Search

Objective: To gain insight into the current management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus by Canadian primary care physicians., Method: A total of 479 primary care physicians from across Canada submitted data on 5123 type 2 diabetes patients whom they had seen on a single day on or around World Diabetes Day, November 14, 2012., Results: Mean glycated hemoglobin (A1C) was 7.4%, low-density lipoprotein (LDL-C) was 2.1 mmol/L and blood pressure (BP) was 128/75 mm Hg. A1C ≤7.0% was met by 50%, LDL-C ≤2.0 mmol/L by 57%, BP <130/80 mm Hg by 36% and the composite triple target by 13% of patients. Diet counselling had been offered to 38% of patients. Of the 87% prescribed antihyperglycemic agents, 18% were on 1 non-insulin antihyperglycemic agent (NIAHA) (85% of which was metformin), 15% were on 2 NIAHAs, 6% were on ≥3 NIAHAs, 19% were on insulin only and 42% were on insulin + ≥1 NIAHA(s). Amongst the 81% prescribed lipid-lowering therapy, 88% were on monotherapy (97% of which was a statin). Among the 83% prescribed antihypertensive agents, 39%, 34%, 21% and 6% received 1, 2, 3 and >3 drugs, respectively, with 59% prescribed angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and 35% angiotensin II receptor blockers., Conclusions: The Diabetes Mellitus Status in Canada survey highlights the persistent treatment gap associated with the treatment of type 2 diabetes and the challenges faced by primary care physicians to gain glycemic control and global vascular protection in these patients. It also reveals a higher use of insulin therapy in primary care practices relative to previous surveys. Practical strategies aimed at more effectively managing type 2 diabetes patients are urgently needed., (Copyright © 2013 Canadian Diabetes Association. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Impaired glucose tolerance and metabolic syndrome are associated with increased risk of heart failure (HF). However, predictors associated with the increased risk of incident HF have not been well characterized. We aimed to identify independent predictors of incident HF hospitalization among patients with impaired glucose tolerance., Methods and Results: In Nateglinide and Valsartan in Impaired Glucose Tolerance Outcomes Research (NAVIGATOR), 9306 research participants with impaired glucose tolerance and ≥1 cardiovascular risk factors were randomized to valsartan versus placebo and nateglinide versus placebo in a 2×2 factorial manner, with a median follow-up of 6.5 years. Using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model, we analyzed the relationships among baseline clinical factors and the outcome of incident HF hospitalization in patients without history of HF. Significant predictors were identified by forward selection. Increasing age, history of coronary heart disease, and atrial fibrillation or flutter were among several known independent predictors of incident HF hospitalization. Increased waist circumference (hazard ratio per 10 cm, 1.37; 95% confidence interval, 1.21-1.55; P<0.001) and increased urinary albumin-creatinine ratio (P<0.001) were identified as novel predictors. The predictive model for incident HF hospitalization showed good discrimination, with an optimism-corrected C-index of 0.79., Conclusions: Among research participants with impaired glucose tolerance, there are several easily identifiable predictors of incident HF hospitalization, including traditional risk factors and novel indices of central adiposity and increased urinary albumin-creatinine ratio, which enable further risk stratification and help distinguish patients who could benefit from more aggressive risk factor management.

Background and Aims: Nutrition recommendations for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are partly guided by the postprandial responses elicited by diets varying in carbohydrate (CHO). We aimed to explore whether long-term changes in postprandial responses on low-glycemic-index (GI) or low-CHO diets were due to acute or chronic effects in T2DM., Methods and Results: Subjects with diet-alone-treated T2DM were randomly assigned to high-CHO/high-GI (H), high-CHO/low-GI (L), or low-CHO/high-monounsaturated-fat (M) diets for 12-months. At week-0 (Baseline) postprandial responses after H-meals (55% CHO, GI = 61) were measured from 0800 h to 1600 h. After 12 mo subjects were randomly assigned to H-meals or study diet meals (L, 57% CHO, GI = 50; M, 44% CHO, GI = 61). This yielded 5 groups: H diet with H-meals (HH, n = 34); L diet with H- (LH, n = 17) or L-meals (LL, n = 16); and M diet with H- (MH, n = 18) or M meals (MM, n = 19). Postprandial glucose fluctuations were lower in LL than all other groups (p < 0.001). Changes in postprandial-triglycerides differed among groups (p < 0.001). After 12 mo in HH and MM both fasting- and postprandial-triglycerides were similar to Baseline while in MH postprandial-triglycerides were significantly higher than at Baseline (p = 0.028). In LH, triglycerides were consistently (0.18-0.34 mmol/L) higher than Baseline throughout the day, while in LL the difference from Baseline varied across the day from 0.04 to 0.36 mmol/L (p < 0.001)., Conclusion: Low-GI and low-CHO diets have both acute and chronic effects on postprandial glucose and triglycerides in T2DM subjects. Thus, the composition of the acute test-meal and the habitual diet should be considered when interpreting the nutritional implications of different postprandial responses., (Copyright © 2012 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Many developments have occurred since the publication of the widely-used 2009 Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) Dyslipidemia guidelines. Here, we present an updated version of the guidelines, incorporating new recommendations based on recent findings and harmonizing CCS guidelines with those from other Societies. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used, per present standards of the CCS. The total cardiovascular disease Framingham Risk Score (FRS), modified for a family history of premature coronary disease, is recommended for risk assessment. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol remains the primary target of therapy. However, non-high density lipoprotein cholesterol has been added to apolipoprotein B as an alternate target. There is an increased emphasis on treatment of higher risk patients, including those with chronic kidney disease and high risk hypertension. The primary panel has recommended a judicious use of secondary testing for subjects in whom the need for statin therapy is unclear. Expanded information on health behaviours is presented and is the backbone of risk reduction in all subjects. Finally, a systematic approach to statin intolerance is advocated to maximize appropriate use of lipid-lowering therapy. This document presents the recommendations and principal conclusions of this process. Along with associated Supplementary Material that can be accessed online, this document will be part of a program of knowledge translation. The goal is to increase the appropriate use of evidence-based cardiovascular disease event risk assessment in the management of dyslipidemia as a fundamental means of reducing global risk in the Canadian population., (Copyright © 2013 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Risk factors for cardiovascular events are well established in general populations and those with diabetes but have been sparsely studied in impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). We sought to identify predictors of (1) a composite cardiovascular outcome (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction and non-fatal stroke) and (2) cardiovascular death, among patients with IGT., Design: We studied participants enrolled in the Nateglinide and Valsartan in Impaired Glucose Tolerance Outcomes Research (NAVIGATOR) trial. Predictors of cardiovascular events were identified in observational analyses., Setting: Clinical trial participants in 40 countries., Participants: 9306 participants with biochemically confirmed IGT at high risk of cardiovascular events participated in NAVIGATOR., Primary and Secondary Outcome Measures: Cox proportional hazard regression models were constructed using variables (demographic data, medical history, clinical features, biochemical results and ECG findings) recorded at baseline to identify variables associated with and predictive of cardiovascular events., Results: Over 6.4 years, 639 (6.9%) participants experienced a cardiovascular event, and 244 (2.6%) cardiovascular death. While predictors of both outcomes included established risk factors such as existing cardiovascular disease, male gender, older age, current smoking status and higher low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, other variables such as reduced estimated glomerular filtration rate, previous thromboembolic disease, atrial fibrillation, higher urinary albumin/creatinine ratio and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease were also important predictors. Glycaemic measures were not predictive of cardiovascular events. c-Statistics for predicting cardiovascular events and cardiovascular death were 0.74 and 0.82, respectively. This compares with c-statistics for cardiovascular events and cardiovascular death of 0.65 and 0.71, respectively, using the classical Framingham risk factors of age, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, systolic blood pressure, treatment for hypertension and smoking status., Conclusions: The most powerful independent predictors of cardiovascular events in IGT included both established risk factors and other variables excluding measures of glycaemia, allowing effective identification of high-risk individuals.

