We compared cardiovascular disease outcomes according to the presence of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) at baseline in a post hoc analysis from the PROactive study. Of the 5238 patients in PROactive (a study of pioglitazone versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes and macrovascular disease; mean follow-up=34.5 months), 1274 had PAD at baseline (619=pioglitazone; 655=placebo). Patients with PAD at baseline showed significantly higher rates of the primary endpoint, main secondary endpoint, all-cause mortality (all P<0.0001), and stroke (P=0.0175) than those with no PAD at baseline. The risk of PAD alone was similar to that of myocardial infarction alone. In patients with no PAD at baseline, the event rates of the primary endpoint (P=0.0160), main secondary endpoint (P=0.0453), and acute coronary syndrome (P=0.0287) were significantly lower with pioglitazone than with placebo. This beneficial effect of pioglitazone was not seen in patients with PAD at baseline. In the total population, there was a higher frequency of leg revascularizations with pioglitazone than placebo-this was wholly due to first events that occurred within the initial 12 months of treatment. The presence of PAD increased the risk of all major cardiovascular events. Those without PAD at baseline seemed to benefit more from pioglitazone treatment than the overall PROactive population.