Search

Aims/hypothesis: Insulin resistance and inflammation are components of a biological framework that is hypothesised to be shared by type 2 diabetes and depression. However, depressive symptoms include a large heterogeneity of somatic and cognitive-affective symptoms, and this may obscure the associations within this biological framework. Cross-sectional and longitudinal data were used to disentangle the contributions of insulin resistance and inflammation to somatic and cognitive-affective symptoms of depression., Methods: This secondary analysis used data from the Emotional Distress Sub-Study of the GRADE trial. Insulin resistance and inflammation were assessed using the HOMA-IR estimation and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels, respectively, at baseline and at the study visits at year 1 and year 3 (HOMA-IR) and every 6 months (hsCRP) for up to 3 years of follow-up. Depressive symptoms were assessed at baseline using the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-8), and a total score as well as symptom cluster scores for cognitive-affective and somatic symptoms were calculated. For the cross-sectional analyses, linear regression analyses were performed, with inflammation and insulin resistance at baseline as dependent variables. For the longitudinal analyses, linear mixed-effect regression analyses were performed, with inflammation and insulin resistance at the various time points as dependent variables. In all analyses, depressive symptoms (total score and symptom cluster scores) were the independent variables, controlled for important demographic, anthropometric and metabolic confounders. For the analysis of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), data from 1321 participants were analysed. For the analysis of inflammation (hsCRP), data from 1739 participants were analysed., Results: In cross-sectional analysis and after adjustment for potential confounders, a one-unit increase in PHQ-8 total score was significantly associated with a 0.8% increase in HOMA-IR (p=0.007), but not with hsCRP (0.6% increase, p=0.283). The somatic symptom score was associated with a 5.8% increase in HOMA-IR (p=0.004). Single-item analyses of depressive symptoms showed that fatigue (3.6% increase, p=0.002) and increased/decreased appetite (3.5% increase, p=0.009) were significantly associated with HOMA-IR cross-sectionally. The cognitive-affective symptom score was not significantly associated with HOMA-IR at baseline. In longitudinal analyses, a one-unit increase in PHQ-8 total score was significantly associated with a 0.8% increase in hsCRP over time (p=0.014), but not with HOMA-IR over time (0.1% decrease, p=0.564). Again, only the somatic symptom cluster was significantly associated with hsCRP over time (5.2% increase, p=0.017), while the cognitive-affective symptom score was not., Conclusion/interpretation: The results highlight the associations of depressive symptoms with markers of inflammation and insulin resistance, both cross-sectionally and longitudinally, in individuals with type 2 diabetes. In particular, somatic symptoms of depression appear to be the driver of these associations, even after controlling for concomitant conditions, with a potential role for fatigue and issues with appetite., Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01794143., Competing Interests: Acknowledgements: The following GRADE Research Group investigators were collaborators in this work: Cardiovascular Adjudication Advisor: Everett, Brendan M. (Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA) Collaborating Investigators (Recruitment Sites): Abdouch, Ivan (University of Nebraska Medical Center/Omaha VA, Omaha, NE, USA); Bahtiyar, Gul (SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA); Brantley, Paula (Pennington Biomedical Research Center (LSU), Baton Rouge, LA, USA); Broyles, Frances E. (Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA); Canaris, Gay (University of Nebraska Medical Center/Omaha VA, Omaha, NE, USA); Copeland, Paul (Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA); Craine, Jeri J. (UW Valley Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA); Fein, Warren L. (Swedish Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA); Gliwa, Agnieska (SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA); Hope, Lisel M. (SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA); Lee, Melissa S. (SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA); Meiners, Rebecca (Pennington Biomedical Research Center (LSU), Baton Rouge, LA, USA); Meiners, Vaughan (Pennington Biomedical Research Center (LSU), Baton Rouge, LA, USA); O’Neal, Hollis (Pennington Biomedical Research Center (LSU), Baton Rouge, LA, USA); Park, James E. (UW Valley Medical Center, Seattle, WA, USA); Sacerdote, Alan (SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA); Sledge, Jr., Edward (Pennington Biomedical Research Center (LSU), Baton Rouge, LA, USA); Soni, Lisa (SUNY Downstate Medical Center, Brooklyn, NY, USA); Steppel-Reznik, Jeanne (Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA); Turchin, Alexander (Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA). Emotional Distress Sub-Study: Golden, Sherita H. (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA); Gonzalez, Jeffrey S. (Yeshiva University, Bronx, NY, USA; Albert Einstein College of Medicine Bronx, NY, USA); Naik, Aanand D. (Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas, USA); Walker, Elizabeth A. (Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY, USA). Data availability: This manuscript is based on follow-up data and outcome assessments from the 1739 participants enrolled into the Emotional Distress Sub-Study (EDS) of the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Type 2 Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) study. The GRADE and EDS database will be available in 2025 at the NIDDK Data Repository ( https://repository.niddk.nih.gov/study/151 ). Funding: Open Access funding enabled and organized by Projekt DEAL. The GRADE study was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) of the National Institutes of Health under award number U01DK098246. The planning of GRADE was supported by a U34 planning grant from the NIDDK (U34-DK-088043). The American Diabetes Association supported the initial planning meeting for the U34 proposal. The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention also provided funding support. The Department of Veterans Affairs provided resources and facilities. Additional support was provided by NIH through grant numbers P30 DK017047, P30 DK020541, P30 DK020572, P30 DK072476, P30 DK079626, P30 DK092926, U54 GM104940, UL1 TR000170, UL1 TR000439, UL1 TR000445, UL1 TR001102, UL1 TR001108, UL1 TR001409, 2UL1TR001425, UL1 TR001449, UL1 TR002243, UL1 TR002345, UL1 TR002378, UL1 TR002489, UL1 TR002529, UL1 TR002535, UL1 TR002537, UL1 TR002541 and UL1 TR002548. Educational materials (the 4 Steps to Manage Your Diabetes for Life booklet) were provided by the National Diabetes Education Program. Material support in the form of donated medications and supplies was provided by Becton, Dickinson and Company, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck & Co. Inc., Novo Nordisk, Roche Diagnostics and Sanofi. The content of this manuscript is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health. The GRADE Study Research Group is deeply grateful to our participants whose loyal dedication made the GRADE study possible. The GRADE Emotional Distress Sub-Study was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) of the National Institutes of Health under award number R01 DK104845. Additional support was provided by grant