A practice-based research network focused on comparative effectiveness research in type 2 diabetes management.

PURPOSE: To establish a real-world research platform focused on comparative effectiveness research and health care decision making in diabetes care in order to obtain a detailed understanding of individualized patient management in primary care. METHODS: Diabetes FORWARD (Foundation of Real-World Assessment and Research in Diabetes) is a North American research platform being organized to conduct longitudinal, noninterventional investigations of an anticipated 10,000 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Recruitment will be stratified to reflect typical (primarily primary care) clinical T2DM populations. Streamlined data collection relying on electronic medical records (retrospective) and periodic surveys (prospective) will reduce the burden of study participation and, therefore, enhance enrollment by busy primary care and endocrinology practices. Physician data will include baseline demographic and practice information. Patient data will include demographics, T2DM characteristics and treatment, resource utilization information, and patient-reported outcomes. Responses can be tracked within the observation window in near-real time, allowing immediate, noninterventional reaction at the point of nonresponse. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: Diabetes FORWARD is expected to provide important real-world data describing how actual clinical T2DM management differs across sites, settings, and clinicians, and its impact on glycemic control, treatment adherence and persistence, and clinical outcomes. These data will also help to identify the effect of diabetes management on the onset and progression of retinopathy, neuropathy, nephropathy, and cardiovascular disease at 6-month intervals. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, Diabetes FORWARD is the first diabetes-focused, practice-based research network in the United States and Canada. The current study will provide robust data that should reflect typical management of T2DM in clinical practice in North America.

Considerations for diabetes: treatment with insulin pen devices.

Insulin is essential for the treatment of type 1 diabetes, and most patients with type 2 diabetes will eventually require insulin for glycemic control. Several barriers contribute to delays in initiating insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes. Furthermore, insulin-treated patients often miss doses or otherwise fail to self-administer their insulin as prescribed, placing themselves at the risk of developing complications. Insulin pens can help overcome barriers to initiating insulin therapy and can facilitate the self-management of diabetes. Compared with the vial and syringe, insulin pens are more accurate, associated with greater adherence, and preferred by patients because of their convenience and ease of use. Large database analyses suggest that insulin pens may reduce the rate of occurrence of hypoglycemic events in patients with type 2 diabetes. Despite higher costs of insulin pens vs vials and syringes, studies suggest little or no increase in total health care costs and decreases in diabetes-related costs associated with reduced health care utilization with pens. Interestingly, the use of insulin pens within the United States lags far behind the use of pens in Europe and Japan. Insulin pens may be disposable or refillable, and some pens have special features [eg, audible clicks, large-dose selector and dial, memory function, half-unit dosing, high dosing (ie, 80 U)] that offer the opportunity to individualize treatment by meeting patients' needs. This review compares available insulin pens, describes strategies to facilitate their usage, and discusses how insulin pens can improve self-management of diabetes while reducing cost.

Efficacy and safety of exenatide once weekly versus metformin, pioglitazone, and sitagliptin used as monotherapy in drug-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (DURATION-4): a 26-week double-blind study.

