A1C: Is the Target Moving ? Pamela L. Stamm, PharmD, CDE, BCPS Associate Professor of Pharmacy Practice, Auburn University Harrison School of Pharmacy,

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Practical implementation of the ADVANCE results in real life Davide Carvalho Centro Hospitalar S. João, University of Porto Medical School, Portugal 12.
Advertisements

THE ACTION TO CONTROL CARDIOVASCULAR RISK IN DIABETES STUDY (ACCORD)
Aggressive Hyperglycemia Management. Significant hospital hyperglycemia requires close follow-up Previously diagnosed diabetes and elevated A1C Without.
Foos et al, EASD, Lisbon, 13 September 2011 Comparison of ACCORD trial outcomes with outcomes estimated from modelled and meta- analysis studies Volker.
1 Prediabetes Comorbidities and Complications. 2 Common Comorbidities of Prediabetes Obesity CVD Dyslipidemia Hypertension Renal failure Cancer Sleep.
Lipid Disorders and Management in Diabetes
Benefits of intensive multiple risk factor intervention.
The Long-Term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischemic Disease (LIPID) The LIPID Study Group N Engl J Med 1998;339:
UKPDS Paper 81 Slides © University of Oxford Diabetes Trials Unit UKPDS slides are copyright and remain the property of the University of Oxford Diabetes.
Diabetes Mellitus Type 2
Facts and Fiction about Type 2 Diabetes Michael L. Parchman, MD Department of Family & Community Medicine September 2004.
The concept of Diabetes & CV risk: A lifetime risk challenge
Canadian Diabetes Association 2013 Clinical Practice Guidelines Targets for Glycemic Control Chapter 8 S. Ali Imran, Rémi Rabasa-Lhoret, Stuart Ross.
HbA1c as a compass- pointing you to the right diagnosis? Eric S. Kilpatrick Department of Clinical Biochemistry Hull Royal Infirmary/Hull York Medical.
Achieving Diabetes Targets Where are we, and how can we do better? Robert E. Ratner, MD MedStar Research Institute Georgetown University Medical School.
ACCORD - Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes ADVANCE - Action in Diabetes to Prevent Vascular Disease VADT - Veterans Administration Diabetes.
Improving Medical Management of Diabetes
Building a Diabetes Alliance: The Role of Provider Education Robert E. Jones, MD, FACP, FACE Professor of Medicine University of Utah School of Medicine.
Glucose Targets for Patients with Diabetes: 2011 Irl B. Hirsch, M.D. Professor of Medicine University of Washington School of Medicine.
Diabetes Mellitus Ibrahim Sales, Pharm.D. Assistant Professor of Clinical Pharmacy King Saud University
IDC Diabetes Update: Recent Research and Impact on Diabetes Management Type 1 DiabetesType 1 Diabetes –Post DCCT findings--improving glycemic control and.
Translating Clinical Trials Into Clinical Practice Cliff Bailey on behalf of the Global Partnership for Effective Diabetes Management This slideset was.
Blood glucose: is lower better for diabetic patients?
Individualizing Targets and Tactics for High- Risk Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Practical lessons from ACCORD and other cardiovascular trials Featured.
Joint Effects of Routine Blood Pressure Lowering and Intensive Glucose Control ADVANCE Adapted from EASD 2008.
Journal Club 亀田メディカルセンター 糖尿病内分泌内科 Diabetes and Endocrine Department, Kameda Medical Center 松田 昌文 Matsuda, Masafumi 2008 年9月 25 日 8:20-8:50 B 棟8階 カンファレンス室.
Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes: How Tight is Too Tight? Frederick L. Brancati, MD, MHS Professor of Medicine & Epidemiology Director, Division of.
Session II: Glycemic control, when the lower is not the better Strict glycemic control and cardiovascular diseases Stefano Genovese Diabetologia e Malattie.
1 NHLBI/NEI National Institutes of Health NHLBI/NEI National Institutes of Health.
PPAR  activation Clinical evidence. Evolution of clinical evidence supporting PPAR  activation and beyond Surrogate outcomes studies Large.
FDA Endocrinologic and Metabolic Drugs Advisory Committee 1st June 2008 Rury Holman Clinical outcomes with anti-diabetic drugs: What we already know.