number P30 DK111022. Authors’ relationships and activities: DE reports consulting fees from Roche and Dexcom Germany, payment or honoraria from Roche, Dexcom Germany, Sanofi Aventis, Berlin Chemie AG, Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly and Eli Lilly. CJH reports grants or contracts from the National Institute on Aging (NIA), the NIDDK and JDRF. CP reports grants or contracts from the National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (NICCH) and ADA. RMC reports grants or contracts from NIH and Dexcom and the chairmanship of the Cincinnati Veterans Affairs Research and Development Committee. WTG reports grants or contracts from NIDDK, Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Epitomee, Neurovalen and Pfizer to his university, consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk, Pfizer, Fractyl Health, Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inogen, Zealand, Aluurion and Merck, payment or honoraria from Brown University, Auburn University, Wayne State University, the University of Illinois, Mount Sinai Hospital, the Cleveland Clinic, the University of Miami, the Georgia Endocrine Society and Auburn University for invited lectureships, participation in a data and safety monitoring board/advisory board for Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly, and membership of the Lancet Commission on Obesity. TM reports grants or contracts from Abbott, Dexcom, Insulet, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and Tandem, payment or honoraria from Abbott and Dexcom, support for attending meetings or travel from Abbott, the ADA and the American College of Physicians (ACP) and participation in a data and safety monitoring board/advisory board for Eli Lilly. HJW reports grants or contracts from Abbott, Dexcom, the ADA and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, consulting fees from Dexcom, payment or honoraria from Abbott, and support for attending meetings or travel from the ADA. JSG reports participation in a data and safety monitoring board/advisory board for Vanderbilt University. HK-S, DU, HW, GC-R, VLA and AC declare that there are no relationships or activities that might bias, or be perceived to bias, their work. Contribution statement: All authors affirm that authorship is merited based on the ICMJE authorship criteria. DE, HK-S, DU, HW, CJH, GC-R, VLA, WTG, AC and JSG contributed to the conception and/or design of the study. VLA, RMC, WTG and TM contributed to the acquisition of data. DU and HW conducted the statistical analysis. All authors contributed to the interpretation of data and results. HK-S and JSG acquired funding. HK-S, DU, VLA, WTG, HW and JSG contributed to the supervision and management of the research. DE, HK-S, DU, HW, WTG and JSG drafted the manuscript. All authors contributed to the critical review of the manuscript and approved the final version to be published. DE, DU and HW are the guarantors of this work, and as such had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis., (© 2025. The Author(s).)

Objective: To determine whether the relationship between average glucose (AG) levels and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) differs across racial/ethnic groups., Research Design and Methods: We performed a prospective substudy of GRADE, a comparative effectiveness randomized trial conducted in 36 centers in the U.S. A total of 1,454 of the 5,047 participants in the GRADE cohort, including 534 non-Hispanic White (NHW), 389 non-Hispanic Black (NHB), and 327 Hispanic White patients and 204 patients of other racial/ethnic backgrounds, were included in the substudy. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) performed for 10 days was used to calculate AG10. Immediately after CGM, HbA1c and glycated albumin were measured. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and glucose area under the curve (AUC) were derived from a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test., Results: The relationship between AG10 and HbA1c was significantly different for NHB compared with NHW patients and those of other racial/ethnic groups. HbA1c levels were 0.2-0.6 percentage points higher in NHB than in NHW patients for AG10 levels from 100 to 250 mg/dL. For an HbA1c of 7%, AG10 was 11 mg/dL higher for NHW than for NHB patients. Similar findings were observed across races for relationships of FPG and AUC with HbA1c and for glucose measurements with glycated albumin levels. Differences in the relationship between AG10 and HbA1c across racial groups remained after adjustments for any demographic or other differences between racial/ethnic subgroups., Conclusions: The relationship between several measures of glucose with HbA1c and glycated albumin consistently differed across races. These findings should be considered in setting treatment goals and diagnostic levels., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Objective: We report mortality outcomes in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) among people with type 2 diabetes diagnosed within 10 years and no recent history of cardiovascular events or cancer., Research Design and Methods: Overall mortality rates and major causes of death were assessed over an average of 5 years of follow-up. Cause of death was adjudicated centrally by a committee masked to treatment assignment. We examined baseline covariates and the 10-year Framingham Risk Score for associations., Results: Mortality rate was low (0.59 per 100 participant-years). Participants who died during follow-up were likely to be older, be male, have a history of hypertension, have a history of smoking, and have moderate albuminuria. The two most common underlying causes of death were "cardiovascular-cause" (a composite of underlying causes) (38.6%) and cancer (26.8%). There were no differences by treatment group., Conclusions: Among people with diabetes of relatively short duration, cause of death was varied. Attention to health risks beyond cardiovascular diseases is warranted., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Objective: We examined longitudinal associations between emotional distress (specifically, depressive symptoms and diabetes distress) and medication adherence in Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE), a large randomized controlled trial comparing four glucose-lowering medications added to metformin in adults with relatively recent-onset type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)., Research Design and Methods: The Emotional Distress Substudy assessed medication adherence, depressive symptoms, and diabetes distress in 1,739 GRADE participants via self-completed questionnaires administered biannually up to 3 years. We examined baseline depressive symptoms and diabetes distress as predictors of medication adherence over 36 months. Bidirectional visit-to-visit relationships were also examined. Treatment satisfaction, beliefs about medication, diabetes care self-efficacy, and perceived control over diabetes were evaluated as mediators of longitudinal associations., Results: At baseline, mean ± SD age of participants (56% of whom were White, 17% Hispanic/Latino, 18% Black, and 66% male) was 58.0 ± 10.2 years, diabetes duration 4.2 ± 2.8 years, HbA1c 7.5% ± 0.5%, and medication adherence 89.9% ± 11.1%. Higher baseline depressive symptoms and diabetes distress were independently associated with lower adherence over 36 months (P < 0.001). Higher depressive symptoms and diabetes distress at one visit predicted lower adherence at the subsequent 6-month visit (P < 0.0001) but not vice versa. Treatment assignment did not moderate relationships. Patient-reported concerns about diabetes medications mediated the