hyperglycaemia. The post-hoc analyses of the large randomised glucose intervention trials and the long-term results of these trials have shown clearly that intensive glycaemic control may have more favourable cardiovascular effects when initiated earlier in the course of diabetes, particularly among in patients without cardiovascular disease. Based on the intervention trials a haemoglobin A1c level of less than 7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) is a generally accepted target to reduce microvascular disease and should be initiated early in the course of the diabetes. However, haemoglobin A1c targets should be individualised. Achieving a good glycaemic control without detrimental effect and preferably with benefit to the cardiovascular system and to renal function is an important challenge. When targeting a tight glycaemic control, avoidance of hypoglycaemia is crucial particularly in patients with coronary artery disease and in patients with heart failure. The cardiovascular outcomes trials performed to test the cardiovascular safety of the new glucose-lowering therapies offer compelling evidence in favour of the role of these drugs for cardiovascular prevention. Thus, both the glycaemic target and the choice of therapies should now be defined on an individual basis.

The global epidemics of diabetes in the 21st century: Current situation and perspectives

Diabetes is on the rise worldwide, with a global prevalence in adults in 2017 being 8.8% of the world population, with the anticipation of a further increase to 9.9% by 2045. In total numbers, this reflects a population of 424.9 million people with diabetes worldwide in 2017, with an estimate of a 48% increase to 628.6 million people by 2045. Depending on age, global diabetes prevalence is about 5%, 10%, 15% and close to 20%, respectively, for the age groups 35-39, 45-49, 55-59 and 65-69 years. On a global scale, diabetes hits particularly 'middle aged' people between 40 and 59 years, which causes serious economic and social implications. Furthermore, diabetes affects especially low and middle income countries, as 77% of all people with diabetes worldwide live in those countries. In addition to overt diabetes, an estimated 352.1 million people worldwide are at risk of diabetes, i.e. have defined pre-diabetes, a figure which is anticipated to rise to 531.6 million by 2045. Some 70-75% of all patients with established coronary artery disease, e.g. with acute myocardial infarction, show concomitant diabetes or abnormal glucose regulation, i.e. close to 50% have overt diabetes, with as many as 20% of those being undiagnosed and another 25% having pre-diabetes.

Association between glycated haemoglobin levels and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease: a secondary analysis of the TECOS randomized clinical trial

AIMS

Whether glycaemic control is associated with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is unclear. Consequently, we assessed the relationship between glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c ) and cardiovascular outcomes in a placebo-controlled randomized trial which demonstrated no cardiovascular effect of sitagliptin in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Secondary analysis of 14 656 TECOS participants with time to event analyses using multivariable Cox proportional hazard models. During a median 3.0 (interquartile range 2.3-3.8) year follow-up, 456 (3.1% of 14 656) patients had first hospitalization for heart failure (HF), 1084 (11.5%) died, 1406 (9.6%) died or were hospitalized for HF, and 1689 (11.5%) had a non-HF cardiovascular event (cardiovascular death, non-fatal stroke, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or hospitalization for unstable angina). Associations between baseline or time-varying HbA_1c and cardiovascular outcomes were U-shaped, with the lowest risk when HbA_1c was around 7%. Each one-unit increase in the time-varying HbA_1c above 7% was associated with an adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of 1.21 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11-1.33] for first HF hospitalization, 1.11 (1.03-1.21) for all-cause death, 1.18 (1.09-1.26) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.10 (1.02-1.17) for non-HF cardiovascular events. Each one-unit decrease in the time-varying HbA_1c below 7% was associated with an adjusted HR of 1.35 (95% CI 1.12-1.64) for first HF hospitalization, 1.37 (1.16-1.61) for death, 1.42 (1.23-1.64) for death or HF hospitalization, and 1.22 (1.06-1.41) for non-HF cardiovascular events.

CONCLUSION

Glycated haemogobin exhibits a U-shaped association with cardiovascular outcomes in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic vascular disease, with nadir around 7%.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00790205.

