Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
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.
This paper was prepared for publication by Robert Turner, Rury Holman, Irene Stratton, Carole Cull, Valeria Frighi, Susan Manley, David Matthews, Andrew Neil, Heather McElroy, Eva Kohner, Charles Fox, David Hadden, and David Wright.
UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group Correspondence to: Professor R
Turner, UK Prospective Diabetes Study Group, Diabetes Research
Laboratories, Radcliffe Infirmary, Oxford OX2
6HE
Members of the
study group are given at the end of the paper.
Objective: To determine whether tight control of
blood pressure prevents macrovascular and microvascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Type 2 diabetes and hypertension are commonly associated
conditions, both of which carry an increased risk of cardiovascular and
renal disease.1-6 The prevalence of hypertension in type 2 diabetes is higher than that in the general population, especially in
younger patients.7-9 At the age of 45 around 40% of
patients with type 2 diabetes are hypertensive, the proportion
increasing to 60% by the age of 75.7-9 Hypertension
increases the already high risk of cardiovascular disease associated
with type 2 diabetes
2 3 6 10
and is also a risk factor
for the development of microalbuminuria
11 12
and
retinopathy.13
In the general population treatment to lower blood pressure reduces the
incidence of stroke and myocardial infarction,
14 15
particularly in elderly people.
16 17
In patients with
type 1 diabetes who have microalbuminuria or overt nephropathy strict control of blood pressure reduces urinary albumin excretion and deterioration in renal function.
18 19
Lowering blood
pressure also decreases albuminuria in type 2 diabetes,20
but whether it also reduces the risk of end stage renal disease or of
cardiac disease is not known.
We report results from the hypertension in diabetes study, a
multicentre, randomised, controlled trial (embedded within the UK
prospective diabetes study) designed to determine whether tight blood
pressure control (aiming for a blood pressure of <150/85 mm Hg)
reduces morbidity and mortality in hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes.21
We studied hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes who had been
recruited to the UK prospective diabetes study.
22 23
General practitioners were asked to refer patients aged 25-65 with
newly diagnosed diabetes to 23 participating centres. A total of 5102 were recruited as they met the study's entry criterion (fasting plasma
glucose concentration >6 mmol/l on two mornings), were willing to
join, and did not meet the exclusion criteria for the study.
Exclusion criteria were ketonuria >3 mmol/l; a history of myocardial
infarction in the previous year; current angina or heart failure; more
than one major vascular episode; serum creatinine concentration
>175 µmol/l; retinopathy requiring laser treatment; malignant
hypertension; an uncorrected endocrine abnormality; an occupation which
would preclude insulin treatment (such as heavy goods vehicle driver);
a severe concurrent illness likely to limit life or require extensive
systemic treatment; or inadequate understanding or unwillingness to
enter the study.
22 23
The patients were treated by diet
alone for 3 months.24 Patients who remained hyperglycaemic
(fasting plasma glucose 6.1-15.0 mmol/l) without diabetic symptoms
were randomly allocated conventional blood glucose control, primarily
by diet, or intensive control (aiming for a fasting plasma glucose
concentration <6.0 mmol/l) with additional sulphonylurea,
insulin, or metformin treatment. Details of the protocol are
published.
22 23
Of the 4297 patients recruited to the 20 centres participating in the
hypertension in diabetes study, 243 had either died or were lost to
follow up before the start of the hypertension study in 1987 (fig 1).
Of the remaining 4054 patients, 1544 (38%) had hypertension, defined
in 727 patients as a systolic blood pressure Table 1.
![]()
Abstract
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and methods
Results
Discussion
References
Design: Randomised controlled trial comparing tight
control of blood pressure aiming at a blood pressure of
<150/85 mm Hg (with the use of an angiotensin converting enzyme
inhibitor captopril or a
blocker atenolol as main treatment) with
less tight control aiming at a blood pressure of <180/105 mm Hg.
Setting: 20 hospital based clinics in England,
Scotland, and Northern Ireland.
Subjects: 1148 hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes (mean age 56, mean blood pressure at entry 160/94 mm Hg); 758 patients were allocated to tight control of blood pressure and 390 patients to less tight control with a median follow up of 8.4 years.
Main outcome measures: Predefined clinical end
points, fatal and non-fatal, related to diabetes, deaths related to diabetes, and all cause mortality. Surrogate measures of microvascular disease included urinary albumin excretion and retinal photography.
