Presence and development of diabetic retinopathy in 16 999 patients with type 1 diabetes in the Danish Registry of Diabetic Retinopathy.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the five-year incidence of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and associated risk markers in patients with type 1 diabetes in the national Danish DR-screening programme. METHODS: Based on national data, we included all 16 999 patients with type 1 diabetes in the Danish Registry of Diabetic Retinopathy, who attended the national screening programme in the period 2013-2018. According to the worse eye at first screening, DR was classified (levels 0-4) and linked with various national health registries to retrieve information on diabetes duration, systemic comorbidity, and medication. RESULTS: At first screening, median age and duration of diabetes were 45.0 and 16.7 years, and 57.5% were males. The prevalence and five-year incidences for DR and progression to proliferative DR (PDR) were 44.2%, 8.9% and 2.0%, respectively. In multivariable Cox models, the incidence endpoints were associated with duration of diabetes (hazard ratio [HR] 1.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.63-1.89, and HR 2.04, 95% CI 1.73-2.40 per 10 years), moderately low Charlson Comorbidity Index score (HR 1.27, 95% CI 1.10-1.47, and HR 2.80, 95% CI 2.23-3.51), and use of blood pressure lowering medication (HR 1.20, 95% CI 1.05-1.36, and HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.53-2.57). CONCLUSION: In a study of all patients with type 1 diabetes from the Danish DR-screening programme, we identified duration of diabetes, systemic disease and use of anti-hypertensive treatment as consistent risk markers for incident and progressive DR.

Diabetic retinopathy as an independent marker of cardiovascular disease in type 1 diabetes: Results from a nationwide longitudinal matched case-cohort study.

PURPOSE: To investigate diabetic retinopathy (DR) as a potential marker of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in adults with type 1 diabetes attending the Danish DR-screening programme and non-diabetes adults. METHODS: In this registry-based matched case-cohort study, we identified 16 547 adults with type 1 diabetes, who were registered in the Danish Registry of Diabetic Retinopathy (DiaBase). Each case was age- and sex-matched by five non-diabetes individuals (n = 82 399), and odds ratios (ORs) and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated for incident and upcoming CVD in multivariable models. RESULTS: Adults with type 1 diabetes (median age 44.5 years, 57.6% male) were more likely to have prevalent CVD (OR 1.29; 95% CI, 1.20-1.38) and to develop CVD within 5 years (HR 1.19; 95% CI, 1.08-1.30) as compared to non-diabetes control. However, adults without DR were less likely to develop CVD (HR 0.84; 95% CI, 0.72-0.97) compared to the reference population. For adults with type 1 diabetes, there was an increasing risk for incident CVD for increasing levels of DR (HR 1.33, 1.95, 1.71 and 2.39 for DR-levels 1-4, respectively). Patients with CVD at the time of the first screening had a higher risk to develop DR during follow-up (HR 1.23; 95% CI, 1.02-1.49). CONCLUSION: In a nationwide matched case-cohort study adjusted for potential confounders, DR was identified as an independent marker of prevalent and incident CVD in type 1 diabetes with increasing risk demonstrated for higher levels of DR. Likewise, CVD also independently predicted the risk of incident DR.

Diabetic retinopathy is a predictor of chronic respiratory failure: A nationwide register-based cohort study.

Purpose: Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is a hypoxic retinal disease, but so far, the association with systemic hypoxia is poorly understood. Hence, the aim of this study was to evaluate cross-sectional and longitudinal associations between DR and chronic respiratory failure (CRF) in a national cohort. Design: Cross-sectional and 5-year longitudinal register-based cohort study. Methods: Between 2013 and 2018, we included patients with diabetes from the Danish Registry of Diabetic Retinopathy, who were each age and sex matched with five controls without diabetes. At index date, the prevalence of CRF was compared between cases and controls, and the longitudinal relationship between DR and CRF was assessed in a five-year follow-up. Results: At baseline, we identified 1,980 and 9,990 patients with CRF among 205,970 cases and 1,003,170 controls. The prevalence of CRF was higher among cases than controls (OR 1.75, 95% CI 1.65-1.86), but no difference between cases with and without DR was found.During follow-up, we identified 1,726 and 5,177 events of CRF among cases and controls, respectively. The incidence of CRF was higher among both cases with and without DR compared to controls (DR level 0: HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.16-1.33, DR level 1-4: HR 1.86, 95% CI 1.63-2.12), and higher among cases with DR compared to cases without DR (HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.38-1.72). Conclusion: In this study based on nationwide data, we found an increased risk of present and incident CRF in patients with diabetes with or without DR, and we identified DR as a predictor of future CRF.

Inter-grader reliability in the Danish screening programme for diabetic retinopathy.

