A few diabetes papers of interest

i. Real-World Costs of Continuous Insulin Pump Therapy and Multiple Daily Injections for Type 1 Diabetes: A Population-Based and Propensity-Matched Cohort From the Swedish National Diabetes Register.

“Continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion, or insulin pump, therapy for individuals with type 1 diabetes has increased gradually since the 1980s. Yet, a Cochrane review concluded in 2010 that although some evidence indicates that insulin pumps improve glycemic control compared with standard multiple daily injection (MDI) therapy, insufficient evidence exists regarding mortality, morbidity, and costs (1). A systematic review of cost-effectiveness studies summarized comparisons of insulin pump and MDI therapy using model analyses to describe the expected impact on long-term costs, development of complications, and quality of life (2). Five of the studies reported long-term discounted incremental costs of insulin pumps of $20,000–$40,000, whereas two studies reported lower and one higher additional costs for insulin pump therapy. However, real-world data on health care and societal costs of insulin pump therapy compared with MDI therapy are scarce. […] Data from the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR) have shown a lower incidence of some cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality for individuals with type 1 diabetes on insulin pump therapy in 2005–2012 (5). Registration of insulin pump therapy started in 2002 in the NDR, and use of pump therapy among individuals with type 1 diabetes increased from 10% in 2002 to 22% in 2015 (6). A relevant research question from a health care planning perspective is whether real-world data match earlier model-based predictions for differences in resource use and costs. We investigated from a societal perspective costs of continuous insulin pump and MDI therapy in clinical practice for individuals with type 1 diabetes using the NDR and a 9-year observational panel from national health and socioeconomic data registers.”

“The final analysis set included data in 2005–2013 for 14,238 individuals with type 1 diabetes, of whom 4,991 had insulin pump therapy (598 individuals switched to pump therapy in 2005 or later after original inclusion as control subjects with MDI). We had 73,920 person-years of observation with a mean follow-up of 5 years per subject. […] The distribution of annual costs was left-skewed with a tail of observations with high costs, although the most person-years incurred costs corresponding to typical insulin therapy and up to two regular follow-up appointments […] The difference in the annual total cost between the therapy groups was $3,923 (95% CI $3,703–$4,143). […] The difference in annual medication costs, including disposables, was $3,600, indicating that they contributed significantly to overall annual cost differences. Pump users had more outpatient appointments (3.8 vs. 3.5 per year; P < 0.001) and were less likely to have person-years without use of outpatient or inpatient care (9% vs. 12% of person-years). Even with a median duration of diabetes of 21 years at baseline, the mean cost per patient-year of cardiovascular comorbidities and diabetic complications was low because of the overall low rates of events. […] Total annual costs increased with age for both insulin therapies, and pump therapy was associated with higher costs across age-groups. However, the cost increments for insulin pump therapy decreased with age (differences ranging from 56% for those 18–27 years of age to 44% for those ≥48 years [reference: MDI 18–27 years]). Total costs were higher for women but decreased with years of education and disposable income. […] The level of HbA1c at baseline affected the differences in average annual cost between study groups: the smallest difference ($2,300) was observed for individuals with HbA1c ≥8.6% (≥70 mmol/mol) and the greatest difference for individuals with HbA1c 6.5–8.5% (48–69 mmol/mol) at baseline [pump $12,824 vs. MDI $8,083; P < 0.001, US].”

“The study cohort was young (mean baseline age 34 years) with relatively few diabetic complications in both study groups. For instance, 1.5% of person-years had a cardiovascular event, and 5% had at least one health care contact with a cardiovascular diagnosis.

Observational studies provide a better indication of what is achieved in daily medical practice than randomized controlled studies (12). The strength of this observational study is the size and completeness of the study population, with virtually all adults with type 1 diabetes in Sweden included, longitudinal national register data, and a matching technique that accounts for time-variant variables, including diabetes duration, diabetes-related conditions and comorbidities, and demographic and socioeconomic factors. With the use of time-varying propensity scores, we allowed selected MDI control subjects to switch to pump therapy rather than to condition their eligibility or noneligibility on a future therapeutic change. The plentiful data allowed us to match two control subjects to each pump user to account for the variance in cost variables and enabled extensive subgroup and sensitivity analyses.”

