Favorable effects of insulin sensitizers pertinent to peripheral arterial disease in type 2 diabetes: results from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) trial

Factor affecting severe atherothrombotic cerebral infarction in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: Large-scale claim database analysis of Japan

AIMS

This study aimed to investigate the factors associated with the exacerbation of the severity of atherothrombotic brain infarction at discharge in patients with type 2 diabetes using a large-scale claims database.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study utilized the Medical Data Vision administrative claims database, a nationwide database in Japan using acute care hospital data, and the Diagnosis Procedure Combination system. Diagnosis Procedure Combination data collected between April 1, 2008, and December 31, 2022, were extracted. Patients with type 2 diabetes were included. Severe atherothrombotic brain infarction was defined as a modified Rankin scale score of ≥3.

RESULTS

Severe atherothrombotic brain infarction occurred in 43,916/99,864 (44.0%) patients with type 2 diabetes. The odds ratio for severe atherothrombotic brain infarction increased significantly per 10 year increments in age (odds ratio: 1.69, 95% confidence interval: 1.66-1.71). A body mass index of <25 kg/m2, with a body mass index of ≥25 kg/m2 as reference, also increased the risk for severe atherothrombotic brain infarction (odds ratio: 1.11, 95% confidence interval: 1.08-1.15). The odds ratios in insulin and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor use were significantly higher than 1. In particular, statin use (odds ratio: 0.85, 95% confidence interval: 0.83-0.88), fibrate use (odds ratio: 0.68, 95% confidence interval: 0.59-0.78), aspirin use (odds ratio: 0.78, 95% confidence interval: 0.75-0.80), and P2Y12 inhibitor use (odds ratio: 0.88, 95% confidence interval: 0.85-0.91) were associated with a lower odds ratio for severe atherothrombotic brain infarction.

CONCLUSIONS

The active management of lipid levels using statins and fibrates may be beneficial in preventing the exacerbation of atherothrombotic brain infarction in type 2 diabetes patients.

Contemporary Medical Management of Peripheral Arterial Disease

PURPOSE

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is characterized by atherosclerotic arterial occlusive disease of the lower extremities and is associated with an increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in addition to disabling clinical sequelae, including intermittent claudication and chronic limb-threatening ischemia (CLTI). Given the growing burden of disease, knowledge of modern practices to prevent MACE and major adverse limb events (MALE) is essential. This review article examines evidence for medical management of PAD and its associated risk factors, as well as wound prevention and care.

METHODS

A thorough review of the literature was performed, with attention to evidence for the management of modifiable atherosclerotic risk factors, claudication symptoms, wound prevention, and wound care.

RESULTS

Contemporary management of PAD requires a multi-faceted approach to care, with medical optimization of smoking, hypertension, hyperlipidemia, and diabetes mellitus. The use of supervised exercise therapy for intermittent claudication is highlighted. The anatomic disease patterns of smoking and diabetes mellitus are discussed further, and best practices for diabetic foot ulcer prevention, including offloading footwear, are described. Quality wound care is essential in this patient population and involves strategic use of debridement, wound-healing adjuncts, and skin substitutes, when appropriate.

CONCLUSION

The objective of medical management of PAD is to reduce the risk of MACE and MALE. Atherosclerotic risk factor optimization, appropriate wound care, and management of diabetic foot ulcers, foot infections, gangrene, and chronic, non-healing wounds are critical components of PAD care. Interdisciplinary care is essential to coordinate care, leverage expertise, and improve outcomes.