largest percentage (11.9%-15.5%) of the longitudinal link between emotional distress and adherence., Conclusions: Depressive symptoms and diabetes distress both predict lower adherence to glucose-lowering medications over time among adults with T2DM. Addressing emotional distress and concerns about anticipated negative effects of taking these treatments may be important to support diabetes treatment adherence., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Objective: To evaluate whether baseline levels of depressive symptoms and diabetes-specific distress are associated with glycemic control in Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE), a large randomized controlled trial comparing the metabolic effects of four common glucose-lowering medications when combined with metformin in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)., Research Design and Methods: The primary and secondary outcomes were defined as an HbA1c value ≥7%, subsequently confirmed, and an HbA1c value >7.5%, subsequently confirmed, respectively. Separate Cox proportional hazards models assessed the association between baseline levels of each exposure of interest (depressive symptoms measured with the eight-item Patient Health Questionnaire and diabetes distress measured with the Diabetes Distress Scale) and the subsequent risk of metabolic outcomes., Results: This substudy included 1,739 participants (56% of whom were non-Hispanic White, 18% non-Hispanic Black, 17% Hispanic, and 68% male; mean [SD] age 58.0 [10.2] years, diabetes duration 4.2 [2.8] years, and HbA1c 7.5% [0.48%]). A total of 1,157 participants reached the primary outcome, with time to event of 2.1 years on average, while 738 participants reached the secondary outcome at 3 years on average. With adjustment for sex, race/ethnicity, treatment group, baseline age, duration of T2DM, BMI, and HbA1c, there were no significant associations between the depressive symptoms or diabetes distress and the subsequent risk of the primary or secondary outcomes., Conclusions: The current findings suggest that, at least for individuals with diabetes of relatively short duration, baseline levels of emotional distress are not associated with glycemic control over time., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Objective: In Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) (5,047 participants, mean follow-up 5.0 years), differences in glycemic control were demonstrated over time among four randomized therapies added to metformin. Weight gain and hypoglycemia are also important outcomes for people with type 2 diabetes. We compared the effects of the four randomized GRADE medications on a composite outcome incorporating glycemic deterioration, weight gain, and hypoglycemia., Research Design and Methods: The composite outcome was time to first occurrence of any of the following: HbA1c >7.5%, confirmed; ≥5% weight gain; or severe or recurrent nonsevere hypoglycemia. Secondary analyses included examination of individual components of the composite outcome, subgroup effects and potential mediators, and treatment satisfaction. Cumulative incidence was estimated with the Kaplan-Meier estimator. Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess pairwise group differences in risk of an outcome., Results: Risk of reaching the composite outcome (events per 100 participants per treatment year [PTYs]) was lowest with liraglutide (19 per 100 PTYs) followed by sitagliptin (26 per 100 PTYs), glargine (29 per 100 PTYs), and glimepiride (40 per 100 PTYs); all pairwise comparisons were statistically significant. The order was the same for risk of weight gain and hypoglycemia, but risk of glycemic deterioration was lowest with glargine, followed by liraglutide, glimepiride, and sitagliptin. No significant heterogeneity in risk of composite outcome was detected across prespecified covariates. Participants who reached the composite outcome had modestly but significantly lower treatment satisfaction., Conclusions: Among participants treated with common second-line drug classes for type 2 diabetes, the liraglutide group had the lowest and glimepiride the highest risk of reaching a composite outcome encompassing glycemic deterioration, weight gain, and hypoglycemia. These findings may inform decision-making regarding type 2 diabetes therapy., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Objective: To describe rescue insulin use and associated factors in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE)., Research Design and Methods: GRADE participants (type 2 diabetes duration <10 years, baseline A1C 6.8%-8.5% on metformin monotherapy, N = 5,047) were randomly assigned to insulin glargine U-100, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin and followed quarterly for a mean of 5 years. Rescue insulin (glargine or aspart) was to be started within 6 weeks of A1C >7.5%, confirmed. Reasons for delaying rescue insulin were reported by staff-completed survey., Results: Nearly one-half of GRADE participants (N = 2,387 [47.3%]) met the threshold for rescue insulin. Among participants assigned to glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin, rescue glargine was added by 69% (39% within 6 weeks). Rescue aspart was added by 44% of glargine-assigned participants (19% within 6 weeks) and by 30% of non-glargine-assigned participants (14% within 6 weeks). Higher A1C values were associated with adding rescue insulin. Intention to change health behaviors (diet/lifestyle, adherence to current treatment) and not wanting to take insulin were among the most common reasons reported for not adding rescue insulin within 6 weeks., Conclusions: Proportionately, rescue glargine, when required, was more often used than rescue aspart, and higher A1C values were associated with greater rescue insulin use. Wanting to use noninsulin strategies to improve glycemia was commonly reported, although multiple factors likely contributed to not using rescue insulin. These findings highlight the persistent challenge of intensifying type 2 diabetes treatment with insulin, even in a clinical trial., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Objective: We evaluated whether adding basal insulin to metformin in adults with early type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) would increase emotional distress relative to other treatments., Research Design and Methods: The Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) of adults with T2DM of <10 years' duration, HbA1c 6.8-8.5%, and taking metformin monotherapy randomly assigned participants to add insulin glargine U-100, sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, or the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor sitagliptin. The Emotional Distress Substudy enrolled 1,739 GRADE participants (mean [SD] age 58.0 [10.2] years, 32% female, 56% non-Hispanic White, 18% non-Hispanic Black, 17% Hispanic) and assessed diabetes distress and depressive symptoms every 6 months. Analyses examined differences at 1 year and over the 3-year follow-up., Results: Across treatments, diabetes distress (-0.24, P < 0.0001) and depressive symptoms (-0.67, P < 0.0001) decreased over 1 year. Diabetes distress was lower at 1 year for the glargine group than for the other groups combined (-0.10, P = 0.002). Diabetes distress was also lower for liraglutide than for glimepiride or sitagliptin (-0.10, P = 0.008). Over the 3-year follow-up, there were no significant group differences in total diabetes distress; interpersonal diabetes distress remained lower for those assigned to liraglutide. No significant differences were observed for depressive symptoms., Conclusions: Contrary to expectations, this randomized trial found