Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
The British Journal of Diabetes & Vascular Disease
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Mccallum, R. W
Right arrow Articles by Fisher, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?

Reviews

Review: Comparing cardiovascular outcomes in diabetes studies

Roland W Mccallum

Department of Medicine and Diabetes, Royal Alexandra Hospital, Corsebar Road, Paisley, PA2 9PN, UK

Miles Fisher

Wards 4 & 5, Glasgow Royal Infirmary, 84 Castle Street, Glasgow, G4 0SF, UK, miles.fisher{at}northglasgow.scot.nhs.uk

iabetes can be considered as a cardiovascular disease leading to the premature death of patients. The increase in cardiovascular risk has been extensively investigated and is associated with a cluster of adverse factors. The effects of various treatments used to affect the pathogenesis of the atherosclerotic process have been investigated in many large trials. A number of issues make the interpretation and comparison of these trials complicated, and in particular the use of a single primary end point such as mortality has been replaced with composite end points. The effects of risk factors and interventions on coronary heart disease (CHD) risk has been converted to cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk for understandable reasons, but this makes the interpretation and comparison of results even more complex. This review provides a critical analysis of outcome studies, highlighting differences in design, end points, patient inclusion and definitions in recent cardiovascular diabetology trials, and examines the potential pitfalls in making unjustified comparisons. Br J Diabetes Vasc Dis 2006; 6:111—18

Key Words: cardiovascular disease • coronary heart disease • diabetes • trials.

The British Journal of Diabetes & Vascular Disease, Vol. 6, No. 3, 111-118 (2006)
DOI: 10.1177/14746514060060030301
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    What's this?