Lipid/Metabolic
Ten years later, UKPDS shows intensive glucose lowering, but not tight BP control, reduces MI, all-cause mortality
September 10, 2008 | Shelley Wood

Rome, Italy - Ten-year posttrial monitoring from the landmark United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) indicates that a strategy of early intensive glucose lowering, either with a sulfonylurea or metformin, has lasting, significant effects not only on major diabetes end points but also on risk of MI or all-cause mortality. By contrast, blood-pressure benefits seen with "tighter" blood-pressure lowering in 1997, when the trial first concluded, were not maintained over time.

Drs Rury R Holman and David R Matthews (Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolism, UK) presented the 10-year posttrial monitoring results for UKPDS here at the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) 2008 Meeting, exactly 10 years to the day after the primary trial results were presented at the EASD 1998 meeting in Barcelona, Spain.

"UKPDS has definitively shown today that early glucose-lowering in the longer term really does impact on cardiovascular disease in people with type 2 diabetes," Holman told heartwire. "We're talking about a 13% reduction in all-cause mortality and a 15% reduction in MI. Now, that may not be as big as what we see with a statin or something, but given the millions of people with diabetes, this is a very substantial change, and it is over and above the other treatments that patients are getting."

The 10-year posttrial monitoring results for UKPDS have been published simultaneously online September 10, 2008 in the New England Journal of Medicine [1,2].


Intensive glucose control: "Legacy effects"

Dr Rury R Holman

The original UKPDS was launched in 1977, enrolling patients until 1991 and completed by 1997, with final results published in 1998 showing a reduced risk of microvascular complications, a nonsignificant reduction in MI, and no improvement in all-cause mortality with intensive glucose lowering using a sulfonylurea or insulin, instead of conventional glucose control through diet. In a subset of obese patients treated with metformin instead of conventional diet therapy, metformin was associated with significant reductions in risk of MI and death by 1997. According to Dr Ian Campbell (Victoria Hospital Kirkcaldy, Fife, UK) who introduced the two UKPDS investigators before their presentation, the original UKPDS results have formed the "cornerstone" for diabetes management: "They taught us about the need for intensive glucose control."

Holman explained during his presentation that over the ensuing 10 years since UKPDS wrapped up, surviving patients from the original trial were seen annually until 2002 in UKPDS clinics, but no attempt was made to maintain their previously randomized therapies. From 2002 to 2005, follow-up was conducted via questionnaires to patients and their physicians. In all, 44% of patients randomized to one of the glucose-lowering arms within UKPDS had died by 2007.

As Holman showed today, differences in HbA1c levels disappeared within one year of the trial's completion, partly in response to the trial findings and their impact on diabetes guidelines. But despite the lack of an enduring difference in glucose control between the intensive- and standard-therapy groups, intensive-therapy patients treated either in the sulfonylurea/insulin group or in the metformin arm of the trial had experienced significant reductions in any diabetes end point, microvascular disease, MI, and all-cause mortality, as compared with the conventional-therapy controls, after the additional 10 years of follow-up.

Original and late-follow-up relative risk reduction with sulfonylurea/insulin

End point
1997: Relative risk reduction (%)
1997: p
2007: Relative risk reduction (%)
2007: p
Any diabetes-related end point
12
0.029
9
0.040
Microvascular disease
25
0.0099
24
0.001
MI
16
0.052
15
0.014
All-cause mortality
6
0.44
13
0.007

Original and late-follow-up relative risk reduction with metformin

End point
1997: Relative risk reduction (%)
1997: p
2007: Relative risk reduction (%)
2007: p
Any diabetes-related end point
32
0.0023
21
0.013
Microvascular disease
29
0.19
16
0.31
MI
39
0.010
33
0.005
All-cause mortality
36
0.011
27
0.002


Intensive blood-pressure control: No "legacy effects"

Dr David R Matthews

In the blood-pressure arm of UKPDS, trial participants with hypertension were randomized to standard blood-pressure control or "tighter" control, permitting the addition of ACE inhibitors and beta blockers. In the 1997 results, patients in the more intensive BP-control arm had experienced significant reductions in microvascular disease, but no significant benefits in terms of MI risk or all-cause mortality.

Ten-year posttrial monitoring for the blood-pressure arm of the UKPDS was conducted in much the same way as the glucose portion of the trial, with clinic-based follow-up for the first five years, followed by questionnaire-based follow-up from 2002 to 2007. As Matthews told a packed conference room today, differences in blood-pressure levels seen in the original trial disappeared within two years postcompletion. As anticipated in 1997, 51% of the trial participants had died by the time the 10-year posttrial monitoring ended in 2007.