no evidence for a deleterious effect of basal insulin on emotional distress. Glargine lowered diabetes distress modestly at 1 year rather than increasing it. Liraglutide also reduced diabetes distress at 1 year. Results can inform treatment decisions for adults with early T2DM., (© 2024 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Background: Cardiovascular disease is a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes. The effects of glucose-lowering medications on cardiovascular outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes and low cardiovascular risk are unclear. We investigated cardiovascular outcomes by treatment group in participants randomly assigned to insulin glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, or sitagliptin, added to baseline metformin, in GRADE (Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Type 2 Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study)., Methods: A total of 5047 participants with a mean±SD age of 57.2±10.0 years, type 2 diabetes duration of 4.0±2.7 years, and low baseline prevalence of cardiovascular disease (myocardial infarction, 5.1%; cerebrovascular accident, 2.0%) were followed for a median of 5 years. Prespecified outcomes included between-group time-to-first event analyses of MACE-3 (composite of major adverse cardiovascular events: cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke), MACE-4 (MACE-3+unstable angina requiring hospitalization or revascularization), MACE-5 (MACE-4+coronary revascularization), MACE-6 (MACE-5+hospitalization for heart failure), and the individual components. MACE outcomes and hospitalization for heart failure in the liraglutide-treated group were compared with the other groups combined using Cox proportional hazards models. MACE-6 was also analyzed as recurrent events using a proportional rate model to compare all treatment groups., Results: We observed no statistically significant differences in the cumulative incidence of first MACE-3, MACE-4, MACE-5, or MACE-6, or their individual components, by randomized treatment group. However, when compared with the other treatment groups combined, the liraglutide-treated group had a significantly lower risk of MACE-5 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.54-0.91]; P =0.021), MACE-6 (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.70 [95% CI, 0.55-0.90]; P =0.021), and hospitalization for heart failure (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.49 [95% CI, 0.28-0.86]; P =0.022). Compared with the liraglutide group, significantly higher rates of recurrent MACE-6 events occurred in the groups treated with glimepiride (rate ratio, 1.61 [95% CI, 1.13-2.29]) or sitagliptin (rate ratio 1.75; [95% CI, 1.24-2.48])., Conclusions: This comparative effectiveness study of a contemporary cohort of adults with type 2 diabetes, largely without established cardiovascular disease, suggests that liraglutide treatment may reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients at relatively low risk compared with other commonly used glucose-lowering medications., Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT01794143., Competing Interests: Disclosures Dr Green reports research support from Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Merck, Bluedrop, Sanofi/Lexicon, and Roche, and serving as an advisor or consultant for Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, Bayer, AstraZeneca, Merck, Hawthorne Effect, Sanofi/Lexicon, Pfizer, Valo, Anji, Vertex, and Novo Nordisk. Dr Everett reports research support from Novo Nordisk and PCORI; consulting fees from the American Heart Association, Eli Lilly and Company, Ipsen Pharmaceuticals, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, and Novo Nordisk; and royalties from UpToDate. Dr Desouza reports serving as a consultant for Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca, Asahi, and Bayer. Dr Inzucchi reports serving as an advisor or consultant to Boehringer Ingelheim, AstraZeneca, Bayer, Novo Nordisk, Merck, Pfizer, Lexicon, Abbott, VTV Therapeutics, and Esperion, and delivering lectures sponsored by Boehringer Ingelheim and AstraZeneca. Dr Tan is a retiree of and receives a pension from Eli Lilly and Company. Dr Utzschneider reports personal fees from Nevro Corporation, research support from Eli Lilly and Company, and research support from AVID, outside the submitted work. Dr Mudaliar reports serving as a speaker for AstraZeneca and a consultant for Bayer. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

Based on self-report in the GRADE diabetes study, cumulative incidence of retinopathy was low over 5 years (3.7 %; 184 of 4098 participants) and did not differ among the 4 treatment groups (glargine 4.0 %, glimepiride 3.2 %, liraglutide 3.7 %, sitagliptin 3.8 %). There were no differences in retinopathy with specific therapies in GRADE. Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01794143., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest DH, LSK, HKS and NY have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background/aims: We present and describe recruitment strategies implemented from 2013 to 2017 across 45 clinical sites in the United States, participating in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study, an unmasked, randomized controlled trial evaluating four glucose-lowering medications added to metformin in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (duration of diabetes <10 years). We examined the yield of participants recruited through Electronic Health Records systems compared to traditional recruitment methods to leverage access to type 2 diabetes patients in primary care., Methods: Site selection criteria included availability of the study population, geographic representation, the ability to recruit and retain a diverse pool of participants including traditionally underrepresented groups, and prior site research experience in diabetes clinical trials. Recruitment initiatives were employed to support and monitor recruitment, such as creation of a Recruitment and Retention Committee, development of criteria for Electronic Health Record systems queries, conduct of remote site visits, development of a public screening website, and other central and local initiatives. Notably, the study supported a dedicated recruitment coordinator at each site to manage local recruitment and facilitate screening of potential participants identified by Electronic Health Record systems., Results: The study achieved the enrollment goal of 5000 participants, meeting its target with Black/African American (20%), Hispanic/Latino (18%), and age ≧60 years (42%) subgroups but not with women (36%). Recruitment required 1 year more than the 3 years originally planned. Sites included academic hospitals, integrated health systems, and Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Participants were enrolled through Electronic Health Record queries (68%), physician referral (13%), traditional mail outreach (7%), TV, radio, flyers, and Internet (7%), and other strategies (5%). Early implementation of targeted Electronic Health Record queries yielded a greater number of eligible participants compared to other recruitment methods. Efforts over time increasingly emphasized engagement with primary care networks., Conclusion: Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness successfully recruited a diverse study population with relatively new onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus, relying to a large extent on the use of Electronic Health Record to screen potential participants. A comprehensive approach to recruitment with frequent monitoring was critical to meet the recruitment goal.