Lower the better; the case for glucose Professor Taner DAMCI Istanbul University Cerrahpaşa Medical School, TURKEY.
ORIGIN Outcome Reduction with an Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN) Trial Overview Large international randomized controlled trial in patients with.
Macrovascular Outcomes with Antidiabetic Drugs: Ongoing Studies Hertzel C. Gerstein MD MSc FRCPC Professor & Population Health Institute Chair in Diabetes.
The ADVANCE trial: update and new results Jean-François Gautier Saint Louis Hospital, Paris 12 th Meeting of the Mediterranean Group for the Study of Diabetes.
Diabetes Mellitus 101 for Cardiologists (and Alike): 2015 Stan Schwartz MD,FACP Affiliate, Main Line Health System Emeritus, Clinical Associate Professor.
Diabetes Mellitus 101 for Cardiologists (and Alike): 2015 Stan Schwartz MD,FACP Affiliate, Main Line Health System Emeritus, Clinical Associate Professor.
Glycemic Control: When the Lower is Not the “Better”?
Lancet 373: , 2009 Baseline Characteristics of Participants and Study Design of Clinical Trials to Compare Intensive glucose- lowering versus.
HOPE: Heart Outcomes Prevention Evaluation study Purpose To evaluate whether the long-acting ACE inhibitor ramipril and/or vitamin E reduce the incidence.
A Diabetes Outcome Progression Trial
Individualization Strategies for Older Patients with Diabetes Elbert S. Huang, MD MPH FACP University of Chicago.
UKHDS (UKPDS): UK Hypertension in Diabetes Study Purpose To determine whether tight control of blood pressure (aiming for BP
The Obesity/Diabetes Epidemic: Perspectives, Consequences, Prevention, Treatment Stan Schwartz MD, FACP, FACE Private Practice, Ardmore Obesity Program.
Therapy of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: UPDATE Glycemic Goals in the Care of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes ADA and AACE Guidelines: Room For Improvement.
Diabetes Mellitus 101 for Cardiologists (and Alike): 2015
Demystifying Cardiovascular Safety of Sulfonylurea.
An initiative of South Asian Federation of Endocrine Societies (SAFES)
Long-term Cardiovascular Effects of 4.9 Years of Intensive Blood Pressure Control in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: The Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk.
Prevalence (%) estimates of diabetes (20-79 years) 2010.
Part 3. Diabetes Report Card: HbA 1c Levels in the United States Hoerger TJ, et al. Diabetes Care. 2008;31: Patients (%) HbA 1c (%)
Diabetes and the Kidney Richard Kingston Department of Renal Medicine Kent and Canterbury Hospital.
Carina Signori, DO Journal Club August 2010 Macdonald, M. et al. Diabetes Care; Jun 2010; 33,
A Randomized Trial of Intensive versus Standard Blood-Pressure Control The SPRINT Research Group* November 9, /NEJMoa R2 이성곤 /pf. 우종신.
R1 강민혜 / prof. 전숙. Introduction Patients with type 2 diabetes have a greatly increased risk of cardiovascular events. The morbidity and mortality related.
Diabetes Mellitus 101 for Cardiologists (and Alike): 2015 Stan Schwartz MD,FACP Affiliate, Main Line Health System Emeritus, Clinical Associate Professor.
Bariatric Surgery for T2DM The STAMPEDE Trial. A.R. BMI 36.5 T2DM diagnosed age 24 On Metformin, glyburide  insulin Parents with T2DM, father on dialysis.
Dr John Cox Diabetes in Primary Care Conference Cork
Diabetes type 2 Landmark Outcomes Trials
Objective 2 Discuss recent data, guidelines, and counseling points pertaining to the older adults with diabetes.
ACCORD Design and Baseline Characteristics
Contents Physiology and pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes
Recent Breakthroughs in Cardiovascular Outcomes Trials in T2DM
Macrovascular Complications Microvascular Complications
Systolic Blood Pressure Intervention Trial (SPRINT)
Type 2 diabetes.
Diabetes Journal Club March 17, 2011
Glycemic control for macrovascular disease in type II diabetes: Evidence and insights from recent trials  Sanjay Rajagopalan  Journal of Indian College.
Pharmacotherapy for Diabetic Coronary Disease:
Hyperglycemic Targets & Hypoglycemia
Presentation transcript:

