The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
The George Institute for Global Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, AustraliaSchool of Public Health, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia.
Diabetes Care. 2014 Aug;37(8):2359-65. doi: 10.2337/dc14-0199. Epub 2014 May 8.
There is no consensus on the importance of visit-to-visit glycemic variability in diabetes. Therefore, we assessed the effects of visit-to-visit variability (VVV) in HbA1c and fasting glucose on major outcomes in the ADVANCE (Action in Diabetes and Vascular Disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation) trial.
ADVANCE was a factorial randomized controlled trial of intensive glucose control and blood pressure lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes. VVV in the intensive glucose treatment group was defined using the SD of five measurements of HbA1c and glucose taken 3-24 months after randomization. Outcomes were combined macro- and microvascular events and all-cause mortality occurring post 24 months. Sensitivity analyses were performed using other indices of variability and in the standard glucose treatment group.
Among 4,399 patients in the intensive group, an increase in VVV of HbA1c was associated with an increased risk of vascular events (P = 0.01) and with mortality (P < 0.001): highest versus lowest tenth hazard ratio (95% CI) 1.64 (1.05-2.55) and 3.31 (1.57-6.98), respectively, after multivariable adjustment. A clear association was also observed between VVV of fasting glucose and increased risk of vascular events (P < 0.001; 2.70 [1.65-4.42]). HbA1c variability was positively associated with the risk of macrovascular events (P = 0.02 for trend), whereas glucose variability was associated with both macro- and microvascular events (P = 0.005 and P < 0.001 for trend, respectively). Sensitivity analyses using other indices, and patients in the standard glucose treatment group, were broadly consistent with these results.
Consistency of glycemic control is important to reduce the risks of vascular events and death in type 2 diabetes.
血糖波动在糖尿病中的重要性尚未达成共识。因此,我们评估了 ADVANCE 试验中糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)和空腹血糖的随访内血糖变异性(VVV)对主要结局的影响。
ADVANCE 是一项 2 型糖尿病强化血糖控制和降压的析因随机对照试验。强化血糖治疗组的 VVV 采用随机分组后 3-24 个月内 HbA1c 和血糖的 5 次测量值的标准差来定义。主要终点为 24 个月后发生的复合大血管和微血管事件及全因死亡率。采用其他变异性指标进行了敏感性分析,并在标准血糖治疗组进行了分析。
在强化组的 4399 例患者中,HbA1c 的 VVV 增加与血管事件风险增加相关(P=0.01)和死亡率增加相关(P<0.001):最高与最低十分位数的危险比(95%CI)分别为 1.64(1.05-2.55)和 3.31(1.57-6.98),校正后多变量分析。空腹血糖的 VVV 与血管事件风险增加也有明显关联(P<0.001;2.70 [1.65-4.42])。HbA1c 变异性与大血管事件风险呈正相关(趋势 P=0.02),而血糖变异性与大血管和微血管事件均相关(趋势 P=0.005 和 P<0.001)。采用其他指标和标准血糖治疗组患者进行的敏感性分析与这些结果基本一致。
血糖控制的一致性对于降低 2 型糖尿病患者血管事件和死亡风险非常重要。