Aims: People with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) have an increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD). We examined depressive symptoms (DS) and diabetes distress (DD) in relation to the estimated 10-year risk of CVD in adults with T2DM enrolled in the GRADE Emotional Distress Substudy., Methods: Linear regression models examined the associations of baseline DS and DD with estimated 10-year risk of CVD using the Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease (ASCVD) risk score, adjusting for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, income, diabetes duration, diabetes-related complications, and HbA1c., Results: A total of 1,605 GRADE participants were included: 54% Non-Latino (NL) White, 18% Latino, 19% NL-Black, 66% male, mean age 57.5 (SD = 10.25) years, diabetes duration 4.2 (SD = 2.8) years, and HbA1c 7.5% (SD = 0.5%). After incorporating covariates, only DS, especially cognitive-affective symptoms, were associated with ASCVD risk (estimate = 0.15 [95% CI: 0.04, 0.025], p = 0.006). Higher DS remained significantly associated with higher ASCVD risk when adding DD to covariates (estimate = 0.19 [95% CI: 0.07, 0.30], p = 0.002). DD was not associated with ASCVD risk when accounting for covariates., Conclusions: Depressive symptoms, particularly cognitive-affective symptoms, are associated with increased 10-year predicted ASCVD risk among adults with early T2DM. Diabetes distress is not significantly associated with the predicted ASCVD risk when accounting for covariates., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: [GCR reports grants from JDRF outside the submitted work. CJH reports grants from NIH, and JDRF outside the submitted work. CP reports grants/contracts from NIH, outside the submitted work. EW reports grants from NIH, participation in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for a NIH P20 center grant, and leadership as a board of director for Chronic Care International, outside the submitted work. JSG reports grants from NIH and JDRF, outside the submitted work. AC reports grants from NIH, outside the submitted work. IB, HKS, AND, AC, RF, and DE have nothing to disclose.]., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a powerful risk factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), conferring a greater relative risk in women than men. We sought to examine sex differences in cardiometabolic risk factors and management in the contemporary cohort represented by the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE)., Research Design and Methods: GRADE enrolled 5047 participants (1837 women, 3210 men) with T2DM on metformin monotherapy at baseline. The current report is a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data collected July 2013 to August 2017., Results: Compared with men, women had a higher mean body mass index (BMI), greater prevalence of severe obesity (BMI≥40 kg/m 2 ), higher mean LDL cholesterol, greater prevalence of low HDL cholesterol, and were less likely to receive statin treatment and achieve target LDL, with a generally greater prevalence of these risk factors in younger women. Women with hypertension were equally likely to achieve blood pressure targets as men; however, women were less likely to receive ACE inhibitors or angiotensin receptor blockers. Women were more likely to be divorced, separated or widowed, and had fewer years of education and lower incomes., Conclusions: This contemporary cohort demonstrates that women with T2DM continue to have a greater burden of cardiometabolic and socioeconomic risk factors than men, particularly younger women. Attention to these persisting disparities is needed to reduce the burden of CVD in women., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01794143)., Competing Interests: Competing interests: JBG reports grants from NIDDK during the conduct of the study; and grants and personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim/Lilly, personal fees from NovoNordisk, grants from Roche, personal fees from Hawthorne Effect/Omada, grants and personal fees from Sanofi/Lexicon, personal fees from Pfizer, grants from Glaxo SmithKline, personal fees from Bayer, grants from Merck, and grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca outside the submitted work. HA reports other from Novo Nordisk during the conduct of the study; and other from Novo Nordisk outside the submitted work. CD reports grants and personal fees from Novo Nordisk, personal fees from Astra Zeneca, grants from Sanofi, grants from the Department of Defense, and consultation for Bayer outside the submitted work. AJA reports personal fees from Novo Nordisk and personal fees from Lilly during the conduct of the study; and personal fees from Medtronic outside the submitted work. DJW reports other from Novo Nordisk outside the submitted work. VRA reports grants and other from Applied Therapeutics, grants and other from Fractyl, grants and other from Novo Nordisk, other from Pfizer, grants and other from Sanofi, other from Eli Lilly, and other from Janssen (Spouse) outside the submitted work. BIG, NMB, JHL, TH, HK-S and CES have nothing to disclose., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2023. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Objective: We examined emotional distress in relation to metformin adherence, overall diabetes self-management, and glycemic control among adults with early type 2 diabetes (T2DM) enrolled in the GRADE study., Methods: Linear regression models examined cross-sectional associations of baseline depression symptoms and diabetes distress with adherence to metformin, self-management, and HbA1c, adjusting for covariates. Cognitive-affective (e.g., sadness) and somatic (e.g., sleep/appetite disturbance) depression symptoms and diabetes distress subscales were also examined., Results: This substudy of 1,739 GRADE participants (56 % Non-Hispanic White, 18 % Non-Hispanic Black, 17 % Hispanic, 68 % male, mean[SD] age = 57.96[10.22] years, diabetes duration = 4.21[2.81] years, and HbA1c = 7.51[0.48]) found that the prevalence of clinically significant depression and diabetes distress was 8.7 % and 25 %, respectively. Fully adjusted models showed that depression symptoms were associated with lower self-management (p < 0.0001); this effect was only significant for somatic symptoms. Diabetes distress was associated with lower adherence (p = 0.0001) and self-management (p < 0.0001); effects were significant for all subscales, except physician-related distress. No significant relationships of total depression symptom severity or diabetes distress with HbA1c were found., Conclusions: Depression symptoms and diabetes distress were robustly associated with problematic diabetes self-management among participants in GRADE. These findings highlight the need for routine assessment of depression symptoms and diabetes distress early in T2DM care., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest JSG reports grants from NIH and JDRF, outside the submitted work. CJH reports grants from NIDDK, NIA, and JDRF outside the submitted work. EAW reports grants from NIH/NIDDK, participation in a data safety monitoring board or advisory