HbA(1c) and Risk of Severe Hypoglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes The Diabetes and Aging Study

Section of Endocrinology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut.
Diabetes care (Impact Factor: 8.57). 07/2013; 36(11). DOI: 10.2337/dc13-0610
Source: PubMed

We examined the association between HbA1c level and self-reported severe hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Type 2 diabetic patients in a large, integrated healthcare system, who were 30-77 years of age and treated with glucose-lowering therapy, were asked about severe hypoglycemia requiring assistance in the year prior to the Diabetes Study of Northern California survey conducted in 2005-2006 (62% response rate). The main exposure of interest was the last HbA1c level collected in the year preceding the observation period. Poisson regression models adjusted for selected demographic and clinical variables were specified to evaluate the relative risk (RR) of severe hypoglycemia across HbA1c levels. We also tested whether the HbA1c-hypoglycemia association differed across potential effect modifiers (age, diabetes duration, and category of diabetes medication).RESULTSAmong 9,094 eligible survey respondents (mean age 59.5 ± 9.8 years, mean HbA1c 7.5 ± 1.5%), 985 (10.8%) reported experiencing severe hypoglycemia. Across HbA1c levels, rates of hypoglycemia were 9.3-13.8%. Compared with those with HbA1c of 7-7.9%, the RR of hypoglycemia was 1.25 (95% CI 0.99-1.57), 1.01 (0.87-1.18), 0.99 (0.82-1.20), and 1.16 (0.97-1.38) among those with HbA1c <6, 6-6.9, 8-8.9, and ≥9%, respectively, in a fully adjusted model. Age, diabetes duration, and category of diabetes medication did not significantly modify the HbA1c-hypoglycemia relationship.CONCLUSIONS
Severe hypoglycemia was common among patients with type 2 diabetes across all levels of glycemic control. Risk tended to be higher in patients with either near-normal glycemia or very poor glycemic control.

1 Follower
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the risk for documented hypoglycaemia with glimepiride versus linagliptin. This was an exploratory analysis of data from a 2-year, randomised, double-blind study of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor linagliptin 5 mg qd (n = 764) versus the sulphonylurea glimepiride 1-4 mg qd (n = 755) in patients uncontrolled by metformin. Patients randomised to glimepiride started on 1 mg and after 4 weeks were allowed to be individually uptitrated stepwise to glimepiride 4 mg if fasting plasma glucose ≤110 mg/dl was not achieved. Investigator-reported hypoglycaemia was evaluated by dose, over time, and by the degree of HbA1c reduction. The percentage of patients with at least one hypoglycaemic event at the individual maximum glimepiride dose was: 1 mg, 45.0%; 2 mg, 50.8%; 3 mg, 36.1%; 4 mg, 27.7%. The incidence of hypoglycaemia was higher with glimepiride than with linagliptin (36.1% vs. 7.5%; p < 0.0001); after performing sensitivity analyses by excluding events during dose escalation (weeks 0-16), this difference remained significant (weeks 16-104: 25.8% vs. 5.9%; p < 0.0001). Notably, the incidence of hypoglycaemia was higher with glimepiride than with linagliptin in each quartile of HbA1c change from baseline (all p < 0.0001); the incidence of hypoglycaemic episodes was not increased with greater reductions in HbA1c in either group. In all 4-week intervals across the 2-year study, the incidence of hypoglycaemia was lower with linagliptin than with glimepiride. Linagliptin was associated with a lower risk for hypoglycaemia than glimepiride at all dose levels and time intervals, and regardless of change in HbA1c. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.
    Diabetes Obesity and Metabolism 11/2014; 17(3). DOI:10.1111/dom.12419 · 5.46 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To present a case report of recurrent hypoglycaemia in type 2 diabetic patient due to hypothyroidism. We describe a case with type 2 diabetes who complained of episodes of recurrent hypoglycaemia in last few weeks. We also discuss the results of the diagnostic workup done to find out the cause of recurrent hypoglycaemia. After ruling out common causes like overdosing of oral hypoglycaemic agents or insulin, renal or hepatic impairment we found overt hypothyroidism as a cause of recurrent hypoglycaemia. Levothyroxine therapy was started in this patient. Upon normalization of thyroid function, patient did not further experience any episodes of hypoglycaemia. We did not find any report on hypothyroidism as a cause of recurrent hypoglycaemia in type 2 diabetic patients. We conclude that during workup, clinicians should take hypothyroidism into consideration as a potential cause of hypoglycaemia in type 2 diabetic patients.
    01/2015; 14:13. DOI:10.1186/s40200-015-0149-y
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like protein 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) is a new intriguing therapeutic option for patients with type 2 diabetes. In our daily practice we abbreviate this therapeutic concept with the term BIT (basal insulin combined incretin mimetic therapy) in a certain analogy to BOT (basal insulin supported oral therapy). In most cases BIT is indeed an extension of BOT, if fasting, prandial or postprandial blood glucose values have not reached the target range. In our paper we discuss special features of combinations of short- or prandial-acting and long- or continuous-acting GLP-1 RAs like exenatide, lixisenatide and liraglutide with basal insulin in relation to different glycemic targets. Overall it seems appropriate to use a short-acting GLP-1 RA if, after the near normalization of fasting blood glucose with BOT, the prandial or postprandial values are elevated. A long-acting GLP-1 RA might well be given, if fasting blood glucose values are the problem. Based on pathophysiological findings, recent clinical studies and our experience with BIT and BOT as well as BOTplus we developed chart-supported algorithms for decision making, including features and conditions of patients. The development of these practical tools was guided by the need for a more individualized antidiabetic therapy and the availability of the new BIT principle.
    Therapeutic advances in endocrinology and metabolism 10/2014; 5(5):95-123. DOI:10.1177/2042018814556099

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
Jan 27, 2015