Incident cardiovascular disease by clustering of favourable risk factors in type 1 diabetes: the EURODIAB Prospective Complications Study.

AIMS: The aim of this prospective study was to examine CVD risk reduction in type 1 diabetes (1) for people with favourable cardiovascular health metrics and (2) by clustering of these metrics. METHODS: Data from 2313 participants from the EURODIAB Prospective Complications Study were analysed. All had type 1 diabetes (51% men, mean ± SD age 32 ± 9 years). Seven cardiovascular health metrics were studied-smoking, BMI, physical activity, a diet score, total cholesterol/HDL-cholesterol ratio, combined systolic and diastolic BP and HbA1c-divided into favourable/less favourable categories. Cox proportional hazards models were used to calculate HRs (95% CIs) of incident CVD for each metric. Clusters were made by scoring each individual by the number of favourable metrics. RESULTS: A total of 163 people developed incident CVD during a mean ± SD follow-up of 7.2 ± 1.3 years. Participants with more favourable HbA1c levels of <57 mmol/mol (<7.4%) had a 37% significantly lower CVD risk than those with a less favourable HbA1c (HR [95% CI] 0.63 [0.44, 0.91]), and participants with a more favourable BP (systolic BP <112 mmHg and diastolic BP <70 mmHg) had a 44% significantly lower CVD risk than participants in the less favourable BP group (HR [95% CI] 0.56 [0.34, 0.92]). There was a dose-response relation with a lower HR observed with greater clustering of more favourable metrics: people with four or more favourable metrics had an HR of 0.37 (95% CI 0.18, 0.76), adjusted for sex and age at diabetes diagnosis, compared with those with no favourable metrics. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Low HbA1c and low BP were protective cardiovascular health metrics in our study of people with type 1 diabetes. Targeting all cardiovascular health metrics could be more effective in preventing CVD than targeting single metrics.

HbA1c, fasting and 2 h plasma glucose in current, ex- and never-smokers: a meta-analysis.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The relationships between smoking and glycaemic variables have not been well explored. We compared HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and 2 h plasma glucose (2H-PG) in current, ex- and never-smokers. METHODS: This meta-analysis used individual data from 16,886 men and 18,539 women without known diabetes in 12 DETECT-2 consortium studies and in the French Data from an Epidemiological Study on the Insulin Resistance Syndrome (DESIR) and Telecom studies. Means of three glycaemic variables in current, ex- and never-smokers were modelled by linear regression, with study as a random factor. The I (2) statistic was used to evaluate heterogeneity among studies. RESULTS: HbA1c was 0.10% (95% CI 0.08, 0.12) (1.1 mmol/mol [0.9, 1.3]) higher in current smokers and 0.03% (0.01, 0.05) (0.3 mmol/mol [0.1, 0.5]) higher in ex-smokers, compared with never-smokers. For FPG, there was no significant difference between current and never-smokers (-0.004 mmol/l [-0.03, 0.02]) but FPG was higher in ex-smokers (0.12 mmol/l [0.09, 0.14]). In comparison with never-smokers, 2H-PG was lower (-0.44 mmol/l [-0.52, -0.37]) in current smokers, with no difference for ex-smokers (0.02 mmol/l [-0.06, 0.09]). There was a large and unexplained heterogeneity among studies, with I (2) always above 50%; I (2) was little changed after stratification by sex and adjustment for age and BMI. In this study population, current smokers had a prevalence of diabetes that was 1.30% higher as screened by HbA1c and 0.52% lower as screened by 2H-PG, in comparison with never-smokers. CONCLUSION/INTERPRETATION: Across this heterogeneous group of studies, current smokers had a higher HbA1c and lower 2H-PG than never-smokers. This will affect the chances of smokers being diagnosed with diabetes.

HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose and the prediction of diabetes: Inter99, AusDiab and D.E.S.I.R.

INTRODUCTION: With diabetes defined by HbA1c≥6.5% and/or FPG≥7.0mmol/l and/or diabetes treatment, we investigated HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) thresholds/change-points above which the incidence of diabetes increases. METHODS: Data are Danish (Inter99), Australian (AusDiab) and French (D.E.S.I.R.), with respectively 4930, 6012 and 3784 non-diabetic participants. RESULTS: Diabetes incidences at 5 years for Inter99 and AusDiab and at 6 years for D.E.S.I.R. were 2.3%, 3.1% and 2.4% respectively and incidences increased with baseline HbA1c and FPG. As HbA1c distributions differed between cohorts, HbA1c was standardized on D.E.S.I.R. data. Change-points where diabetes incidence increased were identified for HbA1c (%) after standardization: 5.1 (4.9-5.6) (Inter99), 5.4 (5.1-5.6) (AusDiab), 5.3 (5.1-5.7) (D.E.S.I.R.); for FPG change-points (mmol/l) were 5.1 (…-6.1) (Inter99), 5.5 (5.2-5.8) (AusDiab), no change-point for D.E.S.I.R. Using current diabetes risk criteria HbA1c≥5.7% and/or FPG≥5.6mmol/l to screen for diabetes provided high sensitivity (over 89%) and positive predictive values: 4.3%, 6.9%, and 5.9% respectively. CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c and FPG change-points predicting incident diabetes did not always exist, differed across studies, when available were generally lower than current criteria with wide confidence intervals. Using jointly HbA1c≥5.7% and/or FPG≥5.6mmol/l as a criterion for the risk of incident diabetes is appropriate.

Are the same clinical risk factors relevant for incident diabetes defined by treatment, fasting plasma glucose, and HbA1c?

OBJECTIVE: To compare incidences and risk factors for diabetes using seven definitions, with combinations of pharmacological treatment, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥7.0 mmol/L, and HbA(1c) ≥6.5%. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Participants aged 30-65 years from the Data from an Epidemiological Study on the Insulin Resistance Syndrome (DESIR) cohort were followed for 9 years. RESULTS: More men had incident diabetes as defined by FPG ≥7.0 mmol/L and/or treatment than by HbA(1c) ≥6.5% and/or treatment: 7.5% (140/1,867) and 5.3% (99/1,874), respectively (P < 0.009); for women incidences were similar: 3.2% (63/1,958) and 3.4% (66/1,954). Known risk factors predicted diabetes for almost all definitions. Among those with incident diabetes by FPG alone versus HbA(1c) alone, there were more men (78 vs. 35%), case patients were 8 years younger, and fewer were alcohol abstainers (12 vs. 35%) (all P < 0.005). A diabetes risk score discriminated well between those with and without incident diabetes for all definitions. CONCLUSIONS: In men, FPG definitions yielded more incident cases of diabetes than HbA(1c) definitions, in contrast with women. An FPG-derived risk score remained relevant for HbA(1c)-defined diabetes.