Cited by 1,428Diabetes Treatment and ManagementDiabetes Management and ResearchDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins

Effect of intensive treatment of hyperglycaemia on microvascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: an analysis of the ACCORD randomised trial

Open access
Ismail-Beigi, Faramarz, Craven, Timothy, Banerji, Mary Ann, Basile, Jan, Calles, Jorge, Cohen, Robert M, Cuddihy, Robert, Cushman, William C +15 more·2010·The Lancet

Abstract

Design ACCORD is a parallel group, randomized trial designed to investigate whether intensive glycemic therapy with a target HbA1c of <6.0% versus standard therapy with a target of 7.0 to 7.9% reduces cardiovascular disease (CVD) morbidity, mortality, and microvascular complications in participants with type 2 diabetes. Methods Volunteers with established type 2 diabetes, HbA1c levels ≥ 7.5% and CVD or two or more CVD risk factors were recruited at 77 clinical sites across the U.S. and Canada. Instructional materials, behavioral counseling, glucose-lowering medications and self-monitoring supplies were provided by the study. Therapeutic regimens were individualized on the basis of randomized assignment and response to therapy. This investigation examines the effect of treatment to glycemic goals on occurrence of microvascular diabetes complications. Prespecified composite outcomes were: 1) dialysis or renal transplantation, or serum creatinine >291.7 micromol/L, or retinal photocoagulation or vitrectomy, and 2) these plus peripheral neuropathy. Thirteen prespecified secondary measures of kidney, eye, and peripheral nerve function were also evaluated. Randomization was performed at clinical sites using a central randomization routine available on the study website. Both investigators and participants were unmasked to treatment arm assignment. Results A total of 10,251 participants were randomized (5,128 intensive and 5,123 standard) between January, 2001 and October, 2005. This analysis includes 10,234 patients (5,107 intensive and 5,108 standard). Intensive therapy was stopped before study end due to increased mortality, and patients were transitioned to standard therapy. Outcomes are reported at transition and at study end. At transition, the first composite outcome occurred in 443/5107 and 444/5108 participants in the intensive and standard arms, respectively (p= 0.99), and the second outcome in 1591/5107 and 1659/5108 participants in intensive and standard arms (p=0.20). Results were similar at study end. Secondary measures at study end favoring intensive therapy (p<0.05) included development of macroalbuminuria, cataract extraction, visual acuity, a score of >2.0 on the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument, loss of ankle jerk and light touch. Conclusions Intensive glycemic treatment did not reduce the risk of advanced measures of microvascular outcomes, but delayed the onset of macroalbuminuria and some measures of eye complications and neuropathy. These benefits must be weighed against the increase in total and CVD-related mortality, increased weight gain, and higher risk for severe hypoglycemia.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0140-6736(10)60576-4

Cites

41 of 41 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical benefits of early achievement of near-normal glycemic control in individuals with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes.

    “Numerous studies have demonstrated the clinical benefits of early achievement of nearnormal glycemic control in individuals with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes (77-83).”

    From Clinical Targets for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Data Interpretation: Recommendations From the International Consensus on Time in Range (2019) · cites this paper as [82]

    The Introduction (page not provided) reports that several trials found reduced microvascular complications with intensive glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. The Discussion notes benefits in a trial that began at diagnosis, but ACCORD itself studied people with long-standing type 2 diabetes. This source does not establish the claimed benefits for type 1 diabetes or directly demonstrate benefits from early achievement of near-normal control. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Intensive lowering of blood glucose with the goal of achieving near-normoglycemia has been shown in large randomized studies to delay the onset and progression of albuminuria and reduce eGFR in people with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes.

    “Intensive lowering of blood glucose with the goal of achieving near-normoglycemia has been shown in large, randomized studies to delay the onset and progression of albuminuria and reduce eGFR in people with type 1 diabetes (52,53) and type 2 diabetes (1,(54)(55)(56)(57)(58)(59).”

    From 11. Chronic Kidney Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025 (2025) · cites this paper as [56]

    For the type 2 diabetes portion attributed to this source, the Results report less new macroalbuminuria with intensive treatment and a short-term decline in eGFR; the microalbuminuria difference was no longer significant at study end. The paper does not establish delayed progression of existing albuminuria, and the eGFR difference was not significant at study end. The type 1 diabetes portion has separate citations and is not assessed here. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Lowering blood glucose itself helps prevent CKD and its progression.

    “Insulin alone was used to lower blood glucose in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study of type 1 diabetes, while a variety of agents were used in clinical trials of type 2 diabetes, supporting the conclusion that lowering blood glucose itself helps prevent CKD and its progression.”

