Original Article
Long-Term Follow-up after Tight Control of Blood Pressure in Type 2 Diabetes
N Engl J Med 2008; 359:1565-1576October 9, 2008
- Abstract
Background
Post-trial monitoring of patients in the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) examined whether risk reductions for microvascular and macrovascular disease, achieved with the use of improved blood-pressure control during the trial, would be sustained.
Methods
Among 5102 UKPDS patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus, we randomly assigned, over a 4-year period beginning in 1987, 1148 patients with hypertension to tight or less-tight blood-pressure control regimens. The 884 patients who underwent post-trial monitoring were asked to attend annual UKPDS clinics for the first 5 years, but no attempt was made to maintain their previously assigned therapies. Annual questionnaires completed by patients and general practitioners were used to follow patients who were unable to attend the clinic in years 1 through 5, and questionnaires were used for all patients in years 6 to 10. Seven prespecified aggregate clinical end points were examined on an intention-to-treat basis, according to the previous randomization categories.
Results
Differences in blood pressure between the two groups during the trial disappeared within 2 years after termination of the trial. Significant relative risk reductions found during the trial for any diabetes-related end point, diabetes-related death, microvascular disease, and stroke in the group receiving tight, as compared with less tight, blood-pressure control were not sustained during the post-trial follow-up. No risk reductions were seen during or after the trial for myocardial infarction or death from any cause, but a risk reduction for peripheral vascular disease associated with tight blood-pressure control became significant (P=0.02).
Conclusions
The benefits of previously improved blood-pressure control were not sustained when between-group differences in blood pressure were lost. Early improvement in blood-pressure control in patients with both type 2 diabetes and hypertension was associated with a reduced risk of complications, but it appears that good blood-pressure control must be continued if the benefits are to be maintained. (UKPDS 81; Current Controlled Trials number, ISRCTN75451837.)
Media in This Article
Figure 1
Enrollment, Randomization, and Follow-up of Study Participants.Figure 2
Mean Blood Pressures and Corresponding Body Weights, for Years 1 through 5 Only, of Patients Who Attended a UKPDS Clinic, According to Treatment Assignment.Article Activity
- Article
The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) was a randomized, prospective, multicenter trial that indicated that improved glucose control in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus reduces the risk of clinically evident microvascular complications, with a relative risk reduction for myocardial infarction of 16% (P=0.052).1 From 1987 to 1991, UKPDS patients with hypertension were, in addition, randomly assigned in a factorial manner to a tight blood-pressure control regimen involving an angiotensin-converting–enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or a beta-blocker or to a less-tight blood-pressure control strategy that excluded these agents.2 For tight as compared with the less-tight control of blood pressure, there were relative risk reductions of 24% for any diabetes-related end point, 32% for diabetes-related death, 44% for stroke, and 37% for microvascular disease. 3
A postinterventional benefit with regard to both microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes has been reported in the Steno-2 Study.4 Over a period of 5.5 years after multifactorial risk intervention, persistent reductions in the rates of death from any cause, death from cardiovascular causes, and progression of microvascular disease were reported, despite diminutions in the within-trial differences in glucose, blood-pressure, and lipid control, suggesting that there may be a persistent effect of earlier improved management of risk factors.4
We report here the results of a 10-year, postinterventional follow-up of the survivor cohort of the UKPDS blood-pressure study that examined whether a continued benefit of earlier improved blood-pressure control was evident and, if so, the degree to which it persisted. In a companion article in this issue of the Journal, we report the results of the post-trial monitoring in the glycemic intervention groups of the UKPDS patients.5
Methods
Patients
Details on recruitment of patients for the UKPDS and the protocols, methods,2,6 and post-trial monitoring procedures5 have been reported previously. The embedded Hypertension in Diabetes Study (HDS)2 involved randomization of 1148 of 1544 UKPDS patients with hypertension (blood pressure, ≥160/90 mm Hg or ≥150/85 mm Hg if the patient was receiving antihypertensive treatment) in a factorial manner, over a 4-year period beginning in 1987, to a tight blood-pressure control regimen (with randomized assignment to up to 50 mg of captopril [Capoten, Bristol-Myers Squibb] twice daily or up to 100 mg of atenolol [Tenormin, Hoechst] once daily) or to a less-tight blood-pressure control regimen (without the use of ACE inhibitors or beta-blockers). A total of 144 patients declined to participate in the blood-pressure study. A total of 252 other patients were excluded because they already required strict blood-pressure control (owing to previous stroke, accelerated hypertension, cardiac failure, or renal failure) or beta-blockade (owing to myocardial infarction in the previous year or current angina), had severe vascular disease or a severe concurrent illness, had contraindications to the use of beta-blockers, or were pregnant. The 1148 patients had a mean (±SD) age of 56.4±8.1 years and 56% were male; 87% reported that they were white, 4% Asian Indian, and 7% Afro-Caribbean.
The blood-pressure target for the tight-control group was less than 150/85 mm Hg, and the target for the less-tight–control group was less than 180/105 mm Hg, with therapies added as necessary in the following recommended sequence: 20 mg of furosemide daily (maximum, 40 mg twice daily), 10 mg of slow-release nifedipine daily (maximum, 40 mg), 250 mg of methyldopa daily (maximum, 500 mg), and 1 mg of prazosin thrice daily (maximum, 5 mg). The median duration of follow-up for the comparison of tight control with less-tight control was 8.4 years,2 and within the tight-control group, the duration was 8.6 years for the comparison of ACE inhibitors with beta-blockers.
Post-Trial Monitoring
When the interventional trial closed on September 30, 1997, the survivor cohort entered a 10-year post-trial monitoring program planned to coincide with a projected 50% mortality rate. In September 1998,3,7 after publication of the UKPDS results, patients and clinicians were advised to aim for the lowest feasible blood-glucose and blood-pressure levels. Patients returned to their usual physicians, with no attempt to maintain previously randomized therapies, and were seen annually for 5 years in UKPDS clinics. Standardized collection of end-point data was continued, as were measurements of blood pressure, levels of fasting plasma glucose, glycated hemoglobin, and plasma creatinine; calculation of the albumin-to-creatinine ratio; and clinical examinations every 3 years. Questionnaires — the European Quality of Life–5 Dimensions (EQ-5D) instrument8 and a questionnaire on health-resource use — were administered annually. Patients who were unable to attend clinics were mailed the EQ-5D and health-resource questionnaires, and additional questionnaires were sent to their general practitioners to capture possible end points. During years 6 to 10, because of funding constraints, these questionnaires were used to follow all patients remotely. After the censoring date of post-trial monitoring (September 30, 2007), final questionnaires were sent to all remaining patients.
Clinical Outcomes
The study administrator obtained full documentation from hospitals and general practitioners for all putative end points, whether reported at a clinic visit or on a questionnaire. The vital status of patients was obtained from the U.K. Office of National Statistics. End points were adjudicated exactly as they had been during the trial and by the same end-point committee, the members of which were unaware of the treatment assignments. The seven prespecified UKPDS aggregate clinical end points2 were any diabetes-related end point (sudden death, death from hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction, angina, heart failure, fatal or nonfatal stroke, renal failure, amputation, vitreous hemorrhage, retinal photocoagulation, blindness in one eye, or cataract extraction), diabetes-related death (death from myocardial infarction, stroke, peripheral vascular disease, renal disease, hyperglycemia or hypoglycemia, or sudden death), death from any cause, myocardial infarction (sudden death, fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction), fatal or nonfatal stroke, peripheral vascular disease (amputation of at least one digit or death from peripheral vascular disease), and microvascular disease (vitreous hemorrhage, retinal photocoagulation, or renal failure).
Statistical Analysis
Statistical analyses were performed on the basis of the intention-to-treat principle with the use of descriptive statistics presented as the number of patients (percentage) or appropriate measures of central tendency and dispersion. Continuous and categorical study variables were compared between tight and less-tight blood-pressure–control therapies by means of nonparametric tests. Kaplan–Meier time-to-event analyses were used for aggregate clinical end points, with log-rank tests used to test for differences between previous treatment assignments. Since recruitment was performed during a 4-year period, patients could have participated in the interventional trial for 6 to 10 years. Since there was no common time from randomization to the commencement of post-trial monitoring, we used serial hazard-ratio plots with confidence intervals, after checking that proportional-hazards assumptions were not violated, to estimate post-trial relative risks, with P values calculated only at the end of the follow-up period. Absolute risk rates are expressed as the number of events per 1000 person-years.