“We observed only a few deaths (n = 353 [2.5% main analysis sample], no difference pump vs. MDI [OR 0.98 (95% CI 0.79–1.23)]) and similar rates of cardiovascular disease for pump and MDI in this study, except for borderline significantly fewer events with angina in the pump group. A heterogeneous distribution of events was found across nontreatment characteristics: ∼70% of all cardiovascular events occurred among individuals 48 years of age or older, and >90% of the events occurred among individuals with diabetes duration ≥20 years at baseline.

A lack of comparable calculations of total costs of diabetes treatment has been published to date, but cost-effectiveness studies of pump and MDI therapy have predicted long-term costs for the two treatment methods. Roze et al. (2) performed a meta-review of model-based studies that compared pump therapy and MDI, concluding that pump therapy can be cost effective. Published models have identified change in HbA1c and reduction in number of hypoglycemic events as important drivers of costs. A Swedish health technology assessment review in 2013 did not find evidence for differences in severe hypoglycemia between pump therapy and MDI but identified indications of lower HbA1c (13). […] Subgroup analyses by age indicated that the value of improved prevention may take time to manifest. Approximately one-quarter of additional annual costs for individuals with type 1 diabetes age ≥48 years (∼25% of the cohort) could be prevented with insulin pump therapy.

Whether insulin pump therapy is cost efficient ultimately depends on therapeutic effects beyond resource use and costs as well as on how much the payer is prepared to invest in additional quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). If the payer’s cost-effectiveness threshold is $50,000 per QALY gained, treatment needs to provide an average annual additional 0.1 QALY or, on the basis of the subgroup analyses, gains in the range of 0.06–0.12 QALY. Similarly, with a threshold of $100,000, the required gain in annual QALYs would have to be between 0.03 and 0.06. The average cost difference between insulin therapies in this study and a 20-year time horizon roughly correspond to a discounted (3%) lifetime cost difference of $62,000. The corresponding cost for a 40-year time horizon is $95,000. Previous model-based cost-effectiveness analyses have reported expected discounted QALY gains for a lifetime in the range of 0.46–1.06 QALYs, whereas the estimates of the increase in discounted lifetime costs varied (2).”

ii. Cumulative Risk of End-Stage Renal Disease Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Nationwide Inception Cohort Study.

“One of the most devastating complications of diabetes is chronic kidney disease. Relative to the general population, persons with diabetes have a 5- to 13-fold risk of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) (46). ESRD extensively increases risk of death among patients with diabetes (79), and diabetes is the most common cause of ESRD in most industrialized countries (10); a study of 18 European countries showed that type 2 diabetes was the most frequent renal disease leading to initiation of renal replacement therapy (11).

Most earlier studies of the incidence of ESRD in diabetes have used prevalence cohorts, which means that patients have not been followed since their diabetes diagnosis. Patients with all types of diabetes typically have been included, and the incidence rate of ESRD has been 1–9 per 1,000 patient-years (4,1214), with larger estimates among African Americans and those with a longer duration of diabetes. Notably, a prevalence cohort study from Italy including only patients with type 2 diabetes showed that only 10 of 1,408 patients developed ESRD over a 10-year follow-up (15). To our knowledge, only two inception cohort studies have addressed the incidence of ESRD. The UK Prospective Diabetes Study followed 5,097 patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes, only 14 of whom required renal replacement therapy during the median follow-up of 10.4 years (16). However, the cumulative risk was not computed, and any subgroup analyses would not have been possible because of the small number of patients who developed ESRD. A population-based study from Saskatchewan, Canada, included 90,429 incident cases of diabetes among the adult study population, and the results showed an almost threefold risk of ESRD among indigenous patients (17). Among nonindigenous patients, the cumulative incidence of ESRD was ∼1–2% at 20 years since the diabetes diagnosis.

We and others have estimated the cumulative risk of ESRD in inception cohorts of patients with type 1 diabetes (1821). Although type 2 diabetes is a major cause of ESRD, cumulative risk of ESRD after type 2 diabetes has been diagnosed is not well known. Here, we present the cumulative risk of ESRD during a 24-year follow-up of a nationwide population-based cohort of 421,429 patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes in 1990–2011.”