Issues for the management of people with diabetes and COVID-19 in ICU

In the pandemic “Corona Virus Disease 2019” (COVID-19) people with diabetes have a high risk to require ICU admission. The management of diabetes in Intensive Care Unit is always challenging, however, when diabetes is present in COVID-19 the situation seems even more complicated. An optimal glycemic control, avoiding acute hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia and glycemic variability may significantly improve the outcome. In this case, intravenous insulin infusion with continuous glucose monitoring should be the choice. No evidence suggests stopping angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin-renin-blockers or statins, even it has been suggested that they may increase the expression of Angiotensin-Converting-Enzyme-2 (ACE2) receptor, which is used by “Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) to penetrate into the cells. A real issue is the usefulness of several biomarkers, which have been suggested to be measured during the COVID-19. N-Terminal-pro-Brain Natriuretic-Peptide, D-dimer and hs-Troponin are often increased in diabetes. Their meaning in the case of diabetes and COVID-19 should be therefore very carefully evaluated. Even though we understand that in such a critical situation some of these requests are not so easy to implement, we believe that the best possible action to prevent a worse outcome is essential in any medical act.

Proceedings of the Guideline Workshop 2019: Strategies for the Optimization of Guideline Processes in Diabetes, Cardiovascular Diseases, and Kidney Diseases

The Guideline Workshop 2019, held in October 2019 in Munich, Germany, had the purpose of facilitating discussion on strategies for optimization of guideline processes in diabetes among a group of representatives of renown national and international societies in the field of diabetes, cardiology, and nephrology. Results of this panel's discussions are presented in this article and comprise a variety of suggestions for improving the quality and usability of guidelines, as well as to accelerate the development and responsiveness of guidelines to newly published, relevant data from clinical trials such as cardiovascular outcome trials in diabetes mellitus. These include, but are not limited to, recommendations to optimize presentation of content in guidelines, use of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach to rating the quality of evidence to harmonize guidelines, and utilization of digital health technologies to accelerate, streamline, and optimize communication on relevant data and development of clinical guidelines and necessary updates, while reducing costs. Recognizing that achieving alignment in guideline development among various medical organizations will be a long-term process, representatives from cross-sectional medical organizations relevant to cardio/renal metabolic disease and experts in guideline methodology will work together in the future. Among other activities, it is planned to continue the activity and organize a Guideline Workshop in 2020.

Comparison of mechanisms and transferability of outcomes of SGLT2 inhibition between type 1 and type 2 diabetes

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a major chronic disease with ever-increasing prevalence and a variety of serious complications for persons with DM, such as cardiovascular and/or renal complications. New glucose-lowering therapies like DPP-4 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, and SGLT-2 inhibitors have undergone cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) for type 2 diabetes (T2DM), as by the guidance of the FDA. However, CVOTs for type 1 diabetes (T1DM) are generally lacking. Both, persons with T1DM and T2DM, are burdened with a high incidence of cardiovascular and renal disease such as atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and diabetic kidney disease (DKD). Although pathologies of the two types of diabetes cannot be compared, similar mechanisms and risk factors like sex, hyperglycaemia, hypertension, endothelial damage and (background) inflammation have been identified in the development of CVD and DKD in T1DM and T2DM. Recent CVOTs in T2DM demonstrated that SGLT-2 inhibitors, besides exerting a glucose-lowering effect, have beneficial effects on cardiovascular and renal mechanisms. These mechanisms are reviewed in detail in this manuscript and evaluated for possible transferability to, and thus efficacy in, T1DM. Our review of current literature suggests that SGLT-2 inhibitors have cardioprotective benefits beyond their glucose-lowering effects. As this mainly has been observed in CVOTs in T2DM, further investigation in the adjunctive therapy for type 1 diabetes is suggested.

Issues of Cardiovascular Risk Management in People With Diabetes in the COVID-19 Era

People with diabetes compared with people without exhibit worse prognosis if affected by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) induced by the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), particularly when compromising metabolic control and concomitant cardiovascular disorders are present. This Perspective seeks to explore newly occurring cardio-renal-pulmonary organ damage induced or aggravated by the disease process of COVID-19 and its implications for the cardiovascular risk management of people with diabetes, especially taking into account potential interactions with mechanisms of cellular intrusion of SARS-CoV-2. Severe infection with SARS-CoV-2 can precipitate myocardial infarction, myocarditis, heart failure, and arrhythmias as well as an acute respiratory distress syndrome and renal failure. They may evolve along with multiorgan failure directly due to SARS-CoV-2-infected endothelial cells and resulting endotheliitis. This complex pathology may bear challenges for the use of most diabetes medications in terms of emerging contraindications that need close monitoring of all people with diabetes diagnosed with SARS-CoV-2 infection. Whenever possible, continuous glucose monitoring should be implemented to ensure stable metabolic compensation. Patients in the intensive care unit requiring therapy for glycemic control should be handled solely by intravenous insulin using exact dosing with a perfusion device. Although not only ACE inhibitors and angiotensin 2 receptor blockers but also SGLT2 inhibitors, GLP-1 receptor agonists, pioglitazone, and probably insulin seem to increase the number of ACE2 receptors on the cells utilized by SARS-CoV-2 for penetration, no evidence presently exists that shows this might be harmful in terms of acquiring or worsening COVID-19. In conclusion, COVID-19 and related cardio-renal-pulmonary damage can profoundly affect cardiovascular risk management of people with diabetes.