board for a NIH P20 center grant, and leadership as a board of director for Chronic Care International, outside the submitted work. HKS, IB, GCR, AND, AW, DE, JBF and AC have nothing to disclose., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Data are lacking on the comparative effectiveness of commonly used glucose-lowering medications, when added to metformin, with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease outcomes in persons with type 2 diabetes., Methods: We assessed the comparative effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications, added to metformin, in achieving and maintaining a glycated hemoglobin level of less than 7.0% in participants with type 2 diabetes. The randomly assigned therapies were insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin. Prespecified secondary outcomes with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease included hypertension and dyslipidemia, confirmed moderately or severely increased albuminuria or an estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m 2 of body-surface area, diabetic peripheral neuropathy assessed with the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument, cardiovascular events (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE], hospitalization for heart failure, or an aggregate outcome of any cardiovascular event), and death. Hazard ratios are presented with 95% confidence limits that are not adjusted for multiple comparisons., Results: During a mean 5.0 years of follow-up in 5047 participants, there were no material differences among the interventions with respect to the development of hypertension or dyslipidemia or with respect to microvascular outcomes; the mean overall rate (i.e., events per 100 participant-years) of moderately increased albuminuria levels was 2.6, of severely increased albuminuria levels 1.1, of renal impairment 2.9, and of diabetic peripheral neuropathy 16.7. The treatment groups did not differ with respect to MACE (overall rate, 1.0), hospitalization for heart failure (0.4), death from cardiovascular causes (0.3), or all deaths (0.6). There were small differences with respect to rates of any cardiovascular disease, with 1.9, 1.9, 1.4, and 2.0 in the glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin groups, respectively. When one treatment was compared with the combined results of the other three treatments, the hazard ratios for any cardiovascular disease were 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 1.3) in the glargine group, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4) in the glimepiride group, 0.7 (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9) in the liraglutide group, and 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.5) in the sitagliptin group., Conclusions: In participants with type 2 diabetes, the incidences of microvascular complications and death were not materially different among the four treatment groups. The findings indicated possible differences among the groups in the incidence of any cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.)., (Copyright © 2022 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Background: The comparative effectiveness of glucose-lowering medications for use with metformin to maintain target glycated hemoglobin levels in persons with type 2 diabetes is uncertain., Methods: In this trial involving participants with type 2 diabetes of less than 10 years' duration who were receiving metformin and had glycated hemoglobin levels of 6.8 to 8.5%, we compared the effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications. We randomly assigned participants to receive insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), the sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, or sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor. The primary metabolic outcome was a glycated hemoglobin level, measured quarterly, of 7.0% or higher that was subsequently confirmed, and the secondary metabolic outcome was a confirmed glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5%., Results: A total of 5047 participants (19.8% Black and 18.6% Hispanic or Latinx) who had received metformin for type 2 diabetes were followed for a mean of 5.0 years. The cumulative incidence of a glycated hemoglobin level of 7.0% or higher (the primary metabolic outcome) differed significantly among the four groups (P<0.001 for a global test of differences across groups); the rates with glargine (26.5 per 100 participant-years) and liraglutide (26.1) were similar and lower than those with glimepiride (30.4) and sitagliptin (38.1). The differences among the groups with respect to a glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5% (the secondary outcome) paralleled those of the primary outcome. There were no material differences with respect to the primary outcome across prespecified subgroups defined according to sex, age, or race or ethnic group; however, among participants with higher baseline glycated hemoglobin levels there appeared to be an even greater benefit with glargine, liraglutide, and glimepiride than with sitagliptin. Severe hypoglycemia was rare but significantly more frequent with glimepiride (in 2.2% of the participants) than with glargine (1.3%), liraglutide (1.0%), or sitagliptin (0.7%). Participants who received liraglutide reported more frequent gastrointestinal side effects and lost more weight than those in the other treatment groups., Conclusions: All four medications, when added to metformin, decreased glycated hemoglobin levels. However, glargine and liraglutide were significantly, albeit modestly, more effective in achieving and maintaining target glycated hemoglobin levels. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.)., (Copyright © 2022 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

Aims: We evaluated differences in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) enrolled in the GRADE study at VA vs non-VA sites, focusing on cardiovascular risk factors and rates of diabetes care target achievements., Methods: We compared baseline characteristics between participants at VA (n = 1216) and non-VA (n = 3831) sites, stratifying analyses by cardiovascular disease (CVD) history., Results: VA and non-VA participants had similar diabetes duration (4.0 years), HbA1c (7.5%), and BMI (34 kg/m 2 ); however, VA participants had more individuals ≥ 65 years (37.3% vs 19.8%, p < 0.001), men (90.0% vs 55.2%, p < 0.001), hypertension (75.8% vs 63.6%, p < 0.001), hyperlipidemia (76.6% vs 64.6%, p < 0.001), current smokers (19.0% vs 12.1%, p < 0.001), nephropathy (20.4% vs 17.0%, p < 0.05), albuminuria (18.4% vs 15.1%, p < 0.05), and CVD (10.4% vs 5.2%, p < 0.001). In those without CVD, more VA participants were treated with lipid (70.8% vs 59.5%, p < 0.001) and blood pressure (74.9% vs 65.4%, p < 0.001) lowering medications, and had LDL-C < 70 mg/dl (32.9% vs 24.2%, p < 0.05). Among those with CVD, more VA participants had BP < 140/90 (80.2% vs 70.1%, p < 0.05) after adjusting for demographics., Conclusion: GRADE participants at VA sites had more T2DM complications, greater CVD risk and were more likely to be treated with medications to reduce it, leading to