OBJECTIVE: To test the safety and efficacy of exenatide once weekly (EQW) compared with metformin (MET), pioglitazone (PIO), and sitagliptin (SITA) over 26 weeks, in suboptimally treated (diet and exercise) drug-naive patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to subcutaneous (SC) EQW 2.0 mg + oral placebo (n = 248), MET 2,000 mg/day + SC placebo (n = 246), PIO 45 mg/day + SC placebo (n = 163), or SITA 100 mg/day + SC placebo (n = 163) for 26 weeks. MET and PIO therapies were increased to maximum-tolerated dosages. Injections with EQW or placebo were administered weekly, while oral medication or placebo was administered daily. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were as follows: 59% men, 67% Caucasian, mean age 54 years, HbA(1c) 8.5%, fasting serum glucose 9.9 mmol/L, body weight 87.0 kg, and diabetes duration 2.7 years. HbA(1c) reductions (%) at 26 weeks (least-squares means) with EQW versus MET, PIO, and SITA were -1.53 vs. -1.48 (P = 0.620), -1.63 (P = 0.328), and -1.15 (P < 0.001), respectively. Weight changes (kg) were -2.0 vs. -2.0 (P = 0.892), +1.5 (P < 0.001), and -0.8 (P < 0.001), respectively. Common adverse events were as follows: EQW, nausea (11.3%) and diarrhea (10.9%); MET, diarrhea (12.6%) and headache (12.2%); PIO, nasopharyngitis (8.6%) and headache (8.0%); and SIT, nasopharyngitis (9.8%) and headache (9.2%). Minor (confirmed) hypoglycemia was rarely reported. No major hypoglycemia occurred. CONCLUSIONS: EQW was noninferior to MET but not PIO and superior to SITA with regard to HbA(1c) reduction at 26 weeks. Of the agents studied, EQW and MET provided similar improvements in glycemic control along with the benefit of weight reduction and no increased risk of hypoglycemia.

Improving blood pressure control in individuals with diabetes: a quality improvement collaborative.

BACKGROUND: Studies show that it is difficult to achieve blood pressure (BP) targets among people with diabetes. Methods to improve BP control are needed. A quality improvement (QI) collaborative was established to improve systolic BP (SBP) control in persons with diabetes. METHODS: A longitudinal study with a three-phase QI collaborative as the intervention was conducted with 51 primary care practices within 12 health care organizations in the United States. Baseline, 6-, and 12-month posteducation performance data were collected. Phase 1 began in October 2006, and all sites completed all three phases by June 2008. Sites participated on four collaborative conference calls to discuss shared data and individual site activities, as well as on monthly calls with their project consultant. Some 624 staff participated in interactive education programs, and data were collected on 11,510 patients with diabetes. FINDINGS: All site champions stated that the collaborative supported process changes and engaged stakeholders and patients, focused staff on accurate BP measurement and treatment options, and served to identify and address gaps in outcomes. Mean SBP significantly improved from baseline (130.4 mmHg) to 6 months (127.4 mmHg; p < .001) and to 12 months (128.6 mmHg; p < .001). The proportion of patients with SBP < 130 mmHg increased from baseline (47.3%) to 6 months (56.4%; p < .001) and to 12 months (53.1%; p < .001). The proportion of patients with BP < 130/80 mmHg increased from baseline (36.8%) to 6 months (45.1%; p < .001) and to 12 months (42.2%; p < .001) CONCLUSIONS: A QI collaborative that provides focus, structure, and strategies to help health care organizations customize and standardize processes related to BP management can improve BP control in patients with diabetes.

Type 2 diabetes care and insulin intensification: is a more multidisciplinary approach needed? Results from the MODIFY survey.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the opinions of primary care physicians (PCPs) and diabetes specialists on their perceived role in tackling type 2 diabetes (T2D) and the challenges they face, particularly regarding insulin intensification. METHODS: Six hundred physicians from Germany, Japan, Spain, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and the United States were recruited to complete an online survey. Screening criteria included T2D patients seen per week (Europe/Japan: all ≥ 2; United States: PCPs ≥ 5; specialists ≥ 10) and years in practice (3-30 years). RESULTS: Most physicians had seen an increase in TD2 patients in the past 5 years, and almost all agreed that the burden of diabetes is increasing. Notable proportions of PCPs never initiate/modify insulin and never/rarely intensify insulin. Main barriers to insulin intensification cited were lack of experience and lack of time to educate patients. Better collaboration between primary and secondary care was considered one of the most important factors in improving insulin treatment of T2D. CONCLUSIONS: PCPs are less involved in the initiation and intensification of insulin than specialists; however, all physicians appreciate the need for increased PCP involvement. A multidisciplinary approach that includes using the skills of diabetes educators will assist physicians in improving management of T2D.