Lower-limb peripheral arterial disease and amputations in people with diabetes: Risk factors, prognostic value and management

Lower-limb peripheral arterial disease (PAD), is a common manifestation of systemic atherosclerosis, resulting from a partial or complete obstruction of at least one lower-limb arteries. PAD is a major endemic disease with an excess risk of major cardiovascular events and death. It also leads to disability, high rates of lower-limb adverse events and non-traumatic amputation. In patients with diabetes, PAD is particularly frequent and has a worse prognosis than in patients without diabetes. The risk factors of PAD are comparable to those for cardiovascular disease. The ankle-brachial index is usually recommended to screen PAD despite its limited performance in patients with diabetes, affected by the presence of peripheral neuropathy, medial arterial calcification, incompressible arteries and infection. Toe brachial index and toe pressure emerge as alternative screening tools. The management of PAD requires strict control of cardiovascular risk factors including diabetes, hypertension and dyslipidaemia, the use of antiplatelet agents and lifestyle management, to reduce cardiovascular adverse events, but few randomized controlled trials have evaluated the benefits of these treatments in PAD. Several advances have been achieved in endovascular and surgical revascularization procedures, with obvious improvement in PAD prognosis. Further studies are required to increase our understanding of the pathophysiology of PAD and to evaluate the interest of different therapeutic strategies in the occurrence and progression of PAD in patients with diabetes. Here, we present a narrative and contemporary review to synthesize the key epidemiology findings, screening and diagnosis methods, and major therapeutic advances regarding PAD in patients with diabetes.

Diabetic foot ulcer: Challenges and future

Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) have become one of the important causes of mortality and morbidity in patients with diabetes, and they are also a common cause of hospitalization, which places a heavy burden on patients and society. The prevention and treatment of DFUs requires multidisciplinary management. By controlling various risk factors, such as blood glucose levels, blood pressure, lipid levels and smoking cessation, local management of DFUs should be strengthened, such as debridement, dressing, revascularization, stem cell decompression and oxygen therapy. If necessary, systemic anti-infection treatment should be administered. We reviewed the progress in the clinical practice of treating DFUs in recent years, such as revascularization, wound repair, offloading, stem cell transplantation, and anti-infection treatment. We also summarized and prospectively analyzed some new technologies and measurements used in the treatment of DFUs and noted the future challenges and directions for the development of DFU treatments.

Transmetatarsal amputations in patients with diabetes mellitus: A contemporary analysis from an academic tertiary referral centre in a developing community

Transmetatarsal amputation (TMA) involves the surgical removal of the distal portion of metatarsals in the foot. It aims to maintain weight-bearing and independent ambulation while eliminating the risk of spreading soft tissue infection or gangrene. This study aimed to explore the risk factors and surgical outcomes of TMA in patients with diabetes at an academic tertiary referral center in Jordan. Medical records of all patients with diabetes mellitus who underwent TMA at King Abdullah University Hospital, Jordan, between January 2017 and January 2019 were retrieved. Patient characteristics along with clinical and laboratory findings were analyzed retrospectively. Pearson’s chi-square test of association, Student’s t-test, and multivariate regression analysis were used to identify and assess the relationships between patient findings and TMA outcome. The study cohort comprised 81 patients with diabetes who underwent TMA. Of these, 41 (50.6%) patients achieved complete healing. Most of the patients were insulin-dependent (85.2%). Approximately half of the patients (45.7%) had severe ankle-brachial index (ABI). Thirty patients (37.1%) had previous revascularization attempts. The presence of peripheral arterial disease (P<0.05) exclusively predicted poor outcomes among the associated comorbidities. Indications for TMA included infection, ischemia, or both. The presence of severe ABI (≤0.4, P<0.01) and a previous revascularization attempt (P<0.05) were associated with unfavorable outcomes of TMA. Multivariate analysis that included all demographic, clinical, and laboratory variables in the model revealed that insulin-dependent diabetes, low albumin level (< 33 g/L), high C-reactive protein level (> 150 mg/L), and low score of Laboratory Risk Indicator for Necrotizing Fasciitis (LRINEC, <6) were the main factors associated with poor TMA outcomes. TMA is an effective technique for the management of diabetic foot infection or ischemic necrosis. However, attention should be paid to certain important factors such as insulin dependence, serum albumin level, and LRINEC score, which may influence the patient’s outcome.

Major adverse limb events in type 2 diabetes patients receiving glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists versus sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors: A retrospective multi-institutional study

AIMS

To compare the risk of incident major adverse limb events (MALEs) between patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) who initiated glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 Inhibitors (SGLT2Is).