But unlike the enduring benefits seen in survivors randomized to intensive glucose control, tighter control in the blood-pressure arm of the study produced no lasting improvements in microvascular disease, MI, all-cause mortality, or any diabetes-related end point. Indeed, differences in microvascular disease seen at the end of the trial had disappeared over the subsequent 10 years.

Original and late-follow-up relative risk reduction with intensive BP lowering

End point
1997: Relative risk reduction (%)
1997: p
2007: Relative risk reduction (%)
2007: p
Any diabetes-related end point
24
0.0046
7
0.35
Microvascular disease
37
0.0092
16
0.20
MI
21
0.13
10
0.35
All-cause mortality
18
0.17
11
0.18

To download tables as slides, click on slide logo above

"Early improvement in blood-pressure control in patients with both type 2 diabetes and hypertension was associated with a reduced risk of complications, but it appears that good blood-pressure control must be continued if the benefits are to be maintained," the authors conclude.

In a press statement, Matthews offered one hypothesis behind the disappointing blood-pressure results. '"With glucose control it matters how well you are treated now and how well you were treated in the past; with blood pressure, it seems to be related just to current therapy, confirming how essential it is to maintain good blood-pressure levels over time if the risk of complications is to be minimized."

Holman, likewise, speculated that the findings speak to different pathophysiological mechanisms. "It does seem that the metabolism for glucose and its way of causing complications is very different from that of blood pressure," he told heartwire. "That's not really surprising—blood pressure is a mechanical issue, but for glucose, with its effects on the endothelium, encouraging atherosclerosis, it's a longer-term process."


Much-needed optimism?

Commenting on the results for heartwire, Dr Darren McGuire (University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX) observed: "These analyses are very interesting and inject some much-needed optimism into the potential for glucose modulation to favorably affect atherosclerotic vascular risk."

He pointed out that one of the "most plausible" theories as to why the recent ACCORD, ADVANCE, and VADT trials showed no benefit of glucose control on cardiovascular outcomes was that the glucose control was too late and could not "stop the moving train."

"In UKPDS follow-up, after 66 000 person-years of observation and accumulating almost 1500 primary atherosclerotic disease events, not counting CV deaths, the end points go consistently in the right direction," McGuire observed. "This is quite reassuring, compared with the UKPDS primary report, where MI was improved with intensive glucose control, although it just missed statistical significance, but the point estimate for stroke was in the opposite direction. That trend has been reversed in this longer-term follow-up, with more events and therefore more statistical accuracy."

Holman believes the late UKPDS data reinforce the need to start glucose control at the "earliest possible time" in the progression of disease, which means diagnosing diabetes earlier, rather than later.

"With other interventions like blood pressure drugs and statins, cardiologists have been successful in reducing risk in people with established cardiovascular disease," Holman said. "You can't play catch-up with glucose control. . . . I think this will change the paradigm. It will mean that we can't afford to wait until people have problems; we'll have to treat glucose from day one and treat it properly.

Holman disclosed receiving research support from Ashai Kasei Pharma, Bayer Healthcare, Bayer Schering Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Merck Serono, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis; and receiving honoraria from Amylin, Astella, Bayer, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, King, Merck, Merck Serono, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Takeda, and Sanofi-Aventis. Matthews disclosed receiving lecture and advisory fees from Novo Nordisk, GlaxoSmithKline, Servier, Merck, Novartis, Eli Lilly, Takeda, and Roche; and owning shares in OSI Pharmaceuticals and Particle Therapeutics.

Sources
  1. Holman RR, Paul SJ, Bethel MA, et al. Long-term follow-up after tight control of blood pressure in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0806359. Available at: http://www.nejm.org.
  2. Holman RR, Paul SJ, Bethel MA, et al. Ten-year follow-up of intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008; DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa0806470. Available at: http://www.nejm.org.



Your comments
Ten years later, UKPDS shows intensive glucose lowering, but not tight BP control, reduces MI, all
# 1 of 5
September 10, 2008 11:01 (EDT)
steven tatar
ALLHAT, should it have been a 10 year study?,
Would it still support the thesis of diuretics 1st, to prevent cv events, given the 10 year post UKPDS data?

The legacy of altered glucose metabolism from chlorthalidone may not be apparent in the first 5 years.

Likewise the cardiovascular outcome of new diabetic drugs may also require a decade of clinical study to sort out. The pharmaceutical industry will not be able to fund such studies with the political/economic push toward preferred use of the virtually free generic drugs.

