Correction to: Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

The affiliation details for Geltrude Mingrone are corrected below.

Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the prior position statements, published in 2012 and 2015, on the management of type 2 diabetes in adults. A systematic evaluation of the literature since 2014 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on lifestyle management and diabetes self-management education and support. For those with obesity, efforts targeting weight loss, including lifestyle, medication and surgical interventions, are recommended. With regards to medication management, for patients with clinical cardiovascular disease, a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor or a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist with proven cardiovascular benefit is recommended. For patients with chronic kidney disease or clinical heart failure and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, an SGLT2 inhibitor with proven benefit is recommended. GLP-1 receptor agonists are generally recommended as the first injectable medication.

Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2018. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD).

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the prior position statements, published in 2012 and 2015, on the management of type 2 diabetes in adults. A systematic evaluation of the literature since 2014 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on lifestyle management and diabetes self-management education and support. For those with obesity, efforts targeting weight loss, including lifestyle, medication, and surgical interventions, are recommended. With regards to medication management, for patients with clinical cardiovascular disease, a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor or a glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist with proven cardiovascular benefit is recommended. For patients with chronic kidney disease or clinical heart failure and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, an SGLT2 inhibitor with proven benefit is recommended. GLP-1 receptor agonists are generally recommended as the first injectable medication.

The National Diabetes Education Program at 20 Years: Lessons Learned and Plans for the Future.

The National Diabetes Education Program (NDEP) was established to translate findings from diabetes research studies into clinical and public health practice. Over 20 years, NDEP has built a program with partnership engagement that includes science-based resources for multiple population and stakeholder audiences. Throughout its history, NDEP has developed strategies and messages based on communication research and relied on established behavior change models from health education, communication, and social marketing. The program's success in continuing to engage diverse partners after 20 years has led to time-proven and high-quality resources that have been sustained. Today, NDEP maintains a national repository of diabetes education tools and resources that are high quality, science- and audience-based, culturally and linguistically appropriate, and available free of charge to a wide variety of audiences. This review looks back and describes NDEP's evolution in transforming and communicating diabetes management and type 2 diabetes prevention strategies through partnerships, campaigns, educational resources, and tools and identifies future opportunities and plans.

Intensive glycemic control in younger and older U.S. adults with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To determine the extent to which older vs. younger adults with diabetes intensively control glycemia. METHODS: Participants were age≥40years who self-reported a physician diagnosis of diabetes in the 2009-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (N=1554). Intensive glycemic control was defined as A1c<7.0% and taking insulin, sulfonylureas, or ≥2 glycemic medications. Logistic regression was used to determine the adjusted odds of intensive control in older (≥65years) vs. younger adults (age 40-64years). RESULTS: The prevalence of intensive control was greater for older (33.4%) vs. younger (21.3%) adults (p<0.001). In logistic regression, intensive control was significantly higher in older vs. younger adults after fully adjusting for sociodemographics, diabetes duration, comorbidities, disability, use of multiple medications, and depression (OR=1.72, 1.09-2.69). The multivariable adjusted prevalence of intensive control was 40% higher in adults ≥75years (35.6%) compared to adults 40-49years (21.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Older adults are being treated more aggressively than younger adults to achieve A1c<7.0% despite the presence of comorbidities, duration of diabetes, disability, and depression. Glycemic guidelines for individualized therapy are not being widely followed.

NIH Precision Medicine Initiative: Implications for Diabetes Research.

In his January 2015 State of the Union address, President Barack Obama announced a new Precision Medicine Initiative (PMI) to personalize approaches toward improving health and treating disease (www.whitehouse.gov/precision-medicine). He stated that the goal of such an initiative was "to bring us closer to curing diseases like cancer and diabetes, and to give all of us access to the personalized information we need to keep ourselves and our families healthier." Since that time, the National Institutes of Health (NIH) has taken a leadership role in implementing the President's vision related to biomedical research (www.nih.gov/precisionmedicine). Here, we discuss the NIH component of the PMI, related ongoing diabetes research, and near-term research that could position the diabetes field to take full advantage of the opportunities that stem from the PMI.

Type 1 Diabetes--Reaping the Rewards of a Targeted Research Investment.

The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) precipitated a major research effort to develop new approaches to achieve near-normal glycemic control in real-world settings in people with type 1 diabetes. Toward that end, a unique funding stream from the U.S. Congress-the Special Statutory Funding Program for Type 1 Diabetes Research-has provided nearly $2.5 billion for research into the prevention, cure, and treatment of type 1 diabetes since 1998. This funding generated a targeted, sustained investment in type 1 diabetes research with six specific goals: identifying new therapeutic targets through the understanding of disease etiology and pathogenesis, preventing or reversing the disease, developing cell replacement therapy, improving management and care, preventing or reducing the complications, and attracting new talent and applying new technologies to type 1 diabetes research. This Perspective describes exciting results that have emerged from the investment and further advances on the horizon, including artificial pancreas technologies, new therapies for diabetic retinopathy, and breakthroughs in laboratory production of ß-cells. The recent program extension enables us to build on this foundation and pursue key new initiatives to harness emerging technologies and develop the next generation of type 1 diabetes researchers.

Update on Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Light of Recent Evidence: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association.

Cardiovascular disease risk factor control as primary prevention in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus has changed substantially in the past few years. The purpose of this scientific statement is to review the current literature and key clinical trials pertaining to blood pressure and blood glucose control, cholesterol management, aspirin therapy, and lifestyle modification. We present a synthesis of the recent literature, new guidelines, and clinical targets, including screening for kidney and subclinical cardiovascular disease for the contemporary management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Update on Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Light of Recent Evidence: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association and the American Diabetes Association.

