ACCORD: A1C less than 7% is not a predictor of mortality risk in patients with Type 2 Diabetes
Low blood glucose levels do not explain the excess deaths
seen in the intensive control group of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk
in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial, according to a report presented at the American Diabetes
Association's 69th Scientific Sessions.
"After the original ACCORD report showed an increased
mortality risk in the intensive strategy group aiming to lower A1C level under
6%, concern arose that this approach might be dangerous," said Matthew C.
Riddle, M.D., Professor of Medicine, Oregon Health Science University and a member
of the Glycemia Management Group of ACCORD. He was also a site principal investigator
in the study. While he confirmed the estimate reported last year of a 20% increased
risk of death associated with ACCORD's intensive treatment strategy, new analyses
did not confirm the proposed theory that low A1C levels might be the cause.
"An A1C below 7% alone does not appear to explain
the excess deaths in the ACCORD trial and is not necessarily a predictor of mortality
risk," said Riddle. "Further, the rate of one-year change in A1C showed
that a greater decline in A1C was associated with a lower risk of death."
Analyses to identify the cause of the increased mortality, such as hypoglycemia,
weight gain, or a particular drug or combination of drugs - are continuing.
"However, we found a 20% higher risk of death for
every 1% higher A1C level above 6%, suggesting that lower blood glucose levels
may be a worthy target in some patients," said Riddle. That higher risk of
death remained even after statistical adjustment for age, duration of diabetes,
or prior cardiovascular events. This analysis is consistent with analyses from
other epidemiologic studies showing a relationship between higher A1Cs and higher
risk of death.
The goal was for the intensive group to reach an A1C
level of less than 6% and for the standard group goal to reach between 7 and 7.9%.
A closer look at the role of hypoglycemia was presented
by Denise Bonds, M.D., MPH, who was an investigator at ACCORD's Coordinating Center
and who is now a medical officer for the trial at the National Heart, Lung, and
Blood Institute (NHLBI) at the National Institutes of Health (NIH).
The study defined severe hypoglycemia as a blood glucose
level of less than 50 mg/dl or symptoms consistent with hypoglycemia and recovery
with glucagon or an oral carbohydrate. It was further divided into those who required
any assistance versus those who required emergency medical assistance at home
or in a hospital.
"Some predictors of hypoglycemia cannot be changed.
For example, we found that more frequently those who required medical assistance
for severe hypoglycemia were female or African-American, had a longer duration
of diabetes, or had entered the study already receiving insulin," said Bonds.
"However, more than half of severe hypoglycemic events were preceded by a
missed meal, delayed meal, or a meal with fewer carbohydrates than normal - information
that individuals with diabetes can use to modify their behavior and help in preventing
and reducing hypoglycemic events."
About one-third of severe hypoglycemic events resulted
in confusion or abnormal behavior for the individual, one-third resulted in loss
of consciousness, and one-third required hospitalization.
A total of 451 deaths occurred in the ACCORD standard
and intensive groups combined, and 7% of those individuals had at least one severe
hypoglycemic event requiring medical assistance.
"We found that severe hypoglycemia in both groups
was associated with a higher risk of death but, among those who had severe hypoglycemia
in the intensive arm, it was associated with a lower risk of death compared to
those who had severe hypoglycemia in the standard group," said Bonds.
The explanation for this is unclear, but it must be remembered
that patients in the intensive group were seen more frequently, had more phone
calls with health care providers, and more frequent but milder hypoglycemic events.
It is theorized that these patients learned how to recognize and treat themselves
at the first signs of hypoglycemia or perhaps that the hypoglycemia that caused
mortality was of a different type.
The ACCORD group also adjudicated each death for the
potential role of hypoglycemia. Of the 451 deaths, they were only able to identify
one case where it was concluded that severe hypoglycemia definitely played a role.
However, there cannot be complete certainty because glucose measures are not available
near or at the times of deaths. Continuous glucose monitoring was rarely done
during the trial.
ACCORD enrolled 10,251 adults at 77 clinics in the U.S.
and Canada. The average age at study entry was 62 years. The 35% who had prior
cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction and strokes) were the secondary prevention
group, while the balance who were at high risk for such events had problems such
as left ventricular hypertrophy, microalbuminuria, or at least two of the following
risk factors: high LDL, low HDL, high blood pressure, an elevated BMI, or were
smokers.
ACCORD was testing an intensive strategy of glycemic
control versus a standard strategy, so intensive group patients had more frequent
clinic visits and were required to do more frequent self-monitoring of blood glucose
because they modified certain medications themselves in response to self-monitoring
results. The same menu of medications was available to physicians treating both
groups, but patients in the intensive group tended to be prescribed more of them,
based on the individual physician's clinical judgment, to get to the target. A
broad comparison is that 52% of intensive patients vs. 16% of those in the standard
group were likely to be on insulin plus three oral agents.
ACCORD's comparison of two forms of glycemic therapy
ended after 3.4 years of follow up due to the excess deaths in the intensive group,
and that experience forms the basis for all reports to date. However, the trial
has continued and, together with other studies for blood pressure and lipid control,
will end June 30th, with complete analyses of all three studies expected in the
next year.
ACCORD is primarily sponsored by NHLBI, with additional
funding and scientific expertise from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive
and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). Other components of the NIH - the National Institute
of Aging and National Eye Institute - as well as the Centers for Disease Control
and Prevention, provide support substudies.
|