Upon the publication of the results of the 20-year-long UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) (1), the general recommendation was to achieve, in as many as possible of individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), a target HbA1c value ≤7%, i.e., the average value associated with significant reduction in the risk of micro- and macrovascular complications. This “universal” glycemic target, however, has been challenged by the results of subsequent intervention trials (2–4). Given the critical analysis of the results of these trials, the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the American Heart Association suggested that an individualized HbA1c target should be identified based on the duration of diabetes, life expectancy, presence and severity of diabetes complications, and propensity for hypoglycemia (5). This suggestion has been endorsed by several international guidelines. They also suggest a selection of glucose-lowering strategies to be individualized in order to ensure the most appropriate risk-to-benefit ratio for all patients. According to the ADA/European Association for the Study of Diabetes position statement for T2DM management (6), this can be achieved through balanced assessment of efficacy, risk of hypoglycemia, effect on body weight, and costs of available glucose-lowering agents and their combination. Although the concept of treatment individualization is appealing, how to pursue it in the clinical setting remains highly debated. To this purpose, careful phenotypic description of the person with T2DM may be appropriate. A few years ago, the ABCD approach was proposed to help physicians in individualizing glycemic target and treatment selection (7). “ABCD” stands for four phenotypic traits that are easy to collect and to factor in: age, body weight, complications and comorbidities, and duration of diabetes. ### Age Age is the strongest risk factor for life expectancy and mortality. The number of elderly people with diabetes is growing, and >70% of the elderly with T2DM …