Methodist Journal

IN THIS ISSUE

Lipids and Lipoproteins

Vol 15, Issue 1 (2019)


FEATURED GUEST EDITOR

ISSUE INTRO

Lipids and Cardiovascular Disease: Putting it All Together

See More
RECOGNITIONS

Guest Editors Henry Pownall and Antonio Gotto Offer Insight and Expertise on the topic of Lipids and Cardiovascular Disease

See More

REVIEW ARTICLES See More

Cholesterol: Can’t Live With It, Can’t Live Without It

How Much Do Lipid Guidelines Help the Clinician? Reading Between the (Guide)lines

Statins: Then and Now

Poststatin Lipid Therapeutics: A Review

HDL and Reverse Cholesterol Transport Biomarkers

Revisiting Reverse Cholesterol Transport in the Context of High-Density Lipoprotein Free Cholesterol Bioavailability

High-Density Lipoprotein Subspecies in Health and Human Disease: Focus on Type 2 Diabetes

Gene Delivery in Lipid Research and Therapies

CASE REPORTS See More

Device-Related Thrombus: A Reason for Concern?

Retained Coronary Balloon Requiring Emergent Open Surgical Retrieval: An Uncommon Complication Requiring Individualized Management Strategies

Loperamide Mimicking Brugada Pattern

Reversed Pulsus Paradoxus in Right Ventricular Failure

MUSEUM OF HMH MULTIMODALITY IMAGING CENTER See More

Transcatheter Embolization of a Persistent Vertical Vein: A Rare Cause of Left-to-Right Shunt and Right-Sided Heart Failure

CLINICAL PERSPECTIVES See More

POINTS TO REMEMBER

Lipids and Renal Disease

EXCERPTA

Addressing the Feedback Loop Between Depression, Diabetes, and Cardiovascular Disease

POINTS TO REMEMBER

The Kidney as an Endocrine Organ

EXCERPTA

The Other Side of the Prescription

EDITORIALS

Letter to the Editor in response to “Role of Subcutaneous Leadless Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator in Young Patients

Vol 14, Issue 4 (2019)

Article Full Text

REVIEW ARTICLES

Prediabetes: Why Should We Care?

Jump to:
Article Citation:

Zand A, Ibrahim K, Patham B. Prediabetes: Why Should We Care? Methodist DeBakey Cardiovasc J. 2018;14(4):289-97.



Abstract

A clear link between cardiovascular disease and prediabetes has emerged over the past few years. Recent studies have shown that patients with prediabetes can suffer from coronary artery disease and diastolic heart failure even before progressing to overt diabetes. With this knowledge, physicians must identify prediabetes and take appropriate measures to optimize glycemic control. The pathophysiological defect seen in prediabetes can be managed with lifestyle modifications; thus, it is essential that physicians have a clear understanding of the current recommendations regarding diet and exercise. This review outlines the complications associated with prediabetes, presents an overview of the available pharmacological and surgical therapies that are effective in treating it, and provides a stepwise, multipronged approach for management.

Keywords
prediabetes , impaired fasting glucose , impaired glucose tolerance , diabetes prevention , management of prediabetes

INTRODUCTION

The 2017 National Diabetes Statistics Report from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that 33.9% of the adult U.S. population has prediabetes based on either fasting glucose or hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels. The prevalence is higher in those aged 65 years and older, at 48.3%. Not surprisingly, only 11.6% of U.S. adults know they have prediabetes.1

Diagnosis of prediabetes is based on the presence of impaired fasting glucose, impaired glucose tolerance, and/or elevated HbA1c levels between 5.7% and 6.4%.2 Impaired glucose tolerance is defined as blood glucose levels of 140 to 199 mg/dL during a 75-gram oral glucose tolerance test (normal < 140 mg/dL), and impaired fasting glucose is defined as blood glucose levels of 100 to 125 mg/dL, although the World Health Organization has a narrower threshold of  between 110 and 125 mg/dL).3 In multiple studies, prediabetes is shown to have a cause-effect relationship to cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality. In a cohort meta-analysis by Huang et al., prediabetes was associated with an increased risk of coronary heart disease, stroke, and all-cause mortality.4

Focusing on lifestyle and medical management of prediabetes, this review highlights the systemic and, in particular, cardiac complications associated with prediabetes, with the goal of providing tools for healthcare providers to treat this patient population and provide secondary preventative measures.