“Of 421,429 patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes in 1990–2011, 1,516 developed ESRD and 150,524 died before the end of 2013. The total number of patient-years of type 2 diabetes was 3,458,797 […]. The median follow-up was 6.82 years. A sex difference was found for age distribution: 70% of women and 55% of men were 60 years or older when type 2 diabetes was diagnosed. […] The cumulative risk of ESRD was 0.29% at 10 years and 0.74% at 20 years since the diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. […] Men had a 93% higher risk of ESRD than women. […] this male predominance is a common finding for all causes of ESRD (10). […] As an alternative analysis, the incidence rate of ESRD was calculated among all prevalent cases of type 2 diabetes in the time periods 1990–1999 and 2000–2011, thus including patients who were diagnosed with type 2 diabetes before 1990 but who contributed patient-years in 1990–2013 […]. During a total of 4,345,251 patient-years, 2,127 patients developed ESRD, resulting in an incidence rate of 0.49 per 1,000 patient-years (95% CI 0.47–0.51). The incidence rate was higher among men (0.66 [95% CI 0.63–0.70]) than among women (0.33 [95% CI 0.31–0.35]) and in 2000–2013 (0.53 [95% CI 0.51–0.56]) than in 1990–1999 (0.37 [95% CI 0.34–0.41]). The incidence rate of ESRD had increased most among men older than 70 years. For both men and women, the incidence rate of ESRD peaked among those aged 60–79 years.”

“Among patients diagnosed with type 2 diabetes between 1990 and 2011, the cumulative risk of death was 34% at 10 years and 64% at 20 years since the diagnosis of diabetes. […] Patients aged 70–79 years when diabetes was diagnosed had an eightfold risk of death during the follow-up compared with those aged 40–49 years. When calculating HR for death, occurrence of ESRD was included in the multivariable model as a time-dependent variable […], and ESRD increased the risk of death 4.2-fold during follow-up. […] In the interaction analysis, sex modified the effects of age and ESRD on HR for death. Among men, ESRD increased risk of death 3.8-fold and among women, 5.6-fold. Age (70–79 vs. 40–49 years) showed an HR for death of 7.4 among men and 9.8 among women. Also, a statistically significant interaction occurred between age and ESRD during follow-up, showing a weaker association between ESRD and risk of death among those aged 70 years or older (HR 3) than among those younger than 60 years (HR 5).”

“Our study shows that risk of ESRD is small among people with type 2 diabetes. This may seem unexpected, because a substantial proportion of patients are entering early stages of chronic kidney disease, with 25% of patients having microalbuminuria and 5% having macroalbuminuria 10 years after their diabetes diagnosis (16). These early stages of kidney disease are associated with increased premature mortality; this contributes to the fact that relatively few patients develop ESRD, as death is a common competing risk event. However, diabetes is the most common cause of ESRD in most industrialized countries, and because of a high and increasing prevalence of diabetes among the general population, a considerable absolute number of patients with type 2 diabetes need dialysis therapy (10,11). Our findings are important for clinicians who inform patients with type 2 diabetes about the associated risks and complications. […] Notably, people diagnosed with type 2 diabetes at an older age have a lower risk of ESRD and a higher risk of death than those diagnosed at a younger age. The cumulative risk of ESRD and death has decreased since the early 1990s among people with type 2 diabetes.”

iii. Impact of Age of Onset, Puberty, and Glycemic Control Followed From Diagnosis on Incidence of Retinopathy in Type 1 Diabetes: The VISS Study.

“In a population-based observational study, HbA1c for 451 patients diagnosed with diabetes before 35 years of age during 1983–1987 in southeast Sweden was followed for up to 18–24 years from diagnosis. Long-term mean weighted HbA1c (wHbA1c) was calculated. Retinopathy was evaluated by fundus photography and analyzed in relation to wHbA1c levels.”