A1C: Is the Target Moving ? Pamela L. Stamm, PharmD, CDE, BCPS Associate Professor of Pharmacy Practice, Auburn University Harrison School of Pharmacy, July 23, 2011

Objectives Discuss A1C as a treatment targetDiscuss A1C as a treatment target Identify benefits and risks of tight glucose controlIdentify benefits and risks of tight glucose control Recognize when evidence supports tight vs relaxed A1C goalsRecognize when evidence supports tight vs relaxed A1C goals Select A1C targets for individual patientsSelect A1C targets for individual patients

Case 1: Ms. Taylor 67 year old female in nursing home67 year old female in nursing home Recently diagnosed w/ DM on lifestyle aloneRecently diagnosed w/ DM on lifestyle alone PMH: HTN, OA, and now DMPMH: HTN, OA, and now DM FSBG: FSBG: A1C: 8.0%A1C: 8.0%

Case 2: Mr. Samuels 70 yo African American male70 yo African American male FH: mom and brother required dialysisFH: mom and brother required dialysis PMH: Type 2 DM, HTN, CKD stage 3, OAPMH: Type 2 DM, HTN, CKD stage 3, OA A1C: 7.5A1C: 7.5 Current medications:Current medications: Glargine 30 units dailyGlargine 30 units daily Aspart 10 units with mealsAspart 10 units with meals

Case 3: Ms. Lopez 74 year old Hispanic Female in nursing home w/ DM74 year old Hispanic Female in nursing home w/ DM Takes metformin and glipizideTakes metformin and glipizide No hypoglycemic symptomsNo hypoglycemic symptoms FSBG: 72-90FSBG: A1C: 6.8%A1C: 6.8% 1-2 falls per month1-2 falls per month

Case 4: Mr. Kopeski 80 year old male in assisted living80 year old male in assisted living Takes maximum metformin and glipizideTakes maximum metformin and glipizide No hypoglycemiaNo hypoglycemia FSBG: FSBG: PMH: HTN, MI (5 years ago), COPD on O 2PMH: HTN, MI (5 years ago), COPD on O 2 Recent A1C: 8.5Recent A1C: 8.5

Guidelines ADAAACE < 6.5%< 6.5% Should individualizeShould individualize Below or around 7%Below or around 7% Can go lowerCan go lower Less stringent goals may be appropriateLess stringent goals may be appropriate Endocrine Practice 2011;17(Suppl 2): Diabetes Care 2011; 34 (Suppl) 1S11-S61.

Why relax the A1C goal? Reduced life expectancy,Reduced life expectancy, Extended duration of DMExtended duration of DM Presence or absence of microvascular or macrovascular complicationsPresence or absence of microvascular or macrovascular complications Presence of Co-morbiditiesPresence of Co-morbidities Risk of hypoglycemia, especially severe hypoglycemiaRisk of hypoglycemia, especially severe hypoglycemia Endocrine Practice 2011;17(Suppl 2): Diabetes Care 2011; 34 (Suppl) 1S11-S61.

History that established A1C DCCT (Type 1)DCCT (Type 1) Kumomato Study (Type 2)Kumomato Study (Type 2) UKPDS (Type 2)UKPDS (Type 2)

Goal A1C: History KumomatoUKPDS Populations<6.5% vs standard 7% vs 7.9% Duration Microvascular events ↓↓ Macrovascular events Not assessed ↔ Diabetes Res Clin Pract 1995; 28: 103–117 Lancet 1998; 352: 837–853

Many Questions Unanswered Could macrovascular benefits be see after long term therapy?Could macrovascular benefits be see after long term therapy? Are there incremental benefits in A1C reduction?Are there incremental benefits in A1C reduction? What about persons w/ established DM?What about persons w/ established DM? Are benefits the same in the elderly?Are benefits the same in the elderly? Are benefits the same in those w/ significant co-morbidities?Are benefits the same in those w/ significant co-morbidities?

More Recent Trials DCCT / EDICDCCT / EDIC UKPDS Follow-upUKPDS Follow-up ADVANCEADVANCE ACCORDACCORD VADTVADT Meta-analyses of trialsMeta-analyses of trials Co-morbidity trialCo-morbidity trial

UKPDS 10 year follow-up 5102 newly diagnosed persons with type 2 diabetes5102 newly diagnosed persons with type 2 diabetes Interventions: diet, sulfonylurea or insulin, or metformin (if >120% or IBW)Interventions: diet, sulfonylurea or insulin, or metformin (if >120% or IBW) Median follow-up approx. 17 yrsMedian follow-up approx. 17 yrs Post-trial follow-up in all 3 groups was approximately 50%Post-trial follow-up in all 3 groups was approximately 50% N Engl J Med 2008; 359:1577–1589.

UKPDS 10 year follow-up N Engl J Med 2008; 359:1577–1589.

UKPDS follow-up: SFU-Ins Cohort Outcome Intensive Therapy Conventional Therapy RR (95% CI) Any diabetes end point 48.1%52.2% 0.91 ( ) Diabetes-related death 14.5%17.0% 0.83 ( ) Death any cause 26.8%30.3% 0.87 ( ) MI16.8%19.6% 0.85 ( ) Microvascular disease 11.0%14.2% 0.76 ( ) N Engl J Med 2008; 359:1577–1589.

