The efficacy of glycemic control with continuous glucose monitoring on atheroma progression: rationale and design of the Observation of Coronary Atheroma Progression under Continuous Glucose Monitoring Guidance in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (OPTIMAL)

Background

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are high-risk subjects who more frequently have micro- and macrovascular diseases including coronary artery disease (CAD). Since impaired glycemic homeostasis directly influences the formation and propagation of atherosclerotic plaques, optimal management of glycemic status is required for the prevention of diabetic atherosclerosis. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides not only average glucose level but also the degree of glucose fluctuation and hypoglycemia. Given the association of glycemic variability with diabetic macrovascular diseases, CGM-based glycemic management could favorably modulate glycemic fluctuation, thereby potentially modifying atheroma burden in T2DM subjects. To test this hypothesis, the Observation of Coronary Atheroma Progression under Continuous Glucose Monitoring Guidance in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (OPTIMAL) study has been designed (Japan Registry of Clinical Trials: jRCT1052180152, University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry UMIN000036721).

Methods

The OPTIMAL is a single-center, randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of CGM-based glycemic control on atheroma progression in T2DM patients with CAD by using serial intravascular ultrasound (IVUS) and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) imaging. A total of 90 eligible subjects will be randomized 1:1 into two groups to receive either CGM-based glycemic control or HbA1c-baded glycemic management. Coronary angiography and NIRS/IVUS imaging is repeated at the end of the assigned treatment period.

Results

The primary endpoint is the normalized absolute change in total atheroma volume (TAV) from baseline to 12 months. The secondary endpoints include (I) the absolute change in percent atheroma volume, (II) the percent change in lipid core burden index, (III) the change in coefficient variance measured by CGM, (IV) the change in atherogenic markers (high-density lipoprotein functionality, proprotein convertase subxilisin/kexin type 9 and fatty-acid binding proteins), and (V) the frequency of hypoglycemia. Safety will also be evaluated.

Conclusions

The collaboration of CGM use with serial NIRS/IVUS imaging will enable to compare atheroma progression rate under CGM-based glycemic management and HbA1c-based approach.