Results: Mean blood pressure during follow up was
significantly reduced in the group assigned tight blood pressure control (144/82 mm Hg) compared with the group assigned to less tight
control (154/87 mm Hg) (P<0.0001). Reductions in risk in the group
assigned to tight control compared with that assigned to less tight
control were 24% in diabetes related end points (95% confidence
interval 8% to 38%) (P=0.0046), 32% in deaths related to diabetes
(6% to 51%) (P=0.019), 44% in strokes (11% to 65%) (P=0.013), and
37% in microvascular end points (11% to 56%) (P=0.0092),
predominantly owing to a reduced risk of retinal photocoagulation.
There was a non-significant reduction in all cause mortality. After
nine years of follow up the group assigned to tight blood pressure
control also had a 34% reduction in risk in the proportion of patients
with deterioration of retinopathy by two steps (99% confidence
interval 11% to 50%) (P=0.0004) and a 47% reduced risk (7% to 70%)
(P=0.004) of deterioration in visual acuity by three lines of the early
treatment of diabetic retinopathy study (ETDRS) chart. After nine years
of follow up 29% of patients in the group assigned to tight control
required three or more treatments to lower blood pressure to achieve
target blood pressures.
Conclusion: Tight blood pressure control in patients
with hypertension and type 2 diabetes achieves a clinically important reduction in the risk of deaths related to diabetes, complications related to diabetes, progression of diabetic retinopathy, and deterioration in visual acuity.
Key messages
![]()
Introduction
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and methods
Results
Discussion
References
![]()
Subjects and methods
Top
Abstract
Introduction
Subjects and methods
Results
Discussion
References
160 mm Hg and/or a
diastolic blood pressure
90 mm Hg or in 421 patients receiving
antihypertensive treatment as a systolic pressure of
150 mm Hg
and/or a diastolic pressure
85 mm Hg (fig 1). Patients were
enrolled on the basis of the mean of three blood pressure measurements
taken at consecutive clinic visits. The exclusion criteria were a
clinical requirement for strict blood pressure control (previous
stroke, accelerated hypertension, cardiac failure, or renal failure) or
blockade (myocardial infarction in the previous year or current
angina); severe vascular disease (more than one major vascular
episode); a severe concurrent illness or contraindications to
blockers (asthma, intermittent claudication, foot ulcers, or
amputations); pregnancy; or unwillingness to join the study. Of the
1544 hypertensive patients, 252 were excluded and 144 patients did not
enter the study. A total of 1148 patients (637 men (55%)) with a mean
age of 56.4 (SD 8.1) years entered the hypertension in diabetes study
between 1987 and 1991.21 Table 1 shows their
characteristics at randomisation to blood pressure control
policy.

View larger version (38K):
[in a new window]
Fig 1.
Selection and random allocation of
patients to treatment in hypertension in diabetes study
Treatment protocol
Randomisation stratified for those with or without previous
treatment for hypertension was performed by the coordinating centre. In
all 758 patients were allocated tight control of blood pressure, aiming
for a blood pressure <150/85 mm Hg (400 patients were given an
angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor (captopril) and 358 a
blocker (atenolol) as the main treatment); 390 patients were allocated
a less tight control of blood pressure, aiming for a blood pressure
<180/105 mm Hg but avoiding treatment with angiotensin converting
enzyme inhibitors or
blockers (fig 1). Sealed opaque envelopes were
used and checked as described for the UK prospective diabetes
study.23 The original blood pressure target of
200/105 mm Hg in the group assigned to less tight control was reduced
in 1992 by the steering committee of the hypertension in diabetes study after publication of the results of studies in elderly, non-diabetic subjects during 1991-2.
16 25 26
Randomisation produced
balanced numbers of patients allocated to the various glucose and blood pressure treatment combinations for the UK prospective diabetes study
and hypertension in diabetes study.
Clinic visits
Patients visited study clinics every 3-4 months. At each visit
plasma glucose concentration, blood pressure, and body weight were
measured, and treatments to control blood pressure and blood glucose
concentration were noted and adjusted if target values were not met. If
treatments and target blood pressures were not in accord with the
protocol, the coordinating centre sent letters about affected patients
to the clinical centres requesting appropriate action. A central record
of all apparent protocol deviations was maintained. Symptoms including
any drug side effects and clinical events were noted. Physicians
recorded hypoglycaemic episodes as minor if the patient was able to
treat the symptoms unaided and as major if third party or medical
intervention was necessary.