    From 11. Chronic Kidney Disease and Risk Management: Standards of Care in Diabetes—2025 (2025) · cites this paper as [56]

    The Results (page not provided) show that intensive glucose-lowering treatment reduced new macroalbuminuria, a renal risk marker. They also report no significant reduction in overt renal failure and a temporary renal outcome favoring standard treatment. The paper therefore supports a narrower renal benefit, not the unqualified conclusion that lowering glucose itself prevents CKD and its progression. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The ADVANCE and VADT trials found modest reduction in nephropathy with intensive glycemic management; ACCORD was stopped after a median of 3.5 years due to higher mortality in the intervention arm.

    “The ADVANCE and VADT trials found modest reduction in nephropathy with intensive glycemic management; ACCORD was stopped after a median of 3.5 years due to higher mortality in the intervention arm (51-55).”

    From 6. Glycemic Goals, Hypoglycemia, and Hyperglycemic Crises: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2026. (2026) · cites this paper as [53]

    The Discussion reports that ADVANCE and VADT found reductions in microalbuminuria with intensive glycemic treatment, supporting the renal-outcome point at that narrower level. The Introduction says ACCORD’s intensive strategy was stopped because of increased all-cause mortality, but gives a median follow-up of 3.7 years, not 3.5 years. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.90)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • The ACCORD trial, with 35% of participants having a previous cardiovascular event, showed increased mortality (HR 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.46; P = 0.04) in the intensive glycaemic arm (HbA1c 6.5%, 48 mmol/mol) compared with controls.

    “Of interest, the ACCORD trial, with 35% of participants having a previous CV event, showed increased mortality (HR 1.22; 95% CI, 1.01-1.46;P = 0.04) in the intensive glycaemic arm (HbA1c 6.5%, 48 mmol/mol) compared with controls.129”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Ismail-Beigi, F., Craven, T., Banerji, M. A., Basile, J., Calles, J., Cohen, R. M., Cuddihy, R., Cushman, W. C., Genuth, S., Grimm, R. H., Hamilton, B. P., Hoogwerf, B., Karl, D., Katz, L., Krikorian, A., O'Connor, P., Pop-Busui, R., Schubart, U., Simmons, D., Taylor, H., Thomas, A., Weiss, D., & Hramiak, I.
Affiliations
  • Wake Forest University Health Sciences (US)
  • SUNY Downstate Health Sciences University (US)
  • Medical University of South Carolina (US)
  • Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist (US)
  • Cincinnati VA Medical Center (US)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • Memphis VA Medical Center (US)
  • Case Western Reserve University (US)
  • Berman Center for Outcomes and Clinical Research (US)
  • University of Maryland, Baltimore (US)
  • Eli Lilly (United States) (US)
  • Oregon Health & Science University (US)
  • VA NY Harbor Healthcare System (US)
  • Albert Einstein College of Medicine (US)
  • University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (US)
  • Henry Ford Hospital (US)
  • St Joseph's Health Care (CA)
Venue
The Lancet
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2010-08
Volume
376
Issue
9739
Pages
419-430
ISSN
  • 0099-5355 (ISSN-L)
  • 0140-6736
OpenAlex
W2111824270
Cited by
1,428
References
41
Citations by year
2026: 36 · 2025: 50 · 2024: 77 · 2023: 76 · 2022: 107 · 2021: 101 · 2020: 103 · 2019: 99 · 2018: 122 · 2017: 91 · 2016: 82 · 2015: 90 · 2014: 111 · 2013: 84 · 2012: 87
FWCI
68.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • The Lancet (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • National Institutes of Health (n01hc95183-23-0-0, n01hc95180-24-0-1, n01hc95184-24-0-1, n01hc95181-23-0-1, n01hc95182-23-0-1, n01hc95178-28-0-1, n01hc95179-25-0-0)
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (N01- HC-95181, R01HL073030, N01 HC095184, N01-HC- 95180, N01-HC-95178, N01 HC095182, N01 HC095181, Y01 HC001010, N01-HC-095183, N01 HC095178, N01-HC-95184, N01HC95179, IAAY1-HC-1010, IAA #Y1-HC-9035, N01 HC095180, N01‐HC‐95183, N01-HC-95182, N01 HC095179)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Treatment and Management
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes Management and Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Diabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Keywords
type 2 diabetes, tight glycemic control, hyperglycemia, microvascular complications, HbA1c, renal outcomes, retinopathy, diabetic nephropathy, diabetic retinopathy, diabetic neuropathy, ACCORD trial, cardiovascular disease, cardiovascular complications, renal function, eye function, nerve function, serum creatinine, retinal photocoagulation, vitrectomy
MeSH terms
Adult, Aged, Blood Glucose, Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2, Diabetic Angiopathies, Diabetic Nephropathies, Diabetic Neuropathies, Diabetic Retinopathy, Glycated Hemoglobin, Humans, Hypoglycemic Agents, Lipids, Middle Aged

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review