CARDIAC COMPLICATIONS OF PREDIABETES

The prediabetes state is not only a noteworthy risk factor for type 2 diabetes but is also a significant risk factor for macrovascular disease. Although some of the risk may be due to the progression to overt diabetes, an independent risk is still present in individuals who have not yet progressed to diabetes.5 A meta-analysis of 38 prospective studies in which cardiovascular disease (CVD) or mortality was the end point concluded that increasing glucose levels displayed a linear relationship with CVD risk.6

The macrovascular complications from prediabetes typically arise due to atherosclerosis. Because prediabetes and metabolic syndrome often coexist, the risk of developing an atheroma is high. In addition, strong evidence suggests that patients with prediabetes have an increase in fibrinogen and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP)—both proatherogenic factors—compared with normoglycemic patients.7,8 This section focuses mainly on the macrovascular complications associated with prediabetes, specifically coronary artery disease and heart failure.

Coronary Artery Disease

While most recognize a direct link between diabetes and coronary artery disease, few physicians and patients acknowledge the potential risk associated with a prediabetes diagnosis. Sen et al. conducted a study on 62 acute coronary syndrome patients who were admitted to a tertiary facility in India to identify the proportion that had prediabetes; they discovered that 48.4% of this patient population had prediabetes and 25% had diabetes.9

In a study by the American Diabetes Association (ADA)10 on the impact of prediabetes on coronary artery atherosclerosis, 67 patients with established coronary artery disease (CAD) underwent angioscopic evaluation of multiple main trunk arteries. Per ADA guidelines, 16 of the patients were classified as nondiabetic, 28 were considered prediabetic, and 23 were diabetic. Yellow plaques identified by angioscopy are commonly considered the primary lesion in acute coronary syndromes, and the presence of two or more per vessel is considered to be a risk factor for future cardiac events. All groups were assessed for both the number of yellow plaques per vessel and intensity of yellow grade. The number and grade of yellow plaques were higher in the prediabetic patients than in nondiabetics (P = .02 and P = .04, respectively) but similar in both prediabetic and diabetic patients (P = .44 and P = .21, respectively). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, both diabetes and prediabetes were independent predictors of multiple yellow plaques.10 In a larger study done by Scicali et al., the impact of prediabetes on coronary artery calcium (CAC) scores and mean common carotid media thickness (IMT) was compared in prediabetic patients and nondiabetic patients. Of the 272 patients enrolled, both the CAC scores and mean IMT were significantly higher in the prediabetes group (P < .001 and P < .001, respectively).11 In conclusion, a prediabetes state could potentially have a similar impact as diabetes on coronary and peripheral atherosclerosis. Larger studies are needed in the prediabetes population to establish a direct link between prediabetes and CAD.

Diastolic Heart Failure

Although studies such as the Framingham Heart Study have established an epidemiologic link between diabetes and heart failure,12 there is no established pathophysiologic association between prediabetes and cardiac function in humans. In an experimental animal model, Koncsos et al. aimed to better define the relationship between prediabetes and diastolic heart failure by administering a single low dose of streptozotocin to Long Evans rats fed with high-fat chow. This treatment induced prediabetes as characterized by a slight elevation in fasting blood glucose, impaired glucose and insulin tolerance, and an increase in visceral adipose tissue. The cardiac consequence of a metabolic derangement such as prediabetes was assessed in this setting. Measurement of morphological and functional parameters of the hearts, as assessed by echocardiography, determined that left ventricular (LV) mass as well as LV anterior and posterior wall thickness were increased in prediabetes rats. Other cardiac dimensional parameters remained unchanged. The slope of the LV end-diastolic pressurevolume relationship, an early and sensitive indicator of diastolic dysfunction, was elevated in the prediabetes group. Pathological evaluation revealed increased oxidative mitochondrial stress and increased mitofusin-2 (MFN2) levels in vascular smooth muscle. Increased MFN2 is thought to induce apoptotic cell death in rat cardiomyocytes.13 Of note, in a previous study by Essop et al., cardiac mitochondrial oxidative stress in male Wistar rats was not seen even after 16 weeks, indicating that mitochondrial oxidative stress might not be present in all models and stages of prediabetes.14 Di Pino et al. studied the effects of prediabetes on diastolic function in 167 patients with HbA1c between 5.7% and 6.4%. In patients with prediabetes, they found a significantly lower peak mitral inflow in early diastole (E wave) to late diastolic atrial filling velocity (A wave) ratio (P < .05), a higher left atrium volume (LAV) (P < .05), and a higher sphericity index (SI) (P < .05) when compared to controls. The E/A ratio, LAV, and SI are all early signs of diastolic dysfunction.15