METHODS

T2DM patients with prescriptions of GLP-1 RAs or SGLT2Is between January 1, 2016 and December 31, 2018 were retrospectively identified from a multi-institutional database. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to balance covariates, and compared MALEs between GLP-1 RAs and SGLT2Is initiators using Fine and Gray subdistribution hazard model.

RESULTS

There were 3,087 patients in the GLP-1 RAs group and 19,101 patients in the SGLT2Is group. After IPTW adjustment, the mean ages were 59.0 and 58.8 years, mean durations of diabetes were 6.4 years and 6.1 years, and 25.4% and 28.4% of the patients had cardiovascular disease, respectively. Lower extremity arterial disease was uncommon in both groups (2%). Those who initiated GLP-1 RAs treatment were associated with reduced rate of MALEs (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [HR] 0.62, 95% confidence interval 0.46-0.83).

CONCLUSIONS

T2DM patients who received GLP-1 RAs treatment were associated with lower risk of MALEs compared to those who received SGLT2Is treatment.

Effects of lipid-lowering therapy on major adverse limb events in patients with peripheral arterial disease: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

OBJECTIVE

Patients with peripheral artery disease (PAD) are at increased risk of major adverse limb events (MALE). Furthermore, MALE have several clinical implications and a poor prognosis, so prevention is a fundamental issue. The main objective of the present meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials is to evaluate the effect of different lipid-lowering therapies on MALE incidence in patients with PAD.

METHODS

A meta-analysis of randomized studies that evaluated the use of lipid-lowering therapy in patients with PAD and reported MALE was performed, after searching the PubMed/MEDLINE, Embase, ScieLO, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Controlled Trials databases. A fixed- or random-effects model was used.

RESULTS

Five randomized clinical trials including 11,603 patients were identified and considered eligible for the analyses (5903 subjects were allocated to receive lipid-lowering therapy, while 5700 subjects were allocated to the respective placebo/control arms). The present meta-analysis revealed that lipid-lowering therapy was associated with a lower incidence of MALE (OR: 0.76, 95% confidence interval: 0.66-0.87; I2: 28%) compared to placebo/control groups. The sensitivity analysis shows that the results are robust.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that the use of lipid-lowering therapy compared with the placebo/control arms was associated with a marked reduction in the risk of MALE. Physicians involved in the monitoring and treatment of patients with PAD must work hard to ensure adequate lipid-lowering medication in these patients.

Lower extremity artery disease in patients with type 2 diabetes

Among all peripheral arterial diseases, lower extremity arterial disease is a serious condition in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus, associated with important disability, cardiovascular risk, and socio-economic burden. Patients with both conditions generally display poorer prognosis of affected limbs compared with non-diabetic subjects, leading to increased rates of adverse limb events including amputations. Nonetheless, awareness on lower extremity arterial disease remains somehow suboptimal in the diabetic population, partly related to an atypical clinical presentation in several cases. A regular and appropriate screening for lower extremity arterial disease in patients suffering from type 2 diabetes mellitus is therefore recommended. Affected subjects should receive optimal medical treatment including careful management of the different cardiovascular risk factors through a healthy lifestyle, a regular and structured physical activity, the administration of lipid-lowering, antidiabetic drugs, and (when indicated) antihypertensive and antithrombotic drugs. This review aims to outline current evidence about lower extremity arterial disease in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, in order to elucidate its epidemiology, pathophysiology, screening and diagnosis, and management options.