Background: In observational analyses, higher levels of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol have been associated with a lower risk of coronary heart disease events. However, whether raising HDL cholesterol levels therapeutically reduces cardiovascular risk remains uncertain. Inhibition of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) raises HDL cholesterol levels and might therefore improve cardiovascular outcomes., Methods: We randomly assigned 15,871 patients who had had a recent acute coronary syndrome to receive the CETP inhibitor dalcetrapib, at a dose of 600 mg daily, or placebo, in addition to the best available evidence-based care. The primary efficacy end point was a composite of death from coronary heart disease, nonfatal myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, unstable angina, or cardiac arrest with resuscitation., Results: At the time of randomization, the mean HDL cholesterol level was 42 mg per deciliter (1.1 mmol per liter), and the mean low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level was 76 mg per deciliter (2.0 mmol per liter). Over the course of the trial, HDL cholesterol levels increased from baseline by 4 to 11% in the placebo group and by 31 to 40% in the dalcetrapib group. Dalcetrapib had a minimal effect on LDL cholesterol levels. Patients were followed for a median of 31 months. At a prespecified interim analysis that included 1135 primary end-point events (71% of the projected total number), the independent data and safety monitoring board recommended termination of the trial for futility. As compared with placebo, dalcetrapib did not alter the risk of the primary end point (cumulative event rate, 8.0% and 8.3%, respectively; hazard ratio with dalcetrapib, 1.04; 95% confidence interval, 0.93 to 1.16; P=0.52) and did not have a significant effect on any component of the primary end point or total mortality. The median C-reactive protein level was 0.2 mg per liter higher and the mean systolic blood pressure was 0.6 mm Hg higher with dalcetrapib as compared with placebo (P<0.001 for both comparisons)., Conclusions: In patients who had had a recent acute coronary syndrome, dalcetrapib increased HDL cholesterol levels but did not reduce the risk of recurrent cardiovascular events. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; dal-OUTCOMES ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00658515.).

Background: Legumes, including beans, chickpeas, and lentils, are among the lowest glycemic index (GI) foods and have been recommended in national diabetes mellitus (DM) guidelines. Yet, to our knowledge, they have never been used specifically to lower the GI of the diet. We have therefore undertaken a study of low-GI foods in type 2 DM with a focus on legumes in the intervention., Methods: A total of 121 participants with type 2 DM were randomized to either a low-GI legume diet that encouraged participants to increase legume intake by at least 1 cup per day, or to increase insoluble fiber by consumption of whole wheat products, for 3 months. The primary outcome was change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values with calculated coronary heart disease (CHD) risk score as a secondary outcome., Results: The low-GI legume diet reduced HbA1c values by -0.5% (95% CI, -0.6% to -0.4%) and the high wheat fiber diet reduced HbA1c values by -0.3% (95% CI, -0.4% to -0.2%). The relative reduction in HbA1c values after the low-GI legume diet was greater than after the high wheat fiber diet by -0.2% (95% CI, -0.3% to -0.1%; P < .001). The respective CHD risk reduction on the low-GI legume diet was -0.8% (95% CI, -1.4% to -0.3%; P = .003), largely owing to a greater relative reduction in systolic blood pressure on the low-GI legume diet compared with the high wheat fiber diet (-4.5 mm Hg; 95% CI, -7.0 to -2.1 mm Hg; P < .001)., Conclusion: Incorporation of legumes as part of a low-GI diet improved both glycemic control and reduced calculated CHD risk score in type 2 DM.

Many patients remain at high risk for future cardiovascular events despite levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) at, or below, target while taking statin therapy. Much effort is therefore being focused on strategies to reduce this residual risk. High-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) is a strong, independent, inverse predictor of coronary heart disease risk and is therefore an attractive therapeutic target. Currently available agents that raise HDL-C have only modest effects and there is limited evidence of additional cardiovascular risk reduction on top of background statin therapy associated with their use. It was hoped that the use of cholesteryl ester transfer protein (CETP) inhibitors would provide additional benefit, but the results of clinical outcome studies to date have been disappointing. The results of ongoing trials with other CETP inhibitors that raise HDL-C to a greater degree and also lower LDL-C, as well as with other emerging therapies are awaited., (Copyright © 2012 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

BACKGROUND Treatment of hypertension in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) has been shown to improve cardiovascular outcomes; however, the value of intensive blood pressure (BP) targets remains uncertain. We sought to determine the effectiveness and safety of treating BP to intensive targets (upper limit of 130 mm Hg systolic and 80 mm Hg diastolic) compared with standard targets (upper limit of 140-160 mm Hg systolic and 85-100 mm Hg diastolic) in patients with type 2 DM. METHODS Using electronic databases, bibliographies, and clinical trial registries, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to identify randomized trials enrolling adults diagnosed as having type 2 DM and comparing prespecified BP targets. Data on study characteristics, risk for bias, and outcomes were collected. Random-effects models were used to pool relative risks and risk differences for mortality, myocardial infarction, and stroke. RESULTS The use of intensive BP targets was not associated with a significant decrease in the risk for mortality (relative risk difference, 0.76; 95% CI, 0.55-1.05) or myocardial infarction (relative risk difference, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.80-1.08) but was associated with a decrease in the risk for stroke (relative risk, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48-0.86). The pooled analysis of risk differences associated with the use of intensive BP targets demonstrated a small absolute decrease in the risk for stroke (absolute risk difference, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to -0.00) but no statistically significant difference in the risk for mortality or myocardial infarction. CONCLUSION Although the use of intensive compared with standard BP targets in patients with type 2 DM is associated with a small reduction in the risk for stroke, evidence does not show that intensive targets reduce the risk for mortality or myocardial infarction.

Contrary to concerns that fructose may have adverse metabolic effects, there is evidence that small, 'catalytic' doses ( ≤ 10 g/meal) of fructose decrease the glycaemic response to high-glycaemic index meals in human subjects. To assess the longer-term effects of 'catalytic' doses of fructose, we undertook a meta-analysis of controlled feeding trials. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Library. Analyses included all controlled feeding trials ≥ 7 d featuring 'catalytic' fructose doses ( ≤ 36 g/d) in isoenergetic exchange for other carbohydrates. Data were pooled by the generic inverse variance method using random-effects models and expressed as mean differences (MD) with 95 % CI. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Q statistic and quantified by I 2. The Heyland Methodological Quality Score assessed study quality. A total of six feeding trials (n 118) met the eligibility criteria. 'Catalytic' doses of fructose significantly reduced HbA1c (MD - 0·40, 95 % CI - 0·72, - 0·08) and fasting glucose (MD - 0·25, 95 % CI - 0·44, - 0·07). This benefit was seen in the absence of adverse effects on fasting insulin, body weight, TAG or uric acid. Subgroup and sensitivity analyses showed evidence of effect modification under certain conditions. The small number of trials and their relatively short duration limit the strength of the conclusions. In conclusion, this small meta-analysis shows that 'catalytic' fructose doses ( ≤ 36 g/d) may improve glycaemic control without adverse effects on body weight, TAG, insulin and uric acid. There is a need for larger, longer ( ≥ 6 months) trials using 'catalytic' fructose to confirm these results.