Blood pressure measurements
Blood pressure (diastolic phase 5) while the patient was sitting
and had rested for at least five minutes was measured by a trained
nurse with a Copal UA-251 or a Takeda UA-751 electronic auscultatory
blood pressure reading machine (Andrew Stephens, Brighouse, West
Yorkshire) or with a Hawksley random zero sphygmomanometer (Hawksley,
Lancing, Sussex) in patients with atrial fibrillation. The first
reading was discarded and the mean of the next three consecutive
readings with a coefficient of variation below 15% was used in the
study, with additional readings if required. Monthly quality assurance
measurements have shown the mean difference between Takeda and Hawksley
machines to be 1 (4) mm Hg or less.
Clinical examination
At entry to the UK prospective diabetes study and subsequently
every three years all patients had a clinical examination which included retinal colour photography, ophthalmoscopy, measurement of
visual acuity, assessment of peripheral and autonomic neuropathy, chest
radiography, electrocardiography, and measurement of brachial and
posterior tibial blood pressure using Doppler techniques. Annual direct
ophthalmoscopy was also carried out. Every year a fasting blood
sample was taken to measure glycated haemoglobin (haemoglobin
A1c), plasma creatinine concentration, and concentrations of urea, immunoreactive insulin, and insulin antibodies; random urine
samples were taken for measurement of albumin concentration.
Biochemistry
Biochemical methods have been reported
previously.
23 27
Urinary albumin concentration was
measured by an immunoturbidimetric method with a normal reference range
of 1.4 mg/l to 36.5 mg/l.27 Microalbuminuria has been
defined as a urinary albumin concentration of
50 mg/l28 and clinical grade proteinuria as a urinary
albumin concentration of
300 mg/l.
Clinical end points
Twenty one clinical end points were predefined in the study
protocol.22 All available clinical information was
gathered for possible end points
for example, copies of admission
notes, operation records, death certificates, and necropsy reports.
Copies of these, without reference to the patient's allocated or
actual treatment, were formally presented to two independent physicians who allocated an appropriate code from the ninth revision of the international classification of diseases (ICD-9) if the criteria for
any particular clinical end point had been met. Any disagreement between the two assessors was discussed and the evidence reviewed. If
agreement was not possible the information was submitted to a panel
of two further independent assessors for final arbitration. The closing
date for the study was 30 September 1997.
Details of subclinical, surrogate
variables have been published.23
Statistical analysis
Analysis was on an intention to treat basis, comparing patients
allocated to tight and less tight blood pressure control. Patients
allocated to tight control with angiotensin converting enzyme
inhibitors or
blockers were pooled in this paper for analysis. They
are compared in the accompanying paper.29 Life table
analyses were performed with log rank tests, and hazard ratios were
obtained from Cox's proportional hazards models and used to estimate
relative risks. Survival function estimates were calculated using the
product limit (Kaplan-Meier) method. In the text relative risks are
quoted as risk reductions and significance tests were two sided. For
aggregate end points 95% confidence intervals are quoted, whereas for
single end points 99% confidence intervals are quoted to allow for
potential type 1 errors. Similarly, 99% confidence intervals were used
to assess surrogate end points that were measured at triennial visits.
Mean (SD), geometric mean (1 SD interval), or median (interquartile
range) values are quoted for the biometric and biochemical variables,
with values from Wilcoxon, t, or
2 tests
for comparisons. Risk reductions for surrogate end points were derived
from frequency tables. The overall values for blood pressure during a
period were assessed for each patient as the mean during that period
and for each allocation as the mean of patients with data in the
allocation. Control of blood pressure was assessed in patients
allocated to the two groups who had data at nine years of follow up.
Data monitoring and ethics committee
The data monitoring and ethics committee examined the end points
every six months to consider halting or modifying the study according
to predetermined guidelines. These included a difference of three or
more standard deviations by log rank test in the rate of deaths related
to diabetes or deaths related to diabetes and major illness between the
group assigned to tight control and that assigned to less tight control
or between the group given captopril and that given
atenolol.22 One of the stopping criteria was attained
immediately before the scheduled end of the
study.
|
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Follow up
The median follow up to death, the last known date at which vital
status was known, or to the end of the trial was 8.4 years. The vital
status was known at the end of the trial in all patients except 14 (1%) who had emigrated and a further 33 patients (3%) who could not
be contacted in the last year of the study for assessment of clinical
end points.
