Search

ObjectiveType 2 diabetes is a risk factor for cognitive impairment. We examined the relation of glycemia, lipids, blood pressure (BP), hypertension history, and statin use with cognition in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE).Research design and methodsCross-sectional analyses from GRADE at baseline examined the association of glycemia (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c]), LDL, systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP), hypertension history, and statin use with cognition assessed by the Spanish English Verbal Learning Test, letter and animal fluency tests, and Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST).ResultsAmong 5,047 GRADE participants, 5,018 (99.4%) completed cognitive assessments. Their mean age was 56.7 ± 10.0 years, and 36.4% were women. Mean diabetes duration was 4.0 ± 2.7 years. HbA1c was not related to cognition. Higher LDL was related to modestly worse DSST scores, whereas statin use was related to modestly better DSST scores. SBP between 120 and 139 mmHg and DBP between 80 and 89 mmHg were related to modestly better DSST scores. Hypertension history was not related to cognition.ConclusionsIn people with type 2 diabetes of a mean duration of

Background: The Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) study has enrolled a racially and ethnically diverse population with type 2 diabetes, performed extensive phenotyping, and randomly assigned the participants to one of four second-line diabetes medications. The continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) substudy has been added to determine whether there are racial/ethnic differences in the relationship between average glucose (AG) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). CGM will also be used to compare time in target range, glucose variability, and the frequency and duration of hypoglycemia across study groups. Methods: The observational CGM substudy will enroll up to 1800 of the 5047 GRADE study participants from the four treatment groups, including as many as 450 participants from each of 4 racial/ethnic minority groups to be compared: Hispanic White, non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic African American, and non-Hispanic Other. CGM will be performed for 2 weeks in proximity to a GRADE annual visit, during which an oral glucose tolerance test will be performed and HbA1c and glycated albumin measured. Indicators of interindividual variation in red blood cell turnover, based on specialized erythrocyte measurements, will also be measured to explore the potential causes of interindividual HbA1c variations. Conclusions: The GRADE CGM substudy will provide new insights into whether differences exist in the relationship between HbA1c and AG among different racial/ethnic groups and whether glycemic profiles differ among frequently used diabetes medications and their potential clinical implications. Understanding such differences is important for clinical care and adjustment of diabetes medications in patients of different races or ethnicities.

OBJECTIVE: We examined longitudinal associations between emotional distress (specifically, depressive symptoms and diabetes distress) and medication adherence in Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE), a large randomized controlled trial comparing four glucose-lowering medications added to metformin in adults with relatively recent-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Emotional Distress Substudy assessed medication adherence, depressive symptoms, and diabetes distress in 1,739 GRADE participants via self-completed questionnaires administered biannually up to 3 years. We examined baseline depressive symptoms and diabetes distress as predictors of medication adherence over 36 months. Bidirectional visit-to-visit relationships were also examined. Treatment satisfaction, beliefs about medication, diabetes care self-efficacy, and perceived control over diabetes were evaluated as mediators of longitudinal associations. RESULTS: At baseline, mean ± SD age of participants (56% of whom were White, 17% Hispanic/Latino, 18% Black, and 66% male) was 58.0 ± 10.2 years, diabetes duration 4.2 ± 2.8 years, HbA1c 7.5% ± 0.5%, and medication adherence 89.9% ± 11.1%. Higher baseline depressive symptoms and diabetes distress were independently associated with lower adherence over 36 months (P < 0.001). Higher depressive symptoms and diabetes distress at one visit predicted lower adherence at the subsequent 6-month visit (P < 0.0001) but not vice versa. Treatment assignment did not moderate relationships. Patient-reported concerns about diabetes medications mediated the largest percentage (11.9%–15.5%) of the longitudinal link between emotional distress and adherence. CONCLUSIONS: Depressive symptoms and diabetes distress both predict lower adherence to glucose-lowering medications over time among adults with T2DM. Addressing emotional distress and concerns about anticipated negative effects of taking these treatments may be important to support diabetes treatment adherence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To describe rescue insulin use and associated factors in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: GRADE participants (type 2 diabetes duration <10 years, baseline A1C 6.8%–8.5% on metformin