Objective: Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble co-formulation of insulin degludec (70%) and insulin aspart (IAsp: 30%). Here, we compare the efficacy and safety of IDegAsp, an alternative IDegAsp formulation (AF: containing 45% IAsp), and biphasic IAsp 30 (BIAsp 30)., Design: Sixteen-week, open-label, randomised, treat-to-target trial., Methods: Insulin-naive subjects with type 2 diabetes (18-75 years) and a HbA1c of 7-11% were randomised to twice-daily IDegAsp (n=61), AF (n=59) or BIAsp 30 (n=62), all in combination with metformin. Insulin was administered pre-breakfast and dinner (main evening meal) and titrated to pre-breakfast and pre-dinner plasma glucose (PG) targets of 4.0-6.0 mmol/l., Results: Mean HbA1c after 16 weeks was comparable for IDegAsp, AF and BIAsp 30 (6.7, 6.6 and 6.7% respectively). With IDegAsp, 67% of subjects achieved HbA1c 7.0% Without confirmed hypoglycaemia in the last 4 weeks of treatment compared with 53% (AF) and 40% (BIAsp 30). Mean fasting PG was significantly lower for IDegAsp vs BIAsp 30 (treatment difference (TD): -0.99 mmol/l (95% confidence interval: -1.68; 0.29)) and AF vs BIAsp 30 (TD: -0.88 mmol/l (-1.58; -0.18)). A significant, 58% lower rate of confirmed hypoglycaemia was found for IDegAsp vs BIAsp 30 (rate ratio (RR): 0.42 (0.23; 0.75)); rates were similar for AF vs BIAsp 30 (RR: 0.92 (0.54; 1.57)). IDegAsp and AF had numerically lower rates of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia vs BIAsp 30 (RR: 0.33 (0.09; 1.14) and 0.66 (0.22; 1.93) respectively)., Conclusions: IDegAsp provided comparable overall glycaemic control to BIAsp 30 with a significantly lower rate of hypoglycaemia.

Objective: The effect of fructose on cardiometabolic risk in humans is controversial. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled feeding trials to clarify the effect of fructose on glycemic control in individuals with diabetes., Research Design and Methods: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (through 22 March 2012) for relevant trials lasting ≥7 days. Data were aggregated by the generic inverse variance method (random-effects models) and expressed as mean difference (MD) for fasting glucose and insulin and standardized MD (SMD) with 95% CI for glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) and glycated albumin. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Cochran Q statistic and quantified by the I(2) statistic. Trial quality was assessed by the Heyland methodological quality score (MQS)., Results: Eighteen trials (n = 209) met the eligibility criteria. Isocaloric exchange of fructose for carbohydrate reduced glycated blood proteins (SMD -0.25 [95% CI -0.46 to -0.04]; P = 0.02) with significant intertrial heterogeneity (I(2) = 63%; P = 0.001). This reduction is equivalent to a ~0.53% reduction in HbA(1c). Fructose consumption did not significantly affect fasting glucose or insulin. A priori subgroup analyses showed no evidence of effect modification on any end point., Conclusions: Isocaloric exchange of fructose for other carbohydrate improves long-term glycemic control, as assessed by glycated blood proteins, without affecting insulin in people with diabetes. Generalizability may be limited because most of the trials were <12 weeks and had relatively low MQS (<8). To confirm these findings, larger and longer fructose feeding trials assessing both possible glycemic benefit and adverse metabolic effects are required.

We report the case of a 57-year-old woman with gastric carcinoid. The tumor was surgically removed and immunohistochemical investigation demonstrated a rare combination: ghrelin and serotonin in the cytoplasm of the tumor cells. The functional significance of simultaneous production of ghrelin and serotonin is not clear. It may be that an autocrine/paracrine interaction exists between these two different hormones.

The aim of this study was to determine the effects of atorvastatin in patients of South Asian versus European origin who participated in the Achieve Cholesterol Targets Fast with Atorvastatin Stratified Titration (ACTFAST) study. ACTFAST was a 12-week prospective, open-label study in patients at high risk for atherosclerosis (European origin, n = 1978; South Asian origin, n = 64). Compared with patients of European origin, patients of South Asian origin were younger, were less likely to smoke, and had lower body mass index, systolic blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and triglycerides. Because significant differences were observed in baseline characteristics between patient groups, case control propensity scores were used. In the unmatched analysis, South Asians had greater LDL-C response to atorvastatin than patients of European origin. However, after propensity matching, atorvastatin lowered LDL-C and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) to a similar degree in both groups, with no differences in safety profile. The authors observed no correlation between change in hs-CRP and LDL-C concentrations in either population. In conclusion, atorvastatin lowered both LDL-C and hs-CRP to a similar degree in patients of South Asian or European origin, suggesting usual starting doses of atorvastatin (with appropriate monitoring), rather than lower starting doses as has been advocated by some, may be used in patients of South Asian origin.

We updated the evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension in adults for 2012. The new recommendations are: (1) use of home blood pressure monitoring to confirm a diagnosis of white coat syndrome; (2) mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists may be used in selected patients with hypertension and systolic heart failure; (3) a history of atrial fibrillation in patients with hypertension should not be a factor in deciding to prescribe an angiotensin-receptor blocker for the treatment of hypertension; and (4) the blood pressure target for patients with nondiabetic chronic kidney disease has now been changed to < 140/90 mm Hg from < 130/80 mm Hg. We also reviewed the recent evidence on blood pressure targets for patients with hypertension and diabetes and continue to recommend a blood pressure target of less than 130/80 mm Hg., (Copyright © 2012 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To prospectively evaluate diabetes management in the primary care setting and explore factors related to guideline-recommended triple target achievement [blood pressure (BP) ≤ 130/80 mmHg, A1C ≤ 7% and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol < 2.5 mmol/l]., Methods: Baseline, 6 and 12 month data on clinical and laboratory parameters were measured in 3002 patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled as part of a prospective quality enhancement research initiative in Canada. A generalised estimating equation model was fitted to assess variables associated with triple target achievement., Results: At baseline, 54%, 53% and 64% of patients, respectively, had BP, A1C and LDL-cholesterol at target; all three goals were met by 19% of patients. The percentage of individuals achieving these targets significantly increased during the study [60%, 57%, 76% and 26%, respectively, at the final visit, p < 0.0001 except for A1C, p = 0.27]. A much smaller proportion of patients had adequate control during the entire study period [30%, 39%, 53% and 7%, respectively]. In multivariable analysis, women, patients younger than 65 years and patients of Afro-Canadian origin were less likely to achieve the triple target., Discussion: As part of a quality enhancement research initiative, we observed important improvements in the attainment of guidelines-recommended targets in patients with type 2 diabetes followed for a 12-month period in the primary care setting; however, many individuals still failed to achieve and especially maintain optimal goals for therapy, particularly the triple target. Results of the multivariable analysis reinforce the need to address barriers to improve diabetes care, particularly in more susceptible groups., (© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Hyperuricemia is linked to gout and features of metabolic syndrome. There is concern that dietary fructose may increase uric acid concentrations. To assess the effects of fructose on serum uric acid concentrations in people with and without diabetes, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled feeding trials. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library for relevant trials (through August 19, 2011). Analyses included all controlled feeding trials ≥ 7 d investigating the effect of fructose feeding on uric acid under isocaloric conditions, where fructose was isocalorically exchanged with other carbohydrate, or hypercaloric conditions, and where a control diet was supplemented with excess energy from fructose. Data were aggregated by the generic inverse variance method using random effects models and expressed as mean difference (MD) with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Q statistic and quantified by I(2). A total of 21 trials in 425 participants met the eligibility criteria. Isocaloric exchange of fructose for other carbohydrate did not affect serum uric acid in diabetic and nondiabetic participants [MD = 0.56 μmol/L (95% CI: -6.62, 7.74)], with no evidence of inter-study heterogeneity. Hypercaloric supplementation of control diets with fructose (+35% excess energy) at extreme doses (213-219 g/d) significantly increased serum uric acid compared with the control diets alone in nondiabetic participants [MD = 31.0 mmol/L (95% CI: 15.4, 46.5)] with no evidence of heterogeneity. Confounding from excess energy cannot be ruled out in the hypercaloric trials. These analyses do not support a uric acid-increasing effect of isocaloric fructose intake in nondiabetic and diabetic participants. Hypercaloric fructose intake may, however, increase uric acid concentrations. The effect of the interaction of energy and fructose remains unclear. Larger, well-designed trials of fructose feeding at "real world" doses are needed.