Post-trial monitoring was initiated by the investigators and was sponsored for 5 years by the Medical Research Council and then by the University of Oxford. The investigators designed and conducted the study, analyzed the data, and prepared the manuscript, independently of any funding bodies. The investigators vouch for the completeness and accuracy of the data.
Results
Characteristics of the Patients
Baseline characteristics for the 884 patients undergoing post-trial monitoring among the 1148 patients randomly assigned to tight or less-tight blood-pressure control (Figure 1Figure 1
Enrollment, Randomization, and Follow-up of Study Participants.), and for the 592 patients in the tight-control group who were randomly assigned to ACE-inhibitor or beta-blocker therapy, are shown in Table 1Table 1
Baseline Characteristics of the Survivor Cohort Entering Post-Trial Monitoring.. As compared with patients who had been assigned to less-tight blood-pressure control, those who had been previously assigned to tight blood-pressure control during the study had a lower mean systolic blood pressure (by 9 mm Hg, P<0.001) and a lower diastolic blood pressure (by 3 mm Hg, P<0.001) but a higher median glycated hemoglobin value (by 0.8 percentage points, P=0.001). In the group undergoing tight blood-pressure control, 61% of patients were taking two or more antihypertensive agents, as compared with 36% in the group undergoing less-tight blood-pressure control. Overall, less than 2% of patients were taking lipid-lowering drugs. The two groups did not differ significantly with respect to age; sex; race or ethnic group; body weight; levels of fasting plasma glucose, lipids, or plasma creatinine; or the albumin-to-creatinine ratio (Table 1). Baseline characteristics for patients previously assigned to an ACE inhibitor or beta-blocker also did not differ significantly between the two groups, except that the beta-blocker group had a greater mean body weight, by 4 kg (P=0.01), a lower total cholesterol level, by 7 mg per deciliter (0.18 mmol per liter) (P=0.04), and a lower high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level, by 3 mg per deciliter (0.08 mmol per liter) (P=0.009). No significant differences were found at baseline for any variable between patients with and those without available final-year data (Table 1), except that those with data were less often white (P<0.001).In years 1 through 5, the majority of patients (92 to 97%) attended a UKPDS clinic. The median duration of follow-up after randomization with regard to the comparison of the tight-control and the less-tight–control groups was 14.5 years (15,583 person-years), including a median of 8.0 years of post-trial monitoring. The median duration of follow-up after randomization with regard to the comparison of patients receiving an ACE inhibitor and those receiving a beta-blocker was 14.6 years (10,358 person-years), including a median of 7.6 years after the trial.
The mortality rate was 51%, with the leading causes of death being cardiovascular events (53%) and cancer (21%). The overall rate of loss to follow-up was 2%. Baseline differences between the less-tight–control group and the tight-control group in the number of antihypertensive agents taken were no longer evident by year 5 after the trial, with 73% and 75% of patients, respectively, taking two or more agents. By year 5, among all patients, 24% were receiving lipid-lowering therapy and 44% were receiving aspirin, with no significant differences between the two groups. Baseline differences between the groups in mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures were lost by year 1 and year 2, respectively (Figure 2Figure 2
Mean Blood Pressures and Corresponding Body Weights, for Years 1 through 5 Only, of Patients Who Attended a UKPDS Clinic, According to Treatment Assignment.). There were no significant changes in body weight (Figure 2). There were no significant differences in glycated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose, or plasma creatinine levels or albumin-to-creatinine ratio, at any time point, between the tight and less-tight–control groups, or between the ACE inhibitor and beta-blocker groups, with the exception of fasting plasma glucose at year 3 and glycated hemoglobin at year 4 (P=0.04 for both end points) (see the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this article at www.nejm.org).Clinical Outcomes
Among patients undergoing tight blood-pressure control as compared with those undergoing less-tight control, significant relative risk reductions seen during the trial — for any diabetes-related end point (relative risk reduction of 24%, P=0.005), diabetes-related death (32%, P=0.02), stroke (44%, P=0.01), and microvascular disease (37%, P=0.009) — were not sustained during the post-trial follow-up period. These differences diminished over time (Figure 3Figure 3
Hazard Ratios for Prespecified UKPDS End Points at the End of the Trial (1997) and for Each Year of the 10-Year Post-Trial Monitoring Period, According to Treatment Assignments.), with risk reductions that were not significant at year 10 of 7% for any diabetes-related end point (P=0.31), 16% for diabetes-related death (P=0.12), 23% for stroke (P=0.12), and 16% for microvascular disease (P=0.17) (Table 2Table 2
UKPDS End Points among Patients Followed for Up to 20 Years, Including Up to 10 Years of Post-Trial Monitoring, According to Treatment Assignments. and Figure 4Figure 4
Kaplan–Meier Cumulative-Incidence Plots and Log-Rank P Values for Pre-specified UKPDS End Points during the 20-Year Period of the Trial and the Post-Trial Monitoring Period, According to Treatment Assignments.).The nonsignificant relative risk reductions observed during the trial for myocardial infarction (21%, P=0.13) and death from any cause (18%, P=0.17) were also diminished during the follow-up period (Figure 3). Risk reductions in the tight-control group as compared with the less-tight–control group 10 years after the trial ended were 10% for myocardial infarction (P=0.35) and 11% for death from any cause (P=0.18) (Table 2 and Figure 4). Overall, few patients had peripheral vascular disease (8 in each group), with maintenance of the risk reduction seen during the trial (49%, P=0.17) (Figure 4); however, the number of patients with this end point increased to 21 in each group during the post-trial monitoring period, and there was a significant risk reduction in the tight-control group at year 10 (50%, P=0.02) (Table 2 and Figure 4). Between the patients receiving an ACE inhibitor or beta-blocker, no significant differences in aggregate end points were seen during the trial or during post-trial monitoring, apart from an emerging, nominally significant increase in the risk of death from any cause in the ACE-inhibitor group (P=0.047) (Table 2 and Figure 3 and Figure 4).
Discussion
This 10-year follow-up study of the survivor cohort from the UKPDS blood-pressure–intervention trial shows that the benefits seen in patients assigned to a strategy of tight blood-pressure control3 were not maintained once the differences in blood pressure seen during the trial itself were lost. Participating patients were a hypertensive cohort recruited from among people with newly diagnosed diabetes and have been followed for over 15,000 person-years since their randomization to tight or less-tight blood-pressure control. The lower blood-pressure levels attained early in the course of diabetes did not appear to confer a legacy effect, as seen with the more sustained benefits of earlier improved blood-glucose control. 5,9
The UKPDS blood-pressure trial showed substantial reductions in the relative risk of any diabetes-related end point, diabetes-related death, stroke, and microvascular disease associated with a strategy of tight blood-pressure control, as compared with less-tight control, that maintained systolic pressure that was 10 mm Hg lower, and diastolic pressure that was 5 mm Hg lower, over a median of 8.4 years.3,7 After the trial, blood-pressure levels fell in the less-tight–control group and rose in the tight-control group, with no significant between-group differences after 2 years. In line with this equalization of blood pressures, the risk reductions observed were substantially smaller by year 10 after the trial, and none remained significant. No significant risk reductions were seen, during or after the trial, for myocardial infarction or death from any cause. The risk-reduction point estimate of 49%, which was not significant (P=0.17), for the small number of patients with peripheral vascular disease during the trial3 remained unchanged, but with the accumulation of additional events during the post-trial monitoring period, the risk reduction was significant at year 10 (50%, P=0.02). No significant differences were found during or after the trial in the comparison of ACE-inhibitor therapy and beta-blocker therapy with regard to any aggregate end point, apart from a nominally significant increase in the risk of death from any cause with ACE-inhibitor use at the end of the post-trial monitoring period.