LIFESTYLE MODIFICATIONS

The combination of diet and exercise is arguably the single most important factor that could halt the progression towards type 2 diabetes in patients with prediabetes. Among the first studies to prove this was the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study (DPS), a controlled randomized trial including 522 overweight subjects with impaired glucose tolerance who were randomized to either an intensive lifestyle intervention group or a standard-of-care control group.16 The intensive lifestyle intervention group received individualized dietary counseling and circuit-type resistance training and were advised to increase overall physical activity, whereas the control group received general counseling on diet and exercise along with an annual physical exam. The lifestyle intervention arm of the study was designed to be at a high intensity during the first year, followed by a maintenance period, with the goal of reducing both weight and dietary fat intake while increasing physical activity and dietary fiber. Weight reductions were measured after 1 year and at 3 years; the intervention group lost 4.5 kg and 3.5 kg while the control group lost 1.0 and 0.9 kg, respectively. Lipid and glycemic parameters showed more improvement in the intervention group, with a 58% reduction in the risk of developing diabetes compared to the control group. The subjects who were free of diabetes at the end of the intervention were followed up for an additional 3 years, and the incidence of diabetes, physical activity, and dietary intake of fiber and fat was measured. During the total 7-year follow-up period,17 the study concluded that the incidence of type 2 diabetes was 4.3 versus 7.4 per 100 person-years in the intervention and control group, respectively (log-rank test P = .0001), indicating a 36% reduction in relative risk.

Figure 1. Lifestyle interventions in prediabetes; adapted from American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists guidelines.22

Another large study that reproduced similar results was from the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP), which was similar to the Finnish study in its design but included a group treated with metformin for comparison.18 A total of 3,234 high-risk adults were recruited; 1,079 participants underwent intensive lifestyle intervention, 924 were treated with metformin, and 932 were treated with a placebo. The lifestyle group achieved two important goals: loss of 7% of their initial body weight and a minimum of 150 min of physical activity per week (at an intensity similar to brisk walking). Diabetes incidence was reduced by 58% in the lifestyle group and by 31% with metformin compared to placebo. Analysis was by intention-to-treat, with one case of diabetes prevented for every 6.9 people. Further analysis of the lifestyle group showed a 16% reduction in diabetes risk for every kilogram of weight loss.19 After a 10-year follow-up, the study concluded that the effects of lifestyle modification on diabetes prevention were maintained.

Both the Finnish and DPP studies were successful in demonstrating that lifestyle intervention is a valuable key to managing prediabetes. However, the challenge still remains in implementing these methods in a community setting. Katula et al. applied the methods of the DPP study to the local community via key modifications to enhance efficiency and feasibility.20 Community healthcare workers with well-controlled diabetes and a history of a healthy lifestyle were recruited to deliver a group-based lifestyle weight loss (LWL) intervention through a partnership with a community-based diabetes educational program. The study recruited 301 obese volunteers who were prediabetic on at least two occasions. The LWL intervention had two valuable goals for their participants: a calorie intake between 1,200 and 1,800 kcal per day, and &#8805; 180 min of physical activity per week. This approach is in agreement with parameters set by the American Diabetes Association, the North American Association for the Study of Obesity, and the American Society of Clinical Nutrition.21 Participants were present at 67.7% of all group intervention sessions. On an adjusted average of the 6- and 12-month means, LWL intervention participants had a net weight loss of 6.0% of their body weight and 5.0 cm in waist circumference compared to standard of care patients. There was also a 4.3 mg/dL decrease in fasting glucose in the LWL intervention participants versus a decrease of 0.4 mg/dL in the standard of care patients (P < .001).