RESULTS Lower wHbA1c, diabetes onset ≤5 years of age, and diabetes onset before puberty, but not sex, were associated with longer time to appearance of simplex retinopathy. Proliferative retinopathy was associated only with wHbA1c. The time to first appearance of any retinopathy decreased with increasing wHbA1c. Lower wHbA1c after ≤5 years’ diabetes duration was associated with later onset of simplex retinopathy but not proliferative retinopathy. With time, most patients developed simplex retinopathy, except for those of the category wHbA1c ≤50 mmol/mol (6.7%), for which 20 of 36 patients were without any retinopathy at the end of the follow-up in contrast to none of 49 with wHbA1c >80 mmol/mol (9.5%). […] At the end of the follow-up only 54 patients (12.5%) had no signs of retinopathy and 145 (33.6%) had slight simplex, 175 (40.5%) moderate simplex, and 57 (13.2%) proliferative retinopathy.”

CONCLUSIONS Onset at ≤5 years of age and lower wHbA1c the first 5 years after diagnosis are associated with longer duration before development of simplex retinopathy. There is a strong positive association between long-term mean HbA1c measured from diagnosis and up to 20 years and appearance of both simplex and proliferative retinopathy.”

“Complete avoidance of retinopathy in patients with type 1 diabetes evidently requires a very tight glycemic control, which is very difficult to achieve with the treatment tools available today and is also dangerous because of the risk of severe hypoglycemia (27). […] In clinical practice, it is of great importance to find the balance between the risk of potentially dangerous hypoglycemic events and quality of life and the risk of severe microvascular complications to be able to recommend an evidence-based optimal level of HbA1c both in the short-term and in the long-term. The observation that wHbA1c before and during puberty did not influence the prevalence of proliferative retinopathy at 20 years’ diabetes duration is of clinical importance in the setting of targets for glycemic control in young children for whom severe hypoglycemia might be especially dangerous.

Simplex retinopathy is not sight threatening, even if advanced simplex retinopathy is a risk factor for proliferative retinopathy (13). However, simplex retinopathy may regress, and in our study simplex retinopathy regressed in a group of patients with mean wHbA1c 7.0% (SD 0.7%) (53 [8] mmol/mol). Proliferative retinopathy is clinically more relevant and should be avoided. We previously showed that the threshold for proliferative retinopathy is higher than for simplex retinopathy (28). Proliferative retinopathy did not occur in this material in patients with wHbA1c <7.6% (60 mmol/mol), which indicates what should be an important goal for glycemic control. This is in close agreement with the position statement for type 1 diabetes in children and adolescents recently issued by the American Diabetes Association recommending an HbA1c target of <7.5% (58 mmol/mol) (31).

In summary, after 20 years of diabetes duration, there is a strong positive association between long-term mean wHbA1c followed from diagnosis and appearance of both simplex and proliferative retinopathy. Diabetes onset at <5 years of age and lower wHbA1c the first 5 years after diagnosis are associated with longer duration before development of simplex retinopathy but not proliferative retinopathy. Proliferative retinopathy does not appear in patients with wHbA1c <7.6% (60 mmol/mol).”

iv. Association of Diabetes and Glycated Hemoglobin With the Risk of Intracerebral Hemorrhage: A Population-Based Cohort Study.

“Spontaneous intracerebral hemorrhage (ICH) is a devastating condition accounting for 10–15% of all stroke cases. It is associated with a dismal prognosis, as only 38% of affected patients survive the first year (1).

Type 2 diabetes affects more than 415 million adults worldwide and is a well-known contributor to cardiovascular morbidity, cognitive decline, and all-cause mortality (2). Although diabetes is an independent risk factor for ischemic stroke (3), as yet there is no conclusive evidence for the association between diabetes and ICH, as previous studies showed conflicting results (48). […] We sought to determine 1) the association of diabetes and ICH and 2) the relationship between HbA1c levels and ICH in a large nationwide population-based cohort. […] We sought to determine 1) the association of diabetes and ICH and 2) the relationship between HbA1c levels and ICH in a large nationwide population-based cohort.”

