The Diabcare-Asia 1998 study--outcomes on control and complications in type 1 and type 2 diabetic patients.

UNLABELLED: The aim of this study was to describe the glycaemic and metabolic control and diabetes-related complications in type 1 and type 2 Asian patients. METHODS: Data of diabetes patients from 230 diabetes centres in 12 Asian regions were collected on a retrospective-prospective basis through review of medical records, interview and laboratory assessments. Analysis of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) was carried out in central laboratories appointed by Bio-Rad. The data collection case record forms were scanned electronically. RESULTS: 22177 patients with valid data made up the analysis population. Among patents with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, there was a higher proportion of women than men (53% vs. 47% for type 1 patients and 56% vs. 44% for type 2 diabetes). Hypertension (61%) and overweight (40% with BMI > or = 25 kg/m2 were common in type 2 patients. Dyslipidaemia was also present in at least half of both types of patients. Control of glycaemia (mean HbA,1c and fasting blood glucose [FBG]) was poor in type 1 (9.9 +/- 2.5%; 10.2 +/- 5.2 mmol/l) and type 2 patients (8.5 +/- 2.0%; 8.9 +/- 3.4 mmol/l). Glycaemia in the majority of both types of patients fell short of those stipulated by various guidelines. In type 2 patients, glycaemia deteriorated (HbA1c > 7.5%, FBG > or = 7.0 mmol/l) with duration of diabetes > 7 years. Both types of diabetes appear to share a similar high prevalence of complications of cataract, retinopathy and neuropathy, although the prevalence of cataract (27%) and neuropathy (35%) was higher in type 2 diabetes. Screening for microalbuminuria was not common. CONCLUSIONS: The Inadequate metabolic and hypertension control, especially in type 2 patients, needs to be addressed.

Prognostic factors in diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis (DPLN) can have variable clinical course. Identification of the predictors of outcome would help to improve the management. We have studied the prognostic significance of clinical, laboratory and histological parameters in patients with DPLN. METHODS: Twenty nine patients diagnosed to be having DPLN seen between 1987 and 1991 were followed up for over 57 months. Parameters assessed for prognostic significance included serum creatinine, urine protein at the time of biopsy, blood pressure, type of immunosuppression, composite scores and individual components of activity index (AI) and chronicity index (CI). Kaplan-Meier survival curves were plotted and the results were compared using log rank test. Fishers' exact test was used to study the risk factors. RESULTS: End stage renal failure developed in 7/29 (24.1%) patients; 7/19 (36.8%) who had hypertension and 7/16 (43.8%) who had nephrotic proteinuria developed renal failure, while none who had normal blood pressure or nonnephrotic proteinuria, developed renal failure (p < 0.01). Three patients had high activity index (> 12) and all three developed renal failure. Other parameters such as age, gender, serum creatinine, type of immunosuppression, CI and individual components of AI failed to predict the outcome (p > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Hypertension, nephrotic proteinuria and high AI were predictive of progression to end stage renal failure in patients with diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis.

Treatment of diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis: an Indian experience.

BACKGROUND: Immunosuppressive therapy has improved the prognosis in lupus nephritis. However, infectious complications may contribute to morbidity. There is also debate on the best form of therapy. We, therefore, compared the results of two different forms of therapy. METHOD: Twenty-nine patients diagnosed to have diffuse proliferative lupus nephritis were followed up over 54 months. The treatment consisted of azathioprine (1.5 mg/kg/day) or pulse intravenous cyclophosphamide (500 mg/m2 body surface area monthly) along with prednisolone (2 mg/kg on alternate days). RESULTS: Seventeen patients received azathioprine (group A) and 12 received cyclophosphamide (group B). The mean (SD) follow up in groups A and B were 54.35 (33.6) and 52 (35.8) months, respectively. Apart from the higher number of males in group B, both groups were comparable for age, presence of hypertension, renal function, 24-hour urinary protein excretion and composite scores for histological activity and chronicity indices (p > 0.05). The renal survival estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method was similar in both groups (p > 0.05). Four patients had renal failure requiring replacement therapy in group A and 3 in group B. Major infective episodes were more common in group B than in group A (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Azathioprine was as effective as pulse intravenous cyclophosphamide in preserving renal functions up to 54 months. Major infective episodes were more common with pulse intravenous cyclophosphamide.