Effects of basal insulin glargine and omega-3 on lower limb arterial disease outcome in patients with dysglycaemia: An analysis of the Outcome Reduction with an Initial Glargine INtervention (ORIGIN) trial

The impact of insulin or omega-3 supplements on the incidence and progression of peripheral artery disease (PAD) in patients with dysglycaemia has not been well studied. The Outcome Reduction with an Initial Glargine INtervention (ORIGIN) trial randomized participants with dysglycaemia and cardiovascular risk factors to titrated insulin glargine vs standard care, and to either 1 g of omega-3 per day or placebo. We assessed incident PAD, defined as the composite of either asymptomatic or symptomatic PAD according to the randomized interventions in the 11 119 ORIGIN participants whose baseline ankle-brachial index (ABI) was >0.9 (no PAD), and PAD progression in the 971 ORIGIN participants whose baseline ABI was ≤0.9. Hazard ratios (HR) were adjusted for confounders. During a 6.2-year follow-up period, allocation to insulin glargine vs standard care had a neutral effect on the composite of PAD incidence (HR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.86-1.15) and progression (HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.63-1.22). Similar findings were noted for allocation to omega-3 vs placebo for PAD incidence (HR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.89-1.18) and progression (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.67-1.28). In this large study, neither insulin glargine nor omega-3 affected the incidence or progression of PAD.

Lower extremity arterial disease in patients with diabetes: a contemporary narrative review

Lower-extremity arterial disease (LEAD) is a major endemic disease with an alarming increased prevalence worldwide. It is a common and severe condition with excess risk of major cardiovascular events and death. It also leads to a high rate of lower-limb adverse events and non-traumatic amputation. The American Diabetes Association recommends a widespread medical history and clinical examination to screen for LEAD. The ankle brachial index (ABI) is the first non-invasive tool recommended to diagnose LEAD although its variable performance in patients with diabetes. The performance of ABI is particularly affected by the presence of peripheral neuropathy, medial arterial calcification, and incompressible arteries. There is no strong evidence today to support an alternative test for LEAD diagnosis in these conditions. The management of LEAD requires a strict control of cardiovascular risk factors including diabetes, hypertension, and dyslipidaemia. The benefit of intensive versus standard glucose control on the risk of LEAD has not been clearly established. Antihypertensive, lipid-lowering, and antiplatelet agents are obviously worthfull to reduce major cardiovascular adverse events, but few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated the benefits of these treatments in terms of LEAD and its related adverse events. Smoking cessation, physical activity, supervised walking rehabilitation and healthy diet are also crucial in LEAD management. Several advances have been achieved in endovascular and surgical revascularization procedures, with obvious improvement in LEAD management. The revascularization strategy should take into account several factors including anatomical localizations of lesions, medical history of each patients and operator experience. Further studies, especially RCTs, are needed to evaluate the interest of different therapeutic strategies on the occurrence and progression of LEAD and its related adverse events in patients with diabetes.