Since the publication of the UKPDS blood-pressure results, other randomized, controlled trials have confirmed the importance of treating hypertension in patients with type 2 diabetes10-14 and have examined blood-pressure targets lower than the UKPDS target of 150/85 mm Hg.3 None of those subsequent studies have reported post-trial follow-up data, so the longevity of benefits observed during the trial is unknown, and we are unaware of any other blood-pressure trials that have specifically examined post-trial legacy effects. A 10-year post-trial follow-up of the Cooperative North Scandinavian Enalapril Survival Study (CONSENSUS),15 which evaluated the usefulness of enalapril for severe heart failure rather than for hypertension (and which was discontinued after 6 months), showed a significant improvement in survival for patients previously assigned to enalapril (P=0.008).16 The Steno-2 Study, in which patients with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned, in a nonfactorial manner, to conventional or intensive multiple risk factor interventions, showed additive benefits of improved glycemic control, the use of aspirin, and antihypertensive and lipid-lowering therapies after a median of 7.8 years.17 Post-trial follow-up for a median of 5.5 years showed continued benefits in the intensive-therapy group as compared with the conventional group, with an overall 20% absolute reduction in the risk of death from any cause (P=0.02).4 However, these sustained risk reductions cannot simply be regarded as a legacy effect, since favorable differences in systolic blood pressure (a difference of 6 mm Hg), low-density lipoprotein and HDL cholesterol levels, and blood glucose levels persisted beyond the trial period.4
Hypertension is a major risk factor for cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes,18,19 conferring an age-adjusted 82% increase in the risk of diabetes-related death.20 Hypertension is more common among those with diabetes than in the general population, as reported in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial (MRFIT), which showed that the absolute risk of death from cardiovascular causes among men with diabetes was three times that among men without diabetes.21 The UKPDS blood-pressure trial was initiated in 1987 in recognition of the probable need to control both glycemia and blood pressure.22 The trial showed not only the benefits of improved blood-pressure control associated with a stepwise addition of blood-pressure–lowering therapies in a treat-to-target approach but also the necessity of increasing the intensity of these therapies over time.3,23 A more recent combined analysis of the blood-glucose and blood-pressure data from the UKPDS has confirmed the additive effects of blood glucose and blood pressure over time on the risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes and has shown that those assigned to strategies of both intensive glucose control and tight blood-pressure control had fewer events than those assigned to either strategy alone or to neither one.24
It is not surprising that the beneficial effects seen in study populations randomly assigned to blood-pressure–lowering therapies are lost once the blood-pressure differences are lost. Most trials involving lowering of blood pressure, such as the 4.5-year Systolic Hypertension in the Elderly Program (SHEP) trial demonstrating a significant reduction in the risk of stroke,25 show an early separation of the cumulative risk of macrovascular end points between study groups. It might be expected that the relatively rapid “on-effects” of improved blood-pressure lowering on cardiovascular risk would be reflected in similarly rapid “off-effects” if blood-pressure control were to be relaxed. Alternatively, post-trial improvements in blood-pressure therapy in groups treated less aggressively during the trial would be likely to bring their cardiovascular risks into line with those treated more aggressively during the trial. In either case, no long-term differences in cardiovascular risk would be seen, as was found in our trial. This is in direct contrast to the legacy effects of earlier intensive glucose control seen in patients with type 2 or type 1 diabetes during follow-up studies of the UKPDS5 and the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study,9 respectively, both of which showed extended and improved treatment benefits despite early post-trial loss of between-group glycemic differences.
Our study has certain important limitations. Questionnaires may not have captured all nonfatal end points. Biochemical and clinical measurements were not collected in years 6 to 10, although by year 3 after the trial, it was already evident that blood-pressure differences had been lost. The glucose and blood-pressure data from the trial were analyzed separately, given the factorial design, but there may have been some post-trial confounding, since at baseline the glycated hemoglobin levels were higher in patients previously assigned to tight blood-pressure control than in those assigned to less-tight control, presumably because of greater beta-blocker use and possibly the use of thiazide diuretics. The lack of detailed information on risk factors in years 6 through 10 also precludes the use of proportional-hazards analyses to assess effects of other time-dependent covariates such as microalbuminuria.
In conclusion, these 10-year post-trial follow-up data from the UKPDS indicate that the relative risk reductions seen in the tight blood-pressure–control group did not persist when blood-pressure differences were no longer maintained. Optimal blood-pressure control is of major importance in reducing the risks of microvascular and macrovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes but must be maintained if these benefits are to be sustained.
Supported for the first 5 years of post-trial monitoring by the U.K. Medical Research Council, U.K. Department of Health, Diabetes UK, the British Heart Foundation, and the National Institutes of Health and for the final 5 years by Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Serono, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Pfizer. The original UKDPS interventional trial was supported by the U.K. Medical Research Council, British Diabetic Association, U.K. Department of Health, U.S. National Eye Institute, U.S. National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, British Heart Foundation, Wellcome Trust, Charles Wolfson Charitable Trust, Clothworkers' Foundation, Health Promotion Research Trust, Alan and Babette Sainsbury Trust, Oxford University Medical Research Fund Committee, Novo Nordisk, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Hoechst, Lilly, Lipha, and Farmitalia Carlo Erba, with consumables or logistical support from Boehringer Mannheim, Becton Dickinson, Owen Mumford, Securicor, Kodak, Cortecs Diagnostics, Glaxo Wellcome, SmithKline Beecham, Pfizer, Zeneca, Pharmacia, Upjohn, and Roche.
Dr. Holman reports receiving grant support from Asahi Kasei Pharma, Bayer Healthcare, Bayer Schering Pharma, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Merck Serono, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, and Sanofi-Aventis, consulting fees from Amylin, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, and Novartis, and lecture fees from Astella, Bayer, GlaxoSmithKline, King Pharmaceuticals, Eli Lilly, Merck, Merck Serono, Novo Nordisk, Takeda, and Sanofi-Aventis, and owning shares in Glyme Valley Technology, Glyox, and Oxtech; Dr. Paul, receiving consulting fees from Amylin; Dr. Bethel, receiving grant support from Novartis and Sanofi-Aventis and lecture fees from Merck and Sanofi-Aventis; Dr. Neil, receiving consulting fees from Merck, Pfizer, Schering-Plough, and Solvay Healthcare; and Dr. Matthews, receiving lecture and advisory fees from Novo Nordisk, GlaxoSmithKline, Servier, Merck, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Takeda, and Roche, and owning shares in OSI Pharmaceuticals and Particle Therapeutics. The Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolism (OCDEM) has a Partnership for the Foundation of OCDEM, with Novo Nordisk, Takeda, and Servier. No other potential conflict of interest relevant to this article was reported.
This article (10.1056/NEJMoa0806359) was published at www.nejm.org on September 10, 2008.
We thank the patients and staff at the participating centers: Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford; Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen; Selly Oak Hospital, Birmingham; St. George's Hospital and Hammersmith Hospital, London; City Hospital, Belfast; North Staffordshire City General Hospital, Stoke-on-Trent; Royal Victoria Hospital, Belfast; St. Helier Hospital, Carshalton; Whittington Hospital, London; Norfolk and Norwich Hospital, Norwich; Lister Hospital, Stevenage; Ipswich Hospital, Ipswich; Ninewells Hospital, Dundee; Northampton Hospital, Northampton; Torbay Hospital, Torquay; Peterborough District Hospital, Peterborough; Scarborough Hospital, Scarborough; Derbyshire Royal Infirmary, Derby; Manchester Royal Infirmary, Manchester; Hope Hospital, Salford; Leicester General Hospital, Leicester; and Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital, Exeter — all in the United Kingdom; the Northern Ireland General Register Office for provision of vital-status data; and John McMurray for helpful advice. We acknowledge the major contribution of the late Carole Cull and the efforts of members of the Endpoint Adjudication Committee (Charles Fox and Alex Wright).
Source Information
From the Diabetes Trials Unit (R.R.H., S.K.P., M.A.B.) and the Division of Public Health and Primary Health Care (H.A.W.N.), and the National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) School for Primary Care Research (H.A.W.N.), Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolism (R.R.H., S.K.P., M.A.B., H.A.W.N., D.R.M.); and the NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre (R.R.H., H.A.W.N., D.R.M.) — both in Oxford, United Kingdom.
Address reprint requests to Dr. Holman at the Diabetes Trials Unit, Oxford Centre for Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolism, Churchill Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 7LJ, United Kingdom, or at rury.holman@dtu.ox.ac.uk.