Do keep in mind in the following that although the link between hemorrhagic stroke and diabetes is somewhat unclear (…for example: “in the Copenhagen Stroke Registry, hemorrhagic stroke was even six times less frequent in diabetic patients than in non-diabetic subjects (102). […] However, in another prospective population-based study DM was associated with an increased risk of primary intracerebral hemorrhage (103).”), the link between ischemic stroke and diabetes is strong and well-established – see the link for more details.

“This study is based on data from the computerized database of Clalit Health Services (CHS), which provides inclusive health care for more than half of the Israeli population. […] 313,130 patients had a preexisting diagnosis of diabetes and 1,167,585 individuals were without diabetes. Patients with diabetes had to have at least one test result for HbA1c in the 2 years before cohort entry (n = 297,486). Cohort participants (n = 1,465,071) were followed-up until reaching the study outcome (ICH), death, loss to follow-up, or end of follow-up at 31 December 2017 — whichever came first. […] The outcome of interest was ICH, defined as primary discharge diagnosis with ICH (ICD-9 code 431). […] Overall 4,170 patients had incident ICH during a mean (SD) follow-up of 7.3 (1.8) years and 10,730,915 person-years, reflecting an ICH crude incidence rate of 38.8 per 100,000 person-years. […] The strongest risk factors for ICH were prior ICH, prior stroke/transient ischemic attack (TIA), use of anticoagulation, hypertension, alcohol abuse, male sex, Arab ethnicity, chronic liver disease, and older age.”

“Because of the large number of potential confounders, we performed adjustment for a disease risk score (DRS), a summary measure of disease probability. The DRS was estimated using a Cox proportional hazards regression model for ICH outcome that included most clinically relevant ICH risk factors and other clinical covariates likely to be correlated with ICH […]. In comparison with conventional multivariate analyses, adjustment for the single variable DRS increases the efficiency of the analyses (16,17). It has been shown than the DRS and propensity score methods had comparable performance and that DRS has an advantage when multiple comparison groups are studied (16,17). […] The crude incidence rate of ICH was 78.9 per 100,000 person-years among patients with diabetes and 29.4 per 100,000 person-years among patients without diabetes (crude HR 2.69 [95% CI 2.53–2.87]) (Table 2). Diabetes remained significantly associated with ICH after adjustment for DRS (1.36 [1.27–1.45]). […] The results were unchanged after exclusion of new cases of diabetes and after censoring at the time of new diabetes diagnosis occurring during follow-up: DRS-adjusted HR 1.37 (95% CI 1.28–1.46) and 1.38 (1.29–1.47), respectively. […] The risk of ICH was directly associated with diabetes duration. Compared with the group without diabetes, the DRS-adjusted HR was 1.23 (95% CI 1.12–1.35) and 1.44 (1.34–1.56) for diabetes duration ≤5 years and >5 years, respectively. The corresponding HRs with adjustment for propensity score were 1.27 (1.15–1.41) and 1.65 (1.50–1.80), respectively […] HbA1c was significantly associated with ICH among patients with diabetes: adjusted HR 1.14 (95% CI 1.10–1.17) for each 1% increase in HbA1c […] HbA1c appears to have a nonlinear J-shaped relationship with ICH (Pnonlinearity = 0.0186), with the lowest risk observed at HbA1c of 6.5% (48 mmol/mol). […] The risk of ICH among patients with HbA1c of 6.5–6.7% (48–50 mmol/mol) was comparable with the risk in patients without diabetes, suggesting that albeit having diabetes, patients with good, but not extreme, diabetes control do not appear to have excess risk of ICH compared with patients without diabetes.”

“To date, the exact mechanisms underlying the association between diabetes, HbA1c, and ICH remain unknown. […] In summary, our study suggests that diabetes is associated with increased risk of ICH that is directly associated with diabetes duration. ICH and HbA1c appear to have a J-shaped relationship, suggesting that both poor control as well as extreme intensive diabetes control might be associated with increased risk.”

v. Nonproteinuric Versus Proteinuric Phenotypes in Diabetic Kidney Disease: A Propensity Score–Matched Analysis of a Nationwide, Biopsy-Based Cohort Study.

