Baseline Characteristics of Randomized Participants in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE)

Deborah J Wexler, Heidi Krause-Steinrauf, Jill P Crandall, Hermes J Florez, Sophia H Hox, Alexander Kuhn, Ajay Sood, Chantal Underkofler, Vanita R Aroda, GRADE Research Group

Abstract

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.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01794143.

© 2019 by the American Diabetes Association.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Map of GRADE clinical centers.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials diagram.

References

    1. Nathan DM, Buse JB, Kahn SE, et al. .; GRADE Study Research Group . Rationale and design of the glycemia reduction approaches in diabetes: a comparative effectiveness study (GRADE). Diabetes Care 2013;36:2254–2261
    1. Nathan DM, Buse JB, Davidson MB, et al. .; American Diabetes Association; European Association for Study of Diabetes . Medical management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a consensus algorithm for the initiation and adjustment of therapy: a consensus statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2009;32:193–203
    1. Kahn SE, Haffner SM, Heise MA, et al. .; ADOPT Study Group . Glycemic durability of rosiglitazone, metformin, or glyburide monotherapy. N Engl J Med 2006;355:2427–2443
    1. Ekström N, Svensson AM, Miftaraj M, et al. . Durability of oral hypoglycemic agents in drug naïve patients with type 2 diabetes: report from the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR). BMJ Open Diabetes Res Care 2015;3:e000059
    1. Turner RC, Cull CA, Frighi V, Holman RR; UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group . Glycemic control with diet, sulfonylurea, metformin, or insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: progressive requirement for multiple therapies (UKPDS 49). JAMA 1999;281:2005–2012
    1. Brown JB, Conner C, Nichols GA. Secondary failure of metformin monotherapy in clinical practice. Diabetes Care 2010;33:501–506
    1. Kuhn A, Park J, Ghazi A, Aroda VR. Intensifying treatment beyond monotherapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus: where do newer therapies fit? Curr Cardiol Rep 2017;19:25.
    1. American Diabetes Association 8. Pharmacologic approaches to glycemic treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2018. Diabetes Care 2018;41(Suppl. 1):S73–S85
    1. Davies MJ, D’Alessio DA, Fradkin J, et al. . Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care 2018;41:2669–2701
    1. Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, et al. . Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes, 2015: a patient-centered approach: update to a position statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. Diabetes Care 2015;38:140–149
    1. Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, et al. .; American Diabetes Association (ADA); European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) . Management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes: a patient-centered approach: position statement of the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD). Diabetes Care 2012;35:1364–1379
    1. Sox HC, Greenfield S. Comparative effectiveness research: a report from the Institute of Medicine. Ann Intern Med 2009;151:203–205
    1. Herman WH, Pop-Busui R, Braffett BH, et al. .; DCCT/EDIC Research Group . Use of the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument as a measure of distal symmetrical peripheral neuropathy in Type 1 diabetes: results from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications. Diabet Med 2012;29:937–944
    1. Lachin JM. Statistical considerations in the intent-to-treat principle. Control Clin Trials 2000;21:167–189
    1. Menke A, Casagrande S, Geiss L, Cowie CC. Prevalence of and trends in diabetes among adults in the United States, 1988-2012. JAMA 2015;314:1021–1029
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) , National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Data. Hyattsville, MD, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2018
    1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Statistics Report [Internet], 2017. Available from . Accessed 13 November 2017
    1. Selvin E, Parrinello CM, Sacks DB, Coresh J. Trends in prevalence and control of diabetes in the United States, 1988-1994 and 1999-2010. Ann Intern Med 2014;160:517–525
    1. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group Effect of intensive blood-glucose control with metformin on complications in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 34) [published correction appears in Lancet 1998;352:1558]. Lancet 1998;352:854–865
    1. UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33) [published correction appears in Lancet 1999;354:602]. Lancet 1998;352:837–853
    1. Viberti G, Lachin J, Holman R, et al. .; ADOPT Study Group . A Diabetes Outcome Progression Trial (ADOPT): baseline characteristics of Type 2 diabetic patients in North America and Europe. Diabet Med 2006;23:1289–1294
    1. Cushman WC, Evans GW, Byington RP, et al. .; ACCORD Study Group . Effects of intensive blood-pressure control in type 2 diabetes mellitus. N Engl J Med 2010;362:1575–1585
    1. Gerstein HC, Miller ME, Byington RP, et al. .; Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Study Group . Effects of intensive glucose lowering in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008;358:2545–2559
    1. Duckworth W, Abraira C, Moritz T, et al. .; VADT Investigators . Glucose control and vascular complications in veterans with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2009;360:129–139
    1. Cefalu WT, Kaul S, Gerstein HC, et al. . Cardiovascular outcomes trials in type 2 diabetes: where do we go from here? Reflections from a Diabetes Care editors’ Expert Forum. Diabetes Care 2018;41:14–31
    1. Iglay K, Hannachi H, Joseph Howie P, et al. . Prevalence and co-prevalence of comorbidities among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Curr Med Res Opin 2016;32:1243–1252
    1. Yoon SS, Dillon CF, Illoh K, Carroll M. Trends in the prevalence of coronary heart disease in the U.S.: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2001-2012. Am J Prev Med 2016;51:437–445
    1. Perkovic V, Jardine MJ, Neal B, et al. . Canagliflozin and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes and nephropathy. N Engl J Med 2019;380:2295–2306
    1. Zelniker TA, Wiviott SD, Raz I, et al. . Comparison of the effects of glucagon-like peptide receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors for prevention of major adverse cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Circulation 2019;139:2022–2031
    1. Gerstein HC, Colhoun HM, Dagenais GR, et al. .; REWIND Investigators . Dulaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes (REWIND): a double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet 2019;394:121–130
    1. Qaseem A, Humphrey LL, Sweet DE, Starkey M, Shekelle P; Clinical Guidelines Committee of the American College of Physicians . Oral pharmacologic treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med 2012;156:218–231
    1. Toscano D. Market Brief – The Market for Type 2 Diabetes Therapeutics – Key Findings From a Recent Analysis of Global Drug Development Efforts. Drug Development and Delivery, November/December 2013 [Internet]. Available from . Accessed 4 June 2018
    1. Knowler WC, Barrett-Connor E, Fowler SE, et al. .; Diabetes Prevention Program Research Group . Reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes with lifestyle intervention or metformin. N Engl J Med 2002;346:393–403
    1. Food and Drug Administration. Dialogues on diversifying clinical trials: Successful strategies for engaging women and minorities in clinical trials [Internet], 2011. Available from . Accessed 13 November 2017
    1. Food and Drug Administration. Collection of race and ethnicity data in clinical trials: Guidance for industry and Food and Drug Administration staff [Internet], 2016. Available from . Accessed 13 November 2017
    1. Suissa S. Lower risk of death with SGLT2 inhibitors in observational studies: real or bias? Diabetes Care 2018;41:6–10

Source: PubMed

Sponsor e collaboratori

Condizioni mediche

Interventi farmacologici

3
Sottoscrivi