Trial reportDiabetes, obesity & metabolism2025
The effect of HbA1c variability on the efficacy of intensive blood pressure control in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Trial report in Diabetes, obesity & metabolism, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effect of HbA1c variability on the efficacy of intensive blood pressure control in patients with type 2 diabetes.Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Trial
- Correction to "The effect of HbA1c variability on the efficacy of intensive blood pressure control in patients with type 2 diabetes".Diabetes, obesity & metabolism · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
aimsThe efficacy of intensive blood pressure (BP) control remains controversial, and the variability of HbA1c was a risk factor for macrovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes. We investigated whether the HbA1c variability modifies the efficacy of intensive BP control.
methodsData from the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure (ACCORD-BP) trial was utilized. K-means clustering was used to cluster patients into three groups based on the HbA1c variability score and baseline HbA1c values. Cox proportional hazard models and generalized linear models were used to measure the subgroup differences in intensive BP control treatment effects. The primary outcome was a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, or death from cardiovascular causes.
resultsIn patients with low HbA1c variability rather than medium or high HbA1c variability, intensive BP control reduced the risk of the primary outcome on a relative scale (HR 0.60, 95%CI 0.40-0.90, p interaction was 0.03), non-fatal MI (HR 0.61, 95% CI 0.37-1.00, p interaction was 0.04) and stroke (HR 0.19, 95%CI 0.05-0.64, p interaction was 0.02) or absolute scale. Regardless of the variability group, intensive BP control did not reduce the risk of cardiovascular or all-cause mortality (p interaction >0.05) both on relative and absolute risk scales.
conclusionHbA1c variability had effect on the efficacy of intensive BP control and intensive BP control brought a significant macrovascular benefit in patients with type 2 diabetes and low HbA1c variability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.