monotherapy, N = 5,047) were randomly assigned to insulin glargine U-100, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin and followed quarterly for a mean of 5 years. Rescue insulin (glargine or aspart) was to be started within 6 weeks of A1C >7.5%, confirmed. Reasons for delaying rescue insulin were reported by staff-completed survey. RESULTS: Nearly one-half of GRADE participants (N = 2,387 [47.3%]) met the threshold for rescue insulin. Among participants assigned to glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin, rescue glargine was added by 69% (39% within 6 weeks). Rescue aspart was added by 44% of glargine-assigned participants (19% within 6 weeks) and by 30% of non-glargine-assigned participants (14% within 6 weeks). Higher A1C values were associated with adding rescue insulin. Intention to change health behaviors (diet/lifestyle, adherence to current treatment) and not wanting to take insulin were among the most common reasons reported for not adding rescue insulin within 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Proportionately, rescue glargine, when required, was more often used than rescue aspart, and higher A1C values were associated with greater rescue insulin use. Wanting to use noninsulin strategies to improve glycemia was commonly reported, although multiple factors likely contributed to not using rescue insulin. These findings highlight the persistent challenge of intensifying type 2 diabetes treatment with insulin, even in a clinical trial. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether adding basal insulin to metformin in adults with early type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) would increase emotional distress relative to other treatments. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) of adults with T2DM of <10 years' duration, HbA1c 6.8–8.5%, and taking metformin monotherapy randomly assigned participants to add insulin glargine U-100, sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, or the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor sitagliptin. The Emotional Distress Substudy enrolled 1,739 GRADE participants (mean [SD] age 58.0 [10.2] years, 32% female, 56% non-Hispanic White, 18% non-Hispanic Black, 17% Hispanic) and assessed diabetes distress and depressive symptoms every 6 months. Analyses examined differences at 1 year and over the 3-year follow-up. RESULTS: Across treatments, diabetes distress (−0.24, P < 0.0001) and depressive symptoms (−0.67, P < 0.0001) decreased over 1 year. Diabetes distress was lower at 1 year for the glargine group than for the other groups combined (−0.10, P = 0.002). Diabetes distress was also lower for liraglutide than for glimepiride or sitagliptin (−0.10, P = 0.008). Over the 3-year follow-up, there were no significant group differences in total diabetes distress; interpersonal diabetes distress remained lower for those assigned to liraglutide. No significant differences were observed for depressive symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Contrary to expectations, this randomized trial found no evidence for a deleterious effect of basal insulin on emotional distress. Glargine lowered diabetes distress modestly at 1 year rather than increasing it. Liraglutide also reduced diabetes distress at 1 year. Results can inform treatment decisions for adults with early T2DM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: In Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) (5,047 participants, mean follow-up 5.0 years), differences in glycemic control were demonstrated over time among four randomized therapies added to metformin. Weight gain and hypoglycemia are also important outcomes for people with type 2 diabetes. We compared the effects of the four randomized GRADE medications on a composite outcome incorporating glycemic deterioration, weight gain, and hypoglycemia. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The composite outcome was time to first occurrence of any of the following: HbA1c >7.5%, confirmed; ≥5% weight gain; or severe or recurrent nonsevere hypoglycemia. Secondary analyses included examination of individual components of the composite outcome, subgroup effects and potential mediators, and treatment satisfaction. Cumulative incidence was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier estimator. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess pairwise group differences in risk of an outcome. RESULTS: Risk of reaching the composite outcome (events per 100 participants per treatment year [PTYs]) was lowest with liraglutide (19 per 100 PTYs) followed by sitagliptin (26 per 100 PTYs), glargine (29 per 100 PTYs), and glimepiride (40 per 100 PTYs); all pairwise comparisons were statistically significant. The order was the same for risk of weight gain and hypoglycemia, but risk of glycemic deterioration was lowest with glargine, followed by liraglutide, glimepiride, and sitagliptin. No significant heterogeneity in risk of composite outcome was detected across prespecified covariates. Participants who reached the composite outcome had modestly but significantly lower treatment satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Among participants treated with common second-line drug classes for type 2 diabetes, the liraglutide group had the lowest and glimepiride the highest risk of reaching a composite outcome encompassing glycemic deterioration, weight gain, and hypoglycemia. These findings may inform decision-making regarding type 2 diabetes therapy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: We report mortality outcomes in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) among people with type 2 diabetes diagnosed within 10 years and no recent history of cardiovascular events or cancer. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Overall mortality rates and major causes of death were assessed over an average of 5 years of follow-up. Cause of death was adjudicated centrally by a committee masked to treatment assignment. We examined baseline covariates and the 10-year Framingham Risk Score for associations. RESULTS: Mortality rate was low (0.59 per 100 participant-years). Participants who died during follow-up were likely to be older, be male, have a history of hypertension, have a history of smoking, and have moderate albuminuria. The two most common underlying causes of death were "cardiovascular-cause" (a composite of underlying causes) (38.6%) and cancer (26.8%). There were no differences by treatment group. CONCLUSIONS: Among people with diabetes of relatively short duration, cause of death was varied. Attention to health risks beyond cardiovascular diseases is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether baseline levels of depressive symptoms and diabetes-specific distress are associated with glycemic control in Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE), a large randomized controlled trial comparing the metabolic effects of four common glucose-lowering medications when combined with metformin in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The primary and secondary outcomes were defined as an HbA1c value ≥7%, subsequently confirmed, and an HbA1c value >7.5%, subsequently confirmed, respectively. Separate Cox proportional hazards models assessed the association between baseline levels of each exposure of interest (depressive symptoms measured with the eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire and diabetes distress measured with the Diabetes Distress Scale) and the subsequent risk of metabolic outcomes. RESULTS: This substudy included 1,739 participants (56% of whom were non-Hispanic White, 18% non-Hispanic Black, 17% Hispanic, and 68% male; mean [SD] age 58.0 [10.2] years, diabetes duration 4.2 [2.8] years, and HbA1c 7.5% [0.48%]). A total of 1,157 participants reached the primary outcome, with time to event of 2.1 years on average, while 738 participants reached the secondary outcome at 3 years on average. With adjustment for sex, race/ethnicity, treatment group, baseline age, duration of T2DM, BMI, and HbA1c, there were no significant associations between the depressive symptoms or diabetes distress and the subsequent risk of the primary or secondary outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: The current findings suggest that, at least for individuals with diabetes of relatively short duration, baseline levels of emotional distress are not associated with glycemic control over time. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background/Aims: We present and describe recruitment strategies implemented from 2013 to 2017 across 45 clinical sites in the United States, participating in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study, an unmasked, randomized controlled trial evaluating four glucose-lowering medications added to metformin in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (duration of diabetes <10 years). We examined the yield of participants recruited through Electronic Health Records systems compared to traditional recruitment methods to leverage access to type 2 diabetes patients in primary care. Methods: Site selection criteria included availability of the study population, geographic representation, the ability to recruit and retain a diverse pool of participants including traditionally underrepresented groups, and prior site research experience in diabetes clinical trials. Recruitment initiatives were employed to support and monitor recruitment, such as creation of a Recruitment and Retention Committee, development of criteria for Electronic Health Record systems queries, conduct of remote site visits, development of a public screening website, and other central and local initiatives. Notably, the study supported a dedicated recruitment coordinator at each site to manage local recruitment and facilitate screening of potential participants identified by Electronic Health Record systems. Results: The study achieved the enrollment goal of 5000 participants, meeting its target with Black/African American (20%), Hispanic/Latino (18%), and age ≧60 years (42%) subgroups but not with women (36%). Recruitment required 1 year more than the 3 years originally planned. Sites included academic hospitals, integrated health systems, and Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Participants were enrolled through Electronic Health Record queries (68%), physician referral (13%), traditional mail outreach (7%), TV, radio, flyers, and Internet (7%), and other strategies (5%). Early implementation of targeted Electronic Health Record queries yielded a greater number of eligible participants compared to other recruitment methods. Efforts over time increasingly emphasized engagement with primary care networks. Conclusion: Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness successfully recruited a diverse study population with relatively new onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus, relying to a large extent on the use of Electronic Health Record to screen potential participants. A comprehensive approach to recruitment with frequent monitoring was critical to meet the recruitment goal. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: We compared HbA1c values obtained from capillary blood collection kits versus venous whole blood collections in study participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Methods: A total of 122 subjects, 64 with type 2 diabetes participating in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) Study and 58 with type 1 diabetes from the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) Study, participated in the validation study. Capillary tubes were filled by fingerstick by the participants on the same day as the collection of venous whole blood samples in EDTA-containing test tubes and were mailed to the central laboratory. HbA1c in all samples was measured with the same high-performance liquid chromatography. GRADE participants also completed a questionnaire on the ease of performing capillary collections. Results: Participants from 22 clinical centers (GRADE n = 5, EDIC n = 17) were between 35 and 86 years of age, with 52% male and diverse race/ethnicities. Venous HbA1c results ranged between 5.4–11.9% (35.5–106.6 mmol/mol) with corresponding capillary results ranging between 4.2–11.9% (22.4–106.6 mmol/mol). The venous and capillary results were highly correlated (R2 = 0.993) and 96.7% differed by ≤0.2% (2.2 mmol/mol). Of participants surveyed, 69% indicated that the instructions and collection were easy to follow and 97% felt the collection method would be easy to do at home. Conclusions: The capillary blood HbA1c results compared well with the conventional venous whole blood results. The capillary kits can be employed in other studies to reduce interruption of critical data collection and potentially to augment clinical care when in-person visits are not possible. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: GRADE (Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study) is a 36-center unmasked, parallel treatment group, randomized controlled trial evaluating four diabetes medications added to metformin in people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). We report baseline characteristics and compare GRADE participants to a National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) cohort.Research Design and Methods: Participants were age ≥30 years at the time of diagnosis, with duration of T2DM <10 years, HbA1c 6.8-8.5% (51-69 mmol/mol), prescribed metformin monotherapy, and randomized to glimepiride, sitagliptin, liraglutide, or insulin glargine.Results: At baseline, GRADE's 5,047 randomized participants were 57.2 ± 10.0 years of age, 63.6% male, with racial/ethnic breakdown of 65.7% white, 19.8% African American, 3.6% Asian, 2.7% Native American, 7.6% other or unknown, and 18.4% Hispanic/Latino. Duration of diabetes was 4.2 ± 2.8 years, with mean HbA1c of 7.5 ± 0.5% (58 ± 5.3 mmol/mol), BMI of 34.3 ± 6.8 kg/m2, and metformin dose of 1,944 ± 204 mg/day. Among the cohort, 67% reported a history of hypertension, 72% a history of hyperlipidemia, and 6.5% a history of heart attack or stroke. Applying GRADE inclusion criteria to NHANES indicates enrollment of a representative cohort with T2DM on metformin monotherapy (NHANES cohort average age, 57.9 years; mean HbA1c, 7.4% [57 mmol/mol]; BMI, 33.2 kg/m2; duration, 4.2 ± 2.5 years; and 7.2% with a history of cardiovascular disease).Conclusions: The GRADE cohort represents patients with T2DM treated with metformin requiring a second diabetes medication. GRADE will inform decisions about the clinical effectiveness of the addition of four classes of diabetes medications to metformin. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emotional distress, including depression and diabetes-specific distress (e.g., feeling overwhelmed by living with diabetes, feelings of failure related to diabetes self-care), is a significant and prevalent problem for patients with type 2 diabetes. Both depression and diabetes distress have been associated with metabolic/glycemic control, diabetes complications, mortality, and quality of life. Recent findings further suggest that risk for emotional distress is influenced by diabetes treatment. The GRADE Study (Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study) is generating prospective data that will provide a unique opportunity to examine the relationships between emotional distress, diabetes treatment, and outcomes in an experimental design. The GRADE study is a randomized clinical trial that will compare the metabolic effects of four common anti-hyperglycemic drugs when combined with metformin. This sub-study recruited a subset (n = 1739) of GRADE participants and will examine patient-level variation in baseline emotional distress as a predictor of glycemic control and other health outcomes, independent of treatment effects. The study will also provide an experimental examination of treatment regimen effects on emotional distress over time as part of the overall evaluation of comparative effectiveness. Evaluation of emotional distress using validated measures will allow us to disentangle the roles of depressive symptoms and diabetes distress, factors that share significant overlap but require distinct approaches to screening and treatment. Study findings may directly influence practice decisions regarding screening and treatment for emotional distress as part of diabetes care. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01794143 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: GRADE enrolled 5,047 adults > 30 years, T2DM < 10 years duration, on metformin, requiring a second medication, A1C 6.8-8.5%. Age-related differences in disease phenotype may affect responses to the randomized treatments being evaluated. Objective: To evaluate whether baseline characteristics differed by age. Methods: Baseline characteristics were compared across age groups, using mean ± SD (ANOVA) or % (Pearson's chi-square). We report nominal, unadjusted p-values. Results: With the defined inclusion criteria, we enrolled a cohort with overall DM duration 4.2 ± 2.8 years, and A1c 7.5 ± 0.5%. Within this cohort, distinct clinical phenotypes by age were present. Across the age groups, older individuals had more CVD, and were on more medications for DM-related comorbidities. Younger individuals were more diverse, had higher weight, FPG, and insulin, more pronounced diabetic dyslipidemia, and were taking fewer medications for comorbidities (Table). Conclusion: Within the GRADE cohort defined by inclusion criteria representing a specific stage of glycemia, the clinical phenotype of T2DM differed by age, with older participants having greater prevalent comorbidity and younger participants having more prominent hyperglycemia and higher weight. An understanding of the distinct phenotypes by age may identify priorities and gaps in clinical care. Disclosure: V.R. Aroda: Consultant; Self; ADOCIA, AstraZeneca, Becton, Dickinson and Company, Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi, Zafgen, Inc. Employee; Spouse/Partner; Merck & Co., Inc. Research Support; Self; AstraZeneca, Calibra Medical, Eisai Inc., Janssen Research & Development, Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi, Theracos, Inc. H. Krause-Steinrauf: None. J.B. Buse: Consultant; Self; Neurimmune AG. Research Support; Self; AstraZeneca, National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi, vTv Therapeutics. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Mellitus Health, PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Stability Health. Other Relationship; Self; ADOCIA, AstraZeneca, Dance Biopharm Holdings Inc., Eli Lilly and Company, MannKind Corporation, NovaTarg, Novo Nordisk A/S, Senseonics, vTv Therapeutics, Zafgen, Inc. B.I. Gulanski: None. H. Florez: None. A.J. Ahmann: Advisory Panel; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, MannKind Corporation, Novo Nordisk Inc., Sanofi-Aventis. Consultant; Self; Dexcom, Inc. Research Support; Self; Dexcom, Inc., Medtronic. A. Loveland: None. A. Kuhn: None. J. Lonier: None. K.J. Mather: Advisory Panel; Self; Roche Diabetes Care. Research Support; Self; Abbott, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. D.J. Wexler: Other Relationship; Spouse/Partner; APOLO1BIO. Funding: National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Data are lacking on the comparative effectiveness of commonly used glucose-lowering medications, when added to metformin, with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease outcomes in persons with type 2 diabetes.Methods: We assessed the comparative effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications, added to metformin, in achieving and maintaining a glycated hemoglobin level of less than 7.0% in participants with type 2 diabetes. The randomly assigned therapies were insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin. Prespecified secondary outcomes with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease included hypertension and dyslipidemia, confirmed moderately or severely increased albuminuria or an estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m2 of body-surface area, diabetic peripheral neuropathy assessed with the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument, cardiovascular events (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE], hospitalization for heart failure, or an aggregate outcome of any cardiovascular event), and death. Hazard ratios are presented with 95% confidence limits that are not adjusted for multiple comparisons.Results: During a mean 5.0 years of follow-up in 5047 participants, there were no material differences among the interventions with respect to the development of hypertension or dyslipidemia or with respect to microvascular outcomes; the mean overall rate (i.e., events per 100 participant-years) of moderately increased albuminuria levels was 2.6, of severely increased albuminuria levels 1.1, of renal impairment 2.9, and of diabetic peripheral neuropathy 16.7. The treatment groups did not differ with respect to MACE (overall rate, 1.0), hospitalization for heart failure (0.4), death from cardiovascular causes (0.3), or all deaths (0.6). There were small differences with respect to rates of any