Concerns have been raised about the adverse effect of fructose on blood pressure. International dietary guidelines, however, have not addressed fructose intake directly. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to assess the effect of fructose in isocaloric exchange for other carbohydrates on systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressures. Studies were identified using Medline, Embase, and Cochrane databases (through January 9, 2012). Human clinical trials of isocaloric oral fructose exchange for other carbohydrate sources for ≥7 days were included in the analysis. Data were pooled by the generic inverse variance method using random-effects models and expressed as mean differences with 95% CI. Heterogeneity was assessed by the Q-statistic and quantified by I(2). Study quality was assessed using the Heyland Methodological Quality Score. Thirteen isocaloric (n=352) and 2 hypercaloric (n=24) trials met the eligibility criteria. Overall, fructose intake in isocaloric exchange for other carbohydrates significantly decreased diastolic (mean difference: -1.54 [95% CI: -2.77 to -0.32]) and mean arterial pressure (mean difference: -1.16 [95% CI: -2.15 to -0.18]). There was no significant effect of fructose on systolic blood pressure (mean difference: -1.10 [95% CI: -2.46 to 0.44]). The hypercaloric fructose feeding trials found no significant overall mean arterial blood pressure effect of fructose in comparison with other carbohydrates. To confirm these results, longer and larger trials are needed. Contrary to previous concerns, we found that isocaloric substitution of fructose for other carbohydrates did not adversely affect blood pressure in humans.

Background: The prevalence of persistent lipid abnormalities in patients receiving statins in primary and secondary care is needed to formulate recommendations for future treatment. Studies associating cardiovascular risk factors with lipid target goal achievement are lacking., Design: A cross-sectional, observational study that assessed the prevalence of persistent dyslipidemia in patients treated with statins and analyzed predictors of lipid target achievement., Methods: Serum lipid values of 22,063 statin-treated patients were studied in the context of their cardiovascular risk factors, and the potency and composition of their lipid-lowering treatment. European Society of Cardiology recommendations were used to classify patient risk, and to define LDL-cholesterol goal and normal levels for HDL-cholesterol and triglycerides., Results: Overall, 48.2% of patients did not achieve the therapeutic goal for LDL-cholesterol, either as a single lipid anomaly or associated with low HDL-cholesterol, elevated triglycerides, or both. Lack of goal achievement was more prevalent among low-risk patients (55.8%) than high-risk patients (46.8%). Serum LDL-cholesterol levels were lower in high-risk patients. Predictors associated with LDL-cholesterol goal achievement were higher statin dose (odds ratio (OR): 0.35), specialist treatment (OR: 0.74), or combined lipid-lowering therapy (OR: 0.80)., Conclusions: Nearly half of statin-treated patients missed their therapeutic LDL-cholesterol goal, highlighting a gap between recommendations and clinical practice. Better achievement of LDL-cholesterol therapeutic goal was found among patients at high cardiovascular risk, those on high statin doses or using combination therapy, and patients managed by specialists. Results suggest that residual dyslipidemia in statin-treated patients at low cardiovascular risk may be reduced by increasing statin dose.

Background: The contribution of fructose consumption in Western diets to overweight and obesity in populations remains uncertain., Purpose: To review the effects of fructose on body weight in controlled feeding trials., Data Sources: MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library (through 18 November 2011)., Study Selection: At least 3 reviewers identified controlled feeding trials lasting 7 or more days that compared the effect on body weight of free fructose and nonfructose carbohydrate in diets providing similar calories (isocaloric trials) or of diets supplemented with free fructose to provide excess energy and usual or control diets (hypercaloric trials). Trials evaluating high-fructose corn syrup (42% to 55% free fructose) were excluded., Data Extraction: The reviewers independently reviewed and extracted relevant data; disagreements were reconciled by consensus. The Heyland Methodological Quality Score was used to assess study quality., Data Synthesis: Thirty-one isocaloric trials (637 participants) and 10 hypercaloric trials (119 participants) were included; studies tended to be small (<15 participants), short (<12 weeks), and of low quality. Fructose had no overall effect on body weight in isocaloric trials (mean difference, -0.14 kg [95% CI, -0.37 to 0.10 kg] for fructose compared with nonfructose carbohydrate). High doses of fructose in hypercaloric trials (+104 to 250 g/d, +18% to 97% of total daily energy intake) lead to significant increases in weight (mean difference, 0.53 kg [CI, 0.26 to 0.79 kg] with fructose)., Limitations: Most trials had methodological limitations and were of poor quality. The weight-increasing effect of fructose in hypercaloric trials may have been attributable to excess energy rather than fructose itself., Conclusion: Fructose does not seem to cause weight gain when it is substituted for other carbohydrates in diets providing similar calories. Free fructose at high doses that provided excess calories modestly increased body weight, an effect that may be due to the extra calories rather than the fructose., Primary Funding Source: Canadian Institutes of Health Research. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT01363791).

Background: Age, gender, and race are factors that influence atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD) risk and may conceivably affect the efficacy of lipid-altering drugs., Methods: Post hoc analysis of two multicenter, 6-week, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group trials assessed age (<65 and ≥ 65 years), gender, and race (white, black, and other) effects on atorvastatin plus ezetimibe versus up-titration of atorvastatin in hypercholesterolemic patients with CHD risk. High CHD risk subjects with low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels ≥ 70 mg/dL (~1.81 mmol/L) during stable atorvastatin 40 mg therapy were randomized to atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe 10mg, or up-titrated to atorvastatin 80 mg. Moderately high CHD risk subjects with LDL cholesterol levels ≥ 100 mg/dL (~2.59 mmol/L) with atorvastatin 20mg were randomized to atorvastatin 20mg plus ezetimibe 10mg, or atorvastatin 40 mg., Results: Although some variability existed, age, gender, and race subgroups did not substantially differ from the entire patient population with regard to lipid-altering findings. Ezetimibe plus atorvastatin produced greater percent reductions in LDL cholesterol, total cholesterol, triglycerides, non-high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, and apolipoprotein B than up-titration of atorvastatin for all subgroups. HDL cholesterol and apolipoprotein AI changes were small and variable., Conclusion: Treatment efficacy in age, gender, and race subgroups did not substantially differ from the entire study population. Ezetimibe combined with atorvastatin generally produced greater incremental reductions in LDL cholesterol and several other key lipid parameters compared with doubling the atorvastatin dose in hypercholesterolemic patients with high or moderately high CHD risk. These results suggest that co-administration of ezetimibe with statins is a useful therapeutic option for treatment of dyslipidemia in differing patient populations., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aim: To assess the prevalence of persistent lipid abnormalities in statin-treated patients with diabetes with and without the metabolic syndrome., Methods: This was a cross-sectional study of 22,063 statin-treated outpatients consecutively recruited by clinicians in Canada and 11 European countries. Patient cardiovascular risk factors, risk level, lipid measurements and lipid-modifying medication regimens were recorded., Results: Of the 20,129 subjects who had documented diabetes and/or metabolic syndrome status, 41% had diabetes (of whom 86.8% also had the metabolic syndrome). Of those with diabetes, 48.1% were not at total cholesterol target compared with 58% of those without diabetes. Amongst those with diabetes, 41.6 and 41.3% of those with and without the metabolic syndrome, respectively, were not at their LDL cholesterol goal relative to 54.2% of those with metabolic syndrome and without diabetes, and 52% of those with neither condition. Twenty per cent of people with diabetes but without the metabolic syndrome were not at the optimal HDL cholesterol level compared with 9% of those with neither condition. Of people with diabetes and the metabolic syndrome, 49.9% were not at optimal triglyceride level relative to 13.5% of people with neither diabetes nor the metabolic syndrome. Simvastatin was the most commonly prescribed statin (>45%) and the most common statin potency was 20-40 mg/day (simvastatin equivalent). Approximately 14% of patients were taking ezetimibe alone or in combination with a statin., Conclusions: Despite evidence supporting the benefits of lipid modification and international guideline recommendations, statin-treated patients with diabetes had a high prevalence of persistent lipid abnormalities. There is frequently room to optimize therapy through statin dose up-titration and/or addition of other lipid-modifying therapies., (© 2011 The Authors. Diabetic Medicine © 2011 Diabetes UK.)