In the last survey, a great majority of those surveyed favored approval of new diabetic drugs only after cv outcomes. Are there any proposals on how to accomplish these types of studies within the real world fiscal constraints?
# 2 of 5
September 11, 2008 09:29 (EDT)
Melissa Walton-Shirley
Complex but do-able
Steven,
to take it a step backward, the outcome of this trial points to how absolutely essential it is to pour funds into prevention and detection. The truth of the matter is that anytime a patient has been diagnosed with Type II diabetes, (unlike the acute presentation of type 1's), it's old news to their microvasculature. Every new ACS pt. with no known diabetes gets a glucose challenge from me, no matter what their weight.
How can we still get new drugs out of the pipeline with our funding so limited? Investments should come at both ends: the pharmaceutical companies need to re think million dollar bonuses to their CEO's, the government needs to shift to prevention focus so less monies are spent on treatment (back smoke free ordinances, implement health and PE curricula in school setting to demand prevention teaching or not receive funding, etc. etc.
Just like we need to map AMI strategies in the US, we can map prevention and detection strategies that will help free up funds to find new drugs.
Melissa
# 3 of 5
September 11, 2008 10:48 (EDT)
D Hackam
population-wide screening for diabetes/pre-diabetes
Melissa, your idea has alot of merit. Pour money into detecting the disease in its earliest aspects. Get people in their 20's, 30's, and 40's to do OGTT and fasting blood glucose, blood pressure, and lipid screening; before the onset of cardiovascular complications. I'll bet with this strategy you could eventually shut down alot of tertiary care hospitals with the money you'll save from preventing CAD, CVD and ESRD, not to mention blindness, PVD, and amputations.

I'm not advocating getting such young people onto medications so early on, but rather giving them a sharp wake-up call regarding their risk of progressing to diabetes and all its complications.
# 4 of 5
September 14, 2008 11:35 (EDT)
Michael Cobble, M.D.
detection
UKPDS again with great information to show that starting treatment early in a new onset DM population has benefits short term and long term, the latter including all mort and cv mort.

Yes it would be nice to see our government and our managed care companies share some burden in risk detection, event prevention and early advocation of treament. We can thank much of the medical industry for advancing medical care and technology - can we do the same for mgd care and govt policy? just wondering.

Another great article in Diabetes Care this month looked at the tale of 3 studies and William B will love this (cheers to you) as it discusses how CACS predicted risk and nonresponse to treatment dramatically in long term DM pts. Also an article on risk reduction in DM2 pts who were dx and tx early. very eye opening
# 5 of 5
October 1, 2008 09:31 (EDT)
CJ Mc
FFTT VS. OGTT
FFTT,.. no cost. Screen with a plain 'old' glucose monitor 2-hrs after a high-carb/high-trans fat "happy meal",.. repeat that and a couple baseline fastings, now you have a "free' documentable 'excuse" for a 3rd party paypor to actually 'approve' running an OGTT. FFTT aka fast Food Tolerance Test is a pretty EZ way to pre-screen. > 140 2-hr PPG. An abstract tested this, ADA 2006 [?]

You have to be logged in to add a comment to this article
Login
Username 
Password 
  Forgot your password?
 
Remember me on this computer
 
Join theheart.org community
Five reasons to become a member of the most trusted source of cardiology news:
1Be part of the conversation in our blogs and discussion forum
2Share your thoughts on our news or educational programs
3Receive exclusive newsletters related to your field of interest
4Access unique continuous medical education content
5See and read what leaders have to say about cardiology today
It is free and it only takes five minutes to join!
 
button
Latest 5 articles from Lipid/Metabolic
Previews
Featured CME
Inside: Lipid/Metabolic
Lipid/Metabolic
Nov 10, 2008 10:55 EST
How can we better identify patients at risk of developing cardiovascular disease? Drs Davidson, Ginsberg, and Chapman provide the lowdown on strategies to identify and treat patients with mixed dyslipidemia and ensure they achieve all their target lipid levels.
Lipid/Metabolic
2 COMMENTS - Jul 14, 2008 09:28 EDT
When and how do you treat elevated triglycerides? Click to take the survey and immediately compare your answers with your colleagues. Your responses will guide us in our selection of topics for future CME programming.
Lipid/Metabolic
Sep 8, 2008 10:00 EDT
Navigating the SEAS: Join Drs Fitchett and Chan as they present their views on the latest controversial findings from clinical on treating aortic stenosis with statins alone or in combination with ezetimibe.