- References
References
1
UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline2
UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS)
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline3
UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group
CrossRef | Web of Science4
Gaede P ,Lund-Andersen H ,Parving HH ,Pedersen O . Effect of a multifactorial intervention on mortality in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008;358:580-591
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline5
Holman RR ,Paul SK ,Bethel MA ,Matthews DR ,Neil HAW . 10-Year follow-up of intensive glucose control in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1577-1589
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline6
UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS)
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline7
UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group
CrossRef | Web of Science8
The EuroQol Group
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline9
Nathan DM ,Cleary PA ,Backlund JY , et al. Intensive diabetes treatment and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 1 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2005;22:2643-265310
Estacio RO ,Jeffers BW ,Hiatt WR ,Biggerstaff SL ,Gifford N ,Schrier RW . The effect of nisoldipine as compared with enalapril on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes and hypertension. N Engl J Med 1998;338:645-652
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline11
Hansson L ,Lindholm LH ,Niskanen L , et al. Effect of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibition compared with conventional therapy on cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in hypertension: the Captopril Prevention Project (CAPPP) randomised trial. Lancet 1999;353:611-616
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline12
Tatti P ,Pahor M ,Byington RP , et al. Outcome results of the Fosinopril Versus Amlodipine Cardiovascular Events Randomized Trial in patients with hypertension and NIDDM. Diabetes Care 1998;21:597-603
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline13
Pahor M ,Psaty BM ,Alderman MH ,Applegate WB ,Williamson JD ,Furberg CD . Therapeutic benefits of ACE inhibitors and other antihypertensive drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Care 2000;23:888-892
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline14
Patel A ,MacMahon S ,Chalmers J , et al. Effects of a fixed combination of perindopril and indapamide on macrovascular and microvascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (the ADVANCE trial): a randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2007;370:829-840
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline15
The CONSENSUS Trial Study Group
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline16
Swedberg K ,Kjekshus J ,Snapinn S . Long-term survival in severe heart failure in patients treated with enalapril: ten year follow-up of CONSENSUS I. Eur Heart J 1999;20:136-139
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline17
Gaede P ,Vedel P ,Larsen N ,Jensen GV ,Parving HH ,Pedersen O . Multifactorial intervention and cardiovascular disease in patients with type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med 2003;348:383-393
Full Text | Web of Science | Medline18
Hypertension in Diabetes Study (HDS)
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline19
Turner RC ,Milns H ,Neil HA , et al. Risk factors for coronary artery disease in non-insulin dependent diabetes mellitus: United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS: 23). BMJ 1998;316:823-828
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline20
Hypertension in Diabetes Study (HDS)
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline21
Stamler J ,Vaccaro O ,Neaton J ,Wentworth D . Diabetes, other risk factors, and 12-yr cardiovascular mortality for men screened in the Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial. Diabetes Care 1993;16:434-444
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline22
Hypertension in Diabetes Study
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline23
Hypertension in Diabetes Study
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline24
Stratton IM ,Cull CA ,Adler AI ,Matthews DR ,Neil HAW ,Holman RR . Additive effects of glycaemia and blood pressure exposure on risk of complications in type 2 diabetes: a prospective observational study (UKPDS 75). Diabetologia 2006;49:1761-1769
CrossRef | Web of Science | Medline25
SHEP Cooperative Research Group
CrossRef | Web of Science
- Citing Articles (146)
Citing Articles
1
Jie Ding, Tien Yin Wong. (2012) Current Epidemiology of Diabetic Retinopathy and Diabetic Macular Edema. Current Diabetes Reports
CrossRef2
L. Gnudi. (2012) Cellular and molecular mechanisms of diabetic glomerulopathy. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation
CrossRef3
Masafumi Koga, Jun Murai, Hiroshi Saito, Soji Kasayama. (2012) Prediction of near-future HbA1c levels using glycated albumin levels before and after glimepiride administration for 2 weeks is useful to determine the effectiveness of the treatment. Diabetology International
CrossRef4
C. Chatzikyrkou, H. Haller, J. Menne. (2012) Behandlungsziele bei Bluthochdruck und Diabetes mellitus. Der Internist
CrossRef5
, J. Perk, G. De Backer, H. Gohlke, I. Graham, Z. Reiner, M. Verschuren, C. Albus, P. Benlian, G. Boysen, R. Cifkova, C. Deaton, S. Ebrahim, M. Fisher, G. Germano, R. Hobbs, A. Hoes, S. Karadeniz, A. Mezzani, E. Prescott, L. Ryden, M. Scherer, M. Syvanne, W. J. M. Scholte Op Reimer, C. Vrints, D. Wood, J. L. Zamorano, F. Zannad, , M. T. Cooney, , J. Bax, H. Baumgartner, C. Ceconi, V. Dean, C. Deaton, R. Fagard, C. Funck-Brentano, D. Hasdai, A. Hoes, P. Kirchhof, J. Knuuti, P. Kolh, T. McDonagh, C. Moulin, B. A. Popescu, Z. Reiner, U. Sechtem, P. A. Sirnes, M. Tendera, A. Torbicki, A. Vahanian, S. Windecker, , C. Funck-Brentano, P. A. Sirnes, V. Aboyans, E. A. Ezquerra, C. Baigent, C. Brotons, G. Burell, A. Ceriello, J. De Sutter, J. Deckers, S. Del Prato, H.-C. Diener, D. Fitzsimons, Z. Fras, R. Hambrecht, P. Jankowski, U. Keil, M. Kirby, M. L. Larsen, G. Mancia, A. J. Manolis, J. McMurray, A. Pajak, A. Parkhomenko, L. Rallidis, F. Rigo, E. Rocha, L. M. Ruilope, E. van der Velde, D. Vanuzzo, M. Viigimaa, M. Volpe, O. Wiklund, C. Wolpert. (2012) European Guidelines on cardiovascular disease prevention in clinical practice (version 2012): The Fifth Joint Task Force of the European Society of Cardiology and Other Societies on Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Clinical Practice (constituted by representatives of nine societies and by invited experts) * Developed with the special contribution of the European Association for Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation (EACPR). European Heart Journal
CrossRef6
N. Altemtam, J. Russell, M. El Nahas. (2012) A study of the natural history of diabetic kidney disease (DKD). Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation 27:5, 1847-1854
CrossRef7
Mariam Naqshbandi Hayward, Elena Kuzmina, David Dannenbaum, Jill Torrie, Jennifer Huynh, Stewart Harris. (2012) Room for improvement in diabetes care among First Nations in northern Quebec (Eeyou Istchee): reasonable management of glucose but poor management of complications. International Journal of Circumpolar Health 71:0,
CrossRef8
Annie K McAuley, Paul G Sanfilippo, Paul P Connell, Jie Jin Wang, Mohamed Dirani, Ecosse Lamoureux, Alex W Hewitt. (2012) Circulating biomarkers of diabetic retinopathy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Management 2:2, 157-169
CrossRef9
Merel JA Luitse, Geert Jan Biessels, Guy EHM Rutten, L Jaap Kappelle. (2012) Diabetes, hyperglycaemia, and acute ischaemic stroke. The Lancet Neurology 11:3, 261-271
CrossRef10
Giuseppe Mancia. (2012) Hypertension: Does antihypertensive treatment have long-term benefits?. Nature Reviews Cardiology
CrossRef11
E. Fhärm, J. Cederholm, B. Eliasson, S. Gudbjörnsdottir, O. Rolandsson. (2012) Time trends in absolute and modifiable coronary heart disease risk in patients with Type 2 diabetes in the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) 2003-2008. Diabetic Medicine 29:2, 198-206
CrossRef12
Soo Lim, Martin K. Rutter. (2012) Unfavorable Effects of Intensive Glucose Lowering on Mortality: Lessons from the 5-Year Follow-up of the ACCORD Trial. Current Cardiovascular Risk Reports 6:1, 1-3
CrossRef13
Remo Panaccione, Toshifumi Hibi, Laurent Peyrin-Biroulet, Stefan Schreiber. (2012) Implementing changes in clinical practice to improve the management of Crohn's disease. Journal of Crohn's and Colitis 6, S235-S242
CrossRef14
Hiroyuki Sasamura, Hiroshi Itoh. (2012) ‘Memory’ and ‘legacy’ in hypertension and lifestyle-related diseases. Hypertension Research
CrossRef15
Neda Laiteerapong, Priya M. John, David O. Meltzer, Elbert S. Huang. (2012) Impact of Delaying Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Results of a Decision Analysis. Journal of General Internal Medicine
CrossRef16
William C. Cushman, Barry R. Davis, Sara L. Pressel, Jeffrey A. Cutler, Paula T. Einhorn, Charles E. Ford, Suzanne Oparil, Jeffrey L. Probstfield, Paul K. Whelton, Jackson T. Wright, Michael H. Alderman, Jan N. Basile, Henry R. Black, Richard H. Grimm, Bruce P. Hamilton, L. Julian Haywood, Stephen T. Ong, Linda B. Piller, Lara M. Simpson, Carol Stanford, Robert J. Weiss, . (2012) Mortality and Morbidity During and After the Antihypertensive and Lipid-Lowering Treatment to Prevent Heart Attack Trial. The Journal of Clinical Hypertension 14:1, 20-31
CrossRef17
Longyi Zeng, Hongyun Lu, Hongrong Deng, Panwei Mu, Xiaofeng Li, Manman Wang. (2012) Noninferiority Effects on Glycemic Control and β-Cell Function Improvement in Newly Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes Patients: Basal Insulin Monotherapy Versus Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Treatment. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 14:1, 35-42
CrossRef18
Claudia R.L. Cardoso, Nathalie C. Leite, Elizabeth S. Muxfeldt, Gil F. Salles. (2012) Thresholds of Ambulatory Blood Pressure Associated With Chronic Complications in Type 2 Diabetes. American Journal of Hypertension 25:1, 82-88
CrossRef19
Wiebke K. Fenske, Dimitri J. Pournaras, Erlend T. Aasheim, Alexander D. Miras, Nicola Scopinaro, Samantha Scholtz, Carel W. Roux. (2012) Can a Protocol for Glycaemic Control Improve Type 2 Diabetes Outcomes After Gastric Bypass?. Obesity Surgery 22:1, 90-96
CrossRef20
R. A. DeFronzo, J. A. Davidson, S. Del Prato. (2012) The role of the kidneys in glucose homeostasis: a new path towards normalizing glycaemia. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 14:1, 5-14
CrossRef21
Nikhil Tandon, Mohammed K. Ali, K.M. Venkat Narayan. (2012) Pharmacologic Prevention of Microvascular and Macrovascular Complications in Diabetes Mellitus. American Journal Cardiovascular Drugs1
CrossRef22
Guenther Silbernagel, Silke Rosinger, Tanja B. Grammer, Marcus E. Kleber, Bernhard R. Winkelmann, Bernhard O. Boehm, Winfried März. (2012) Duration of type 2 diabetes strongly predicts all-cause and cardiovascular mortality in people referred for coronary angiography. Atherosclerosis
CrossRef23
Daniel R. Beriault, Geoff H. Werstuck. (2012) The Role of Glucosamine-Induced ER Stress in Diabetic Atherogenesis. Experimental Diabetes Research 2012, 1-11
CrossRef24
P. Hamet. (2012) What matters in ADVANCE and ADVANCE-ON. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 14, 20-29
CrossRef25
Darren K. McGuire. 2012. Diabetes and the Cardiovascular System. , 1392-1409.