Proceedings of the Guideline Workshop 2019 - Strategies for the optimization of guideline processes in diabetes, cardiovascular diseases and kidney diseases

The Guideline Workshop 2019, held in October 2019 in Munich, Germany, had the purpose of facilitating discussion on strategies for optimization of guideline processes in diabetes amongst a group of representatives of renown national and international societies in the field of diabetes, cardiology, and nephrology. Results of this panel's discussions are presented in this manuscript and comprise a variety of suggestions for improving the quality and usability of guidelines, as well as to accelerate the development and responsiveness of guidelines to newly published, relevant data from clinical trials such as cardiovascular outcome trials in diabetes mellitus. These include, but are not limited to, recommendations to optimize presentation of content in guidelines, use of the GRADE-approach to rating the quality of evidence to harmonize guidelines, and utilization of digital health technologies to accelerate, streamline, and optimize communication on relevant data and development of clinical guidelines and necessary updates, while reducing costs. Recognizing that achieving alignment in guideline development among various medical organizations will be a long-term process, representatives from cross-sectional medical organizations relevant to cardio-renal metabolic disease and experts in guideline methodology will work together in the future. Among other activities, it is planned to continue the activity and organize a Guideline Workshop in 2020.

Treatment paradigm shifting implications of recent cardiovascular outcome trials: Core insights on the brink of the 2020ies

Based on cardiovascular (CV) outcome trials (CVOTs) being available on the brink of the 2020ies, CV safety assessed by major adverse CV event outcomes has been established for the classes of glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1 RAs), sodium-glucose-co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2-is), and dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4is) in patients at very high CV risk. This should be relevant to the whole population with diabetes in general as well as the fact that no new serious and unexpected side effects have emerged within these trials. At the same time, treatment paradigm shifting CV benefit has been confirmed for two classes of diabetes medications (SGLT2is & GLP1 RAs), with important additional benefit of SGLT2is reducing heart failure and hard renal endpoints, both in patients with such diseases, but also in patients being in primary prevention. Moreover, the "soft" renal outcome of albuminurea progression seems to be attenuated by all three classes of drugs discussed in this overview. Still ongoing CVOTs are not expected to essentially change the current notions, with the potential of some differentiation regarding subgroups of primary heart failure populations in relation to treatment with SGLT2is.

Confirming the Bidirectional Nature of the Association Between Severe Hypoglycemic and Cardiovascular Events in Type 2 Diabetes: Insights From EXSCEL

OBJECTIVE

We sought to confirm a bidirectional association between severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs) and cardiovascular (CV) event risk and to characterize individuals at dual risk.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In a post hoc analysis of 14,752 Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL) participants, we examined time-dependent associations between SHEs and subsequent major adverse cardiac events (CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction [MI] or stroke), fatal/nonfatal MI, fatal/nonfatal stroke, hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome (hACS), hospitalization for heart failure (hHF), and all-cause mortality (ACM), as well as time-dependent associations between nonfatal CV events and subsequent SHEs.

RESULTS

SHEs were uncommon and not associated with once-weekly exenatide therapy (hazard ratio 1.13 [95% CI 0.94-1.36], P = 0.179). In fully adjusted models, SHEs were associated with an increased risk of subsequent ACM (1.83 [1.38-2.42], P < 0.001), CV death (1.60 [1.11-2.30], P = 0.012), and hHF (2.09 [1.37-3.17], P = 0.001), while nonfatal MI (2.02 [1.35-3.01], P = 0.001), nonfatal stroke (2.30 [1.25-4.23], P = 0.007), hACS (2.00 [1.39-2.90], P < 0.001), and hHF (3.24 [1.98-5.30], P < 0.001) were all associated with a subsequent increased risk of SHEs. The elevated bidirectional time-dependent hazards linking SHEs and a composite of all CV events were approximately constant over time, with those individuals at dual risk showing higher comorbidity scores compared with those without.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings, showing greater risk of SHEs after CV events as well as greater risk of CV events after SHEs, validate a bidirectional relationship between CV events and SHEs in patients with high comorbidity scores.