PHARMACOLOGICAL AGENTS

There are currently four medications for treating the prediabetes subpopulation, including metformin, pioglitazone, acarbose, and liraglutide. In addition, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) has also proposed three weight-loss therapies—including orlistat, lorcaserin, and phentermine/topiramate ER—to manage obesity with the goal of halting the progression of insulin resistance and type 2 diabetes (Figure 1).22 No data is available for naltrexone/bupropion. Table 1 provides an extensive review of the currently available pharmacological agents.23-40

Table 1a. Summary of current medications to treat prediabetes.23-40 T2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus; MI: myocardial infarction; CVD: cardiovascular disease
Table 1b. Summary of current medications to treat prediabetes.23-40 T2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus; MI: myocardial infarction; CVD: cardiovascular disease
Table 1c. Summary of current medications to treat prediabetes.23-40 T2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus; MI: myocardial infarction; CVD: cardiovascular disease
Table 1d. Summary of current medications to treat prediabetes.23-40 T2DM: type 2 diabetes mellitus; MI: myocardial infarction; CVD: cardiovascular disease

BARIATRIC SURGERY

In 2011, the American College of Surgeons Bariatric Surgery Center Network (ACS-BSCN) recognized bariatric surgery as a potential intervention for type 2 diabetes and prediabetes in addition to assisting in weight loss in morbidly obese patients. De la Cruz-Muñozand colleagues performed a retrospective analysis of 1,602 adults who underwent bariatric surgery; they were categorized into those with diagnosed type 2 diabetes, those with prediabetes, those with high fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and those with normal FPG. At 1- and 3-year follow-up post bariatric surgery, all four groups had normal FPG, but the prediabetes group had more significant weight loss (47 kg) than the diabetes population.41 Procedures such as the Roux-en-Y gastric bypass and the biliopancreatic diversion have been shown to be the most effective for patients with diabetes.42 Normalization of plasma glucose concentrations, HbA1c, and insulin levels were seen in 80% to 100% of patients within days post-surgery prior to any weight loss. The above findings could be attributed to reduced food intake, malabsorption of nutrients, and alterations in gastrointestinal anatomy that incite changes in the incretin system.

Among obese patients (body mass index > 40) who are candidates for bariatric surgery, prediabetes patients should be prioritized because they are at higher risk of diabetes and complications that can be prevented with surgery and the subsequent weight loss. This is supported by a post hoc analysis of 4,032 participants from the Swedish Obese Subjects study, half of whom had bariatric surgery and the other half receiving usual care. After 15 years of follow-up, patients in the diabetes, prediabetes, and normoglycemic groups who underwent bariatric surgery had a reduced incidence of macrovascular complications. Interestingly, the largest risk reduction for macrovascular complications was seen in the prediabetes group.43

CONCLUSION

The link between prediabetes and cardiovascular disease has been clearly established, and physicians should be aware of the implications for their patients. At this time, major organizations such as the AACE have publish written statements on the importance of diagnosing and treating the prediabetes population. Following these steps will help ensure that future complications in this subpopulation will not take a toll on our healthcare system.

The first step in managing patients with prediabetes is to encourage strict lifestyle modifications consisting of &#8805; 180 min of physical activity per week and a calorie intake of 1,200 to 1,800 kcal per day. Providers can also refer their patients to ancillary providers, such as dieticians or weight management specialists, who can help them achieve their goals. In addition to lifestyle management, anti-obesity agents such as orlistat, lorcaserin, and phentermine/topiramate should be considered for obese patients with prediabetes.