Cardiovascular disease risk factor control as primary prevention in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus has changed substantially in the past few years. The purpose of this scientific statement is to review the current literature and key clinical trials pertaining to blood pressure and blood glucose control, cholesterol management, aspirin therapy, and lifestyle modification. We present a synthesis of the recent literature, new guidelines, and clinical targets, including screening for kidney and subclinical cardiovascular disease for the contemporary management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Associations between trends in race/ethnicity, aging, and body mass index with diabetes prevalence in the United States: a series of cross-sectional studies.

BACKGROUND: The increase in the prevalence of diabetes over the past few decades has coincided with an increase in certain risk factors for diabetes, such as a changing race/ethnicity distribution, an aging population, and a rising obesity prevalence. OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which the increase in diabetes prevalence is explained by changing distributions of race/ethnicity, age, and obesity prevalence in U.S. adults. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, using data from 5 NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys): NHANES II (1976-1980), NHANES III (1988-1994), and the continuous NHANES 1999-2002, 2003-2006, and 2007-2010. SETTING: Nationally representative samples of the U.S. noninstitutionalized civilian population. PATIENTS: 23 932 participants aged 20 to 74 years. MEASUREMENTS: Diabetes was defined as a self-reported diagnosis or fasting plasma glucose level of 7.0 mmol/L (126 mg/dL) or more. RESULTS: Between 1976 to 1980 and 2007 to 2010, diabetes prevalence increased from 4.7% to 11.2% in men and from 5.7% to 8.7% in women (P for trends for both groups < 0.001). After adjustment for age, race/ethnicity, and body mass index, diabetes prevalence increased in men (6.2% to 9.6%; P for trend < 0.001) but not women (7.6% to 7.5%; P for trend = 0.69). Body mass index was the greatest contributor among the 3 covariates to the change in prevalence estimates after adjustment. LIMITATION: Some possible risk factors, such as physical activity, waist circumference, and mortality, could not be studied because data on these variables were not collected in all surveys. CONCLUSION: The increase in the prevalence of diabetes was greater in men than in women in the U.S. population between 1976 to 1980 and 2007 to 2010. After changes in age, race/ethnicity, and body mass index were controlled for, the increase in diabetes prevalence over time was approximately halved in men and diabetes prevalence was no longer increased in women. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Utility of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force criteria for diabetes screening.

BACKGROUND: Federal law requires certain private insurers to cover and waive patient cost sharing for preventive medical services that receive a grade of B or better from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). The USPSTF recommends that asymptomatic adults who have a blood pressure (BP) higher than 135/80 mmHg be screened for type 2 diabetes. PURPOSE: The goals of this study were to determine the sensitivity and specificity of the USPSTF screening criteria and to determine the prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors and comorbidity among undiagnosed individuals by USPSTF criteria. METHODS: Data come from 7189 adults who participated in the 2003-2010 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; statistical analysis was conducted in 2011-2012. Participants with fasting plasma glucose ≥126 mg/dL or hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥6.5% who did not self-report a diagnosis of diabetes were categorized as having undiagnosed diabetes. RESULTS: Among people without diagnosed diabetes, 4.0% had undiagnosed diabetes. The proportion of adults with undiagnosed diabetes who were identified (sensitivity) using BP >135/80 mmHg as the screening standard was 44.4%; among individuals without undiagnosed diabetes, 74.8% had BP ≤135/80 mmHg (specificity). For those with undiagnosed diabetes, the prevalence of HbA1c 7.0%-<8.0% was 10.6% for those with BP ≤135/80 mmHg and 14.3% for those with BP >135/80 mmHg; and 12.8% and 9.4% for HbA1c ≥8.0%, respectively. Elevated low-density lipoprotein (100-160 mg/dL) was similar by BP cut-point (52%-53%). For those with BP ≤135/80 mmHg, 16.7% had a history of cardiovascular disease and 22.9% had chronic kidney disease. CONCLUSIONS: The USPSTF screening recommendations result in missing more than half of those who have undiagnosed diabetes, and a substantial proportion of these people have increased low-density lipoprotein and other cardiovascular risk factors.

The prevalence of meeting A1C, blood pressure, and LDL goals among people with diabetes, 1988-2010.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of people with diabetes who meet hemoglobin A1c (A1C), blood pressure (BP), and LDL cholesterol (ABC) recommendations and their current statin use, factors associated with goal achievement, and changes in the proportion achieving goals between 1988 and 2010. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Data were cross-sectional from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (NHANES) from 1988-1994, 1999-2002, 2003-2006, and 2007-2010. Participants were 4,926 adults aged ≥ 20 years who self-reported a previous diagnosis of diabetes and completed the household interview and physical examination (n = 1,558 for valid LDL levels). Main outcome measures were A1C, BP, and LDL cholesterol, in accordance with the American Diabetes Association recommendations, and current use of statins. RESULTS: In 2007-2010, 52.5% of people with diabetes achieved A1C <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol), 51.1% achieved BP <130/80 mmHg, 56.2% achieved LDL <100 mg/dL, and 18.8% achieved all three ABCs. These levels of control were significant improvements from 1988 to 1994 (all P < 0.05). Statin use significantly increased between 1988-1994 (4.2%) and 2007-2010 (51.4%, P < 0.01). Compared with non-Hispanic whites, Mexican Americans were less likely to meet A1C and LDL goals (P < 0.03), and non-Hispanic blacks were less likely to meet BP and LDL goals (P < 0.02). Compared with non-Hispanic blacks, Mexican Americans were less likely to meet A1C goals (P < 0.01). Younger individuals were less likely to meet A1C and LDL goals. CONCLUSIONS: Despite significant improvement during the past decade, achieving the ABC goals remains suboptimal among adults with diabetes, particularly in some minority groups. Substantial opportunity exists to further improve diabetes control and, thus, to reduce diabetes-related morbidity and mortality.