Control of blood
pressure
The mean (SD) blood pressure in the two groups was similar at
randomisation (table 1). Mean blood pressure in patients over nine
years of follow up was 144 (14)/82 (7) mm Hg in the 297 patients under
tight control and 154 (16)/87 (7) mm Hg in the 156 assigned to less
tight control (P<0.0001 in both cases) (fig 2). The mean differences
in systolic and diastolic pressures were 10 (95% confidence interval 9 to 12) mm Hg and 5 (4 to 6) mm Hg respectively. Cross sectional blood
pressure in patients with data at each year were similar to the data in
patients with nine years of follow up. At nine years the proportion of
patients with both a systolic blood pressure of <150 mm Hg and a
diastolic blood pressure of <85 mm Hg was 56% in the group assigned
to tight control and 37% in the group assigned to less tight control.
The proportion of patients who had a mean blood pressure of
<180/105 mm Hg was 96% and 91% respectively.
|
|
Compliance with allocated treatment
In the group assigned to tight control of blood pressure patients
took their allocated treatment for 77% of the total person years and
did not take antihypertensive treatments for 6% of the total person
years. In the other group patients did not take any antihypertensive
treatments for 43% of the total person years; they took an angiotensin
converting enzyme inhibitor for 11% of the total person years and a
blocker for 9%.
Figure 3 shows the increasing number of antihypertensive agents required to maintain blood pressure lower than target levels. At nine years 29% of those assigned to tight blood pressure control required three or more agents in comparison with 11% of patients in the other group. The proportion of patients taking nifedipine was 32% in the group assigned to less tight blood pressure control and 31% and 40% in the group assigned to tight blood pressure control taking captopril and atenolol respectively.
Control of blood glucose
Haemoglobin A1c in the groups assigned to tight and
less tight blood pressure control over 1-4 years was 7.2% and 7.2%
respectively and over 5-8 years 8.3% and 8.2% respectively.
Aggregate clinical end points
Any clinical end point related to diabetes
Patients allocated to tight compared with less tight control of
blood pressure had a 24% reduction in risk of developing any end point
related to diabetes, (P=0.0046) (figs 4 and
5).
|
|
|
Deaths related to diabetes and all cause mortality
Patients in the group assigned to tight blood pressure control
compared with those in the other group had a 32% reduction in risk of
mortality from diseases substantially increased by diabetes (P=0.019),
two thirds of which were cardiovascular diseases. The reduction in all
cause mortality was not significant (fig 4). The trend to protection
against microvascular disease and death related to diabetes became
evident within the first three years of allocation to tight control
(figs 4-7).
Myocardial infarction, stroke and peripheral vascular disease
The group assigned to tight blood pressure control had a
non-significant reduction in risk of 21% in the aggregate end point for myocardial infarction (table 2 and fig 7). This group also had a
44% reduction in risk of stroke, fatal and non-fatal, compared with
the group assigned to less tight blood pressure control (P=0.013). Amputations were not significantly reduced, with a trend to reductions in risk of 49%. One patient in each group died of peripheral vascular
disease.
When all macrovascular diseases were combined, including myocardial infarction, sudden death, stroke, and peripheral vascular disease, the group assigned to tight blood pressure control had a 34% reduction in risk compared with the group assigned to less tight control (P=0.019).
|
|
Microvascular disease
The group assigned to tight blood pressure control had a 37%
reduction in risk of microvascular disease compared with the less tight
group (P=0.0092) (figs 4 and 7).
Numbers needed to treat
The number of patients who needed to be treated over 10 years to
prevent one patient developing any complication was 6.1 (95% confidence interval 2.6 to 9.5) and to prevent death from a cause related to diabetes 15.0 (12.1 to 17.9).
Single clinical end points
There was a 56% reduction in risk of heart failure (P=0.0043)
(fig 8) in the tight control group compared with the less tight control
group. There was a 35% reduction in risk of retinal photocoagulation (P=0.023) (fig 8). The trend for reduced risk of fatal and non-fatal renal failure was non-significant (fig 8). There was no significant difference in the incidence of death from accidents, cancer, other specified causes or unknown causes.