Healthcare providers can also consider pharmacologic agents (metformin, pioglitazone, liraglutide, or acarbose) for management of prediabetes. Each of these drugs has a safe pharmacologic profile with regard to hypoglycemia. Metformin has a good track record of being a safe, tolerable drug with benefits such as modest weight loss and a potential cardioprotective effect. Pioglitazone (e.g., Actos) is another viable option due to its ability to increase insulin sensitivity and its known advantage in secondary prevention among stroke/myocardial infarction patients; however, it is also known to cause side effects such as weight gain and bone fractures in the osteoporotic population. If weight loss is a desired effect, providers can consider liraglutide, a weight-loss agent approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration that has been shown to improve glycemic control and HbA1c levels.

If medical management fails to achieve glycemic control, advanced measures such as bariatric surgery can be used with the goal of reversing prediabetes and helping obese patients lose weight. All surgical procedures are complex processes that require mental preparedness on the part of the patient and an in-depth understanding of how it will impact their lifestyle; thus, surgery should be reserved for those who are resistant to other forms of treatment. Providers should not be discouraged from sending patients who meet surgical criteria to bariatric surgical centers since studies have shown that surgery can control prediabetes and improve both lipid profiles and blood pressure.

In short, providers can help patients with prediabetes through multiple means and should use the above tools in their arsenal. Providers should also feel comfortable referring patients to an endocrinologist when the clinical picture is complex enough to require multidisciplinary care.

KEY POINTS

  • Prediabetes is a growing concern as it affects roughly 33.9% of U.S. adults, with the majority of this population left untreated.
  • Complications of prediabetes include macrovascular effects such as myocardial infraction, stroke, and peripheral vascular disease as well as microvascular changes such as retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy.
  • Healthcare providers should start screening for prediabetes and initiate treatment as soon as possible, starting with lifestyle interventions and progressing to pharmacologic therapies.
  • Health providers should consider a multidisciplinary approach by involving a certified diabetes educator and/or nutritionist and recruiting additional support from an endocrinologist or bariatric surgeon as needed.
Conflict of Interest Disclosure

The authors have completed and submitted the Methodist DeBakey Cardiovascular Journal Conflict of Interest Statement and none were reported.