Insulin and glucose-lowering agents for treating people with diabetes and chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is the commonest cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Both conditions commonly co-exist. Glucometabolic changes and concurrent dialysis in diabetes and CKD make glucose-lowering challenging, increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. Glucose-lowering agents have been mainly studied in people with near-normal kidney function. It is important to characterise existing knowledge of glucose-lowering agents in CKD to guide treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of insulin and other pharmacological interventions for lowering glucose levels in people with diabetes and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 February 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs looking at head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in people with diabetes and CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and quality of data and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four studies (128 records, 13,036 participants) were included. Nine studies compared sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo; 13 studies compared dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors to placebo; 2 studies compared glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists to placebo; 8 studies compared glitazones to no glitazone treatment; 1 study compared glinide to no glinide treatment; and 4 studies compared different types, doses or modes of administration of insulin. In addition, 2 studies compared sitagliptin to glipizide; and 1 study compared each of sitagliptin to insulin, glitazars to pioglitazone, vildagliptin to sitagliptin, linagliptin to voglibose, and albiglutide to sitagliptin. Most studies had a high risk of bias due to funding and attrition bias, and an unclear risk of detection bias.Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 1092 participants: MD -0.29%, -0.38 to -0.19 (-3.2 mmol/mol, -4.2 to -2.2); I2 = 0%), fasting blood glucose (FBG) (5 studies, 855 participants: MD -0.48 mmol/L, -0.78 to -0.19; I2 = 0%), systolic blood pressure (BP) (7 studies, 1198 participants: MD -4.68 mmHg, -6.69 to -2.68; I2 = 40%), diastolic BP (6 studies, 1142 participants: MD -1.72 mmHg, -2.77 to -0.66; I2 = 0%), heart failure (3 studies, 2519 participants: RR 0.59, 0.41 to 0.87; I2 = 0%), and hyperkalaemia (4 studies, 2788 participants: RR 0.58, 0.42 to 0.81; I2 = 0%); but probably increase genital infections (7 studies, 3086 participants: RR 2.50, 1.52 to 4.11; I2 = 0%), and creatinine (4 studies, 848 participants: MD 3.82 μmol/L, 1.45 to 6.19; I2 = 16%) (all effects of moderate certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may reduce weight (5 studies, 1029 participants: MD -1.41 kg, -1.8 to -1.02; I2 = 28%) and albuminuria (MD -8.14 mg/mmol creatinine, -14.51 to -1.77; I2 = 11%; low certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may have little or no effect on the risk of cardiovascular death, hypoglycaemia, acute kidney injury (AKI), and urinary tract infection (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether SGLT2 inhibitors have any effect on death, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), hypovolaemia, fractures, diabetic ketoacidosis, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.62%, -0.85 to -0.39 (-6.8 mmol/mol, -9.3 to -4.3); I2 = 59%) but may have little or no effect on FBG (low certainty evidence). DPP-4 inhibitors probably have little or no effect on cardiovascular death (2 studies, 5897 participants: RR 0.93, 0.77 to 1.11; I2 = 0%) and weight (2 studies, 210 participants: MD 0.16 kg, -0.58 to 0.90; I2 = 29%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may have little or no effect on heart failure, upper respiratory tract infections, and liver impairment (low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether DPP-4 inhibitors have any effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, GLP-1 agonists probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.53%, -1.01 to -0.06 (-5.8 mmol/mol, -11.0 to -0.7); I2 = 41%; moderate certainty evidence) and may reduce weight (low certainty evidence). GLP-1 agonists may have little or no effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether GLP-1 agonists reduce FBG, increase gastrointestinal symptoms, or affect the risk of pancreatitis (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether glitazones have any effect on HbA1c, FBG, death, weight, and risk of hypoglycaemia (very low certainty evidence).Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin probably reduces hypoglycaemia (2 studies, 551 participants: RR 0.40, 0.23 to 0.69; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin may have had little or no effect on HbA1c, FBG, weight, and eGFR (low certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, it is uncertain if sitagliptin has any effect on death or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty).For types, dosages or modes of administration of insulin and other head-to-head comparisons only individual studies were available so no conclusions could be made.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in diabetes and CKD is limited. SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists are probably efficacious for glucose-lowering and DPP-4 inhibitors may be efficacious for glucose-lowering. Additionally, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce BP, heart failure, and hyperkalaemia but increase genital infections, and slightly increase creatinine. The safety profile for GLP-1 agonists is uncertain. No further conclusions could be made for the other classes of glucose-lowering agents including insulin. More high quality studies are required to help guide therapeutic choice for glucose-lowering in diabetes and CKD.

Intensive Blood Glucose Control and Vascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

People with type 2 diabetes mellitus are at high risk of morbidity and mortality from cardiovascular disease (CVD). Based on observed relationships between hyperglycemia and CVD, several large clinical trials have investigated the ability of treatment strategies to achieve hemoglobin A_1c less than 7% (53 mmol/mol) as a way of reducing this risk. These studies demonstrate that intensified glycemic therapy may reduce CVD risk in younger patients with recent-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus but not in high-risk older individuals with established disease. Attention to blood pressure and lipid-lowering therapies with modified glycemic goals for older high-risk individuals is recommended.

Pioglitazone and cardiovascular risk reduction: time for a second look?