PURPOSE: The Danish Registry of Diabetic Retinopathy includes information from >200 000 patients who attends diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening in Denmark. Screening of patients with uncomplicated type 2 diabetes is often performed by practicing ophthalmologists, while patients with type 1 and complicated type 2 diabetes attends screening at hospitals. We performed a clinical reliability study of retinal images from Danish screening facilities to explore the inter-grader agreement between the primary screening ophthalmologist and a blinded, certified grader. METHODS: Invitations to participate were sent to screening facilities across Denmark. The primary grader uploaded fundus photographs with information on estimated level of DR (International Clinical Diabetic Retinopathy scale as 0 [no DR], 1-3 [mild, moderate or severe nonproliferative DR {NPDR}], or 4 [proliferative DR {PDR}]), region of screening, image style, and screening facility. Images were then regraded by a blinded, certified, secondary grader. Weighted kappa analysis was performed to evaluate agreement. RESULTS: Fundus photographs from 230 patients (458 eyes) were received from practicing ophthalmologists (52.6%) and hospital-based grading centres (47.4%) from all Danish regions. Reported levels of DR by the primary graders were 66.8%, 12.2%, 13.1%, 1.3% and 5.5% for DR levels 0-4. The overall agreement between primary and secondary graders was 93% (κ = 0.83). Based on screening facility agreement was 96% (κ = 0.89) and 90% (κ = 0.76) for practicing ophthalmologists and hospital-based graders. CONCLUSION: In this nationwide study, we observed a high overall inter-grader agreement and based on this, it is reasonable to assume that reported DR gradings in the screening programme in Denmark, accurately reflect the truth.

Five-Year Incidence of Proliferative Diabetic Retinopathy and Associated Risk Factors in a Nationwide Cohort of 201 945 Danish Patients with Diabetes.

Purpose: To evaluate the proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) progression rates and identify the demographic and clinical characteristics of patients who later developed PDR compared with patients who did not progress to that state. Design: A national 5-year register-based cohort study including 201 945 patients with diabetes. Subjects: Patients with diabetes who had attended the Danish national screening program (2013-2018) for diabetic retinopathy (DR). Methods: We used the first screening episode as the index date and included both eyes of patients with and without subsequent progression of PDR. Data were linked with various national health registries to investigate relevant clinical and demographic parameters. The International Clinical Retinopathy Disease Scale was used to classify DR, with no DR as level 0, mild DR as level 1, moderate DR as level 2, severe DR as level 3, and PDR as level 4. Main Outcome Measures: Hazard ratios (HRs) for incident PDR for all relevant demographic and clinical parameters and 1-, 3-, and 5-year incidence rates of PDR according to baseline DR level. Results: Progression to PDR within 5 years was identified in 2384 eyes of 1780 patients. Proliferative diabetic retinopathy progression rates from baseline DR level 3 at 1, 3 and 5 years were 3.6%, 10.9%, and 14.7%, respectively. The median number of visits was 3 (interquartile range, 1-4). Progression to PDR was predicted in a multivariable model by duration of diabetes (HR, 4.66 per 10 years; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.05-5.37), type 1 diabetes (HR, 9.61; 95% CI, 8.01-11.53), a Charlson Comorbidity Index score of > 0 (score 1: HR, 4.62; 95% CI, 4.14-5.15; score 2: HR, 2.28; 95% CI, 1.90-2.74; score ≥ 3: HR, 4.28; 95% CI, 3.54-5.17), use of insulin (HR, 5.33; 95% CI, 4.49-6.33), and use of antihypertensive medications (HR, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.90-2.61). Conclusions: In a 5-year longitudinal study of an entire screening nation, we found increased risk of PDR with increasing baseline DR levels, longer duration of diabetes, type 1 diabetes, systemic comorbidity, use of insulin, and blood pressure-lowering medications. Most interestingly, we found lower risk of progression from DR level 3 to PDR compared with that in previous studies. Financial Disclosures: Proprietary or commercial disclosure may be found after the references.

Bidirectional 5-year risks of diabetic retinopathy, glaucoma and/or ocular hypertension: Results from a national screening programme.

PURPOSE: We aimed to investigate if diabetic retinopathy (DR), glaucoma and/or ocular hypertension (OHT) are prospectively linked, as previous studies have proposed cross-sectional associations, but longitudinal data from larger cohorts are lacking. METHODS: We performed a bidirectional 5 years prospective, registry-based cohort study. We extracted data from national registers, including the Danish Registry of Diabetic Retinopathy, the Danish Civil Registration System, the Danish National Patient Register and the Danish National Prescription Registry. DR level was defined by the highest level of the two eyes. Glaucoma and/or OHT was defined by diagnostic codes (H40*) or at least three redeemed prescriptions of glaucoma medication (S01E*) within 1 year. We included 205 970 persons with diabetes and 1 003 170 age- and gender-matched non-diabetes controls. Exposures were level-specific DR (i) and glaucoma and/or OHT (ii), and outcomes were hazard ratios (HRs) for 5 years incident glaucoma and/or OHT (i) and DR (ii). RESULTS: Persons with diabetes were more likely to develop glaucoma and/or OHT (multivariable adjusted HR 1.11, 95% CI 1.06-1.15), but this did not depend on the level of DR. In persons with diabetes, those with glaucoma and/or OHT were more likely to develop DR (multivariable adjusted HR 1.12, 95% CI 1.03-1.23) within 5 years. CONCLUSION: In a national cohort, diabetes associated with a little higher risk of upcoming glaucoma and/or OHT, and, inversely, the presence of the latter predicted a higher risk of incident DR. Nevertheless, our data do not seem to justify including glaucoma evaluation in the national Danish DR-screening programme.