Continuous glucose monitoring reveals different glycemic responses of moderate- vs high-carbohydrate lunch meals in people with type 2 diabetes.

This single-center, meal-intervention, crossover study was conducted to determine the glycemic response to fixed meals with varying carbohydrate content. Continuous glucose monitoring was used to document the glycemic response. Participants were 14 people with type 2 diabetes on metformin only. On 4 consecutive days in March or July 2008, study participants consumed a fixed breakfast and one of two test meals (lunch) provided in random order. The two lunch types varied only in carbohydrate content; the protein, fat, fiber, and glycemic index were similar. They consumed no caloric food or beverages for 4 hours after each meal. Consuming double the carbohydrate content did not double the glycemic response variables, yet most were substantially different in glucose value (mg/dL) or minutes. General linear model analyses revealed substantial differences for peak glucose, change from baseline glucose to peak, time to return to preprandial glucose, 4-hour glucose area under the curve, and 4-hour mean glucose. Continuous glucose monitoring data provided a robust description of the glycemic response to the two meals. Such data can help improve postprandial glucose levels through more informed nutrition recommendations and synchronization of food intake, diabetes medication, and/or physical activity.

Effects of exenatide combined with lifestyle modification in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a lifestyle modification program plus exenatide versus lifestyle modification program plus placebo on weight loss in overweight or obese participants with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin and/or sulfonylurea. METHODS: In this 24-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 194 patients participated in a lifestyle modification program, consisting of goals of 600 kcal/day deficit and physical activity of at least 2.5 hours/week. Participants were randomized to 5 microg exenatide twice daily injection + lifestyle modification program (n = 96) or placebo + lifestyle modification program (n = 98), and after 4 weeks increased their exenatide dose to 10 microg twice daily or volume equivalent of placebo. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics: (mean +/- standard deviation) age, 54.8 +/- 9.5 years; weight, 95.5 +/- 16.0 kg; hemoglobin A(1c), 7.6 +/- 0.8%. At 24 weeks (least squares mean +/- standard error), treatments showed similar decreases in caloric intake (-378 +/- 58 vs -295 +/- 58 kcal/day, exenatide + lifestyle modification program vs placebo + lifestyle modification program, P = .27) and increases in exercise-derived energy expenditure. Exenatide + lifestyle modification program showed greater change in weight (-6.16 +/- 0.54 kg vs -3.97 +/- 0.52 kg, P = .003), hemoglobin A(1c) (-1.21 +/- 0.09% vs -0.73 +/- 0.09%, P <.0001), systolic (-9.44 +/- 1.40 vs -1.97 +/- 1.40 mm Hg, P <.001) and diastolic blood pressure (-2.22 +/- 1.00 vs 0.47 +/- 0.99 mm Hg, P = .04). Nausea was reported more for exenatide + lifestyle modification program than placebo + lifestyle modification program (44.8% vs 19.4%, respectively, P <.001), with no difference in withdrawal rates due to adverse events (4.2% vs 5.1%, respectively, P = 1.0) or rates of hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: When combined with lifestyle modification, exenatide treatment led to significant weight loss, improved glycemic control, and decreased blood pressure compared with lifestyle modification alone in overweight or obese participants with type 2 diabetes on metformin and/or sulfonylurea treatment.

