Badaru Angela, Klingensmith Georgeanna J, Dabelea Dana, Mayer-Davis Elizabeth J, Dolan Lawrence, Lawrence Jean M, Marcovina Santica, Beavers Daniel, Rodriguez Beatriz L, Imperatore Giuseppina, Pihoker Catherine
Corresponding author: Catherine Pihoker,
Diabetes Care. 2014;37(1):64-72. doi: 10.2337/dc13-1124. Epub 2013 Sep 11.
OBJECTIVE To describe treatment regimens in youth with type 2 diabetes and examine associations between regimens, demographic and clinical characteristics, and glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This report includes 474 youth with a clinical diagnosis of type 2 diabetes who completed a SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth study visit. Diabetes treatment regimen was categorized as lifestyle alone, metformin monotherapy, any oral hypoglycemic agent (OHA) other than metformin or two or more OHAs, insulin monotherapy, and insulin plus any OHA(s). Association of treatment with demographic and clinical characteristics (fasting C-peptide [FCP], diabetes duration, and self-monitoring of blood glucose [SMBG]), and A1C was assessed by χ(2) and ANOVA. Multiple linear regression models were used to evaluate independent associations of treatment regimens and A1C, adjusting for demographics, diabetes duration, FCP, and SMBG. RESULTS Over 50% of participants reported treatment with metformin alone or lifestyle. Of the autoantibody-negative youth, 40% were on metformin alone, while 33% were on insulin-containing regimens. Participants on metformin alone had a lower A1C (7.0 ± 2.0%, 53 ± 22 mmol/mol) than those on insulin alone (9.2 ± 2.7%, 77 ± 30 mmol/mol) or insulin plus OHA (8.6 ± 2.6%, 70 ± 28 mmol/mol) (P < 0.001). These differences remained significant after adjustment (7.5 ± 0.3%, 58 ± 3 mmol/mol; 9.1 ± 0.4%, 76 ± 4 mmol/mol; and 8.6 ± 0.4%, 70 ± 4 mmol/mol) (P < 0.001) and were more striking in those with diabetes for ≥2 years (7.9 ± 2.8, 9.9 ± 2.8, and 9.8 ± 2.6%). Over one-half of those on insulin-containing therapies still experience treatment failure (A1C ≥8%, 64 mmol/mol). CONCLUSIONS Approximately half of youth with type 2 diabetes were managed with lifestyle or metformin alone and had better glycemic control than individuals using other therapies. Those with longer diabetes duration in particular commonly experienced treatment failures, and more effective management strategies are needed.
目的 描述2型糖尿病青少年的治疗方案,并研究治疗方案、人口统计学和临床特征与血糖控制之间的关联。研究设计与方法 本报告纳入了474例临床诊断为2型糖尿病且完成青少年糖尿病SEARCH研究访视的青少年。糖尿病治疗方案分为单纯生活方式干预、二甲双胍单药治疗、除二甲双胍外的任何口服降糖药(OHA)或两种及以上OHA、胰岛素单药治疗以及胰岛素联合任何OHA。通过χ²检验和方差分析评估治疗与人口统计学和临床特征(空腹C肽[FCP]、糖尿病病程和血糖自我监测[SMBG])以及糖化血红蛋白(A1C)之间的关联。使用多元线性回归模型评估治疗方案与A1C的独立关联,并对人口统计学、糖尿病病程、FCP和SMBG进行校正。结果 超过50%的参与者报告采用单纯生活方式干预或二甲双胍治疗。在自身抗体阴性的青少年中,40%仅使用二甲双胍治疗,而33%采用含胰岛素的治疗方案。单纯使用二甲双胍治疗的参与者的A1C水平(7.0±2.0%,53±22 mmol/mol)低于单纯使用胰岛素治疗的参与者(9.2±2.7%,77±30 mmol/mol)或胰岛素联合OHA治疗的参与者(8.6±2.6%,70±28 mmol/mol)(P<0.001)。校正后这些差异仍然显著(7.5±0.3%,58±3 mmol/mol;9.1±0.4%,76±4 mmol/mol;8.6±0.4%,70±4 mmol/mol)(P<见0.001)且在糖尿病病程≥2年的患者中更为明显(7.9±2.8%,9.9±2.8%,9.8±2.6%)。超过一半接受含胰岛素治疗的患者仍经历治疗失败(A1C≥8%,64 mmol/mol)。结论 约一半的2型糖尿病青少年采用单纯生活方式干预或二甲双胍治疗,血糖控制优于使用其他治疗方法的患者。尤其是糖尿病病程较长的患者通常会经历治疗失败,因此需要更有效的管理策略。