CrossRef26
J. Michael Gaziano, Paul M Ridker, Peter Libby. 2012. Primary and Secondary Prevention of Coronary Heart Disease. , 1010-1035.
CrossRef27
Paul M Ridker, Peter Libby. 2012. Risk Markers for Atherothrombotic Disease. , 914-934.
CrossRef28
J. A. García-Donaire, J. Segura, C. Cerezo, L. M. Ruilope. (2011) A review of renal, cardiovascular and mortality endpoints in antihypertensive trials in diabetic patients. Blood Pressure 20:6, 322-334
CrossRef29
A.C. Carlsson, A. Nixon Andreasson, P.E. Wändell. (2011) Poor self-rated health is not associated with a high total allostatic load in type 2 diabetic patients – But high blood pressure is. Diabetes & Metabolism 37:5, 446-451
CrossRef30
E. Pellegrini, M. Maurantonio, I.M. Giannico, M.S. Simonini, D. Ganazzi, L. Carulli, R. D'Amico, A. Baldini, P. Loria, M. Bertolotti, N. Carulli. (2011) Risk for cardiovascular events in an Italian population of patients with type 2 diabetes. Nutrition, Metabolism and Cardiovascular Diseases 21:11, 885-892
CrossRef31
Sandra L. Tunis. (2011) Cost Effectiveness of Self-Monitoring of Blood Glucose (SMBG) for Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Not on Insulin. Applied Health Economics and Health Policy 9:6, 351-365
CrossRef32
Luis M. Ruilope. (2011) Current challenges in the clinical management of hypertension. Nature Reviews Cardiology
CrossRef33
Kyaw Soe, Alan Sacerdote, Jocelyn Karam, Gül Bahtiyar. (2011) Management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the elderly. Maturitas 70:2, 151-159
CrossRef34
Ola Granström, Klas Bergenheim, Phil McEwan, Karin Sennfält, Martin Henriksson. (2011) Cost-effectiveness of saxagliptin (Onglyza®) in type 2 diabetes in Sweden. Primary Care Diabetes
CrossRef35
F. Bonnet, E. Gauthier, H. Gin, S. Hadjadj, J.-M. Halimi, T. Hannedouche, V. Rigalleau, D. Romand, R. Roussel, P. Zaoui. (2011) Expert consensus on management of diabetic patients with impairment of renal function. Diabetes & Metabolism 37, S1-S25
CrossRef36
Alejandro Sierra, Jorge Salazar. (2011) What is the role of direct renin inhibitors in the treatment of the hypertensive diabetic patient?. Advances in Therapy 28:9, 716-727
CrossRef37
P. Massin. (2011) Innovations thérapeutiques dans la rétinopathie diabétique. Journal Français d'Ophtalmologie 34:7, 491-497
CrossRef38
Francesco Paneni, Francesco Cosentino, Jasmine Passerini, Massimo Volpe. (2011) Is there any memory effect of blood pressure lowering in diabetes?. International Journal of Cardiology 151:3, 384-385
CrossRef39
Massimo Volpe, Francesco Cosentino, Giuliano Tocci, Francesca Palano, Francesco Paneni. (2011) Antihypertensive Therapy in Diabetes: The Legacy Effect and RAAS Blockade. Current Hypertension Reports 13:4, 318-324
CrossRef40
Ralph A. DeFronzo, Muhammad Abdul-Ghani. (2011) Assessment and Treatment of Cardiovascular Risk in Prediabetes: Impaired Glucose Tolerance and Impaired Fasting Glucose. The American Journal of Cardiology 108:3, 3B-24B
CrossRef41
Drazenka Pongrac Barlovic, Aino Soro
Paavonen, Karin A. M. Jandeleit
CrossRef42
J.B. Dixon, P. Zimmet, K.G. Alberti, F. Rubino. (2011) Bariatric surgery: An IDF statement for obese Type 2 diabetes. Obesity Research & Clinical Practice 5:3, e171-e189
CrossRef43
J.B. Dixon, P. Zimmet, K.G. Alberti, F. Rubino. (2011) Bariatric surgery: an IDF statement for obese Type 2 diabetes. Surgery for Obesity and Related Diseases 7:4, 433-447
CrossRef44
B. Bouhanick, F. Ah-Kang, B. Chamontin. (2011) Hypertension artérielle et diabète: nouvelles données apportées par l’étude ACCORD-Blood Pressure (ACCORD-BP). Médecine des Maladies Métaboliques 5:3, 312-316
CrossRef45
Helen Slade, Sheila M. Williams, Patrick J. Manning, Robert J. Walker. (2011) High-risk diabetic nephropathy patients: The outcome of evidence-based clinical practice in an outpatient clinic. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 92:3, 356-360
CrossRef46
M. Samir Arnaout, Wael Almahmeed, Mohsen Ibrahim, James Ker, Ma Taher Khalil, Corrie T. Van Wyk, Giuseppe Mancia, Eyas Al Mousa. (2011) Hypertension and its management in countries in Africa and the Middle East, with special reference to the place of β -blockade. Current Medical Research and Opinion 27:6, 1223-1236
CrossRef47
J. B. Dixon, P. Zimmet, K. G. Alberti, F. Rubino, . (2011) Bariatric surgery: an IDF statement for obese Type 2 diabetes. Diabetic Medicine 28:6, 628-642
CrossRef48
Raul Fechete, Andreas Heinzel, Paul Perco, Konrad Mönks, Johannes Söllner, Gil Stelzer, Susanne Eder, Doron Lancet, Rainer Oberbauer, Gert Mayer, Bernd Mayer. (2011) Mapping of molecular pathways, biomarkers and drug targets for diabetic nephropathy. PROTEOMICS - Clinical Applications 5:5-6, 354-366
CrossRef49
Richard E Gilbert, Qingling Huang, Kerri Thai, Suzanne L Advani, Kodie Lee, Darren A Yuen, Kim A Connelly, Andrew Advani. (2011) Histone deacetylase inhibition attenuates diabetes-associated kidney growth: potential role for epigenetic modification of the epidermal growth factor receptor. Kidney International 79:12, 1312-1321
CrossRef50
Miguel Camafort-Babkowski, Vivencio Barrios, Antonio Coca. (2011) Management of hypertension in diabetic patients: outstanding issues. Expert Review of Cardiovascular Therapy 9:6, 721-728
CrossRef51
Steven G. Chrysant, George S. Chrysant. (2011) Current Status of Aggressive Blood Glucose and Blood Pressure Control in Diabetic Hypertensive Subjects. The American Journal of Cardiology 107:12, 1856-1861
CrossRef52
B. Tomlinson, J.J. Dalal, J. Huang, L.P. Low, C.G. Park, A.R. Rahman, E.B. Reyes, A.A. Soenarta, A. Heagerty, F. Follath. (2011) The role of β -blockers in the management of hypertension: An Asian perspective. Current Medical Research and Opinion 27:5, 1021-1033
CrossRef53
David Siegel, Arthur L.M. Swislocki. (2011) The ACCORD Study: The Devil Is in the Details. Metabolic Syndrome and Related Disorders 9:2, 81-84
CrossRef54
M. V. Chittari, P. McTernan, N. Bawazeer, K. Constantinides, M. Ciotola, J. P. O’Hare, S. Kumar, A. Ceriello. (2011) Impact of acute hyperglycaemia on endothelial function and retinal vascular reactivity in patients with Type 2 diabetes. Diabetic Medicine 28:4, 450-454
CrossRef55
Anna Solini, Ele Ferrannini. (2011) Pathophysiology, Prevention and Management of Chronic Kidney Disease in the Hypertensive Patient With Diabetes Mellitus. The Journal of Clinical Hypertension 13:4, 252-257
CrossRef56
Mariela Glandt, Zachary T. Bloomgarden. (2011) Hypertension in Diabetes: Treatment Considerations. The Journal of Clinical Hypertension 13:4, 314-318
CrossRef57
Sonia Morales, José A. García-Salcedo, Manuel Muñoz-Torres. (2011) Pentosidina: un nuevo biomarcador de las complicaciones en la diabetes mellitus. Medicina Clínica 136:7, 298-302
CrossRef58
J.J. Criado-Álvarez, J.C. Méndez-Cabeza Fuentes, F. Bustos Guadaño. (2011) ¿Controlamos correctamente la diabetes desde atención primaria en Talavera de la Reina (Toledo)?. SEMERGEN - Medicina de Familia 37:3, 113-118
CrossRef59
Hirohito Sone. (2011) Prevention and management of atherosclerotic complications of diabetes. Nippon Ronen Igakkai Zasshi. Japanese Journal of Geriatrics 48:3, 253-256
CrossRef60
Larry B. Goldstein, Ralph L. Sacco. 2011. Primary Prevention of Stroke. , 242-251.