International variation in characteristics and clinical outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes and heart failure: Insights from TECOS

International differences in management/outcomes among patients with type 2 diabetes and heart failure (HF) are not well characterized. We sought to evaluate geographic variation in treatment and outcomes among these patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Among 14,671 participants in the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS), those with HF at baseline and a documented ejection fraction (EF) (N = 1591; 10.8%) were categorized by enrollment region (North America, Latin America, Western Europe, Eastern Europe, and Asia Pacific). Cox models were used to examine the association between geographic region and the primary outcome of all-cause mortality (ACM) or hospitalization for HF (hHF) in addition to ACM alone. Analyses were stratified by those with EF <40% or EF ≥40%. The majority of participants with HF were enrolled in Eastern Europe (53%). Overall, 1,267 (79.6%) had EF ≥40%. β-Blocker (83%) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin receptor blocker (86%) use was high across all regions in patients with EF <40%. During a median follow-up of 2.9 years, Eastern European participants had lower rates of ACM/hHF compared with North Americans (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.45; 95% CI: 0.32-0.64). These differences were seen only in the EF ≥40% subgroup and not the EF <40% subgroup. ACM was similar among Eastern European and North American participants (adjusted hazard ratio: 0.79; 95% CI: 0.44-1.45). CONCLUSIONS: Significant variation exists in the clinical features and outcomes of HF patients across regions in TECOS. Patients from Eastern Europe had lower risk-adjusted ACM/hHF than those in North America, driven by those with EF ≥40%. These data may inform the design of future international trials.

Diabetes as a cardiovascular risk factor: An overview of global trends of macro and micro vascular complications

The global prevalence of diabetes is predicted to increase dramatically in the coming decades as the population grows and ages, in parallel with the rising burden of overweight and obesity, in both developed and developing countries. Cardiovascular disease represents the principal cause of death and morbidity among people with diabetes, especially in those with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Adults with diabetes have 2–4 times increased cardiovascular risk compared with adults without diabetes, and the risk rises with worsening glycaemic control. Diabetes has been associated with 75% increase in mortality rate in adults, and cardiovascular disease accounts for a large part of the excess mortality. Diabetes-related macrovascular and microvascular complications, including coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, heart failure, peripheral vascular disease, chronic renal disease, diabetic retinopathy and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy are responsible for the impaired quality of life, disability and premature death associated with diabetes. Given the substantial clinical impact of diabetes as a cardiovascular risk factor, there has been a growing focus on diabetes-related complications. While some population-based studies suggest that the epidemiology of such complications is changing and that rates of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality among individuals with diabetes are decreasing in high-income countries, the economic and social burden of diabetes is expected to rise due to changing demographics and lifestyle especially in middle- and low-income countries. In this review we outline data from population-based studies on recent and long-term trends in diabetes-related complications.

Report from the 4th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit of the Diabetes & Cardiovascular Disease (D&CVD) EASD Study Group

The 4th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit of the Diabetes & Cardiovascular Disease (D&CVD) EASD Study Group was held in Munich on 25–26 October 2018. As in previous years, this summit served as a reference meeting for in-depth discussions on the topic of recently completed and presented CVOTs. This year, focus was placed on the CVOTs CARMELINA, DECLARE-TIMI 58 and Harmony Outcomes. Trial implications for diabetes management and the impact of the new ADA/EASD consensus statement treatment algorithm were highlighted for diabetologists, cardiologists, endocrinologists, nephrologists and general practitioners. Discussions evolved from CVOTs to additional therapy options for heart failure (ARNI), knowledge gained for adjunct therapy of type 1 diabetes and, on the occasion of the 10 year anniversary of the FDA’s “Guidance for Industry: “should CVOTs be continued and/or modified?” The 5th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit will be held in Munich on 24–25 October 2019 (http://www.cvot.org).