References
  1. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention [Internet]. Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services; 2017. National Diabetes Statistics Report, 2017; 2017 [cited 2018 Jul 2]. Available from: https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/statistics-report/index.html.
  2. American Diabetes Association. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2017 Jan;40(Suppl 1):S11-S24.
  3. World Health Organization [Internet]. Definition and diagnosis of diabetes mellitus and intermediate hyperglycemia: report of a WHO/IDF consultation. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2006 [cited 2018 Aug 6]. Available from: http://www.who.int/diabetes/publications/Definition and diagnosis of diabetes_new.pdf.
  4. Huang Y, Cai X, Mai W, Li M, Hu Y. Association between prediabetes and risk of cardiovascular disease and all cause mortality: systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ. 2016 Nov 23;355:i5953.
  5. Nasr G, Sliem H. Silent myocardial ischemia in prediabetics in relation to insulin resistance. J Cardiovasc Dis Res. 2010 Jul;1(3):116-21.
  6. Levitan EB, Song Y, Ford ES, Liu S. Is nondiabetic hyperglycemia a risk factor for cardiovascular disease? A meta-analysis of prospective studies. Arch Intern Med. 2004 Oct 25;164(19):2147-55.
  7. Isordia-Salas I, Galván-Plata ME, Leaños-Miranda A, et al. Proinflammatory and prothrombotic state in subjects with different glucose tolerance status before cardiovascular disease. J Diabetes Res. 2014;2014:631902.
  8. Bembde AS. A study of plasma fibrinogen level in type-2 diabetes mellitus and its relation to glycemic control. Indian J Hematol Blood Transfus. 2012 Jun;28(2):105-8.
  9. Sen K, Mukherjee AK, Dharchowdhury L, Chatterjee A. A study to find out the proportion of prediabetes in patients with acute coronary syndrome in a medical college of Kolkata. J Indian Med Assoc. 2008 Dec;106(12):776-8.
  10. Kurihara O, Takano M, Yamamoto M, et al. Impact of prediabetic status on coronary atherosclerosis: a multivessel angioscopic study. Diabetes Care. 2013 Mar;36(3):729-33.
  11. Scicali R, Giral P, Gallo A, et al. HbA1c increase is associated with higher coronary and peripheral atherosclerotic burden in non-diabetic patients. Atherosclerosis. 2016 Dec; 255:102-8.
  12. Mahmood SS, Wang TJ. The epidemiology of congestive heart failure: the Framingham Heart Study perspective. Glob Heart. 2013 Mar 1;8(1):77-82.
  13. Koncsos G, Varga ZV, Baranyai T, et al. Diastolic dysfunction in prediabetic male rats: Role of mitochondrial oxidative stress. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2016 Oct 1;311(4):H927-H943.
  14. Essop MF, Anna Chan WY, Valle A, García-Palmer FJ, Du Toit EF. Impaired contractile function and mitochondrial respiratory capacity in response to oxygen deprivation in a rat model of prediabetes. Acta Physiol (Oxf). 2009 Dec;197(4):289-96.
  15. Di Pino A, Mangiafico S, Urbano F, et al. HbA1c Identifies Subjects With Prediabetes and Subclinical Left Ventricular Diastolic Dysfunction. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2017 Oct 1;102(10):3756-64.
  16. Lindström J, Louheranta A, Mannelin M, et al.; Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study Group. The Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study (DPS): Lifestyle intervention and 3-year results on diet and physical activity. Diabetes Care. 2003 Dec;26(12):3230-6.
  17. Lindström J, Ilanne-Parikka P, Peltonen M, et al.; Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study Group. Sustained reduction in the incidence of type 2 diabetes by lifestyle intervention: follow-up of the Finnish Diabetes Prevention Study. Lancet. 2006 Nov 11;368(9548):1673-9.
  18. Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) Research Group. The Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP): description of lifestyle intervention. Diabetes Care. 2002 Dec;25(12):2165-71.
  19. Hamman RF, Wing RR, Edelstein SL, et al. Effect of weight loss with lifestyle intervention on risk of diabetes. Diabetes Care. 2006 Sep;29(9):2102-7.
  20. Katula JA, Vitolins MZ, Rosenberger EL, et al. One-year results of a community-based translation of the Diabetes Prevention Program: Healthy-Living Partnerships to Prevent Diabetes (HELP PD) Project. Diabetes Care. 2011 Jul;34(7):1451-7.
  21. Klein S, Sheard NF, Pi-Sunyer X, et al.; American Diabetes Association; North American Association for the Study of Obesity; American Society for Clinical Nutrition. Weight management through lifestyle modification for the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes: rationale and strategies. A statement of the American Diabetes Association, the North American Association for the Study of Obesity, and the American Society for Clinical Nutrition. Am J Clin Nutr. 2004 Aug;80(2):257-63.