Presence and development of diabetic retinopathy in 153 238 patients with type 2 diabetes in the Danish Registry of Diabetic Retinopathy.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the prevalence and incidence of diabetic retinopathy (DR) along with associated markers in patients with type 2 diabetes in the Danish DR-screening programme. METHODS: We included all persons with type 2 diabetes in the Danish Registry of Diabetic Retinopathy, who had attended at least one episode of DR screening in 2013-2018. DR was classified as levels 0-4 indicating increasing severity. Data were linked with various national health registries to retrieve information on diabetes duration, marital status, comorbidity and systemic medication. RESULTS: Among 153 238 persons with type 2 diabetes, median age and duration of diabetes were 66.9 and 5.3 years and 56.4% were males. Prevalence and 5-year incidences of DR, 2-step-or-more progression of DR and progression to proliferative DR (PDR) were 8.8%, 3.8%, 0.7% and 0.2%, respectively. In multivariable models, leading markers of incident DR and progression to PDR were duration of diabetes (HR 1.98, 95% CI 1.87-2.09; HR 2.89, 95% CI 2.34-3.58 per 10 years of duration) and use of insulin (HR 1.88, 95% CI 1.76-2.01; HR 2.40, 95% CI 1.84-3.13), while the use of cholesterol-lowering medicine was a protecting marker (HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.93; HR 0.70, 95% CI 0.52-0.93). From 2013 to 2015, 3-year incidence rates of PDR decreased from 1.22 to 0.45 events per 1000 person-years. CONCLUSION: Nationally, among Danish individuals with type 2 diabetes attending DR screening, we identified duration of diabetes and use of insulin as the most important predictor for the development of DR, while cholesterol-lowering medicine was a protective factor.

Attendance in a national screening program for diabetic retinopathy: a population-based study of 205,970 patients.

AIMS: A nationwide diabetic retinopathy (DR) screening program has been established in Denmark since 2013. We aimed to perform an evaluation of adherence to DR screenings and to examine whether non-adherence was correlated to DR progression. METHODS: The population consisted of a register-based cohort, who participated in the screening program from 2013 to 2018. We analyzed age, gender, marital status, DR level (International Clinical DR severity scale, none, mild-, moderate-, severe non-proliferative DR (NPDR) and proliferative DR (PDR)), comorbidities and socioeconomic factors. The attendance pattern of patients was grouped as either timely (no delays > 33%), delayed (delays > 33%) or one-time attendance (unexplained). RESULTS: We included 205,970 patients with 591,136 screenings. Rates of timely, delayed and one-time attendance were 53.0%, 35.5% and 11.5%, respectively. DR level at baseline was associated with delays (mild-, moderate-, severe NPDR and PDR) and one-time attendance (moderate-, severe NPDR and PDR) with relative risk ratios (RRR) of 1.68, 2.27, 3.14, 2.44 and 1.18, 2.07, 1.26, respectively (P < 0.05). Delays at previous screenings were associated with progression to severe NPDR or PDR (hazard ratio (HR) 2.27, 6.25 and 12.84 for 1, 2 and 3+ delays, respectively). Any given delay doubled the risk of progression (HR 2.28). CONCLUSIONS: In a national cohort of 205,970 patients, almost half of the patients attended DR screening later than scheduled or dropped out after first screening episode. This was, in particular, true for patients with any levels of DR at baseline. DR progression in patients with delayed attendance, increased with the number of missed appointments.

Diabetic Retinopathy Predicts Risk of Alzheimer's Disease: A Danish Registry-Based Nationwide Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Retinal neurodegeneration is evident in early diabetic retinopathy (DR) which may be associated with other neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer's disease (AD). OBJECTIVE: To investigate diabetes and DR as a risk marker of present and incident AD. METHODS: A register-based cohort study was performed. We included 134,327 persons with diabetes above 60 years of age, who had attended DR screening, and 651,936 age- and gender-matched persons without diabetes. RESULTS: At baseline, the prevalence of AD was 0.7% and 1.3% among patients with and without diabetes, respectively. In a multivariable regression model, patients with diabetes were less likely to have AD at baseline (adjusted OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.59-0.68). During follow-up, incident AD was registered for 1473 (0.35%) and 6,899 (0.34%) persons with and without diabetes, respectively. Compared to persons without diabetes, persons with diabetes and no DR had a lower risk to develop AD (adjusted HR 0.87, 95% CI 0.81-0.93), while persons with diabetes and DR had higher risk of AD (adjusted HR 1.24, 95% CI 1.08-1.43). When persons with diabetes and no DR were used as references, a higher risk of incident AD was observed in persons with DR (adjusted HR 1.34, 95% CI 1.18-1.53). CONCLUSION: Individuals with diabetes without DR were less likely to develop AD compared to persons without diabetes. However, individuals with DR had a 34% higher risk of incident AD, which raise the question whether screening for cognitive impairment should be done among individuals with DR.