The effects of baseline characteristics, glycaemia treatment approach, and glycated haemoglobin concentration on the risk of severe hypoglycaemia: post hoc epidemiological analysis of the ACCORD study.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate potential determinants of severe hypoglycaemia, including baseline characteristics, in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial and the association of severe hypoglycaemia with levels of glycated haemoglobin (haemoglobin A(1C)) achieved during therapy. DESIGN: Post hoc epidemiological analysis of a double 2x2 factorial, randomised, controlled trial. SETTING: Diabetes clinics, research clinics, and primary care clinics. PARTICIPANTS: 10 209 of the 10 251 participants enrolled in the ACCORD study with type 2 diabetes, a haemoglobin A(1C) concentration of 7.5% or more during screening, and aged 40-79 years with established cardiovascular disease or 55-79 years with evidence of significant atherosclerosis, albuminuria, left ventricular hypertrophy, or two or more additional risk factors for cardiovascular disease (dyslipidaemia, hypertension, current smoker, or obese). Interventions Intensive (haemoglobin A(1C) <6.0%) or standard (haemoglobin A(1C) 7.0-7.9%) glucose control. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Severe hypoglycaemia was defined as episodes of "low blood glucose" requiring the assistance of another person and documentation of either a plasma glucose less than 2.8 mmol/l (<50 mg/dl) or symptoms that promptly resolved with oral carbohydrate, intravenous glucose, or glucagon. RESULTS: The annual incidence of hypoglycaemia was 3.14% in the intensive treatment group and 1.03% in the standard glycaemia group. We found significantly increased risks for hypoglycaemia among women (P=0.0300), African-Americans (P<0.0001 compared with non-Hispanic whites), those with less than a high school education (P<0.0500 compared with college graduates), aged participants (P<0.0001 per 1 year increase), and those who used insulin at trial entry (P<0.0001). For every 1% unit decline in the haemoglobin A(1C) concentration from baseline to 4 month visit, there was a 28% (95% CI 19% to 37%) and 14% (4% to 23%) reduced risk of hypoglycaemia requiring medical assistance in the standard and intensive groups, respectively. In both treatment groups, the risk of hypoglycaemia requiring medical assistance increased with each 1% unit increment in the average updated haemoglobin A(1C) concentration (standard arm: hazard ratio 1.76, 95% CI 1.50 to 2.06; intensive arm: hazard ratio 1.15, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.21). CONCLUSIONS: A greater drop in haemoglobin A(1C) concentration from baseline to the 4 month visit was not associated with an increased risk for hypoglycaemia. Patients with poorer glycaemic control had a greater risk of hypoglycaemia, irrespective of treatment group. Identification of baseline subgroups with increased risk for severe hypoglycaemia can provide guidance to clinicians attempting to modify patient therapy on the basis of individual risk. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT00000620.

Clinical application of incretin-based therapy: therapeutic potential, patient selection and clinical use.

Incretin-based therapies address the progressive nature of type 2 diabetes mellitus, not only by addressing glucose control but also with weight-neutral (i.e., dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors sitagliptin and vildagliptin) and weight-reducing effects (i.e., glucagonlike peptide-1 [GLP-1] receptor agonists exenatide and liraglutide). Preclinical data suggest that incretin-based therapies may also preserve beta-cell function, holding promise of a truly disease-modifying therapy. This article examines clinical trial data and accepted algorithms with a view toward elucidating the application of these agents in routine clinical practice. We propose a systematic approach to treatment, addressing (1) patient selection, (2) optimal treatment combinations, and (3) timing and guidance for both initiation and intensification of therapy. The GLP-1 receptor agonists, for example, could be particularly beneficial in patients whose weight significantly increases cardiovascular risk. Early use of these agents may be effective in preventing diabetes in those at risk, or in halting or retarding disease progression in patients with frank diabetes. Additional clinical investigation will be required to test such hypotheses. Given the ever-increasing incidence of diabetes worldwide, the link between obesity and the development of type 2 diabetes, and the need for more effective, weight-focused, convenient and sustainable treatments, the data from such studies will be invaluable to further clarify the role of the incretins in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes.

Clinical application of incretin-based therapy: therapeutic potential, patient selection and clinical use.

