You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 169 No. 13, July 13, 2009 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Editor's Correspondence
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related article
 •Related letters
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Nutritional and Metabolic Disorders
 •Lipids and Lipid Disorders
 •Nutritional and Metabolic Disorders, Other
 •Cardiovascular System
 •Quality of Care
 •Evidence-Based Medicine
 •Cardiovascular Disease/ Myocardial Infarction
 •Drug Therapy
 •Drug Therapy, Other
 •Endocrine Diseases
 •Diabetes Mellitus
 •Hypertension
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

COMMENTS AND OPINIONS
Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: One Extreme to Another—Reply

Stephen Havas, MD, MPH, MS

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

In reply

Dr Hirsch raises important points. Pharmaceutical companies and the American Diabetes Association (ADA) continue to promote using glucose level–lowering drugs in type 2 diabetes mellitus to attain an HbA1c level below 7% despite recurring evidence of potential harm and scant evidence of benefit. Both influenced the National Committee on Quality Assurance (NCQA) to approve a performance measure for that level.1 Yet randomized clinical trials (RCTs) have not demonstrated significant benefits from glucose level–lowering agents in type 2 diabetes except for metformin. Therefore, it makes no sense for third-party payers to hold practitioners to a non–evidence-based measure of an HbA1c level below 7%.

Since my commentary was published,2 the Veterans Affairs Diabetes Trial (VADT) results appeared, providing further RCT evidence of the lack of benefit of lowering HbA1c levels.3 The VADT randomized veterans with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes to intensive control or standard . . . [Full Text of this Article]


AUTHOR INFORMATION


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLE

The ACCORD Trial and Control of Blood Glucose Level in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Time to Challenge Conventional Wisdom
Stephen Havas
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(2):150-154.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

RELATED LETTERS

Changing the Diabetes Treatment Paradigm
Ronald Hirsch
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(13):1246.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: One Extreme to Another
Sarfraz Zaidi
Arch Intern Med. 2009;169(13):1246-1247.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  






HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2009 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.