The well-documented lipid-lowering effects of fibre may be related to its viscosity, a phenomenon that has been understudied, especially when fibre is given against the background of a typical North American (NA) diet. In this three-arm experiment, we compared the lipid-lowering effect of low-viscosity wheat bran (WB), medium-viscosity psyllium (PSY) and a high-viscosity viscous fibre blend (VFB), as part of a fibre intervention aimed at increasing fibre intake to recommended levels within the context of a NA diet in apparently healthy individuals. Using a randomised cross-over design, twenty-three participants (twelve males and eleven females; age 35 (SD 12) years; LDL-cholesterol (C) 2.9 (SEM 0.6) mmol/l) consuming a typical NA diet received a standard, fibre-enriched cereal, where approximately one-third of the fibre was either a low-viscosity (570 centipoise (cP)) WB, medium-viscosity (14,300 cP) PSY or a high-viscosity (136,300 cP) novel VFB, for 3 weeks separated by washout periods of ≥ 2 weeks. There were no differences among the treatments in the amount of food consumed, total dietary fibre intake, reported physical activity and body weight. Final intake of the WB, PSY and VFB was 10.8, 9.0 and 5.1 g, respectively. Reduction in LDL-C was greater with the VFB compared with the medium-viscosity PSY (-12.6 (SEM 3.5) %, P = 0.002) and low-viscosity WB (-14.6 (SEM 4.2) %, P = 0.003). The magnitude of LDL-C reduction showed a positive association with fibre apparent viscosity (r - 0.41, P = 0.001). Despite the smaller quantity consumed, the high-viscosity fibre lowered LDL-C to a greater extent than lower-viscosity fibres. These data support the inclusion of high-viscosity fibre in the diet to reduce plasma lipids among apparently healthy individuals consuming a typical NA diet.

Objective: To summarize the evidence for the need to improve pharmacologic management of hypertension in people with type 2 diabetes and to provide expert advice on how blood pressure (BP) treatment can be improved in primary care., Sources of Information: Studies were obtained by performing a systematic review of the literature on hypertension and diabetes, from which management recommendations were developed, reviewed, and voted on by a group of experts selected by the Canadian Hypertension Education Program and the Canadian Diabetes Association; authors' expert opinions on optimal pharmacologic management were also considered during this process., Main Message: The pathogenesis of hypertension in patients with diabetes is complex, involving a range of biological and environmental factors and genetic predisposition; as a result, hypertension in people with diabetes incurs higher associated risks and adverse events. Mortality and morbidity are heightened in diabetes patients who do not achieve BP control (ie, a target value of less than 130/80 mm Hg). Large randomized controlled trials and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials have shown that reducing BP pharmacologically is single-handedly the most effective way to reduce rates of death and disability in patients with diabetes, particularly associated cardiovascular risks. Often, combinations of 2 or more drugs (diuretics, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, β-blockers, angiotensin receptor blockers, calcium channel blockers, spironolactone, etc) are required for pharmacotherapy to be effective, particularly for patients in whom BP is difficult to control. However, the health care costs associated with extensively lowering BP are substantially less than the costs associated with treating the complications that can be prevented by lowering BP., Conclusion: Detecting and managing hypertension in people with diabetes is one of the most effective measures to prevent adverse events, and pharmacotherapy is one of the most effective ways to maintain target BP levels in primary care.

Context: Combining foods with recognized cholesterol-lowering properties (dietary portfolio) has proven highly effective in lowering serum cholesterol under metabolically controlled conditions., Objective: To assess the effect of a dietary portfolio administered at 2 levels of intensity on percentage change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) among participants following self-selected diets., Design, Setting, and Participants: A parallel-design study of 351 participants with hyperlipidemia from 4 participating academic centers across Canada (Quebec City, Toronto, Winnipeg, and Vancouver) randomized between June 25, 2007, and February 19, 2009, to 1 of 3 treatments lasting 6 months., Intervention: Participants received dietary advice for 6 months on either a low-saturated fat therapeutic diet (control) or a dietary portfolio, for which counseling was delivered at different frequencies, that emphasized dietary incorporation of plant sterols, soy protein, viscous fibers, and nuts. Routine dietary portfolio involved 2 clinic visits over 6 months and intensive dietary portfolio involved 7 clinic visits over 6 months., Main Outcome Measures: Percentage change in serum LDL-C., Results: In the modified intention-to-treat analysis of 345 participants, the overall attrition rate was not significantly different between treatments (18% for intensive dietary portfolio, 23% for routine dietary portfolio, and 26% for control; Fisher exact test, P = .33). The LDL-C reductions from an overall mean of 171 mg/dL (95% confidence interval [CI], 168-174 mg/dL) were -13.8% (95% CI, -17.2% to -10.3%; P < .001) or -26 mg/dL (95% CI, -31 to -21 mg/dL; P < .001) for the intensive dietary portfolio; -13.1% (95% CI, -16.7% to -9.5%; P < .001) or -24 mg/dL (95% CI, -30 to -19 mg/dL; P < .001) for the routine dietary portfolio; and -3.0% (95% CI, -6.1% to 0.1%; P = .06) or -8 mg/dL (95% CI, -13 to -3 mg/dL; P = .002) for the control diet. Percentage LDL-C reductions for each dietary portfolio were significantly more than the control diet (P < .001, respectively). The 2 dietary portfolio interventions did not differ significantly (P = .66). Among participants randomized to one of the dietary portfolio interventions, percentage reduction in LDL-C on the dietary portfolio was associated with dietary adherence (r = -0.34, n = 157, P < .001)., Conclusion: Use of a dietary portfolio compared with the low-saturated fat dietary advice resulted in greater LDL-C lowering during 6 months of follow-up., Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00438425.

Background: There are limited data on the contemporary management and outcomes of non-ST-elevation acute coronary syndrome (NSTE-ACS) patients with diabetes in the "real world." We sought to evaluate (1) the temporal changes in the medical and invasive management and (2) in-hospital outcome of NSTE-ACS patients with and without diabetes., Methods: We included Canadian patients hospitalized for NSTE-ACS enrolled in 4 consecutive, prospective, multicenter registries: Canadian ACS-I (n = 3259; 1999-2001), ACS-II (n = 1,956; 2002-2003), Global Registry of Acute Coronary Events (GRACE/GRACE2 [n = 7,561; 2004-2007]) and Canadian Registry of Acute Coronary Events (n = 1,326; 2008). Participants were stratified by the presence or absence of preexisting diabetes on admission. Temporal changes in patient management and outcomes were evaluated across the 4 registries. Multivariable analyses were performed to determine the independent prognostic significance of diabetes., Results: Of the 14,102 NSTE-ACS patients, 4,046 (28.7%) had previously diagnosed diabetes. Patients with diabetes were older; were more likely to have prior cardiac history including myocardial infarction, revascularization, and heart failure; and had worse Killip class and higher GRACE risk score (all P < .001). Over time, there were significant increases in the use of in-hospital coronary angiography and revascularization. However, diabetic patients were less likely to undergo coronary angiography (52.5% vs 57%, P < .001) or revascularization (28.4% vs 33.4%, P < .001). The underuse of invasive procedures in diabetic patients was seen in all registries and was persistent over time. Overall, compared with the group without diabetes, diabetic patients had higher unadjusted rates of in-hospital mortality (3.0% vs 1.6%, P < .001). In multivariable analysis adjusting for components of the GRACE risk score, diabetes remained an independent predictor of in-hospital death (adjusted odds ratio 1.66, 95% CI 1.30-2.11, P < .001)., Conclusions: Over the last decade, NSTE-ACS patients with diabetes continue to be treated more conservatively, despite evidence that they would derive similar or even greater benefits from aggressive treatment. This underutilization of evidence-based therapies among diabetic patients with NSTE-ACS in the "real world" may partly explain their worse outcome., (Copyright © 2011 Mosby, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aim: This post hoc analysis compared the lipid-altering efficacy and safety of ezetimibe 10 mg plus statin (EZE/statin) vs. statin monotherapy in hypercholesterolaemic patients with and without diabetes., Methods: A pooled analysis of 27 previously published, randomized, double-blind, active- or placebo-controlled clinical trials comprising 21 794 adult patients with (n = 6541) and without (n = 15253) diabetes receiving EZE/statin or statin alone for 4-24 weeks evaluated percentage change from baseline in lipids and other parameters. Consistency of the treatment effect across the subgroups was tested using treatment × subgroup interaction. No multiplicity adjustments were made., Results: Treatment effects within both subgroups were generally consistent with the overall population. EZE/statin was more effective than statin alone in improving low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), total cholesterol (TC), high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglycerides (TGs), non-HDL-C, apolipoprotein (apo) B and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) in the overall population and both subgroups. Patients with diabetes achieved significantly larger reductions in LDL-C, TC and non-HDL-C compared with non-diabetic patients. Incidences of adverse events or creatine kinase elevations were similar between groups. A small but significantly higher incidence of alanine aminotransferase or aspartate aminotransferase elevations was seen in patients receiving EZE/statin (0.6%) vs. statin monotherapy (0.3%) in the overall population., Conclusions: Treatment with EZE/statin vs. statin monotherapy provided significantly larger reductions in LDL-C, TC, TG, non-HDL-C, apo B and hs-CRP and significantly greater increases in HDL-C, with a similar safety profile in patients with and without diabetes. Reductions in LDL-C, TC and non-HDL-C were larger in patients with diabetes than in patients without diabetes., (© 2011 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