  22. Garber AJ, Abrahamson MJ, Barzilay JI, et al. CONSENSUS STATEMENT BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY ON THE COMPREHENSIVE TYPE 2 DIABETES MANAGEMENT ALGORITHM – 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY. Endocr Pract. 2018 Jan;24(1):91-120.
  23. Rena G, Hardie DG, Pearson ER. The mechanisms of action of metformin. Diabetologia. 2017 Sep;60(9):1577-85.
  24. Salpeter SR, Buckley NS, Kahn JA, Salpeter EE. Meta-analysis: metformin treatment in persons at risk for diabetes mellitus. Am J Med. 2008 Feb;121(2):149-157.e2.
  25. Ramachandran A, Snehalatha C, Mary S, et al. The Indian Diabetes Prevention Programme shows that lifestyle modification and metformin prevent type 2 diabetes in Asian Indian subjects with impaired glucose tolerance (IDPP-1). Diabetologia. 2006 Feb;49(2):289-97.
  26. Svensson E, Baggesen LM, Johnsen SP, et al. Early Glycemic Control and Magnitude of HbA1c Reduction Predict Cardiovascular Events and Mortality: Population-Based Cohort Study of 24,752 Metformin Initiators. Diabetes Care. 2017 Jun;40(6):800-7.
  27. Smith U. Pioglitazone: mechanism of action. Int J Clin Pract Suppl. 2001 Sep;(121):13-8.
  28. DeFronzo RA, Tripathy D, Schwenke DC, et al. Pioglitazone for diabetes prevention in impaired glucose tolerance. N Engl J Med. 2011 Mar 24;364(12):1104-15.
  29. Kernan WN, Viscoli CM, Furie KL, et al. Pioglitazone after Ischemic Stroke or Transient Ischemic Attack. N Engl J Med. 2016 Apr 7;374(14):1321-31.
  30. Chiasson JL, Josse RG, Gomis R, Hanefeld M, Karasik A, Laakso M; STOP-NIDDM Trail Research Group. Acarbose for prevention of type 2 diabetes mellitus: the STOP-NIDDM randomised trial. Lancet. 2002 Jun 15;359(9323):2072-7.
  31. Chiasson JL, Josse RG, Gomis R, Hanefeld M, Karasik A, Laakso M; STOP-NIDDM Trial Research Group. Acarbose treatment and the risk of cardiovascular disease and hypertension in patients with impaired glucose tolerance: the STOP-NIDDM trial. JAMA. 2003 Jul 23;290(4):486-94.
  32. Russell-Jones D, Vaag A, Schmitz O, et al. Liraglutide vs insulin glargine and placebo in combination with metformin and sulfonylurea therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (LEAD-5 met+SU): a randomised controlled trial. Diabetologia. 2009 Oct;52(10):2046-55.
  33. le Roux CW, Astrup A, Fujioka K, et al.; SCALE Obesity Prediabetes NN8022-1839 Study Group. 3 years of liraglutide versus placebo for type 2 diabetes risk reduction and weight management in individuals with prediabetes: a randomised, double-blind trial. Lancet. 2017;389(10077):1399-1409.
  34. Marso SP, Daniels GH, Brown-Frandsen K, et al. Liraglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2016 Jul 28;375(4):311-22.
  35. Guerciolini R. Mode of action of orlistat. Int J Obes Relat Metab Disord. 1997 Jun;21 Suppl 3:S12-23.
  36. Torgerson JS, Hauptman J, Boldrin MN, Sjöström L. XENical in the prevention of diabetes in obese subjects (XENDOS) study: a randomized study of orlistat as an adjunct to lifestyle changes for the prevention of type 2 diabetes in obese patients. Diabetes Care. 2004 Jan;27(1):155-61.
  37. Lonneman DJ Jr, Rey JA, McKee BD. Phentermine/Topiramate extended-release capsules (qsymia) for weight loss. P T. 2013 Aug;38(8):446-52.
  38. Guo F, Garvey WT. Cardiometabolic Disease Staging Predicts Effectiveness of Weight-Loss Therapy to Prevent Type 2 Diabetes: Pooled Results From Phase III Clinical Trials Assessing Phentermine/Topiramate Extended Release. Diabetes Care. 2017 Jul;40(7):856-62.
  39. Gustafson A, King C, Rey JA. Lorcaserin (Belviq): A Selective Serotonin 5-HT2C Agonist In the Treatment of Obesity. P T. 2013 Sep;38(9):525-34.
  40. Nesto R, Fain R, Li Y, Shanahan W. Evaluation of lorcaserin on progression of prediabetes to type 2 diabetes and reversion to euglycemia. Postgrad Med. 2016 May;128(4):364-70.
  41. de la Cruz-Muñoz N, Messiah SE, Arheart KL, Lopez-Mitnik G, Lipshultz SE, Livingstone A. Bariatric surgery significantly decreases the prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus and prediabetes among morbidly obese multiethnic adults: long-term results. J Am Coll Surg. 2011 Apr;212(4):505-11; discussion 512-3.
  42. Keidar A. Bariatric surgery for type 2 diabetes reversal: the risks. Diabetes Care. 2011 May;34 Suppl 2:S361-266.
  43. Carlsson LMS, Sjöholm K, Karlsson C, et al. Long-term incidence of microvascular disease after bariatric surgery or usual care in patients with obesity, stratified by baseline glycaemic status: a post-hoc analysis of participants from the Swedish Obese Subjects study. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2017 Apr;5(4):271-9.

Add Comments

Please login to dialogue with author.

Comments