Analyses of surrogate end points
Retinopathy and visual acuity
From median 4.5 years of
follow up a smaller proportion of patients in the group assigned to
tight blood pressure control showed deterioration in retinopathy from
baseline by two or more steps (fig 9), with a 34% reduction in risk by
median 7.5 years (P=0.004). This was partly because fewer patients
required retinal photocoagulation, but the risk was still significantly
reduced when retinal photocoagulation was excluded (data not shown). At nine years of follow up the group assigned to tight blood pressure control had a 47% reduction in risk of a decrease in vision by three
or more lines in both eyes measured with an ETDRS chart (P=0.004) (fig
9). There was no significant difference in the proportion of patients
with impaired vision preventing driving (visual acuity < 6/12 Snellen
or ETDRS chart>0.3), although the trend was for a 28% reduction in
risk in the group assigned to tight control (32/371, 8.6%) compared
with the group assigned to less tight control (24/201,11.9%)
(P=0.20).
Microalbuminuria and proteinuria
By six years a smaller
proportion of patients in the group under tight blood pressure control
had a urinary albumin concentration of
50 mg/l, a 29% reduction in
risk (P=0.009), with a non-significant 39% reduction in risk for
proteinuria
300 mg/l (P=0.061) (fig 9). The reduction in risk for
both a urinary albumin concentration of
50 mg/l and proteinuria at
nine years of follow up was not significant. There was no significant
difference in plasma creatinine concentration or in the proportion of
patients who had a twofold increase in plasma creatinine concentration
between the two groups.
Neuropathy
The surrogate indices of neuropathy and
autonomic neuropathy were not significantly different between the two
groups.
|
ECG abnormality
By median 7.5 years the tight control
group had a lower proportion of Q wave ECG abnormalities than the less tight control group, 29/370 and 30/199 (7.8% and 15.1%, P=0.007) respectively, a 48% risk reduction. ST and T wave abnormalities were
also reduced in the tight control group (fig 9). There was no
difference between the allocations for other surrogate indices of
macrovascular disease.
There was no significant difference between the groups in the proportion of patients who developed surrogate indices for macrovascular disease.
Side effects
Hypoglycaemia
There was no significant difference in the
cumulative incidence of hypoglycaemia in the groups assigned to tight
and less tight blood pressure control, with 6.1% and 4.4%
respectively having a major hypoglycaemic attack. The cause of death in
one patient in the group assigned to less tight control of blood
pressure was attibuted to hypoglycaemia.
Weight gain
Mean weight gain was similar in the two groups
(1.3 kg in the group assigned to less tight control and 2.0 kg in the
tight control; P=0.13).
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
This paper reports that patients with hypertension and type 2 diabetes assigned to tight control of blood pressure achieved a significant reduction in risk of 24% for any end points related to diabetes, 32% for death related to diabetes, 44% for stroke, and 37% for microvascular disease. In addition there was a 56% reduction in risk of heart failure. The mean blood pressure over nine years was 144/82mm Hg on tight control compared with a less tight control mean of 154/87mm Hg. In comparison, intensive blood glucose control in the UK prospective diabetes study decreased the risk of any diabetes related end point by 12% (P=0.029) and microvascular disease by 25% (P=0.0099).23
Comparison of cardiovascular results with other studies
The
risk reduction for strokes is similar to results from a meta-analysis
of clinical trials of improved blood pressure control in the general
population, which showed risk reductions of 42% for strokes and 12%
for myocardial infarction.14 The reduction in
cardiovascular end points is in accord with the results of the Systolic
Hypertension in the Elderly Program for the 568 patients with
non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes whose mean age was 70 and mean
blood pressure 170/76mm Hg at baseline (table 2).30 The
Hypertension Optimal Treatment study showed a reduction in cardiovascular mortality for 1501 diabetic patients randomly allocated a target diastolic blood pressure of
80mm Hg,31
although the blood pressures acheived have not been published.
Intensive blood pressure control in the diabetic subgroup of the
Hypertension Detection and Follw-up Program showed no effect on all
cause mortality.32
Retinopathy
The was a 34% reduction in the rate of
progression of retinopathy by two or more steps using the modified
ETDRS final scale. The 47% reduction in the deterioration of visual
acuity by three lines using the ETDRS chart (equivalent to a change
from 6/6 to 6/12 or 6/9 to 6/18 on the Snellen chart) suggests that
tight blood pressure control also prevented the development of diabetic maculopathy, which is the main cause of visual impairment in type 2 diabetes.33 In the UK prospective diabetes study diabetic maculopathy occurred in 78% of patients requiring retinal
photocoagulation. As diabetic maculopathy responds less well to laser
retinal photocoagulation than proliferative
retinopathy,
34 35
reducing the risk of maculopathy by
tight blood pressure control might provide a major clinical benefit in
reducing the risk of blindness. To our knowledge this is the first
report in patients with type 2 diabetes to show that tight blood
pressure control reduces the risk of clinical complications from
diabetic eye disease.
