GLORIA

GEOMAR Library Ocean Research Information Access

Your email was sent successfully. Check your inbox.

An error occurred while sending the email. Please try again.

Proceed reservation?

Export
Filter
  • Abdul-Ghani, M.  (2)
  • 1
    In: Diabetes Care, American Diabetes Association, Vol. 45, No. 7 ( 2022-07-07), p. 1512-1521
    Abstract: Differences in type 2 diabetes phenotype by age are described, but it is not known whether these differences are seen in a more uniformly defined adult population at a common early stage of care. We sought to characterize age-related clinical and metabolic characteristics of adults with type 2 diabetes on metformin monotherapy, prior to treatment intensification. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE), participants were enrolled who had type 2 diabetes duration & lt;10 years, had HbA1c 6.8–8.5%, and were on metformin monotherapy. Participants were randomly assigned to one of four additional glucose-lowering medications. We compared baseline clinical and metabolic characteristics across age categories ( & lt;45, 45 to & lt;55, 55 to & lt;65, and ≥65 years) using ANOVA and Pearson χ2 tests. RESULTS Within the GRADE cohort (n = 5,047), we observed significant differences by age, with younger adults having greater racial diversity, fewer medications for common comorbidities, lower prevalence of CVD, higher weight and BMI, and more pronounced hyperglycemia and diabetic dyslipidemia and with metabolic profile indicating lower insulin sensitivity (inverse fasting insulin [1/(fasting insulin)], HOMA of steady-state insulin sensitivity, Matsuda index) and inadequate β-cell response (oral disposition index) (P & lt; 0.05 across age categories). CONCLUSIONS Clinical and metabolic characteristics of type 2 diabetes differ by age within the GRADE cohort. Younger adults exhibit more prominent obesity-related characteristics, including higher obesity levels and lower insulin sensitivity and β-cell compensation. Given the increasing burden of type 2 diabetes and complications, particularly among younger populations, these age-related distinctions may inform risk factor management approaches and treatment priorities. Further study will determine whether age-related differences impact response to therapy.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0149-5992
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Diabetes Association
    Publication Date: 2022
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1490520-6
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
  • 2
    In: Diabetes Care, American Diabetes Association, ( 2023-09-26)
    Abstract: To describe rescue insulin use and associated factors in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Type 2 Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS GRADE participants (type 2 diabetes duration & lt;10 years, baseline A1C 6.8%–8.5% on metformin monotherapy, N = 5,047) were randomly assigned to insulin glargine U-100, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin and followed quarterly for a mean of 5 years. Rescue insulin (glargine or aspart) was to be started within 6 weeks of A1C & gt;7.5%, confirmed. Reasons for delaying rescue insulin were reported by staff-completed survey. RESULTS Nearly one-half of GRADE participants (N = 2,387 [47.3%]) met the threshold for rescue insulin. Among participants assigned to glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin, rescue glargine was added by 69% (39% within 6 weeks). Rescue aspart was added by 44% of glargine-assigned participants (19% within 6 weeks) and by 30% of non-glargine-assigned participants (14% within 6 weeks). Higher A1C values were associated with adding rescue insulin. Intention to change health behaviors (diet/lifestyle, adherence to current treatment) and not wanting to take insulin were among the most common reasons reported for not adding rescue insulin within 6 weeks. CONCLUSIONS Proportionately, rescue glargine, when required, was more often used than rescue aspart, and higher A1C values were associated with greater rescue insulin use. Wanting to use non-insulin strategies to improve glycemia was commonly reported, although multiple factors likely contributed to not using rescue insulin. These findings highlight the persistent challenge of intensifying type 2 diabetes treatment with insulin, even in a clinical trial.
    Type of Medium: Online Resource
    ISSN: 0149-5992 , 1935-5548
    Language: English
    Publisher: American Diabetes Association
    Publication Date: 2023
    detail.hit.zdb_id: 1490520-6
    Location Call Number Limitation Availability
    BibTip Others were also interested in ...
Close ⊗
This website uses cookies and the analysis tool Matomo. More information can be found here...