METHODS: Patients with T2D and HbA1c ≥ 8 % and body mass index (BMI) ≥ 27 kg/m2 and/or waist circumference ≥ 80 cm in women and ≥90 cm in men were recruited. The intervention in Diabetes Centre included 1) nurse-led, group-based workshops; 2) review by endocrinologists; 3) telephone reminders by healthcare assistants and 4) peer support during visits. The usual care (UC) group received consultations at outpatient clinic without workshops or peer support. The MIC group received UC after 1-year of intervention. The primary outcome was change of HbA1c from baseline at 1- and 3-year.
RESULTS: Of 207 eligible patients [age (mean ± standard deviation): 56.9 ± 8.8 years, 47.4 % men, disease duration: 13.5 ± 8.2 years, HbA1c: 9.6 ± 1.3 %, BMI: 28.8 ± 4.3 kg/m2, waist circumference: 101.5 ± 9.9 cm (men), 95.3 ± 9.8 cm (women)], 104 received MIC and 103 received UC. 95 % patients had repeat assessments at 1- and 3-year. After adjustment for confounders, MIC had greater HbA1c reduction (β -0.51, 95 % confidence interval [CI] -1.00 to -0.01; P = 0.045) than UC at 1-year, with sustained improvement at 3-year (β -0.56, CI -1.10 to -0.02; P = 0.044).
CONCLUSION: Team-based MIC for 1 year improved glycemic control in obese T2D which was sustained at 3-year.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of data from adults with T2D from 11 Asian countries/regions with structured assessment enrolled in the prospective Joint Asia Diabetes Evaluation (JADE) register between November 2007 and December 2019. Patients receiving insulin and/or injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists were excluded.
RESULTS: Amongst 62 512 patients (mean ± standard deviation age: 57.3 ± 11.8 years; 53.6% men), 54 783 (87.6%) were treated with OGLDs at enrolment. Most received one (37.5%) or two (44.2%) OGLDs. In the entire cohort, 59.4% of treated patients received SU-based therapy with variations amongst countries/regions. Overall, 79.5% of SU regimens were based on SUs plus metformin, and 22.1% on SUs plus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Among SU users, gliclazide was most commonly prescribed (46.7%), followed by glimepiride (40.0%) and glibenclamide (8.1%). More gliclazide users entered the cohort with glycated haemoglobin levels <53 mmol/mol (7%) than non-gliclazide SU users (odds ratio [OR] 1.09, 95% CI 1.02-1.17), with less frequent self-reported hypoglycaemia in the 3 months before registration (OR 0.81, 95% CI 0.72-0.92; adjusted for sociodemographic factors, cardiometabolic risk factors, complications, use of other OGLDs, country/region and year of registration).
CONCLUSION: In Asia, SUs are a popular OGLD class, often combined with metformin. Good glycaemic control and safety profiles associated with the use of SUs, including gliclazide, support their position as a key treatment option in patients with T2D.
METHODS: SUDOSCAN, a non-invasive tool, provides an age-adjusted electrochemical skin conductance (ESC) composite score incorporating hands/feet ESC measurements, with a score ≤53 indicating sudomotor dysfunction. A consecutive cohort of 2833 Chinese adults underwent structured diabetes assessment in 2012-13; 2028 participants without preexisting cardiovascular disease (CVD) and CKD were monitored for incident cardiovascular-renal events until 2015.
RESULTS: In this prospective cohort {mean age 57.0 [standard deviation (SD) 10.0] years; median T2D duration 7.0 [interquartile range (IQR) 3.0-13.0] years; 56.1% men; 72.5% never-smokers; baseline ESC composite score 60.7 (SD 14.5)}, 163 (8.0%) and 25 (1.2%) participants developed incident CKD and CVD, respectively, after 2.3 years of follow-up. The adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) per 1-unit decrease in the ESC composite score for incident CKD, CVD and all-cause death were 1.02 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01-1.04], 1.04 (1.00-1.07) and 1.04 (1.00-1.08), respectively. Compared with participants with an ESC composite score >53, those with a score ≤53 had an aHR of 1.56 (95% CI 1.09-2.23) for CKD and 3.11 (95% CI 1.27-7.62) for CVD, independent of common risk markers. When added to clinical variables (sex and duration of diabetes), the ESC composite score improved discrimination of all outcomes with appropriate reclassification of CKD risk.
CONCLUSIONS: A low ESC composite score independently predicts incident cardiovascular-renal events and death in T2D, which may improve the screening strategy for early intervention.