Renal disease
The proportion of patients in the group
assigned to tight blood pressure control who had a urinary albumin
concentration of >50 mg/l at six years of follow up was only
significantly lower than in the group assigned to less tight control at
six years follow-up. Good control of blood pressure in patients with
renal failure prevents progression of established renal failure in type 1 diabetes.
18 19 36
Ravid et al also showed in 49 normotensive subjects with type 2 diabetes and microalbuminuria (mean
143 mg/24 h (range 30-290)) that improved blood pressure control with
enalapril prevented an increase in urine albumin excretion and gave a
slower decline in renal function.37 Previous
epidemiological studies have shown an association between hypertension
and albuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes who do not have renal
failure.
11 12
High blood pressure in type 2 diabetes
Hypertension remains
underrecognised and undertreated in the diabetic as well as in the
general population. In the 1995 health survey for England 40% of the
general population with hypertension (World Health Organisation
criteria: >160 mm Hg systolic, >95 mm Hg diastolic) were not
treated and one third of the treated subjects still had a blood
pressure greater than 160/95 mm Hg. The mean blood pressure in the
group assigned to less tight control of blood pressure in the
hypertension in diabetes study over nine years of follow up from a mean
age of 56 at recruitment was 154/87 mm Hg. In the second national
health and nutrition survey of 1976-80 in the United States 28% of
hypertensive diabetic patients had blood pressures of
160 mm Hg or
95 mm Hg.9
In this study the mean blood pressure in the group assigned
to tight blood pressure control was 144/82 mm Hg which is lower than
the blood pressures often achieved in hypertensive subjects with or
without diabetes. Advisory groups have recommended that the goals for
blood pressure in diabetic patients should be <140/90 mm Hg,38-40 <140/85 mm Hg,41 or
<130/85 mm Hg.
42 43
These recommendations are based on
studies in the general population14 and in patients with
type 1 diabetes with microalbuminuria or established
nephropathy.
18 19
Guidelines were formulated on the
assumption that data relating to hypertensive non-diabetic subjects and
relatively young patients with type 1 diabetes also applied to those
with type 2 diabetes. The prevention of both macrovascular and
microvascular disease observed in this study provides evidence for the
necessity of tight blood pressure control in type 2 diabetes. The
recommendations for the less strict "fair" or "acceptable"
blood pressure control targets by some of the advisory groups of
160/95 mm Hg,38 <160/90 mm Hg,
40 41
or <150/90 mm Hg39 need to be reviewed in the light of
the results of our study.
Conclusion
Hypertension is common in patients with type 2 diabetes, with a
prevalence of 40-60% over the age range of 45 to 75. This study,
embedded within the UK prospective diabetes study, shows that treatment
with an angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor or
blocker aiming
for a blood pressure of <150/85 mm Hg substantially reduces the risk
of death and complications due to diabetes. The management of blood
pressure should have a high priority in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We appreciate the cooperation of the patients and many NHS and non-NHS staff at the centres. We thank Philip Bassett for editorial assistance, and Caroline Wood, Kathy Waring, and Lorraine Mallia for typing the manuscripts.
Guarantor: R C Turner.
Funding: The UK prospective diabetes study and the hypertension in diabetes study was funded by grants from the Medical Research Council, British Diabetic Association, Department of Health, the United States National Eye Institute and the United States National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease in the National Institutes of Health, the British Heart Foundation, the Charles Wolfson Charitable Trust, the Clothworkers' Foundation, the Health Promotion Research Trust, the Alan and Babette Sainsbury Trust, the Oxford University Medical Research Fund Committee, and pharmaceutical companies, including Novo-Nordisk, Bayer, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Hoechst, Lilly, Lipha, and Farmitalia Carlo Erba. GlaxoWellcome, SmithKline Beecham, Pfizer, Zeneca, Pharmacia and Upjohn, and Roche provided grants for health economics and epidemiological studies. Boehringer Mannheim, Becton Dickinson, Owen Mumford, Securicor, Kodak, and Cortecs Diagnostics gave additional help.
Conflict of interest: None.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
efficacy of ACE inhibitor and
-blocker.
Diabet Med
1994;
11:
773-782[Medline].
20°C.
Clin Chem
1992;
38:
2294-2299(Accepted 17 August 1998)
and concern