cardiovascular disease, with 1.9, 1.9, 1.4, and 2.0 in the glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin groups, respectively. When one treatment was compared with the combined results of the other three treatments, the hazard ratios for any cardiovascular disease were 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 1.3) in the glargine group, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4) in the glimepiride group, 0.7 (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9) in the liraglutide group, and 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.5) in the sitagliptin group.Conclusions: In participants with type 2 diabetes, the incidences of microvascular complications and death were not materially different among the four treatment groups. The findings indicated possible differences among the groups in the incidence of any cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The comparative effectiveness of glucose-lowering medications for use with metformin to maintain target glycated hemoglobin levels in persons with type 2 diabetes is uncertain.Methods: In this trial involving participants with type 2 diabetes of less than 10 years' duration who were receiving metformin and had glycated hemoglobin levels of 6.8 to 8.5%, we compared the effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications. We randomly assigned participants to receive insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), the sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, or sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor. The primary metabolic outcome was a glycated hemoglobin level, measured quarterly, of 7.0% or higher that was subsequently confirmed, and the secondary metabolic outcome was a confirmed glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5%.Results: A total of 5047 participants (19.8% Black and 18.6% Hispanic or Latinx) who had received metformin for type 2 diabetes were followed for a mean of 5.0 years. The cumulative incidence of a glycated hemoglobin level of 7.0% or higher (the primary metabolic outcome) differed significantly among the four groups (P<0.001 for a global test of differences across groups); the rates with glargine (26.5 per 100 participant-years) and liraglutide (26.1) were similar and lower than those with glimepiride (30.4) and sitagliptin (38.1). The differences among the groups with respect to a glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5% (the secondary outcome) paralleled those of the primary outcome. There were no material differences with respect to the primary outcome across prespecified subgroups defined according to sex, age, or race or ethnic group; however, among participants with higher baseline glycated hemoglobin levels there appeared to be an even greater benefit with glargine, liraglutide, and glimepiride than with sitagliptin. Severe hypoglycemia was rare but significantly more frequent with glimepiride (in 2.2% of the participants) than with glargine (1.3%), liraglutide (1.0%), or sitagliptin (0.7%). Participants who received liraglutide reported more frequent gastrointestinal side effects and lost more weight than those in the other treatment groups.Conclusions: All four medications, when added to metformin, decreased glycated hemoglobin levels. However, glargine and liraglutide were significantly, albeit modestly, more effective in achieving and maintaining target glycated hemoglobin levels. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine whether the relationship between average glucose (AG) levels and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) differs across racial/ethnic groups., Research Design and Methods: We performed a prospective substudy of GRADE, a comparative effectiveness randomized trial conducted in 36 centers in the U.S. A total of 1,454 of the 5,047 participants in the GRADE cohort, including 534 non-Hispanic White (NHW), 389 non-Hispanic Black (NHB), and 327 Hispanic White patients and 204 patients of other racial/ethnic backgrounds, were included in the substudy. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) performed for 10 days was used to calculate AG10. Immediately after CGM, HbA1c and glycated albumin were measured. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and glucose area under the curve (AUC) were derived from a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test., Results: The relationship between AG10 and HbA1c was significantly different for NHB compared with NHW patients and those of other racial/ethnic groups. HbA1c levels were 0.2-0.6 percentage points higher in NHB than in NHW patients for AG10 levels from 100 to 250 mg/dL. For an HbA1c of 7%, AG10 was 11 mg/dL higher for NHW than for NHB patients. Similar findings were observed across races for relationships of FPG and AUC with HbA1c and for glucose measurements with glycated albumin levels. Differences in the relationship between AG10 and HbA1c across racial groups remained after adjustments for any demographic or other differences between racial/ethnic subgroups., Conclusions: The relationship between several measures of glucose with HbA1c and glycated albumin consistently differed across races. These findings should be considered in setting treatment goals and diagnostic levels., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)