UKPDS follow-up: Metformin Cohort Outcome Intensive Therapy Conventional Therapy RR (95% CI) Any diabetes end point 45.7%53.9% 0.79 ( ) Diabetes- related death 14.0%18.7% 0.70 ( ) Death any cause 25.9%33.1% 0.73 ( ) MI14.8%21.1% 0.67 ( ) Microvascular disease 12.4%13.4% 0.84 ( ) N Engl J Med 2008; 359:1577–1589.

ADVANCE 11,140 persons mean age 66 with type 2 DM plus CV risk factors11,140 persons mean age 66 with type 2 DM plus CV risk factors 1/3 had CVD1/3 had CVD Baseline Glyc Hgb 7.48%Baseline Glyc Hgb 7.48% Mean duration of DM of 8 yrsMean duration of DM of 8 yrs Used mostly SFU & insulin, low TZD useUsed mostly SFU & insulin, low TZD use Lowered over 3 yearsLowered over 3 years Intensive (6.5%) vs standard (7.3%) controlIntensive (6.5%) vs standard (7.3%) control Study duration of 5-yearsStudy duration of 5-years N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2560–72.

ADVANCE Outcome Intensive (n = 4828) Standard (n = 4721) RRR (CI) Combined CV or micro event 18.1%20% 10% (2 to 18) Major CV event10%10.6%6% (-6 to 16) Major micro event9.4%10.9%14% (3 to 23) Severe hypoglycemia 2.7%1.5%P<0.01 N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2560–72.

ACCORD 10,251 with type 2 DM who were mean age of 62 and had CV risk factors10,251 with type 2 DM who were mean age of 62 and had CV risk factors 1/3 had previous CV event1/3 had previous CV event Baseline Glyc Hgb 8.3%Baseline Glyc Hgb 8.3% Median duration of DM of 10 yrsMedian duration of DM of 10 yrs Median intensive (6.4%) vs standard (7.5%) controlMedian intensive (6.4%) vs standard (7.5%) control High (91.2 vs 57.5%) use of TZDs (rosiglitazone)High (91.2 vs 57.5%) use of TZDs (rosiglitazone) Lowered over 1 yearLowered over 1 year Stopped early at mean of 3.5 yrsStopped early at mean of 3.5 yrs N Engl J Med. 2008; 358: 2545–59.

ACCORD Intensive (n = 4828) Standard (n = 4721) HR (CI) Primary outcome (MI, stroke, or CV death) 6.9%7.2% 0.90 ( ) Death (any cause)5%4%1.22 ( ) Death (CV cause)2.6%1.8%1.35 ( ) Severe hypoglycemia 16.2%5.1%P<0.01 N Engl J Med. 2008; 358: 2545–59.

ACCORD: What explains the results? Not HypoglycemiaNot Hypoglycemia Not rate of glucose fallNot rate of glucose fall

Mortality rates by group Any hypoglycemic event requiring medical or nonmedical assistance No previous events (% per yr) At least one previous event (% per year) Hazard ratio (HR (95% CI)) Intensive1.22.8Unadj: 1.79 ( ) Adj: 1.41 ( ) Standard1.03.7Unadj: 2.93 ( ) Adj: 2.30 ( ) BMJ. 2009;339:b4909 doi /bmjb4909

Hypoglycemic events requiring medical assistance No history HistoryHR (95%CI) Intensive1.3%2.8%Unadj: 1.72 (1.19 to 2.47) Adj: 1.28 (0.88 to 1.85) Standard1.0%4.9%Unadj: 3.88 (2.35 to 6.40) Adj: 2.87 (1.73 to 4.76) ACCORD: mortality rates BMJ. 2009;339:b4909 doi /bmjb4909

Risk factors for hypoglycemia Gender (women > men)Gender (women > men) AgeAge Ethnicity (African American)Ethnicity (African American) Lower education levelsLower education levels BMJ. 2009; 339. doi: /bmj.b5444

VADT 1791 persons mean age 60.4 yrs w/ type 2 DM1791 persons mean age 60.4 yrs w/ type 2 DM About 40% w/ CV eventAbout 40% w/ CV event Baseline Glyc Hgb 9.4%Baseline Glyc Hgb 9.4% Duration of DM of 11.5 yrsDuration of DM of 11.5 yrs Median glyc hgb intensive (6.9%) vs standard (8.4%)Median glyc hgb intensive (6.9%) vs standard (8.4%) Lowered in 6 months and sustainedLowered in 6 months and sustained Median duration 5.6 yrsMedian duration 5.6 yrs N Engl J Med. 2009; 360: 129–39.