METHODS: In this prospective observational study, we measured BCAAs in fasting serum samples collected at inception from 2139 T2D patients free of cardiovascular-renal diseases. The study outcome was the first hospitalization for HF.
RESULTS: During 29 103 person-years of follow-up, 115 primary events occurred (age: 54.8 ± 11.2 years, 48.2% men, median [interquartile range] diabetes duration: 5 years [1-10]). Patients with incident HF had 5.6% higher serum BCAAs than those without HF (median 639.3 [561.3-756.3] vs 605.2 [524.8-708.7] μmol/L; P = .01). Serum BCAAs had a positive linear association with incident HF (per-SD increase in logarithmically transformed BCAAs: hazard ratio [HR] 1.22 [95% CI 1.07-1.39]), adjusting for age, sex, and diabetes duration. The HR remained significant after sequential adjustment of risk factors including incident coronary heart disease (1.24, 1.09-1.41); blood pressure, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and baseline use of related medications (1.31, 1.14-1.50); HbA1c , waist circumference, triglyceride, and baseline use of related medications (1.28, 1.11-1.48); albuminuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate (1.28, 1.11-1.48). The competing risk of death analyses showed similar results.
CONCLUSIONS: Circulating levels of BCAAs are independently associated with incident HF in patients with T2D. Prospective cohort analysis and randomized trials are needed to evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of using different interventions to optimize BCAAs levels in these patients.
METHODS AND FINDINGS: The web-based Joint Asia Diabetes Evaluation (JADE) platform provides a protocol to guide data collection for issuing a personalized JADE report including risk categories (1-4, low-high), 5-year probabilities of cardiovascular-renal events, and trends and targets of 4 risk factors with tailored decision support. The JADE program is a prospective cohort study implemented in a naturalistic environment where patients underwent nurse-led structured evaluation (blood/urine/eye/feet) in public and private outpatient clinics and diabetes centers in Hong Kong. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 16,624 Han Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes who were enrolled in 2007-2015. In the public setting, the non-JADE group (n = 3,587) underwent structured evaluation for risk factors and complications only, while the JADE (n = 9,601) group received a JADE report with group empowerment by nurses. In a community-based, nurse-led, university-affiliated diabetes center (UDC), the JADE-Personalized (JADE-P) group (n = 3,436) received a JADE report, personalized empowerment, and annual telephone reminder for reevaluation and engagement. The primary composite outcome was time to the first occurrence of cardiovascular-renal diseases, all-site cancer, and/or death, based on hospitalization data censored on 30 June 2017. During 94,311 person-years of follow-up in 2007-2017, 7,779 primary events occurred. Compared with the JADE group (136.22 cases per 1,000 patient-years [95% CI 132.35-140.18]), the non-JADE group had higher (145.32 [95% CI 138.68-152.20]; P = 0.020) while the JADE-P group had lower event rates (70.94 [95% CI 67.12-74.91]; P < 0.001). The adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for the primary composite outcome were 1.22 (95% CI 1.15-1.30) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.66-0.75), respectively, independent of risk profiles, education levels, drug usage, self-care, and comorbidities at baseline. We reported consistent results in propensity-score-matched analyses and after accounting for loss to follow-up. Potential limitations include its nonrandomized design that precludes causal inference, residual confounding, and participation bias.
CONCLUSIONS: ICT-assisted integrated care was associated with a reduction in clinical events, including death in type 2 diabetes in public and private healthcare settings.
Objective: To examine the effects of a quality improvement intervention comprising information and communications technology and contact with nonphysician personnel on the care and cardiometabolic risk factors of patients with type 2 diabetes in 8 Asia-Pacific countries.
Design, Setting, and Participants: This 12-month multinational open-label randomized clinical trial was conducted from June 28, 2012, to April 28, 2016, at 50 primary care or hospital-based diabetes centers in 8 Asia-Pacific countries (India, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam). Six countries were low and middle income, and 2 countries were high income. The study was conducted in 2 phases; phase 1 enrolled 7537 participants, and phase 2 enrolled 13 297 participants. Participants in both phases were randomized on a 1:1 ratio to intervention or control groups. Data were analyzed by intention to treat and per protocol from July 3, 2019, to July 21, 2020.