CrossRef61
Erik Øfjord, Arne Skag, Steinar Helberg, Dagfinn Aarskog, Knut Risberg, Trine Jacobsen, Samuel Nasrala, Sjur Bakken, Unni Syversen, Trond Jenssen. (2011) Medikamentell forebygging ved prediabetes - ingen hensikt?. Tidsskrift for Den norske legeforening 131:15, 1418-1419
CrossRef62
D. R. Matthews, P. C. Matthews. (2011) Banting Memorial Lecture 2010
. Type 2 diabetes as an ‘infectious’ disease: is this the Black Death of the 21st century?. Diabetic Medicine 28:1, 2-9
CrossRef63
Yao Liu, Yan-min Yang, Jun Zhu, Hui-qiong Tan, Yan Liang, Jian-dong Li. (2011) Prognostic significance of hemoglobin A1c level in patients hospitalized with coronary artery disease. A systematic review and meta-analysis. Cardiovascular Diabetology 10:1, 98
CrossRef64
Rhonda M. Cooper-DeHoff, Eric F. Egelund, Carl J. Pepine. (2011) Blood pressure lowering in patients with diabetes—one level might not fit all. Nature Reviews Cardiology 8:1, 42-49
CrossRef65
Andrew Siebel, Ana Fernandez, Assam El-Osta. 2010. Glycemic Memory and Epigenetic Changes. , 215-227.
CrossRef66
Patrick Murray, Gary W. Chune, Vasudevan A. Raghavan. (2010) Legacy Effects from DCCT and UKPDS: What They Mean and Implications for Future Diabetes Trials. Current Atherosclerosis Reports 12:6, 432-439
CrossRef67
Sophia Zoungas, Anushka Patel. (2010) Cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: the impact of preventative therapies. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1212:1, 29-40
CrossRef68
L. Saba, R. Sanfilippo, R. Montisci, G. Mallarini. (2010) Associations between Carotid Artery Wall Thickness and Cardiovascular Risk Factors Using Multidetector CT. American Journal of Neuroradiology 31:9, 1758-1763
CrossRef69
Zi-lin Sun. (2010) Quality assessment and improvement in diabetes care-an issue now and for the future. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews 26:6, 446-447
CrossRef70
A. Sainio, T. Jokela, M. I. Tammi, H. Jarvelainen. (2010) Hyperglycemic conditions modulate connective tissue reorganization by human vascular smooth muscle cells through stimulation of hyaluronan synthesis. Glycobiology 20:9, 1117-1126
CrossRef71
A. Woodward, M. Wallymahmed, J. P. Wilding, G. V. Gill. (2010) Nurse-led clinics for strict hypertension control are effective long term: a 7 year follow-up study. Diabetic Medicine 27:8, 933-937
CrossRef72
Srikanth Bellary, J. Paul O'Hare, Neil T. Raymond, Shanaz Mughal, Wasim M. Hanif, Alan Jones, Sudhesh Kumar, Anthony H. Barnett. (2010) Premature cardiovascular events and mortality in south Asians with type 2 diabetes in the United Kingdom Asian Diabetes Study – effect of ethnicity on risk. Current Medical Research and Opinion 26:8, 1873-1879
CrossRef73
A. Ceriello, K. Esposito, M. Ihnat, J. Thorpe, D. Giugliano. (2010) Effect of acute hyperglycaemia, long-term glycaemic control and insulin on endothelial dysfunction and inflammation in Type 1 diabetic patients with different characteristics. Diabetic Medicine 27:8, 911-917
CrossRef74
A. Ceriello, M. A. Ihnat. (2010) ‘Glycaemic variability’: a new therapeutic challenge in diabetes and the critical care setting. Diabetic Medicine 27:8, 862-867
CrossRef75
Seung-Hyun Ko, Wenhong Cao, Zhenqi Liu. (2010) Hypertension Management and Microvascular Insulin Resistance in Diabetes. Current Hypertension Reports 12:4, 243-251
CrossRef76
N. Danchin, É. Eschwège, S. Bekka, M. Krempf. (2010) Variations pondérales, risque cardiométabolique et impact des médicaments antidiabétiques chez le diabétique de type 2. Annales de Cardiologie et d'Angéiologie 59:4, 214-220
CrossRef77
Sally M. Marshall, Allan Flyvbjerg. 2010. Diabetic Nephropathy. , 599-614.
CrossRef78
Riccardo Candido, Mark E. Cooper, Karin A. M. Jandeleit-Dahm. 2010. The Pathogenesis of Macrovascular Complications Including Atherosclerosis in Diabetes. , 635-656.