Insulin resistance, a fundamental pathophysiological abnormality in patients with type 2 diabetes, is associated with increased cardiovascular (CV) disease risk. In diabetes management, the macrovascular impact of antihyperglycemic agents that do not improve insulin sensitivity has generally been disappointing. In contrast, glucose-lowering drugs that work as insulin sensitizing agents have been postulated to reduce CV complications. The data to support this hypothesis have, however, been inconsistent. The impact of thiazolidinediones on macrovascular events is of particular interest. In this review, we discuss the results of trials reporting CV outcomes in patients treated with thiazolidinediones. We focus on the findings of the recent Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke trial that demonstrated a beneficial effect of pioglitazone on CV outcomes in stroke patients with insulin resistance. We discuss the Insulin Resistance Intervention after Stroke results and its implications for clinical practice. We discuss the selective use of pioglitazone as secondary prevention to reduce CV risk in insulin resistant patients.

Effects on All-cause Mortality and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes by Comparing Insulin With Oral Hypoglycemic Agent Therapy: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

PURPOSE

Retrospective, case-control studies and prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on insulin treatment for diabetic patients yielded contradictory mortality and cardiovascular outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the effects of insulin versus oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) on all-cause mortality and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

We searched Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Chinese Biological Medicine Database, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Chinese Technical Periodicals, and Wanfang Data, up to July 10, 2015, for RCTs on insulin and OHAs that assessed all-cause mortality and/or cardiovascular death as primary end points. We derived pooled risk ratios (RRs) as summary statistics.

RESULTS

Three trials were included in which 7649 patients received insulin and 8322 received OHAs, with mean (SD) diabetes duration of 5.0 (6.2) and 4.4 (5.9) years, respectively. Insulin did not differ from OHAs in all-cause mortality (RR = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.93-1.07), cardiovascular death (RR = 1.00; 95% CI, 0.91-1.09), myocardial infarction (RR = 1.04; 95% CI, 0.93-1.16), angina (RR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.88-1.06), sudden death (RR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.66-1.56), or stroke (RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.88-1.15). Insulin reduced the risk of heart failure compared with OHAs (RR = 0.87; 95% CI, 0.75-0.99). In the subgroup of secondary prevention of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs) or very high risk of CVDs, insulin did not differ from OHAs in all-cause mortality (RR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.92-1.07), cardiovascular death (RR = 0.99; 95% CI, 0.90-1.09), myocardial infarction (RR = 1.01; 95% CI, 0.88-1.15), heart failure (RR = 0.69; 95% CI, 0.34-1.40), or stroke (RR = 1.05; 95% CI, 0.90-1.21).

IMPLICATIONS

Insulin did not provide a clear benefit over OHAs in all-cause mortality or cardiovascular outcomes in the patients with T2D. Insulin therapy has many shortcomings, including inconvenience (injection, strict blood glucose monitoring), hypoglycemia, and obvious weight gain. Thus, we conclude that no robust evidence supports the active use of insulin for this population at present.

Contemporary treatment strategies for Type 2 diabetes-related macrovascular disease

Type 2 diabetes mellitus poses a major challenge to healthcare providers in the coming years as its prevalence increases across the globe. The disease doubles the risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, with 70% of sufferers dying from a cardiac cause. Large clinical trials of current glucose-lowering therapies for Type 2 diabetes have shown no benefit in reducing the risk of macrovascular events. Blood pressure control, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor therapy and improvement of dyslipidemia with statins have proven benefit in reducing cardiovascular risk in Type 2 diabetes. A growing understanding of the importance of pathological processes including endothelial dysfunction, abnormal growth factor biology, oxidative stress, dysregulation of adipokines and deficient vascular repair and regeneration in insulin-resistant states promises new treatments to combat the problem.

Cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus: risk factors and medical therapy

Cardiovascular disease is a serious complication of diabetes mellitus. In the last 2 decades, great strides have been made in reducing microvascular complications in patients with diabetes through improving glycemic control. Decreasing rates of cardiovascular events have proved to be more difficult than simply intensifying the management of hyperglycemia. A tremendous effort has been made to deepen understanding of cardiovascular disease in diabetes and to formulate the best treatment approach. This review summarizes the current state of knowledge and discusses areas of uncertainty in the care of patients with diabetes who are at risk for cardiovascular disease.