more LDL-C at goal than non-VA participants, highlighting differences in diabetes populations and care., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: We compared HbA1c values obtained from capillary blood collection kits versus venous whole blood collections in study participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes., Methods: A total of 122 subjects, 64 with type 2 diabetes participating in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) Study and 58 with type 1 diabetes from the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) Study, participated in the validation study. Capillary tubes were filled by fingerstick by the participants on the same day as the collection of venous whole blood samples in EDTA-containing test tubes and were mailed to the central laboratory. HbA1c in all samples was measured with the same high-performance liquid chromatography. GRADE participants also completed a questionnaire on the ease of performing capillary collections., Results: Participants from 22 clinical centers (GRADE n = 5, EDIC n = 17) were between 35 and 86 years of age, with 52% male and diverse race/ethnicities. Venous HbA1c results ranged between 5.4-11.9% (35.5-106.6 mmol/mol) with corresponding capillary results ranging between 4.2-11.9% (22.4-106.6 mmol/mol). The venous and capillary results were highly correlated (R2 = 0.993) and 96.7% differed by ≤0.2% (2.2 mmol/mol). Of participants surveyed, 69% indicated that the instructions and collection were easy to follow and 97% felt the collection method would be easy to do at home., Conclusions: The capillary blood HbA1c results compared well with the conventional venous whole blood results. The capillary kits can be employed in other studies to reduce interruption of critical data collection and potentially to augment clinical care when in-person visits are not possible., Competing Interests: I have read the journal’s policy and the authors of this manuscript have the following competing interests: DMN, HKS, BHB, NY, GL, MWS, JML report grants from NIDDK/NIH during the conduct of the study. VLA, PM, CL, MJ, and XG have nothing to disclose. There are no patents, products in development or marketed products associated with this research to declare. The GRADE Study received material support in the form of donated medications and supplies provided by Becton, Dickinson and Company, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Merck, NovoNordisk, Roche Diagnostics, and Sanofi. Industry contributors have had no role in the DCCT/EDIC study but have provided free or discounted supplies or equipment to support participants’ adherence to the study: Abbott Diabetes Care (Alameda, CA), Animas (Westchester, PA), Bayer Diabetes Care (North America Headquarters, Tarrytown, NY), Becton, Dickinson and Company (Franklin Lakes, NJ), Eli Lilly (Indianapolis, IN), Extend Nutrition (St. Louis, MO), Insulet Corporation (Bedford, MA), Lifescan (Milpitas, CA), Medtronic Diabetes (Minneapolis, MN), Nipro Home Diagnostics (Ft. Lauderdale, FL), Nova Diabetes Care (Billerica, MA), Omron (Shelton, CT), Perrigo Diabetes Care (Allegan, MI), Roche Diabetes Care (Indianapolis, IN), and Sanofi-Aventis (Bridgewater, NJ). This does not alter our adherence to PLOS ONE policies on sharing data and materials."

Objective: Type 2 diabetes is a risk factor for cognitive impairment. We examined the relation of glycemia, lipids, blood pressure (BP), hypertension history, and statin use with cognition in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE)., Research Design and Methods: Cross-sectional analyses from GRADE at baseline examined the association of glycemia (hemoglobin A 1c [HbA 1c ]), LDL, systolic BP (SBP) and diastolic BP (DBP), hypertension history, and statin use with cognition assessed by the Spanish English Verbal Learning Test, letter and animal fluency tests, and Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST)., Results: Among 5,047 GRADE participants, 5,018 (99.4%) completed cognitive assessments. Their mean age was 56.7 ± 10.0 years, and 36.4% were women. Mean diabetes duration was 4.0 ± 2.7 years. HbA 1c was not related to cognition. Higher LDL was related to modestly worse DSST scores, whereas statin use was related to modestly better DSST scores. SBP between 120 and 139 mmHg and DBP between 80 and 89 mmHg were related to modestly better DSST scores. Hypertension history was not related to cognition., Conclusions: In people with type 2 diabetes of a mean duration of <5 years, lower LDL and statin use were related to modestly better executive cognitive function. SBP levels in the range of 120-139 mmHg and DBP levels in the range of 80-89 mmHg, but not lower levels, were related to modestly better executive function. These differences may not be clinically significant., (© 2021 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Emotional distress, including depression and diabetes-specific distress (e.g., feeling overwhelmed by living with diabetes, feelings of failure related to diabetes self-care), is a significant and prevalent problem for patients with type 2 diabetes. Both depression and diabetes distress have been associated with metabolic/glycemic control, diabetes complications, mortality, and quality of life. Recent findings further suggest that risk for emotional distress is influenced by diabetes treatment. The GRADE Study (Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study) is generating prospective data that will provide a unique opportunity to examine the relationships between emotional distress, diabetes treatment, and outcomes in an experimental design. The GRADE study is a randomized clinical trial that will compare the metabolic effects of four common anti-hyperglycemic drugs when combined with metformin. This sub-study recruited a subset (n = 1739) of GRADE participants and will examine patient-level variation in baseline emotional distress as a predictor of glycemic control and other health outcomes, independent of treatment effects. The study will also provide an experimental examination of treatment regimen effects on emotional distress over time as part of the overall evaluation of comparative effectiveness. Evaluation of emotional distress using validated measures will allow us to disentangle the roles of depressive symptoms and diabetes distress, factors that share significant overlap but require distinct approaches to screening and treatment. Study findings may directly influence practice decisions regarding screening and treatment for emotional distress as part of diabetes care. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01794143., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Aims: The Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes - A Comparative Effectiveness (GRADE) trial is a randomized clinical trial comparing glycemic effects of four diabetes medications added to metformin in type 2 diabetes (T2D). Microvascular and macrovascular diseases are secondary outcomes. We evaluated the prevalence and risk factor relationships for microvascular and macrovascular complications in the GRADE cohort at study entry., Methods: Complication prevalence and risk factors were analyzed based on data from screening in all consenting participants meeting GRADE eligibility. Logistic regression and Z-statistics were used to assess risk factor relationships with complications., Results: We enrolled 5047 T2D participants [mean age 57 years; 36% female; mean known T2D duration 4 years (all < 10 years); mean HbA1c 8.0% (∼64 mmol/mol) at screening]. Urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (ACR) ≥ 30 mg/gram was present in 15.9% participants; peripheral neuropathy (by Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument) in 21.5%; cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy by electrocardiography-derived indices in 9.7%; self-reported retinopathy in 1.0%. Myocardial infarction ascertained by self-report or electrocardiogram was present in 7.3%, and self-reported history of stroke in 2.0%., Conclusions: In the GRADE cohort with < 10 years of T2D and a mean HbA1c of 8.0%, diabetes complications were present in a substantial fraction of participants, more so than might otherwise have been expected., Competing Interests: Contribution statement All authors affirm that authorship is merited based on the ICMJE authorship criteria. IB, JPC, CD, JBG, HKS, MEL, KJM, RP-B, EBS, and DJW contributed to the conception and design of this manuscript. IB, JPS, CD, JBG, HKS, KJM, JP, ERS, RP-B and EZS contributed to the acquisition of data for this manuscript. IB contributed to the statistical analysis of data for this manuscript. CB, IB, RMC, JPC, CD, JBG, MSK, HKS, KJM, RP-B, ERS, EBS, EZS, and DJW contributed to the interpretation of data and results for this manuscript. CD, KJM, RP-B, and ERS contributed to the supervision and management of research for this manuscript. IB, CD, HKS, HKS, MEL, KJM, and RP-B contributed to the drafting of this manuscript. CB, IB, RMC, JPC, CD, JBG, MSK, HKS, KJM, JP, RP-B, ERS, EBS, EZS, and DJS contributed to the critical review of this manuscript. IB, KJM and RP-B are guarantors of this work, and as such, had full access to all the data in the study and take responsibility for the integrity of the data and accuracy of the data analysis., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: The G lycemia R eduction A pproaches in D iabetes: A Comparative E ffectiveness (GRADE) study has enrolled a racially and ethnically diverse population with type 2 diabetes, performed extensive phenotyping, and randomly assigned the participants to one of four second-line diabetes medications. The continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) substudy has been added to determine whether there are racial/ethnic differences in the relationship between average glucose (AG) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). CGM will also be used to compare time in target range, glucose variability, and the frequency and duration of hypoglycemia across study groups. Methods: The observational CGM substudy will enroll up to 1800 of the 5047 GRADE study participants from the four treatment groups, including as many as 450 participants from each of 4 racial/ethnic minority groups to be compared: Hispanic White, non-Hispanic White, non-Hispanic African American, and non-Hispanic Other. CGM will be performed for 2 weeks in proximity to a GRADE annual visit, during which an oral glucose tolerance test will be performed and HbA1c and glycated albumin measured. Indicators of interindividual variation in red blood cell turnover, based on specialized erythrocyte measurements, will also be measured to explore the potential causes of interindividual HbA1c variations. Conclusions: The GRADE CGM substudy will provide new insights into whether differences exist in the relationship between HbA1c and AG among different racial/ethnic groups and whether glycemic profiles differ among frequently used diabetes medications and their potential clinical implications. Understanding such differences is important for clinical care and adjustment of diabetes medications in patients of different races or ethnicities.

Objective: GRADE (Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study) is a 36-center unmasked, parallel treatment group, randomized controlled trial evaluating four diabetes medications added to metformin in people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). We report baseline characteristics and compare GRADE participants to a National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) cohort., Research Design and Methods: Participants were age ≥30 years at the time of diagnosis, with duration of T2DM <10 years, HbA 1c 6.8-8.5% (51-69 mmol/mol), prescribed metformin monotherapy, and randomized to glimepiride, sitagliptin, liraglutide, or insulin glargine., Results: At baseline, GRADE's 5,047 randomized participants were 57.2 ± 10.0 years of age, 63.6% male, with racial/ethnic breakdown of 65.7% white, 19.8% African American, 3.6% Asian, 2.7% Native American, 7.6% other or unknown, and 18.4% Hispanic/Latino. Duration of diabetes was 4.2 ± 2.8 years, with mean HbA 1c of 7.5 ± 0.5% (58 ± 5.3 mmol/mol), BMI of 34.3 ± 6.8 kg/m 2 , and metformin dose of 1,944 ± 204 mg/day. Among the cohort, 67% reported a history of hypertension, 72% a history of hyperlipidemia, and 6.5% a history of heart attack or stroke. Applying GRADE inclusion criteria to NHANES indicates enrollment of a representative cohort with T2DM on metformin monotherapy (NHANES cohort average age, 57.9 years; mean HbA 1c , 7.4% [57 mmol/mol]; BMI, 33.2 kg/m 2 ; duration, 4.2 ± 2.5 years; and 7.2% with a history of cardiovascular disease)., Conclusions: The GRADE cohort represents patients with T2DM treated with metformin requiring a second diabetes medication. GRADE will inform decisions about the clinical effectiveness of the addition of four classes of diabetes medications to metformin., (© 2019 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Background and Purpose: The National Diabetes Education Program created the 4 Steps to Manage Your Diabetes for Life (4 Steps) booklet to help patients with diabetes learn the basics of self-management and care recommendations. The purpose of this study is to explore the impact of 4 Steps on participants' diabetes management knowledge and self-efficacy in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE)., Methods: A sample of 348 adults with type 2 diabetes enrolled in GRADE was included in this analysis. Participants took a pretest, were sent home with 4 Steps, then took a posttest at their next visit. The Wilcoxon signed rank test was used to detect differences in knowledge and self-efficacy between scale scores pre- and posttest., Conclusions: Analyses revealed increases in participants' diabetes management knowledge (p < .001) and self-efficacy (p < .001) from pre- to posttest. Participants who reported no formal previous diabetes education showed a statistically significant increase in knowledge scores compared to those with previous diabetes education (p < .05)., Implications for Practice: Appropriate, relevant diabetes education materials may improve self-management knowledge and self-efficacy among adults with type 2 diabetes. Providers should feel confident using 4 Steps as a resource for clinical practice., (©2017 American Association of Nurse Practitioners.)