CrossRef79
Kenneth A. Earle, Robert S.H. Istepanian, Karima Zitouni, Ala Sungoor, Bee Tang. (2010) Mobile Telemonitoring for Achieving Tighter Targets of Blood Pressure Control in Patients with Complicated Diabetes: A Pilot Study. Diabetes Technology & Therapeutics 12:7, 575-579
CrossRef80
Pan Chang Yu, Zsolt Bosnyak, Antonio Ceriello. (2010) The importance of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and postprandial glucose (PPG) control on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 89:1, 1-9
CrossRef81
Ning Cheung, Paul Mitchell, Tien Yin Wong. (2010) Diabetic retinopathy. The Lancet 376:9735, 124-136
CrossRef82
Yi Yang, Vennela Thumula, Patrick F. Pace, Benjamin F. Banahan, Noel E. Wilkin, William B. Lobb. (2010) Nonadherence to angiotensinconverting enzyme inhibitors and/or angiotensin II receptor blockers among high-risk patients with diabetes in Medicare Part D programs. Journal of the American Pharmacists Association 50:4, 527-531
CrossRef83
Addison A. Taylor, George L. Bakris. (2010) The Role of Vasodilating β-Blockers in Patients with Hypertension and the Cardiometabolic Syndrome. The American Journal of Medicine 123:7, S21-S26
CrossRef84
Nicolas Godin, Fang Liu, Garnet J Lau, Marie-Luise Brezniceanu, Isabelle Chénier, Janos G Filep, Julie R Ingelfinger, Shao-Ling Zhang, John S D Chan. (2010) Catalase overexpression prevents hypertension and tubular apoptosis in angiotensinogen transgenic mice. Kidney International 77:12, 1086-1097
CrossRef85
Stephen Tonna, Assam El-Osta, Mark E. Cooper, Chris Tikellis. (2010) Metabolic memory and diabetic nephropathy: potential role for epigenetic mechanisms. Nature Reviews Nephrology 6:6, 332-341
CrossRef86
Tomohiro Katsuya, Ryuichi Morishita. (2010) The challenge of stopping the knocking down of metabolic dominos upstream. Hypertension Research 33:6, 529-530
CrossRef87
Antonio Ceriello. (2010) Hyperglycaemia and the vessel wall: the pathophysiological aspects on the atherosclerotic burden in patients with diabetes. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation 17, S15-S19
CrossRef88
Alice Y.Y. Cheng, Lawrence A. Leiter. (2010) Glucose lowering and cardiovascular disease: what do we know and what should we do?. European Journal of Cardiovascular Prevention & Rehabilitation 17, S25-S31
CrossRef89
P. McEwan, M. Evans, H. Kan, K. Bergenheim. (2010) Understanding the inter-relationship between improved glycaemic control, hypoglycaemia and weight change within a long-term economic model. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 12:5, 431-436
CrossRef90
Wendy C. Burns, Merlin C. Thomas. (2010) The molecular mediators of type 2 epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) and their role in renal pathophysiology. Expert Reviews in Molecular Medicine 12,
CrossRef91
Yi Yang, Vennela Thumula, Patrick F. Pace, Benjamin F. Banahan, Noel E. Wilkin, William B. Lobb. (2010) High-risk Diabetic Patients in Medicare Part D Programs: Are They Getting the Recommended ACEI/ARB Therapy?. Journal of General Internal Medicine 25:4, 298-304
CrossRef92
Oliver Schnell, Eberhard Standl. (2010) Diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Clinical Research in Cardiology Supplements 5:S1, 27-34
CrossRef93
Natsuhiko Ehara, Takeshi Morimoto, Yutaka Furukawa, Satoshi Shizuta, Ryoji Taniguchi, Yoshihisa Nakagawa, Kozo Hoshino, Naritatsu Saito, Takahiro Doi, Yoshisumi Haruna, Neiko Ozasa, Yukiko Imai, Satoshi Teramukai, Masanori Fukushima, Toru Kita, Takeshi Kimura. (2010) Effect of Baseline Glycemic Level on Long-Term Cardiovascular Outcomes After Coronary Revascularization Therapy in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treated With Hypoglycemic Agents. The American Journal of Cardiology 105:7, 960-966
CrossRef94
Ken Fujioka. (2010) Benefits of moderate weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 12:3, 186-194
CrossRef95
John E. Morley. (2010) Hypertension: Is It Overtreated in the Elderly?. Journal of the American Medical Directors Association 11:3, 147-152
CrossRef96
J. E. Gerich. (2010) Role of the kidney in normal glucose homeostasis and in the hyperglycaemia of diabetes mellitus: therapeutic implications. Diabetic Medicine 27:2, 136-142
CrossRef97
Jocelyn Wiggins, Sanjeevkumar Patel. (2010) Management of chronic kidney disease in older adults. Aging Health 6:1, 41-51
CrossRef98
Keith C. Ferdinand. (2010) News From Recent Clinical Trials: Implications for Clinical Practice and the Treatment of Hypertension. The Journal of Clinical Hypertension 12:2, 145-147
CrossRef99
Carl J. Pepine. (2010) Residual risk for secondary ischemic events in patients with atherothrombotic disease: Opportunity for future improvements in patient care. Annals of Medicine 42:1, 19-35
CrossRef100
B. Gallwitz, A. Vaag, A. Falahati, S. Madsbad. (2010) Adding liraglutide to oral antidiabetic drug therapy: onset of treatment effects over time. International Journal of Clinical Practice 64:2, 267-276
CrossRef101
Laurent Azoulay, Verena Schneider-Lindner, Sophie Dell'Aniello, Alicia Schiffrin, Samy Suissa. (2010) Combination therapy with sulfonylureas and metformin and the prevention of death in type 2 diabetes: a nested case-control study. Pharmacoepidemiology and Drug Safetyn/a-n/a
CrossRef102
Jeong-Taek Woo, Kyung Soo Park, Dong-Won Byun, Kyung Soo Ko, Yoon-Sok Chung, Doo Man Kim, Tae Sun Park, Bong Soo Cha, In Kyu Lee, Joong Yeol Park, Hyun Shik Son, Moon-Kyu Lee, Kwang Won Kim, Ho Young Son. (2010) Regulation of Glucose Control in People with Type 2 Diabetes: A Review and Consensus. Korean Diabetes Journal 34:1, 16
CrossRef103
E. B. Jude, I. Eleftheriadou, N. Tentolouris. (2010) Peripheral arterial disease in diabetesâa review. Diabetic Medicine 27:1, 4-14
CrossRef104
L. F. Van Gaal, I. D. Caterson, W. Coutinho, N. Finer, A. P. Maggioni, A. M. Sharma, C. Torp-Pedersen, H. Ge, S. A. Moran, G. M. Shepherd, W. P. T. James, . (2010) Weight and blood pressure response to weight management and sibutramine in diabetic and non-diabetic high-risk patients: an analysis from the 6-week lead-in period of the sibutramine cardiovascular outcomes (SCOUT) trial. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 12:1, 26-34
CrossRef105
Giuseppe Mancia, Stéphane Laurent, Enrico Agabiti-Rosei, Ettore Ambrosioni, Michel Burnier, Mark J. Caulfield, Renata Cifkova, Denis Clément, Antonio Coca, Anna Dominiczak, Serap Erdine, Robert Fagard, Csaba Farsang, Guido Grassi, Hermann Haller, Antony Heagerty, Sverre E. Kjeldsen, Wolfgang Kiowski, Jean Michel Mallion, Athanasios Manolis, Krzysztof Narkiewicz, Peter Nilsson, Michael H. Olsen, Karl Heinz Rahn, Josep Redon, José Rodicio, Luis Ruilope, Roland E. Schmieder, Harry A.J. Struijker-Boudier, Pieter A. Van Zwieten, Margus Viigimaa, Alberto Zanchetti. (2009) Reappraisal of European guidelines on hypertension management: a European Society of Hypertension Task Force document. Blood Pressure 18:6, 308-347
CrossRef106
Keith C. Ferdinand, Daphne P. Ferdinand. (2009) Trends in hypertension treatment in diabetes. Current Hypertension Reports 11:6, 437-443
CrossRef107
Renate E. van Genugten, Daniël H. van Raalte, Michaela Diamant. (2009) Does glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist therapy add value in the treatment of type 2 diabetes? Focus on exenatide. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice 86, S26-S34
CrossRef108
F. M. Turnbull, C. Abraira, R. J. Anderson, R. P. Byington, J. P. Chalmers, W. C. Duckworth, G. W. Evans, H. C. Gerstein, R. R. Holman, T. E. Moritz, B. C. Neal, T. Ninomiya, A. A. Patel, S. K. Paul, F. Travert, M. Woodward. (2009) Intensive glucose control and macrovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. Diabetologia 52:11, 2288-2298
CrossRef109
