Some patients with type 2 diabetes may benefit from intensive glycaemic and blood pressure control: A post‐hoc machine learning analysis of ACCORD trial data

Tianze Jiao,Hamed Kianmehr,Yilu Lin,Piaopiao Li,Naykky Singh Ospina,Hans K. Ghayee,Mohammed Ruzieh,Vivian Fonseca,Lizheng Shi,Ping Zhang,Hui Shao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.15453
2024-02-02
Diabetes Obesity and Metabolism
Abstract:Aim The action to control cardiovascular risk in diabetes (ACCORD) trial showed a neutral average treatment effect of intensive blood glucose and blood pressure (BP) controls in preventing major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) in individuals with type 2 diabetes. Yet, treatment effects across patient subgroups have not been well understood. We aimed to identify patient subgroups that might benefit from intensive glucose or BP controls for preventing MACE. Materials and methods As a post‐hoc analysis of the ACCORD trial, we included 10 251 individuals with type 2 diabetes. We applied causal forest and causal tree models to identify participant characteristics that modify the efficacy of intensive glucose or BP controls from 68 candidate variables (demographics, comorbidities, medications and biomarkers) at the baseline. The exposure was (a) intensive versus standard glucose control [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) <6.0% vs. 7.0%‐7.9%], and (b) intensive versus standard BP control (systolic BP <120 vs. <140 mmHg). The primary outcome was MACE. Results Compared with standard glucose control, intensive one reduced MACE in those with baseline HbA1c 55 mg/dl, men >45 mg/dl; RR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.34‐0.74). Risk reductions were not significant in other patient subgroups. Conclusions Our findings suggest heterogeneous treatment effects of intensive glucose and BP control and could provide biomarkers for future clinical trials to identify more precise HbA1c and BP treatment goals for individualized medicine.
endocrinology & metabolism
What problem does this paper attempt to address?