ADA EASD Position Statement Management of Hyperglycemia in T2 DM April 2012

Editor's Notes

• #8: Changes in obesity and diabetes rates in the United States over a 15 year period.
• #9: Figures given are: number of people with diabetes in 2011 and predicted number of people that will have diabetes in 2030 according to IDF estimates. Percentage is the increase in diabetes from 2011 to 2030. “World” box acts as the legend. The burden of diabetes is one of the greatest challenges of the 21st century, as seen in the global incidence and projections of diabetes epidemic worldwide. 366 million people have diabetes in 2011 and this is predicted to rise to 552 million by 2030. Diabetes caused at least $465 billion in healthcare expenditure in 2011 – 11% of the total expenditure, and is expected to exceed $595 billion by 2030.
• #11: Overview of the microvascular, macrovascular and mortality outcomes from large T2DM and T1DM randomized clinical trials that focused on the relationship between glycemic control and complications.
• #15: Depiction of the elements of decision-making used to determine appropriate efforts to achieve glycaemic targets. Greater concerns about a particular domain are represented by increasing height of the ramp. Thus, characteristics/predicaments towards the left justify more stringent efforts to lower HbA1c, whereas those towards the right are compatible with less stringent efforts. Where possible, such decisions should be made in conjunction with the patient, reflecting his or her preferences, needs and values. This ‘scale’ is not designed to be applied rigidly but to be used as a broad construct to help guide clinical decisions. Adapted with permission from Ismail-Beigi et al [ref 20]
• #22: Diagrammatic representation of the approximate pharmacokinetic properties of various insulin formulations.
• #24: Moving from the top to the bottom of the figure, potential sequences of anti-hyperglycaemic therapy. In most patients, begin with lifestyle changes; metformin monotherapy is added at, or soon after, diagnosis (unless there are explicit contraindications).
• #25: If the A1c target is not achieved after ~3 months, consider one of the 5 treatment options combined with metformin (dual combination): a sulfonylurea, TZD, DPP-4 inhibitor, GLP-1 receptor agonist or basal insulin. Note that the order in the chart is determined by historical introduction andr oute of administration and is not meant to denote any specific preference. Choice is based on patient and drug characteristics, with the over-riding goal of improving glycemic control while minimizing side effects. Shared decision-making with the patient may help in the selection of therapeutic options. Rapid-acting secretagogues (meglitinides) may be used in place of sulfonylureas. Consider in patients with irregular meal schedules or who develop late postprandialhypoglycemia on sulfonylureas. Other drugs not shown (α-glucosidase inhibitors, colesevelam, dopamine agonists, pramlintide) may be used where available in selected patients but have modest efficacy and/or limiting side effects. In patients intolerant of, or with contraindications for, metformin, select initial drug from other classes depicted, and proceed accordingly. Consider starting with 2-drug combinations in patients with very high HbA1c (e.g. ≥9%).
• #26: Further progression to 3-drug combinations are reasonable if 2-drug combinations do not achieve target. If metformin contraindicated or not tolerated, while published trials are generally lacking, it is reasonable to consider 3-drug combinations other than metformin. Insulin is likely to be more effective than most other agents as a third-line therapy, especially when HbA1c is very high (e.g. ≥9.0%). The therapeutic regimen should include some basal insulin before moving to more complex insulin strategies (see Fig. 3)
• #27: Ultimately, more intensive insulin regimens may be required (see Figure 3.) Dashed arrow line on the left-hand side of the figure denotes the option of a more rapid progression from a 2-drug combination directly to multiple daily insulin doses, in those patients with severe hyperglycaemia (e.g. HbA1c ≥10.0-12.0%). Consider beginning with insulin if patient presents with severe hyperglycemia (≥300-350 mg/dl [≥16.7-19.4 mmol/l]; HbA1c ≥10.0-12.0%) with or without catabolic features (weight loss, ketosis, etc).
• #28: Basal insulin alone is usually the optimal initial regimen, beginning at 0.1-0.2 U/kg body weight, depending on the degree of hyperglycemia. It is usually prescribed in conjunction with 1-2 non-insulin agents. In patients willing to take >1 injection and who have higher A1c levels (≥9.0%), BID pre-mixed insulin or a more advanced basal plus mealtime insulin regimen could also be considered (curved dashed arrow lines). When basal insulin has been titrated to an acceptable FPG but A1c remains above target, consider proceeding to basal + meal-time insulin, consisting of 1-3 injections of rapid-acting analogues. A less studied alternative—progression from basal insulin to a twice daily pre-mixed insulin—could be also considered (straight dashed arrow line); if this is unsuccessful, move to basal + mealtime insulin. The figure describes the number of injections required at each stage, together with the relative complexity and flexibility. Once a strategy is initiated, titration of the insulin dose is important, with dose adjustments made based on the prevailing BG levels as reported by the patient. Non-insulin agents may be continued, although insulin secretagogues (sulfonylureas, meglitinides) are typically stopped once more complex regimens beyond basal insulin are utilized. Comprehensive education regarding self-monitoring of BG, diet, exercise, and the avoidance of, and response to, hypoglycemia are critical in any patient on insulin therapy.
• #32: Overview of anti-hyperglycemic therapy in T2DM (Figure 2.) What follows are variations of this figure to help guide the clinician in choosing agents which may be most appropriate under certain situations: to avoid weight gain, to avoid hypoglycemia, and to minimize costs.
• #33: Fig. 2A should be considered when the goal is to avoid hypoglycemia. Note that "hidden" agents may obviously still be used when required, but additional care is needed to avoid adverse events. Here, the risk of hypoglycemia when using the hidden agents will be, in part, dependent on the baseline degree of hyperglycemia, the treatment target, and the adequacy of patient education.
• #40: Overview of anti-hyperglycemic therapy in T2DM (Figure 2.) What follows are variations of this figure to help guide the clinician in choosing agents which may be most appropriate under certain situations: to avoid weight gain, to avoid hypoglycemia, and to minimize costs.
• #41: Fig. 2B should be considered when the goal is to avoid weight gain. Note that "hidden" agents may obviously still be used when required, but additional care is needed to avoid adverse events. Here, the chances of weight gain when using the hidden agents will be mitigated by more rigorous adherence to dietary recommendations and optimal dosing.
• #42: Fig. 2C should be considered when the goal is to minimize costs. This reflects prevailing costs in the North America and Europe in early 2012; costs of certain drugs may vary considerably from country to country and as generic formulations become available.  
• #43: Avoiding ‘glucocentricity’ is key in the comprehensive management of the patient with T2DM. Cardiovascular risk factor reduction must incorporate blood pressure and lipid control, in addition to, where indicated, anti-platelet therapy.