Effect of race on the glycaemic response to sitagliptin: Insights from the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS)

AIM

Pooled efficacy studies suggest that glycaemic responses to dipeptidyl-peptidase 4 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes are greatest in Asians, who may also respond better to alpha-glucosidase inhibitors. We assessed the glycaemic impact of sitagliptin by race in the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS), and whether this was enhanced in Asians with concomitant acarbose therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

TECOS enrolled 14 671 patients with type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and HbA1c of 48-64 mmol/mol (6.5%-8.0%), and randomized them, double-blind, to sitagliptin or placebo. There were 3265 patients (22.3%) from Asian countries. Background glucose-lowering therapies were unaltered for the first 4 months post randomization unless clinically essential, facilitating comparison of sitagliptin-associated effects in self-identified East Asian, Other (South) Asian, White Caucasian, Hispanic, Black and Indigenous groups.

RESULTS

Median baseline HbA1c by race was 54 to 57 mmol/mol (7.1%-7.4%). Mean 4-month reduction in placebo-adjusted HbA1c was greatest in East Asians (-6.6 mmol/mol [-0.60%] vs ≤6.0 mmol/mol [≤0.55%] in other groups), with significantly greater reduction vs the 2 largest groups (White Caucasians, Other Asians; P < .0001) after adjustment for covariates. After the first 4 months, East and Other Asians were more likely to initiate additional oral therapy (metformin and/or sulfonylureas) than insulin vs White Caucasians (P < .0001). Acarbose use increased in the Asian patients, but no glycaemic interaction with allocated study medication was observed (adjusted P = .12).

CONCLUSIONS

The greatest initial reduction in HbA1c with sitagliptin in the TECOS population was in East Asians. No enhanced glycaemic effect was seen when sitagliptin was given with acarbose.

Association Between Sitagliptin Use and Heart Failure Hospitalization and Related Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Previous trial results have suggested that dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor (DPP4i) use might increase heart failure (HF) risk in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The DPP4i sitagliptin has been shown to be noninferior to placebo with regard to primary and secondary composite atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes With Sitagliptin (TECOS).

OBJECTIVE

To assess the association of sitagliptin use with hospitalization for HF (hHF) and related outcomes.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

TECOS was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study evaluating the CV safety of sitagliptin vs placebo, each added to usual antihyperglycemic therapy and CV care among patients with T2DM and prevalent atherosclerotic vascular disease. The median follow-up was 2.9 years. The setting was 673 sites in 38 countries. Participants included 14 671 patients with T2DM and atherosclerotic vascular disease. The study dates were December 2008 through March 2015.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized to sitagliptin vs placebo added to standard care.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Prespecified secondary analyses compared the effect on hHF, hHF or CV death, and hHF or all-cause death composite outcomes overall and in prespecified subgroups. Supportive analyses included total hHF events (first plus recurrent) and post-hHF death. Meta-analyses evaluated DPP4i effects on hHF and on hHF or CV death.

RESULTS

Of 14 671 patients, 7332 were randomized to sitagliptin and 7339 to placebo. Hospitalization for HF occurred in 3.1% (n = 228) and 3.1% (n = 229) of the sitagliptin and placebo groups, respectively (unadjusted hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83-1.19). There was also no difference in total hHF events between the sitagliptin (n = 345) and placebo (n = 347) groups (unadjusted hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.80-1.25). Post-hHF all-cause death was similar in the sitagliptin and placebo groups (29.8% vs 28.8%, respectively), as was CV death (22.4% vs 23.1%, respectively). No heterogeneity for the effect of sitagliptin on hHF was observed in subgroup analyses across 21 factors (P > .10 for all interactions). Meta-analysis of the hHF results from the 3 reported DPP4i CV outcomes trials revealed moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 44.9, P = .16).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Sitagliptin use does not affect the risk for hHF in T2DM, both overall and among high-risk patient subgroups.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00790205.

Increased Risk of Severe Hypoglycemic Events Before and After Cardiovascular Outcomes in TECOS Suggests an At-Risk Type 2 Diabetes Frail Patient Phenotype

OBJECTIVE

Severe hypoglycemic events (SHEs) in type 2 diabetes are associated with subsequent cardiovascular (CV) event risk. We examined whether CV events were associated with subsequent SHE risk.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Time-dependent associations between SHEs and a composite CV end point (fatal/nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, hospitalization for heart failure [hHF]) were examined post hoc in 14,671 TECOS (Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes With Sitagliptin) participants with type 2 diabetes and CV disease followed for a median of 3.0 years.