Interventions: In both phases, the intervention group received 3 care components: a nurse-led Joint Asia Diabetes Evaluation (JADE) technology-guided structured evaluation, automated personalized reports to encourage patient empowerment, and 2 or more telephone or face-to-face contacts by nurses to increase patient engagement. In phase 1, the control group received the JADE technology-guided structured evaluation and automated personalized reports. In phase 2, the control group received the JADE technology-guided structured evaluation only.
Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was the incidence of a composite of diabetes-associated end points, including cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, visual impairment or eye surgery, lower extremity amputation or foot ulcers requiring hospitalization, all-site cancers, and death. The secondary outcomes were the attainment of 2 or more primary diabetes-associated targets (glycated hemoglobin A1c <7.0%, blood pressure <130/80 mm Hg, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol <100 mg/dL) and/or 2 or more key performance indices (reduction in glycated hemoglobin A1c≥0.5%, reduction in systolic blood pressure ≥5 mm Hg, reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥19 mg/dL, and reduction in body weight ≥3.0%).
Results: A total of 20 834 patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized in phases 1 and 2. In phase 1, 7537 participants (mean [SD] age, 60.0 [11.3] years; 3914 men [51.9%]; 4855 patients [64.4%] from low- and middle-income countries) were randomized, with 3732 patients allocated to the intervention group and 3805 patients allocated to the control group. In phase 2, 13 297 participants (mean [SD] age, 54.0 [11.1] years; 7754 men [58.3%]; 13 297 patients [100%] from low- and middle-income countries) were randomized, with 6645 patients allocated to the intervention group and 6652 patients allocated to the control group. In phase 1, compared with the control group, the intervention group had a similar risk of experiencing any of the primary outcomes (odds ratio [OR], 0.94; 95% CI, 0.74-1.21) but had an increased likelihood of attaining 2 or more primary targets (OR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.21-1.49) and 2 or more key performance indices (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.04-1.34). In phase 2, the intervention group also had a similar risk of experiencing any of the primary outcomes (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.83-1.25) and had a greater likelihood of attaining 2 or more primary targets (OR, 1.25; 95% CI, 1.14-1.37) and 2 or more key performance indices (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.33-1.68) compared with the control group. For attainment of 2 or more primary targets, larger effects were observed among patients in low- and middle-income countries (OR, 1.50; 95% CI, 1.29-1.74) compared with high-income countries (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 1.03-1.39) (P = .04).
Conclusions and Relevance: In this 12-month clinical trial, the use of information and communications technology and nurses to empower and engage patients did not change the number of clinical events but did reduce cardiometabolic risk factors among patients with type 2 diabetes, especially those in low- and middle-income countries in the Asia-Pacific region.
Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01631084.
METHODS: Adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) from 11 Asian countries/areas were assessed using the same protocol (2007-2015). We compared treatment target attainment (HbA1c < 7%, blood pressure [BP] < 130/80 mmHg, risk-based LDL-cholesterol, lack of central obesity [waist circumference <90 cm in men or <80 cm in women), use of cardiorenal-protective drugs (renin-angiotensin system [RAS] inhibitors, statins), and self-reported health habits including self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) by gender. Analyses were stratified by countries/areas, age of natural menopause (<50 vs. ≥50 years), and comorbidities (atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease [ASCVD], heart failure, kidney impairment [eGFR < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2]).
FINDINGS: Among 106,376 patients (53.2% men; median (interquartile range) diabetes duration: 6.0 (2.0-12.0) years; mean ± SD HbA1c 8.0 ± 1.9%; 27% insulin-treated), women were older and less likely to receive college education than men (28.9% vs. 48.8%). Women were less likely to smoke/drink alcohol and were physically less active than men. Women had lower BP (<130/80 mmHg: 29.4% vs. 25.7%), less general obesity (54.8% vs. 57.8%) but more central obesity than men (77.5% vs. 57.3%). Women were less likely to have ASCVD (12.8% vs. 17.0%) or heart failure (1.3% vs. 2.3%), but more likely to have kidney impairment (22.3% vs. 17.6%) and any-site cancer than men (2.5% vs. 1.6%). In most countries/areas, more men attained HbA1c <7% and risk-based LDL-cholesterol level than women. After adjusting for potential confounders including countries and centres, men had 1.63 odds ratio (95% CI 1.51, 1.74) of attaining ≥3 treatment targets than women.
INTERPRETATION: Asian women with T2D had worse quality of care than men especially in middle-income countries/areas, calling for targeted implementation programs to close these care gaps.
SPONSOR: Asia Diabetes Foundation.
FUNDING: Nil.