We updated the evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis, assessment, prevention, and treatment of hypertension in adults for 2011. The major guideline changes this year are: (1) a recommendation was made for using comparative risk analogies when communicating a patient's cardiovascular risk; (2) diagnostic testing issues for renal artery stenosis were discussed; (3) recommendations were added for the management of hypertension during the acute phase of stroke; (4) people with hypertension and diabetes are now considered high risk for cardiovascular events if they have elevated urinary albumin excretion, overt kidney disease, cardiovascular disease, or the presence of other cardiovascular risk factors; (5) the combination of an angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor and a dihydropyridine calcium channel blocker (CCB) is preferred over the combination of an ACE inhibitor and a thiazide diuretic in persons with diabetes and hypertension; and (6) a recommendation was made to coordinate with pharmacists to improve antihypertensive medication adherence. We also discussed the recent analyses that examined the association between angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and cancer., (Copyright © 2011 Canadian Cardiovascular Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Treatment guidelines identify low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) as the primary target of therapy with secondary targets of non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C) and apolipoprotein B (apoB). Data were pooled from 27 randomised, double-blind, active or placebo-controlled trials in 21,794 adult hypercholesterolaemic patients (LDL-C 1.81-6.48 mmol/L) receiving ezetimibe/statin or statin for 4-24 weeks. Percentages of patients achieving various targets were calculated among diabetes (n = 6541) and non-diabetes (n = 15,253) subgroups. Significantly more patients with and without diabetes achieved specified levels of LDL-C (< 2.59, < 1.99, < 1.81 mmol/L), non-HDL-C (< 3.37, < 2.59 mmol/L) and apoB (< 0.9, < 0.8 g/L) with ezetimibe/statin versus statin. Patients with diabetes had larger mean per cent reductions in LDL-C and non-HDL-C than non-diabetes patients. A greater percentage of patients achieved both the LDL-C and apoB targets and all three LDL-C, apoB, and non-HDL-C targets with ezetimibe/statin versus statin in both subgroups. Patients with diabetes benefitted at least as much as, and sometimes more than, non-diabetes patients following treatment with ezetimibe/statin.

Background: Despite the well-established benefits of strategies to reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), many patients fail to achieve the guideline recommended targets. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of an enhanced 26-week algorithm-based treatment optimization strategy, involving titration of statin monotherapy and/or combination therapy with statin and ezetimibe, on achievement of guideline-based LDL-C targets in patients at high risk for atherosclerotic disease., Methods and Results: In this national (172-physician) quality enhancement research initiative involving 2334 Canadian men and women (median age, 65 years) at high vascular risk who were not at the guideline-recommended LDL-C target despite statin therapy, 36.6% and 45.5% of patients achieved an LDL-C <2.0 mmol/L at visit 2 and visit 3, respectively, using the treatment optimization algorithm. The percentage of patients achieving the 2009 Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS)-recommended target of either LDL-C <2.0 mmol/L or a 50% or greater reduction from baseline increased from 6.8% at visit 1 to 43.3% at visit 2 and to 52.1% at visit 3. Attainment of LDL-C targets increased significantly with consecutive visits (P < .001). Use of ezetimibe in combination with statin therapy was associated with greater target achievement., Conclusions: Use of a structured treatment optimization algorithm, based on titration of statin dosages and incorporation of ezetimibe therapy when required, enabled the majority of high-risk patients to achieve guideline-recommended targets, thereby narrowing the care gap that exists in dyslipidemia management., (Copyright © 2011. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

With the objectives of clarifying the concepts related to "cardiometabolic risk," "metabolic syndrome" and "risk stratification" and presenting practical strategies to identify and reduce cardiovascular risk in multiethnic patient populations, the Cardiometabolic Working Group presents an executive summary of a detailed analysis and position paper that offers a comprehensive and consolidated approach to the identification and management of cardiometabolic risk. The above concepts overlap and relate to the atherogenic process and development of type 2 diabetes. However, there is confusion about what these terms mean and how they can best be used to improve our understanding of cardiovascular disease treatment and prevention. The concepts related to cardiometabolic risk, pathophysiology, and strategies for identification and management (including health behaviours, pharmacotherapy, and surgery) in the multiethnic Canadian population are presented. "Global cardiometabolic risk" is proposed as an umbrella term for a comprehensive list of existing and emerging factors that predict cardiovascular disease and/or type 2 diabetes. Health behaviour interventions (weight loss, physical activity, diet, smoking cessation) in people identified at high cardiometabolic risk are of critical importance given the emerging crisis of obesity and the consequent epidemic of type 2 diabetes. Vascular protective measures (health behaviours for all patients and pharmacotherapy in appropriate patients) are essential to reduce cardiometabolic risk, and there is growing consensus that a multidisciplinary approach is needed to adequately address cardiometabolic risk factors. Health care professionals must also consider ethnicity-related risk factors in order to appropriately evaluate all individuals in their diverse patient populations., (Copyright © 2011 American College of Cardiology Foundation. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The concepts of "cardiometabolic risk," "metabolic syndrome," and "risk stratification" overlap and relate to the atherogenic process and development of type 2 diabetes. There is confusion about what these terms mean and how they can best be used to improve our understanding of cardiovascular disease treatment and prevention. With the objectives of clarifying these concepts and presenting practical strategies to identify and reduce cardiovascular risk in multiethnic patient populations, the Cardiometabolic Working Group reviewed the evidence related to emerging cardiovascular risk factors and Canadian guideline recommendations in order to present a detailed analysis and consolidated approach to the identification and management of cardiometabolic risk. The concepts related to cardiometabolic risk, pathophysiology, and strategies for identification and management (including health behaviours, pharmacotherapy, and surgery) in the multiethnic Canadian population are presented. "Global cardiometabolic risk" is proposed as an umbrella term for a comprehensive list of existing and emerging factors that predict cardiovascular disease and/or type 2 diabetes. Health behaviour interventions (weight loss, physical activity, diet, smoking cessation) in people identified at high cardiometabolic risk are of critical importance given the emerging crisis of obesity and the consequent epidemic of type 2 diabetes. Vascular protective measures (health behaviours for all patients and pharmacotherapy in appropriate patients) are essential to reduce cardiometabolic risk, and there is growing consensus that a multidisciplinary approach is needed to adequately address cardiometabolic risk factors. Health care professionals must also consider risk factors related to ethnicity in order to appropriately evaluate everyone in their diverse patient populations., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims/hypothesis: Sugar has been suggested to promote obesity, diabetes and coronary heart disease (CHD), yet fruit, despite containing sugars, may also have a low glycaemic index (GI) and all fruits are generally recommended for good health. We therefore assessed the effect of fruit with special emphasis on low GI fruit intake in type 2 diabetes., Methods: This secondary analysis involved 152 type 2 diabetic participants treated with glucose-lowering agents who completed either 6 months of high fibre or low GI dietary advice, including fruit advice, in a parallel design., Results: Change in low GI fruit intake ranged from -3.1 to 2.7 servings/day. The increase in low GI fruit intake significantly predicted reductions in HbA(1c) (r = -0.206, p =0.011), systolic blood pressure (r = -0.183, p = 0.024) and CHD risk (r = -0.213, p = 0.008). Change in total fruit intake ranged from -3.7 to 3.2 servings/day and was not related to study outcomes. In a regression analysis including the eight major carbohydrate foods or classes of foods emphasised in the low GI diet, only low GI fruit and bread contributed independently and significantly to predicting change in HbA(1c). Furthermore, comparing the highest with the lowest quartile of low GI fruit intake, the percentage change in HbA(1c) was reduced by -0.5% HbA(1c) units (95% CI 0.2-0.8 HbA(1c) units, p < 0.001)., Conclusions/interpretation: Low GI fruit consumption as part of a low GI diet was associated with lower HbA(1c), blood pressure and CHD risk and supports a role for low GI fruit consumption in the management of type 2 diabetes., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00438698.

