1 / 18

Type 2 Diabetes: Prototypical Chronic Illness

Type 2 Diabetes: Prototypical Chronic Illness. Challenging Patient: Older Patient with Multiple Co-Morbidities. Managing Chronic Illness. Assess Adherence Assess Risk Monitor Disease Control Monitor Treatment Side Effects Monitor End-Organ Damage Prevent End-Organ Damaage Set Goals

waneta
Download Presentation

Type 2 Diabetes: Prototypical Chronic Illness

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Type 2 Diabetes: Prototypical Chronic Illness Challenging Patient: Older Patient with Multiple Co-Morbidities

  2. Managing Chronic Illness • Assess Adherence • Assess Risk • Monitor Disease Control • Monitor Treatment Side Effects • Monitor End-Organ Damage • Prevent End-Organ Damaage • Set Goals • Treat to Target • Educate Patient

  3. The UKPDS • Most significant study of the treatment of type 2 diabetes published in 25 years • Now Six other outcomes trials evaluating “real-world” patients • University Group Diabetes Project (1975) • Increased CV mortality in patients treated with tolbutamide • “Black Box Warning” (widely ignored) • Multifactorial intervention trial of 160 patients (Steno-2) • Glucose, BP, lipid control, + ASA, ACE I, metformin (All of these were in favor of the intervention group) • Decreased composite of CV death, MI, stroke, PVD Gaede P, et al. Effect of a multifactorial intervention on mortality in type 2 DM. NEJM 2008;358:580-91. • ACCORD • ADVANCE • VADT • Pro-Active

  4. Brief Review of the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) • 10.7-year study of 4,000 pts newly-diagnosed with type 2 diabetes • Goal 1: Evaluate value of tight (<110 mg/dL) vs. loose (<270 mg/dL) control of blood glucose • Goal 2: Evaluate value of tight (<150/85) vs. loose (<180/105) blood pressure control in diabetics

  5. Findings of the UKPDS • Tight glucose control • Decreased diabetes-related outcomes (NNT = 196) • Almost all of this benefit was on the decreased need for photocoagulation • No effect on any single outcome, including visual loss • Had no effect on mortality • A1c changes did not correlate to outcomes (Stratton) • In overweight patients, metformin • Decreased mortality (NNT = 141) • Decreased diabetes-related outcomes (NNT = 74) • Independent of A1c

  6. Findings of the UKPDS • Tight blood pressure • Decreased diabetes-related mortality (NNT = 152) • Decreased diabetes-related outcomes (NNT = 61) • No difference between b-blocker and ACE I • In overweight patients, sulfonylurea drugs and insulin • Hadnoeffect on diabetes-related outcomes • Hadnoeffect on mortality

  7. No advantage to tight control in Type 2 DM • ACCORD. NEJM 2008;358:2545-59 • Stopped early due to increased mortality in intensive control (HBA1C<7) group • ADVANCE. NEJM 2008;358:2560-72 • Reduced microvascular but not major macrovascular events • Strong benefit to treating hypertension

  8. VADT – no benefit to tight control • 1800 military veterans with poor control, mean years since diagnosis 11.5 years, 40% already with CV event. • Mean f/up 5.6 years • Intensive HbA1C- 6.9%; standard,- 8.4% • No difference in micro/macro/death • Severe hypoglycemia 24.1% v 17.6% (NNTH=15) • Duckworth et al. NEJM 2009;360:129-39

  9. Tight Control Lowers CV Events

  10. Tight control does not improve all cause mortality

  11. Real World: Better control associated with higher mortality

  12. Lending a Hand to Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Metformin/?ASA Blood pressure Cholesterol Glucose control? Smoking Slawson DC, Shaughnessy AF. Lending a Hand to Patients with Diabetes. Data from: Vijan S. Treatment of hypertension in type 2 diabetes mellitus: blood pressure goals, choice of agents, and setting priorities in diabetes care. Ann Intern Med 2003; 138:593-602.

  13. 3 Control blood pressure (140/80 mmHg) 4 Add statin and aspirin (and metformin) 2 Stop smoking 5 consider tight glucose control 1 Control symptoms (diet, metformin) Don’t turn the hand around Let’s give our diabetic patients a hand!

  14. What medicine to prescribe for HTN? • 31,512 patients in ALLHAT (not randomised to doxazosin arm) for whom a baseline FPG was recorded • No differences in primary outcome (fatal or non-fatal CHD) between lisinopril and chlorthalidone groups • Patients with IFG randomised to amlodipine had a higher risk of the primary outcome than those taking chlorthalidone(RR 1.73, 1.10 to 2.72, P=0.01) • Patients with DM randomised to amlodipine had a higher risk of heart failure than those taking chlorthalidone (RR 1.39, 1.22 to 1.59 P<0.001) • Patients randomised to chlorthalidone were not disadvantaged for any other outcomes compared to those in other treatment arms

  15. Role of statins in type-2 diabetes • Third/fourth finger of the hand • After symptom control (smoking cessation if relevant) and control of blood pressure • Benefits appear to be around a 2030% relative risk reduction regardless of age, gender, lipid levels. • Baseline risk is the key to the size of the absolute benefits • Should all those with type 2 diabetes be on a statin? • Which statin: • Evidence is for simvastatin 40mg/day or atorvastatin 10mg/day

  16. Role of Home Blood Sugar Monitoring • Cochrane, 2004 – Systematic review of poor quality trials – perhaps some sl. benefit • Diabetes Care, 2005 – Meta-analysis of 6 poor quality trials – min hgba1c benefit • BMJ 2007 – RCT – no difference, increase in hypoglycemia • BMJ 2008 – RCT – no difference, increased depression

  17. What about ASA • IF CAD • Or DM plus one additional risk factor • Younger, without co-morbidities, do not need ASA

  18. Summary for prescribers • Think CV risk, not blood glucose – Set Goals • Treating blood pressure is more important than worrying about drug choice • Low dose thiazidesare safe and well tolerated (ALLHAT) • ACE inhibitors also a reasonable first choice • Many will need combinations to achieve target BP • Still concern about CCBs in patients with diabetes • Why use ARBs or doxazosin, unless you really need to? • Is the emphasis on tight blood glucose control justified by the evidence? • Metformin in everyone with Type-2 DM? • Do patients really need to self monitor their blood glucose as often as they do? • Manage overall risk ( • Polypharmacyis the norm! (and needs support)

More Related