RESULTS

SHEs were uncommon and unassociated with sitagliptin therapy (N = 160 [2.2%], 0.78/100 patient-years vs. N = 143 [1.9%], 0.70/100 patient-years for placebo; hazard ratio [HR] 1.12 [95% CI 0.89, 1.40], P = 0.33). Patients with (versus without) SHEs were older with longer diabetes duration, lower body weight, and lower estimated glomerular filtration rate; were more frequently women, nonwhite, and insulin treated; and more often had microalbuminuria or macroalbuminuria. Analyses adjusted for clinical factors showed SHEs were associated with increased risk of the primary composite CV end point (1.55 [1.06, 2.28], P = 0.025), all-cause death (1.83 [1.22, 2.75], P = 0.004), and CV death (1.72 [1.02, 2.87], P = 0.040). Conversely, nonfatal myocardial infarction (3.02 [1.83, 4.96], P < 0.001), nonfatal stroke (2.77 [1.36, 5.63], P = 0.005), and hHF (3.68 [2.13, 6.36], P < 0.001) were associated with increased risk of SHEs. Fully adjusted models showed no association between SHEs and subsequent CV or hHF events, but the association between CV events and subsequent SHEs remained robust.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings, showing greater risk of SHEs after CV events and greater risk of CV events after SHEs, suggest a common at-risk type 2 diabetes frail patient phenotype.

Report from the 3rd Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit of the Diabetes & Cardiovascular Disease (D&CVD) EASD Study Group

The 3rd Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit of the Diabetes & Cardiovascular Disease EASD Study Group was held on the 26-27 October 2017 in Munich. As in 2015 and 2016, this summit was organised in light of recently completed and published CVOTs on diabetes, aiming to serve as a reference meeting for in-depth discussions on the topic. Amongst others, the CVOTs EXSCEL, DEVOTE, the CANVAS program and the ACE-trial, which released primary outcome results in 2017, were discussed. Trial implications for diabetes management and recent perspectives of diabetologists, cardiologists, endocrinologists, nephrologists and general practitioners were highlighted. The clinical relevance of cardiovascular outcome trials and its implications regarding reimbursement were compared with real-world studies. The 4th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit will be held in Munich 25-26 October 2018 ( http://www.dcvd.org ).

Semi-Automatic Generation of Medical Tele-Expert Opinion for Primary Care Physician

Objectives: A computer-based system has been developed for the generation of medical expert opinions on the insulin-resistance syndrome, based on clinical data obtained from primary care physicians.

Methods: An expert opinion for each patient was generated by using a decision tree for entering individual text modules and by adding optional free text. The expert opinions were returned by e-mail, telefax or by ordinary mail.

Results: 1389 primary care physician sent anonymous data sets and requested expert opinions for a total of 3768 patients. Through the set up of a rule-based system an automation of the generation of the expert opinions could be achieved and the generation time dropped from initially 40 minutes to less than 5 minutes at the end.

Conclusions: By using predefined text modules and a rule based system, a large number of medical expert opinions can be generated with relatively few additional resources.

Causes of Death in a Contemporary Cohort of Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: Insights From the TECOS Trial

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated the specific causes of death and their associated risk factors in a contemporary cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We used data from the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS) study (n = 14,671), a cardiovascular (CV) safety trial adding sitagliptin versus placebo to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and ASCVD (median follow-up 3 years). An independent committee blinded to treatment assignment adjudicated each cause of death. Cox proportional hazards models were used to identify risk factors associated with each outcome.

RESULTS

A total of 1,084 deaths were adjudicated as the following: 530 CV (1.2/100 patient-years [PY], 49% of deaths), 338 non-CV (0.77/100 PY, 31% of deaths), and 216 unknown (0.49/100 PY, 20% of deaths). The most common CV death was sudden death (n = 145, 27% of CV death) followed by acute myocardial infarction (MI)/stroke (n = 113 [MI n = 48, stroke n = 65], 21% of CV death) and heart failure (HF) (n = 63, 12% of CV death). The most common non-CV death was malignancy (n = 154, 46% of non-CV death). The risk of specific CV death subcategories was lower among patients with no baseline history of HF, including sudden death (hazard ratio [HR] 0.4; P = 0.0036), MI/stroke death (HR 0.47; P = 0.049), and HF death (HR 0.29; P = 0.0057).