Background: Higher intake of monounsaturated fat may raise high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol without raising low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. We tested whether increasing the monounsaturated fat content of a diet proven effective for lowering LDL cholesterol (dietary portfolio) also modified other risk factors for cardiovascular disease, specifically by increasing HDL cholesterol, lowering serum triglyceride and further reducing the ratio of total to HDL cholesterol., Methods: Twenty-four patients with hyperlipidemia consumed a therapeutic diet very low in saturated fat for one month and were then randomly assigned to a dietary portfolio low or high in monounsaturated fatty acid for another month. We supplied participants' food for the two-month period. Calorie intake was based on Harris-Benedict estimates for energy requirements., Results: For patients who consumed the dietary portfolio high in monounsaturated fat, HDL cholesterol rose, whereas for those consuming the dietary portfolio low in monounsaturated fat, HDL cholesterol did not change. The 12.5% treatment difference was significant (0.12 mmol/L, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.05 to 0.21, p = 0.003). The ratio of total to HDL cholesterol was reduced by 6.5% with the diet high in monounsaturated fat relative to the diet low in monounsaturated fat (-0.28, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.04, p = 0.025). Patients consuming the diet high in monounsaturated fat also had significantly higher concentrations of apolipoprotein AI, and their C-reactive protein was significantly lower. No treatment differences were seen for triglycerides, other lipids or body weight, and mean weight loss was similar for the diets high in monounsaturated fat (-0.8 kg) and low in monounsaturated fat (-1.2 kg)., Interpretation: Monounsaturated fat increased the effectiveness of a cholesterol-lowering dietary portfolio, despite statin-like reductions in LDL cholesterol. The potential benefits for cardiovascular risk were achieved through increases in HDL cholesterol, further reductions in the ratio of total to HDL cholesterol and reductions in C-reactive protein. (ClinicalTrials.gov trial register no. NCT00430430.).

Background: Canadian and European treatment guidelines identify low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) as a primary treatment target for hypercholesterolaemia., Objectives: This post hoc analysis compared ezetimibe 10 mg (ezetimibe) added to atorvastatin vs. doubling the atorvastatin dose on achievement of the 2009 Canadian Cardiovascular Society (CCS) and the 2007 Joint European Prevention Guidelines primary and optional secondary lipid targets and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels., Methods: After stabilisation on atorvastatin, hypercholesterolaemic patients at moderately high risk (MHR) for coronary heart disease (CHD) not at LDL-C < 2.6 mmol/l were randomised to atorvastatin 20 mg vs. doubling their atorvastatin dose to 40 mg; and patients at high risk (HR) for CHD not at LDL-C < 1.8 mmol/l were randomised to atorvastatin 40 mg plus ezetimibe vs. doubling their atorvastatin dose to 80 mg for 6 weeks., Results: When treated with atorvastatin plus ezetimibe, MHR and HR patients had greater attainment of LDL-C, most lipids and lipoproteins and/or hs-CRP targets compared with doubling their atorvastatin dose. More MHR and HR patients achieved dual targets of LDL-C and: Apolipoprotein (Apo) B, total cholesterol (total-C), total-C/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), non-HDL-C, triglycerides, Apo B/Apo A-I or hs-CRP with ezetimibe + atorvastatin treatment compared with doubling their atorvastatin dose., Conclusions: These results demonstrated greater achievement of single/dual treatment targets as set by Canadian and European treatment guidelines with ezetimibe added to atorvastatin 20 mg or 40 mg compared with doubling the atorvastatin dose to 40 mg or 80 mg in MHR and HR patients, respectively., (© 2010 Blackwell Publishing Ltd.)

Objective: To identify factors in patients with type 2 diabetes and A1C >7.0% associated with attainment of A1C ≤ 7.0%., Research Design and Methods: We used a prospective registry of 5,280 Canadian patients in primary care settings enrolled in a 12-month glycemic pharmacotherapy optimization strategy based on national guidelines., Results: At close out, median A1C was 7.1% (vs. 7.8% at baseline) with 48% of subjects achieving A1C ≤ 7.0% (P < 0.0001). Older patients of Asian or black origin, those with longer diabetes duration, those with lower baseline A1C, BMI, LDL cholesterol, and blood pressure, and those on angiotensin receptor blockers and a lower number of antihyperglycemic agents, were more likely to achieve A1C ≤ 7.0% at some point during the study (all P < 0.0235). Access to private versus public drug coverage did not impact glycemic target realization., Conclusions: Patient demography, cardiometabolic health, and ongoing pharmacotherapy, but not access to private drug insurance coverage, contribute to the care gap in type 2 diabetes.

Background: Some patients administered cholesterol-lowering therapies may experience an increase in the proportion of small LDL particles, which may be misinterpreted as a worsening of atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk. This study assessed the lipid effects of adding ezetimibe to atorvastatin or doubling the atorvastatin dose on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels (and the cholesterol content of LDL subclasses), LDL particle number (approximated by apolipoprotein B), and LDL particle size. This was a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study of hypercholesterolemic, high atherosclerotic coronary heart disease risk patients. After stabilization of atorvastatin 40 mg, 579 patients with LDL-C >70 mg/dL were randomized to 6 weeks of ezetimibe + atorvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg. Efficacy parameters included changes from baseline in LDL-C, apolipoprotein B, non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (non-HDL-C), and lipoprotein subclasses (Vertical Auto Profile II) and pattern for the overall population, as well as patient subgroups with baseline triglyceride levels <150 mg/dL or ≥150 mg/dL., Results: Both treatments significantly reduced LDL-C (and the cholesterol content of most LDL subfractions [LDL1-4]) apolipoprotein B, non-HDL-C levels, but did not reduce the proportion of smaller, more dense LDL particles; in fact, the proportion of Pattern B was numerically increased. Results were generally similar in patients with triglyceride levels <150 or ≥150 mg/dL., Conclusions: When assessing the effects of escalating cholesterol-lowering therapy, effects upon Pattern B alone to assess coronary heart disease risk may be misleading when interpreted without considerations of other lipid effects, such as reductions in LDL-C, atherogenic lipoprotein particle concentration, and non-HDL-C levels., Trial Registration: (Registered at clinicaltrials.gov: Clinical trial # NCT00276484).