Giuseppe Mancia, Stéphane Laurent, Enrico Agabiti-Rosei, Ettore Ambrosioni, Michel Burnier, Mark J Caulfield, Renata Cifkova, Denis Clément, Antonio Coca, Anna Dominiczak, Serap Erdine, Robert Fagard, Csaba Farsang, Guido Grassi, Hermann Haller, Anthony Heagerty, Sverre E Kjeldsen, Wolfgang Kiowski, Jean Michel Mallion, Athanasios Manolis, Krzysztof Narkiewicz, Peter Nilsson, Michael H Olsen, Karl Heinz Rahn, Josep Redon, José Rodicio, Luis Ruilope, Roland E Schmieder, Harry AJ Struijker-Boudier, Pieter A van Zwieten, Margus Viigimaa, Alberto Zanchetti. (2009) Reappraisal of European guidelines on hypertension management: a European Society of Hypertension Task Force document. Journal of Hypertension 27:11, 2121-2158
CrossRef110
A. J. Garber. (2009) Restaging insulin therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 11, 1-5
CrossRef111
Riccardo Candido, Stella Bernardi, Terri J Allen. (2009) Linking diabetes and atherosclerosis. Expert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism 4:6, 603-624
CrossRef112
Christine T. Cigolle, Caroline S. Blaum, Jeffrey B. Halter. (2009) Diabetes and Cardiovascular Disease Prevention in Older Adults. Clinics in Geriatric Medicine 25:4, 607-641
CrossRef113
Eric S. Kilpatrick, Alan S. Rigby, Stephen L. Atkin. (2009) The Diabetes Control and Complications Trial: the gift that keeps giving. Nature Reviews Endocrinology 5:10, 537-545
CrossRef114
S. Akalin, K. Berntorp, A. Ceriello, A. K. Das, E. S. Kilpatrick, T. Koblik, C. S. Munichoodappa, C. Y. Pan, W. Rosenthall, M. Shestakova, B. Wolnik, V. Woo, W. Y. Yang, M. T. Yilmaz, . (2009) Intensive glucose therapy and clinical implications of recent data: a consensus statement from the Global Task Force on Glycaemic Control. International Journal of Clinical Practice 63:10, 1421-1425
CrossRef115
Rita F. Redberg, Emelia J. Benjamin, Vera Bittner, Lynne T. Braun, David C. Goff, Stephen Havas, Darwin R. Labarthe, Marian C. Limacher, Donald M. Lloyd-Jones, Samia Mora, Thomas A. Pearson, Martha J. Radford, Gerald W. Smetana, John A. Spertus, Erica W. Swegler. (2009) ACCF/AHA 2009 Performance Measures for Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease in Adults. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 54:14, 1364-1405
CrossRef116
Anushka Patel, Rohina Joshi, Bastiaan de Galan. (2009) Trials of cardiovascular risk factor management in type 2 diabetes. Current Opinion in Cardiology 24:4, 288-294
CrossRef117
Siobhan HM Brown, Ahmed H Abdelhafiz. (2009) Hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia and hypertension in older people with diabetes: the benefits of cardiovascular risk reduction. Therapy 6:4, 515-529
CrossRef118
S. Prato. (2009) Megatrials in type 2 diabetes. From excitement to frustration?. Diabetologia 52:7, 1219-1226
CrossRef119
David M. Kendall, Robert M. Cuddihy, Richard M. Bergenstal. (2009) Clinical Application of Incretin-Based Therapy: Therapeutic Potential, Patient Selection and Clinical Use. European Journal of Internal Medicine 20, S329-S339
CrossRef120
David C. Lieb, Rodney E. Snow, Mark D. DeBoer. (2009) Socioeconomic Factors in the Development of Childhood Obesity and Diabetes. Clinics in Sports Medicine 28:3, 349-378
CrossRef121
Bernhard Ludvik, Helmut Brath, Thomas Wascher, Hermann Toplak. (2009) Stellenwert von Langzeit-Insulin-Analoga in der Therapie des Diabetes mellitus Typ 2. Wiener klinische Wochenschrift 121:13-14, 473-482
CrossRef122
Matthew P. Gilbert, Richard E. Pratley. (2009) Efficacy and Safety of Incretin-Based Therapies in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. European Journal of Internal Medicine 20, S309-S318
CrossRef123
U.-M. Vischer, B. Bauduceau, I. Bourdel-Marchasson, J.-F. Blickle, T. Constans, A. Fagot-Campagna, E. Kaloustian, V. Lassman-Vague, P. Lecomte, D. Simon, D. Tessier, C. Verny, J. Doucet. (2009) A call to incorporate the prevention and treatment of geriatric disorders in the management of diabetes in the elderly. Diabetes & Metabolism 35:3, 168-177
CrossRef124
Eberhard Standl, Martin Müller, Oliver Schnell. (2009) The impact of glucose-lowering therapy on cardiovascular outcomes. Best Practice & Research Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 23:3, 401-411
CrossRef125
Ole-Petter R. Hamnvik, Graham T. McMahon. (2009) Balancing Risk and Benefit with Oral Hypoglycemic Drugs. Mount Sinai Journal of Medicine: A Journal of Translational and Personalized Medicine 76:3, 234-243
CrossRef126
John Malcolm Cruickshank. (2009) Beta-Blockers and Hypertension. Journal of the American College of Cardiology 53:22, 2105-2106
CrossRef127
David M. Kendall, Robert M. Cuddihy, Richard M. Bergenstal. (2009) Clinical Application of Incretin-Based Therapy: Therapeutic Potential, Patient Selection and Clinical Use. The American Journal of Medicine 122:6, S37-S50
CrossRef128
Matthew P. Gilbert, Richard E. Pratley. (2009) Efficacy and Safety of Incretin-Based Therapies in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus. The American Journal of Medicine 122:6, S11-S24
CrossRef129
Sergio Fazio, MacRae F Linton. (2009) Fenofibrate and risk of minor amputations in diabetes. The Lancet 373:9677, 1740-1741
CrossRef130
M. Kellerer. (2009) Update Typ-2-Diabetes anhand ausgewählter aktueller Publikationen. Der Diabetologe 5:3, 177-189
CrossRef131
G. Wolf. (2009) Diabetes und Niere – Update 2009. Der Diabetologe 5:3, 190-199
CrossRef132
T. Lohmann, M. Möhlig, A. Pfeiffer. (2009) ACCORD, ADVANCE und VADT – Paradigmenwechsel in der Diabetologie?. Clinical Research in Cardiology Supplements 4:S2, 196-199
CrossRef133
Guy W. Ll Lloyd. (2009) Preventive cardiology and cardiac rehabilitation programmes in women. Maturitas 63:1, 28-33
CrossRef134
Nigel A. Calcutt, Mark E. Cooper, Tim S. Kern, Ann Marie Schmidt. (2009) Therapies for hyperglycaemia-induced diabetic complications: from animal models to clinical trials. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 8:5, 417-430
CrossRef135
Carla Sueta Dupree. (2009) Primary prevention of heart failure: what is the evidence?. Current Opinion in Cardiology 24:2, 142-147
CrossRef136
Rohina Joshi, BE de Galan, John Chalmers, Vlado Perkovic, Anushka Patel. (2009) Routine blood pressure lowering and intensive glucose control in patients with Type 2 diabetes: the ADVANCE trial. Expert Review of Endocrinology & Metabolism 4:2, 111-118
CrossRef137
(2009) Follow-up of Intensive Glucose Control in Type 2 Diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine 360:4, 416-418
Full Text138
Su Kyung Park, Mi-Kyoung Park, Ji Hye Suk, Mi Kyung Kim, Yong Ki Kim, In Ju Kim, Yang Ho Kang, Kwang Jae Lee, Hyun Seung Lee, Chang Won Lee, Bo Hyun Kim, Kyung Il Lee, Mi Kyoung Kim, Duk Kyu Kim. (2009) Cause-of-Death Trends for Diabetes Mellitus over 10 Years. Korean Diabetes Journal 33:1, 65
CrossRef139
(2009) Tight blood-pressure control must be maintained in patients with type 2 diabetes. Nature Clinical Practice Endocrinology & Metabolism 5:1, 2-3
CrossRef140
Philip R. Liebson. (2009) Diabetes Control and Cardiovascular Risk, Part II: Intensive Glucose Control - UKPDS Follow-Up. Preventive Cardiology 12:1, 51-58
CrossRef141
2009. Diabetes mellitus and other disorders of metabolism. , 1029-1075.
CrossRef142
W.J. Elliott. (2009) Long-Term Follow-up after Tight Control of Blood Pressure in Type 2 Diabetes. Yearbook of Cardiology 2009, 49-51
CrossRef143
(2008) Long-term effects of tight blood pressure and glucose control in type 2 diabetes. Nature Clinical Practice Nephrology 4:12, 645-645
CrossRef144
Holman, Rury R., Paul, Sanjoy K., Bethel, M. Angelyn, Matthews, David R., Neil, H. Andrew W., . (2008) 10-Year Follow-up of Intensive Glucose Control in Type 2 Diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine 359:15, 1577-1589
Full Text145
Chalmers, John, Cooper, Mark E., . (2008) UKPDS and the Legacy Effect. New England Journal of Medicine 359:15, 1618-1620
Full Text146
Woo Je Lee, Kyung Soo Ko, Byoung Doo Rhee. (2008) Intensive Glucose Control and Cardiovascular Outcomes: Focused on Recent Clinical Trials. Journal of Korean Endocrine Society 23:5, 289
CrossRef
- Letters