“Mainly based on the analysis of the data from patients with type 1 diabetes, in the clinical course of diabetic kidney disease it has long been considered that an increase of albuminuria, from normoalbuminuria (urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio ratio [UACR] <30 mg/g) to microalbuminuria (UACR 30–299 mg/g) to macroalbuminuria (UACR ≥300 mg/g), precedes the progression of renal decline (defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] <60 mL/min/1.73 m2) (13). Morphological changes known as nodular glomerular sclerosis (Kimmelstiel-Wilson nodule) have also been observed in patients with diabetes and loss of renal function (4,5). Therefore, patients with diabetes and reduced renal function are deemed to have overt proteinuria with nodular glomerular sclerosis. Recently, however, cumulative evidence from several cross-sectional studies revealed that a proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes develop progression of renal decline without proteinuria (macroalbuminuria) or even without microalbuminuria, suggesting the existence of a nonproteinuric phenotype of diabetic kidney disease defined as eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and UACR <300 mg/g (611). Despite increasing attention, few clinical trials and longitudinal studies in type 2 diabetes include individuals without proteinuria or individuals with biopsy-proven diabetic kidney disease, and therefore their clinicopathological characteristics, renal prognosis, and all-cause mortality are very limited.

Similar to the U.S. and most countries in Europe, Japan has been suffering from the expanding trend in the continued increase of the prevalence of diabetic kidney disease that leads to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and high mortality (1215). Commissioned by the Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare and the Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development with a goal of better understanding and halting the pandemic of diabetic kidney disease, we established a nationwide biopsy-based cohort of diabetic kidney disease with followed-up data, including ESRD and death ascertainment. Using this nationwide cohort and propensity score–matching methods, we aimed to investigate clinicopathological characteristics, renal prognosis, and mortality in patients with the nonproteinuric phenotype of diabetic kidney disease compared with patients with the classical proteinuric phenotype of diabetic kidney disease.”

“This is a retrospective study of patients who underwent clinical renal biopsy performed from 1 January 1985 to 31 December 2016 and had a pathological diagnosis of diabetic kidney disease at [one of] 18 hospitals in Japan […] 895 patients underwent clinical renal biopsy and had a pathological diagnosis of diabetic kidney disease in our cohort […]. We identified 526 who had an eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 at the time of biopsy. Among them, 88 had nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease (UACR <300 mg/g), and 438 had proteinuric diabetic kidney disease (UACR ≥300 mg/g) at baseline. After propensity score matching, the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease group comprised 82 patients and the proteinuric diabetic kidney disease group comprised 164 patients […] In propensity score–matched cohorts, the blood pressure in patients with nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease was better controlled compared with patients with proteinuric diabetic kidney disease, although patients with nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease were less prescribed RAAS blockade. Patients with nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease had lower total cholesterol levels and higher hemoglobin levels. For pathological characteristics, there was a difference in classification assignment for diabetic kidney disease between the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease group and proteinuric diabetic kidney disease group. […] Compared with the proteinuric diabetic kidney disease group, the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease group had less severe interstitial and vascular lesions. […] In a multivariable logistic regression model, older age, lower systolic blood pressure, higher hemoglobin level, and higher HbA1c were significantly associated with a higher odds of nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease.”