Improvement of insulin sensitivity by a novel drug candidate, BGP-15, in different animal studies

BACKGROUND

Insulin resistance has been recognized as the most significant predictor of further development of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Here we investigated the effect of a heat shock protein (HSP) co-inducer, BGP-15, on insulin sensitivity in different insulin-resistant animal models and compared its effect with insulin secretagogues and insulin sensitizers.

METHODS

Insulin sensitivity was assessed by the hyperinsulinemic euglycemic glucose clamp technique in normal and cholesterol-fed rabbits and in healthy Wistar and Goto-Kakizaki (GK) rats in dose-ranging studies. We also examined the effect of BGP-15 on streptozotocin-induced changes in the vasorelaxation of the aorta in Sprague-Dawley rats.

RESULTS

BGP-15 doses of 10 and 30 mg/kg increased insulin sensitivity by 50% and 70%, respectively, in cholesterol-fed but not in normal rabbits. After 5 days of treatment with BGP-15, the glucose infusion rate was increased in a dose-dependent manner in genetically insulin-resistant GK rats. The most effective dose was 20 mg/kg, which showed a 71% increase in insulin sensitivity compared to control group. Administration of BGP-15 protected against streptozotocin-induced changes in vasorelaxation, which was similar to the effect of rosiglitazone.

CONCLUSION

Our results indicate that the insulin-sensitizing effect of BGP-15 is comparable to conventional insulin sensitizers. This might be of clinical utility in the treatment of T2DM.

Risk factors for incident peripheral arterial disease in type 2 diabetes: results from the Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation in type 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) Trial

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this article was to define risk factors for incidence of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) in a large cohort of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), overall and within the context of differing glycemic control strategies.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

The Bypass Angioplasty Revascularization Investigation in Type 2 Diabetes (BARI 2D) randomized controlled trial assigned participants to insulin-sensitizing (IS) therapy versus insulin-providing (IP) therapy. A total of 1,479 participants with normal ankle-brachial index (ABI) at study entry were eligible for analysis. PAD outcomes included new ABI ≤0.9 with decrease at least 0.1 from baseline, lower extremity revascularization, or lower extremity amputation. Baseline risk factors within the overall cohort and time-varying risk factors within each assigned glycemic control arm were assessed using Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

During an average 4.6 years of follow-up, 303 participants (20.5%) experienced an incident case of PAD. Age, sex, race, and baseline smoking status were all significantly associated with incident PAD in the BARI 2D cohort. Additional baseline risk factors included pulse pressure, HbA1c, and albumin-to-creatinine ratio (P < 0.05 for each). In stratified analyses of time-varying covariates, changes in BMI, LDL, HDL, systolic blood pressure, and pulse pressure were most predictive among IS patients, while change in HbA1c was most predictive among IP patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with T2DM, traditional cardiovascular risk factors were the main predictors of incident PAD cases. Stratified analyses showed different risk factors were predictive for patients treated with IS medications versus those treated with IP medications.

Standard and Novel Treatment Options for Metabolic Syndrome and Diabetes Mellitus

OPINION STATEMENT

Type II diabetes and metabolic syndrome are 2 intertwined conditions that are critical to the healthcare landscape in the United States and abroad. Patients with either diabetes or metabolic syndrome can have a dramatically increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease. Numerous treatment options have existed for some time, which include nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic therapies. In addition, within the last decade, a multiple of novel treatment options have emerged for the management of hyperglycemia in particular. By targeting novel pathways beyond the secretion and supply of insulin, these new therapeutics provide a valuable adjunct to the currently available therapies for diabetes and metabolic syndrome. Here we discuss the current guideline-driven usage of standard therapies with some novel indications. In addition, we discuss the novel therapies for the treatment of hyperglycemia, their mechanisms of action, and appropriate therapeutic indications.