Obesity is associated with hypertension, dyslipidemia, and diabetes, but it is also an independent cardiovascular risk factor. We sought to evaluate the differences in treatment patterns and attainment of guideline-recommended targets among high-risk vascular outpatients in relation to their body mass index (BMI). The prospective Vascular Protection and Guideline Orientated Approach to Lipid Lowering Registries recruited 7,357 high-risk vascular outpatients in Canada from 2001 to 2004. We stratified the patient population into 3 groups according to their BMI: normal weight (BMI <24.9 kg/m²), overweight (BMI 25 to 29.9 kg/m²), and obese (BMI >30 kg/m²). We evaluated the rates of attainment for contemporary guideline targets of blood pressure (<140/90 or <130/80 mm Hg in the presence of diabetes) and lipids (low-density lipoprotein [LDL] <2.5 mmol/L [96.7 mg/dl] and total cholesterol [TC]/high-density lipoprotein [HDL] ratio <4.0). Of the 7,357 patients, 1,305 (17.7%) were normal weight, 2,791 (37.9%) overweight, and 3,261 (44.4%) obese, as determined by the BMI. Obese patients were younger and more likely to have hypertension and diabetes (all p <0.001 for trend). Obese patients had higher baseline blood pressure, TC, LDL cholesterol, triglyceride levels and TC/HDL ratio, and lower HDL cholesterol. Obese patients were more likely to be treated with antihypertensive agents (p = 0.002), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (p = 0.024), angiotensin receptor blockers (p <0.001), and high-dose statin therapy (p = 0.001). On multivariable analyses, obese patients were less likely to attain the blood pressure (odds ratio 0.77, 95% confidence interval 0.66 to 0.90, p = 0.001) and TC/HDL ratio (odds ratio 0.48, 95% confidence interval 0.42 to 0.55, p <0.001) targets but not the LDL targets (odds ratio 0.89, 95% confidence interval 0.78 to 1.03, p = 0.11). In conclusion, only a minority ambulatory patients at high cardiovascular risk achieved both guideline-recommended blood pressure and lipid targets, and this significant treatment gap was more pronounced among obese patients. Our findings underscore the opportunity to optimize the treatment of these high-risk patients., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Despite clear guideline recommendations, there is a growing body of evidence that there is suboptimal use of lipid-lowering treatment in Canadians., Objective: To assess the prevalence and types of persistent lipid abnormalities in Canadian patients receiving statin therapy., Methods: The present cross-sectional study recruited 2436 outpatients 45 years of age or older who were treated with statins by 232 physicians from 10 provinces; all underwent clinical examination and had their latest fasting lipid values while on statin therapy recorded., Results: The median patient age was 66 years (interquartile range [IQR] 58 to 74 years), 60% were men and 80% were in the high 10-year risk category. The median low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level was 2.0 mmol/L (IQR 1.6 mmol/L to 2.5 mmol/L) and the median total cholesterol/high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio was 3.4 mmol/L (IQR 2.8 mmol/L to 4.1 mmol/L). However, based on the 2006 Canadian Cardiovascular Society recommendations, 37% of all patients did not have a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol level at goal or intervention target level, including 45% of high-risk category patients. The majority of patients received atorvastatin (50%) or rosuvastatin (37%) but primarily at low-to-medium doses, and a minority (14%) received additional lipid-modifying therapies., Conclusions: The present observational study highlights the need for more intensive treatment of lipid abnormalities, particularly among high-risk patients. Recognizing several important limitations related to the observational nature of the study, the findings suggest the possibility that, in addition to optimizing adherence, there remains an important need to titrate current statin therapy to higher doses and potentially use a combination of lipid-modifying treatments (once the statin dose has been truly maximized) to further bridge the gap between evidence-based medicine and current Canadian practice.

High-protein diets have been advocated for weight loss and the treatment of diabetes. Yet animal protein sources are often high in saturated fat and cholesterol. Vegetable protein sources, by contrast, are low in saturated fat and without associated cholesterol. We have therefore assessed the effect on serum lipids of raising the protein intake by 5% using a cereal protein, barley protein, as part of a standard therapeutic diet. Twenty-three hypercholesterolemic men and postmenopausal women completed a randomized crossover study comparing a bread enriched with either barley protein or calcium caseinate [30 g protein, 8374 kJ (2000 kcal)] taken separately as two 1-mo treatment phases with a minimum 2-wk washout. Body weight and diet history were collected weekly during each treatment. Fasting blood samples were obtained at wk 0, 2, and 4. Palatability, satiety, and compliance were similar for both the barley protein- and casein-enriched breads, with no differences between the treatments in effects on serum LDL cholesterol or C-reactive protein, measures of oxidative stress, or blood pressure. Nevertheless, because no adverse effects were observed on cardiovascular risk factors, barley protein remains an additional option for raising the protein content of the diet.

Background: Elevated C-reactive protein (CRP) concentration is a risk factor for cardiovascular events that may add prognostic information. Statin treatment is associated with significant reductions in CRP concentrations, which appear to be unrelated to the magnitude of LDL-cholesterol reduction. We investigated the effect of atorvastatin, across its dose range, on high sensitivity (hs)CRP in subjects at high cardiovascular risk., Methods: ACTFAST was a 12 week, prospective, multicenter, open-label trial in which high-risk subjects were assigned a starting dose of atorvastatin (10, 20, 40 or 80 mg/d) based on LDL-C and status of statin use at screening (1345 statin-free [SF] and 772 previously statin-treated [ST])., Results: At baseline, ST subjects had significantly lower hsCRP levels than SF subjects (ST group 2.31, 95% CI 2.15, 2.48 mg/L vs. SF group 3.16, 95% CI 2.98, 3.34 mg/L, p<0.05). In the SF group, atorvastatin 10 to 80 mg significantly (p<0.01) reduced hsCRP levels in a dose dependent-manner. In ST group, additional hsCRP reductions were observed over the statin used at baseline, which were not dose-dependent. Atorvastatin significantly decreased hsCRP concentrations in subjects with or without diabetes or the metabolic syndrome., Conclusions: Atorvastatin treatment at different doses, particularly 80 mg, significantly reduced hsCRP serum concentrations. This reduction was observed in both SF and ST groups and was independent of the presence of metabolic syndrome and/or diabetes. The beneficial effect of atorvastatin was evident at 6 weeks, supporting the practice of early introduction of higher doses of atorvastatin in high-risk patients., (Copyright (c) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To evaluate vascular protection treatment patterns and attainment of the 2003 Canadian Diabetes Association's recommended targets in ambulatory patients with type 2 diabetes., Methods: Between 2005 and 2006, 3002 outpatients with type 2 diabetes were enrolled by 229 primary health care settings across Canada. Baseline characteristics, therapeutic regimens and treatment success - defined as the achievement of a blood pressure (BP) of 13080 mmHg or lower, glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) of 7% or lower, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) lower than 2.5 mmolL and total cholesterolhigh-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio lower than 4.0 - are reported., Results: Overall, 46% of individuals had a BP that was above the Canadian Diabetes Association's recommended target. Of these, 11% were untreated, 28% were receiving monotherapy, 38% were not receiving an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and 16% were not receiving either an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or an angiotensin receptor blocker. Optimal A1C levels were achieved in 53% of patients. Of those who did not attain A1C targets, 3% were not on glucose- lowering pharmacotherapy and 27% were receiving monotherapy. A total of 74% of patients were treated with statins. Overall, 64% and 62%, respectively, met the target LDL-C and the target total cholesterolhigh-density lipoprotein cholesterol ratio. Statins were not prescribed to 43% of patients with LDL-C above target. Antiplatelet therapy was implemented in 81% of patients. In total, 21% achieved the combined targets for BP, A1C and LDL-C., Interpretation: A substantial proportion of patients did not achieve guideline-recommended targets and were not receiving evidence- based therapy for vascular protection two years after publication of the Canadian guidelines. More research is warranted, and novel and effective strategies must be tested and implemented to correct this ongoing treatment gap.

For the reduction of microvascular complications in type 2 diabetes, glycemic control has been shown to be an important and effective intervention. However, considering the findings from several recent, large, randomized controlled trials, the utility of very tight glycemic control in all those with type 2 diabetes, for the reduction of cardiovascular disease remains controversial. The decision to aim for very tight glycemic control must be individualized and the potential benefit of reduced risk of nephropathy must be weighed against the increased risk for hypoglycemia. The results of the 10-year post-trial monitoring of the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) demonstrated macrovascular benefits of glycemic control in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes but lengthy follow-up was required to demonstrate the effect. This raises the possibility that benefits of glucose lowering to reduce cardiovascular risk is more evident in those with a shorter duration of diabetes and requires many years to manifest. For the time being, there remains good evidence for targeting A1c <7% for microvascular protection but attempts to lower A1c beyond this must be considered on an individual basis.