VADT Outcome Intensive (n = 899) Standard (n = 892) HR (CI) Death (any cause) ( ) Death (CV cause) ( ) Cardiovascular event 29.5%33.5% 0.88 ( ) Severe hypoglycemia (patient-yrs) 11/1004/100P<0.01 N Engl J Med. 2009; 360: 129–39.

How to apply this data to patient care?

Meta-Analysis Lancet 2009; 373: 1765–72.

Meta-Analysis

Systematic Review Ann Intern Med 2009;151:

Systematic Review Ann Intern Med 2009;151:

Both reviews Consistent benefit for CHD, although small reductionConsistent benefit for CHD, although small reduction No benefit for strokeNo benefit for stroke No benefit for heart failureNo benefit for heart failure No benefit for CV mortalityNo benefit for CV mortality No benefit for all-cause mortalityNo benefit for all-cause mortality Ann Intern Med 2009;151: Lancet 2009; 373: 1765–72.

Comorbidity may impact benefit 2613 patients with type 2 DM mean age observed over median 4.96 yrs2613 patients with type 2 DM mean age observed over median 4.96 yrs Mean baseline A1C Mean baseline A1C Objective: Does level of comorbidity associated with benefit or lack of benefit from tight controlObjective: Does level of comorbidity associated with benefit or lack of benefit from tight control Annals of Internal Medicine 2009;15 (12):

Risk of CV event according to comorbidity level TIBI score A1C < 6.5% A1C >6.5% HR Low – mod comorbidity ( ) High comorbidity ( ) TIBI score A1C < 7.0% A1C >7.0% HR Low – mod comorbidity ( ) High comorbidity ( ) Annals of Internal Medicine 2009;15 (12):

Is there a J-Curve for A1C? All cause mortality Metformin and SFUInsulin The Lancet. 2009; 375(9713):

Time to first large vessel disease by A1C The Lancet. 2009; 375(9713):

A1C Facts to Remember Rises naturally with aging (0.03%/yr)Rises naturally with aging (0.03%/yr) Inaccurate w/Inaccurate w/ Hemoglobin variationsHemoglobin variations Altered RBC lifespan (iron def, hemolytic anemia, renal failure)Altered RBC lifespan (iron def, hemolytic anemia, renal failure) Diabetes Care 2008; 31(10): Clinical Chemistry 2011; 57 (2):

Case 1: Ms. Taylor 67 year old female in nursing home67 year old female in nursing home Recently diagnosed w/ DM on lifestyle aloneRecently diagnosed w/ DM on lifestyle alone PMH: HTN, OA, and now DMPMH: HTN, OA, and now DM FSBG: FSBG: A1C: 8.0%A1C: 8.0%

Case 2: Mr. Samuels 70 yo African American male70 yo African American male FH: mom and brother required dialysisFH: mom and brother required dialysis PMH: Type 2 DM, HTN, CKD stage 3, OAPMH: Type 2 DM, HTN, CKD stage 3, OA A1C: 7.5A1C: 7.5 Current medications:Current medications: Glargine 30 units dailyGlargine 30 units daily Aspart 10 units with mealsAspart 10 units with meals

Case 3: Ms. Lopez 74 year old Hispanic Female in nursing home w/ DM74 year old Hispanic Female in nursing home w/ DM Takes metformin and glipizideTakes metformin and glipizide No hypoglycemic symptomsNo hypoglycemic symptoms FSBG: 72-90FSBG: A1C: 6.8%A1C: 6.8% 1-2 falls per month1-2 falls per month

Case 4: Mr. Kopeski 80 year old male in assisted living80 year old male in assisted living Takes maximum metformin and glipizideTakes maximum metformin and glipizide No hypoglycemiaNo hypoglycemia FSBG: FSBG: PMH: HTN, MI (5 years ago), COPD on O 2PMH: HTN, MI (5 years ago), COPD on O 2 Recent A1C: 8.5Recent A1C: 8.5

Summary Achieving lower A1C reduces microvascular and macrovascular complications early after diagnosisAchieving lower A1C reduces microvascular and macrovascular complications early after diagnosis Achieving lower A1C reduces even after a diabetes duration of 8-10 yrs reduces microvascular complicationsAchieving lower A1C reduces even after a diabetes duration of 8-10 yrs reduces microvascular complications Those with lower comorbidity levels appear to have cardiovascular benefits from lower A1CThose with lower comorbidity levels appear to have cardiovascular benefits from lower A1C Goal A1C should be individualizedGoal A1C should be individualized

Unanswered Question Does the rate of fall of glycemia impact benefit?Does the rate of fall of glycemia impact benefit?