“After a median follow-up of 1.8 years (IQR 0.9–3.7) from the date of renal biopsy, 297 (56%) of the 526 patients had renal events. The 5-year CKD progression-free survival was 33.2% (95% CI 28.4–38.2%) for all patients, 86.9% (95% CI 73.1–93.9%) for the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease group, and 24.5% (95% CI 19.8–29.5%) for the proteinuric diabetic kidney disease group (log-rank test P < 0.001) […]. The same trend was seen in the propensity score–matched cohort: After a median follow-up of 1.9 years (IQR 0.9–5.0) from the date of renal biopsy, 124 (50%) of the 246 matched patients had renal events. The 5-year CKD progression-free survival was 46.4% (95% CI 38.7–53.6%) for all patients, 86.6% (95% CI 72.5–93.8%) for the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease group, and 30.3% (95% CI 22.4–38.6%) for the proteinuric diabetic kidney disease group (log-rank test P < 0.001) […]. Similarly, for the secondary outcome (all-cause mortality), after a median follow-up of 2.7 years (IQR 1.1–5.7) from the date of renal biopsy, 55 (10%) of the 526 patients had death events. The 5-year death-free survival was 89.7% (95% CI 85.6–92.7%) for all patients, 98.4% (95% CI 89.1–99.8%) for the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease group, and 87.5% (95% CI 82.5–91.2%) for the proteinuric diabetic kidney disease group (log-rank test P < 0.001) […]. The same trend was seen in the propensity matched cohort: After a median follow-up of 3.1 years (IQR 1.3–7.0) from the date of renal biopsy, 35 (14%) of the 246 matched patients had death events. The 5-year death-free survival was 88.2% (95% CI 82.0–92.3%) for all patients, 98.3% (95% CI 88.7–99.8%) for the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease group, and 82.6% (95% CI 73.6–88.8%) for the proteinuric diabetic kidney disease group (log-rank test P = 0.005) […] The overall CKD progression incidence was significantly lower in the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease group (30 [95% CI 18–50] per 1,000 person-years) than in the proteinuric diabetic kidney disease group (231 [95% CI 191–278] per 1,000 person-years; crude HR 0.15 [95% CI 0.08–0.26]). After adjustment for age, sex, known duration of diabetes, and baseline eGFR, the risk of CKD progression remained lower in the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease cohort than in the proteinuric diabetic kidney disease cohort (adjusted HR 0.13 [95% CI 0.08–0.24]). The risk of CKD progression was consistently lower in the nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease group than in the proteinuric diabetic kidney disease group when stratified by potential confounders such as age, sex, obesity, retinopathy, smoking status, use of RAAS blockade, hypertension, dyslipidemia, poor glycemic control, lower eGFR, and pathological findings.”

“In conclusion, in propensity score–matched cohorts of biopsy-proven nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease and proteinuric diabetic kidney disease, patients with nonproteinuric diabetic kidney disease had lower blood pressure with less frequent typical pathological lesions and were at lower risk of CKD progression and all-cause mortality. Further studies are warranted to confirm these findings in other cohorts.”

vi. Single herbal medicine for diabetic retinopathy (Cochrane).

“Diabetic retinopathy is one of the major causes of blindness and the number of cases has risen in recent years. Herbal medicine has been used to treat diabetes and its complications including diabetic retinopathy for thousands of years around the world. However, common practice is not always evidence‐based. Evidence is needed to help people with diabetic retinopathy or doctors to make judicious judgements about using herbal medicine as treatment.”

“We included 10 studies involving 754 participants, of which nine were conducted in China and one in Poland. In all studies, participants in both groups received conventional treatment for diabetic retinopathy which included maintaining blood glucose and lipids using medicines and keeping a stable diabetic diet. In three studies, the comparator group also received an additional potentially active comparator in the form of a vasoprotective drug. The single herbs or extracts included Ruscus extract tablet, Sanqi Tongshu capsule, tetramethylpyrazine injection, Xueshuantong injection, Puerarin injection and Xuesaitong injection. The Sanqi Tongshu capsule, Xueshuantong injection and Xuesaitong injection were all made from the extract of Radix Notoginseng (San qi) and the main ingredient was sanchinoside. The risk of bias was high in all included studies mainly due to lack of masking (blinding). None of the studies reported the primary outcome of this review, progression of retinopathy.

Combined analysis of herbal interventions suggested that people who took these herbs in combination with conventional treatment may have been more likely to gain 2 or more lines of visual acuity compared to people who did not take these herbs when compared to conventional intervention alone at the end of treatment (RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.48; 5 trials, 541 participants; low‐certainty evidence). Subgroup analyses based on the different single herbs found no evidence for different effects of different herbs, but the power of this analysis was low. […]

Authors’ conclusions

No conclusions could be drawn about the effect of any single herb or herbal extract on diabetic retinopathy from the current available evidence. It was difficult to exclude the placebo effect as a possible explanation for observed differences due to the lack of placebo control in the included studies. Further adequately designed trials are needed to establish the evidence.”


September 25, 2019 Posted by | Diabetes, Epidemiology, Health Economics, Medicine, Nephrology, Ophthalmology, Studies | Leave a comment