Incretin-based therapies address the progressive nature of type 2 diabetes mellitus, not only by addressing glucose control but also with weight-neutral (i.e., dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors sitagliptin and vildagliptin) and weight-reducing effects (i.e., glucagonlike peptide-1 [GLP-1] receptor agonists exenatide and liraglutide). Preclinical data suggest that incretin-based therapies may also preserve beta-cell function, holding promise of a truly disease-modifying therapy. This article examines clinical trial data and accepted algorithms with a view toward elucidating the application of these agents in routine clinical practice. We propose a systematic approach to treatment, addressing (1) patient selection, (2) optimal treatment combinations, and (3) timing and guidance for both initiation and intensification of therapy. The GLP-1 receptor agonists, for example, could be particularly beneficial in patients whose weight significantly increases cardiovascular risk. Early use of these agents may be effective in preventing diabetes in those at risk, or in halting or retarding disease progression in patients with frank diabetes. Additional clinical investigation will be required to test such hypotheses. Given the ever-increasing incidence of diabetes worldwide, the link between obesity and the development of type 2 diabetes, and the need for more effective, weight-focused, convenient and sustainable treatments, the data from such studies will be invaluable to further clarify the role of the incretins in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes.

Women with diabetes have poorer control of blood pressure than men.

OBJECTIVE: Diabetes is associated with a higher coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality in women compared with men. Less aggressive control of the CHD risk factors in women can contribute to this excess mortality. Because hypertension has a high prevalence in subjects with diabetes, we compared the control of this risk factor between men and women. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study comparing blood pressure levels and trends over a 1-year period between men and women with diabetes receiving primary care. Using a chronic disease registry database, subjects with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, aged >or=18, were identified for inclusion. Mean weighted systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) were calculated for subjects with multiple longitudinal readings. Subjects were classified into four blood pressure control categories based on the mean weighted blood pressure. Comparisons were made between men and women before and after controlling for baseline characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 3181 subjects (46% women) were included in the study. More women than men were in the moderate and severely elevated blood pressure categories (40% and 6% compared with 32% and 5%, respectively, p<0.001). The unadjusted mean SBP was 3 mm Hg higher in women (139 mm Hg in women compared with 136 in men, p<0.001). These differences remained significant after controlling for baseline variables. CONCLUSIONS: In subjects with diabetes receiving medical care, women had poorer control of blood pressure and a significantly higher mean SBP compared with men. These findings might partially explain the excess CHD mortality in women with diabetes.

Predictors of blood pressure control in patients with diabetes and hypertension seen in primary care clinics.

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure (BP) is not well controlled in the majority of patients with both diabetes and hypertension. This study was designed to identify predictors of BP control in patients with both diabetes and hypertension who are seen in primary care clinics. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted by identifying a cohort of patients diagnosed with diabetes before January 1, 2000 (inception) who met predefined criteria for hypertension at inception and who received primary care in the ensuing 3-year study period (January 1, 2000, to February 31, 2002). Using the mean of all BP values between January 1, 2002, and December 31, 2002, subjects were divided into two groups: those with controlled BP and those with uncontrolled BP. The distribution of clinical predictors was compared between the two groups. Independent predictors were identified using multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Predictors of poor BP control were as follows: 1) isolated systolic hypertension at inception (OR= 0.62, CI = 0.47 to 0.82); 2) uncontrolled BP at inception (OR = 0.71, CI = 0.55 to 0.93); 3) use of oral hypoglycemic drugs versus diet and exercise alone or insulin use (OR = 0.73, CI = 0.56 to 0.95); 4) use of three or more antihypertensive drugs (OR = 0.74, CI = 0.56 to 0.97); and 5) older age (OR = 0.98, CI = 0.97 to 0.99). Predictors of better control were 1) use of nitrates (OR = 1.82, CI = 1.26 to 2.64); 2) history of coronary heart disease (OR = 1.47, CI = 1.08 to 2.00); and 3) at least one annual visit to subspecialist physician (OR = 1.43, CI = 1.09 to 1.88). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with both diabetes and hypertension who are older, have isolated systolic hypertension, use oral hypoglycemic drugs, or use three or more antihypertensive drugs should be targeted for better BP control. The roles of nitrate medication and subspecialist physicians in achieving better BP control needs further study.