CONCLUSIONS

In this analysis of a contemporary cohort of patients with diabetes and ASCVD, sudden death was the most common subcategory of CV death. HF prevention may represent an avenue to reduce the risk of specific CV death subcategories.

Correction to: Updates on cardiovascular outcome trials in diabetes

Following publication of the original article [1], the authors submitted a corrected version of Table 4 (see below).

Updates on cardiovascular outcome trials in diabetes

In 2008 the Food and Drug Administration introduced a guidance for industry that requires the investigation of cardiovascular outcomes of glucose-lowering medications. Since then, an increasing number of cardiovascular outcome trials have been completed in diabetes patients with high cardiovascular risk for members of the SGLT-2 and DPP4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonist classes. The trials confirmed cardiovascular safety for all tested anti-hyperglycaemic drugs and, in addition empagliflozin, semaglutide and liraglutide could even reduce cardiovascular risk. The present review summarizes the results of the DEVOTE, CANVAS, EXSCEL and ACE trials that tested cardiovascular safety of Insulin degludec, canagliflozin, once-weekly exenatide and acarbose and were published in 2017. We provide context on these results by comparing them with earlier trials of glucose-lowering drugs and give an outlook on what to expect in coming years.

Hypertension Control in Adults With Diabetes Mellitus and Recurrent Cardiovascular Events: Global Results From the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes With Sitagliptin

Systolic blood pressure (SBP) treatment targets for adults with diabetes mellitus remain unclear. SBP levels among 12 275 adults with diabetes mellitus, prior cardiovascular disease, and treated hypertension were evaluated in the TECOS (Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes With Sitagliptin) randomized trial of sitagliptin versus placebo. The association between baseline SBP and recurrent cardiovascular disease was evaluated using multivariable Cox proportional hazards modeling with restricted cubic splines, adjusting for clinical characteristics. Kaplan-Meier curves by baseline SBP were created to assess time to cardiovascular disease and 2 potential hypotension-related adverse events: worsening kidney function and fractures. The association between time-updated SBP and outcomes was examined using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models. Overall, 42.2% of adults with diabetes mellitus, cardiovascular disease, and hypertension had an SBP ≥140 mm Hg. The association between SBP and cardiovascular disease risk was U shaped, with a nadir ≈130 mm Hg. When the analysis was restricted to those with baseline SBP of 110 to 150 mm Hg, the adjusted association between SBP and cardiovascular disease risk was flat (hazard ratio per 10-mm Hg increase, 0.96; 95% confidence interval, 0.91-1.02). There was no association between SBP and risk of fracture. Above 150 mm Hg, higher SBP was associated with increasing risk of worsening kidney function (hazard ratio per 10-mm Hg increase, 1.10; 95% confidence interval, 1.02-1.18). Many patients with diabetes mellitus have uncontrolled hypertension. The U-shaped association between SBP and cardiovascular disease events was largely driven by those with very high or low SBP, with no difference in cardiovascular disease risk between 110 and 150 mm Hg. Lower SBP was not associated with higher risks of fractures or worsening kidney function.

Integration of recent evidence into management of patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and type 2 diabetes

Cardiovascular outcome trials of antihyperglycaemic drugs and non-statin LDL-cholesterol-lowering drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes who have, or who are at high risk of, atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease have provided new evidence that has substantially affected the management of cardiovascular risk in these patients. On the basis of proven cardiovascular and renal benefit, the antihyperglycaemic drugs empagliflozin, liraglutide, and semaglutide-the latter being under review for approval by the US Food and Drug Administration and the European Medicines Agency-should be preferentially used as second-line treatments in these patient populations, typically in addition to metformin. Further treatment differentiation among the remainder of the antihyperglycaemic drugs should be made on the basis of evidence regarding cardiovascular safety, which is available for lixisenatide, alogliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and insulin glargine. The risk of heart failure, stroke, or retinopathy, or prevalent fasting versus postprandial hyperglycaemia, could also be considered in treatment decision making. Finally, emerging evidence of cardiovascular benefit for ezetimibe, alirocumab, and evolocumab positions these drugs as add-ons to maximally tolerated statin therapy or for those with statin intolerance.