Development and Progression of Polyneuropathy Over 5 Years in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There is a need for knowledge regarding the natural course of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN), a complication in type 2 diabetes (T2D). The aim of this study was to examine the development of DPN over time. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed T2D, recruited from a national cohort, and controls without diabetes of similar age and sex, underwent sensory phenotyping in 2016-2018. The Toronto consensus criteria were used to classify patients into possible, probable, and confirmed DPN. For this 5-year, observational, follow-up, cohort study, all participants were invited to a reexamination combining bedside sensory examination, quantitative sensory testing (QST), nerve conduction studies (NCSs), and skin biopsies measuring intraepidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD) in order to compare phenotypic and diagnostic changes over time. RESULTS: Of the baseline 389 patients and 97 controls, 184 patients (median [interquartile range] diabetes duration 5.9 [4.1-7.4] years, mean hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] 51 ± 11 mmol/mol at baseline) and 43 controls completed follow-up (46.9%). Confirmed DPN was present in 35.8% and 50.3%, probable DPN in 27.2% and 14.6%, possible DPN in 17.2% and 16.6%, and no DPN in 15.2% and 17.9% at baseline and follow-up, respectively. The estimated prevalence (95% CI) of confirmed DPN was 33.5% (24.9-42.1) compared with 22.7% (17.5-28.0) at baseline. During the follow-up period, 43.9% of patients with probable DPN developed confirmed DPN. Progression of neuropathy occurred in 16.5% and 24.7% and regression in 5.9% and 18.6% of patients based on NCS and IENFD, respectively. Progression based on NCS and/or IENFD was associated with higher baseline waist circumference and triglycerides, and regression with lower baseline HbA1c. Patients with at least probable DPN at baseline but neither patients without DPN nor controls developed increased spread of hyposensitivity, more hyposensitivity on QST and lower NCS z-scores at follow-up, and worsening of nerve parameters at follow-up correlated with higher baseline triglycerides. DISCUSSION: In patients with well-regulated T2D, the proportion of patients with confirmed DPN increased over 5 years driven by progression from probable DPN. A large proportion of patients progressed, and a smaller proportion regressed on nerve parameters. Higher triglycerides correlated with this progression and may constitute a risk factor.

Cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy in patients with type 2 diabetes with and without sensorimotor polyneuropathy.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) in patients with diabetes is associated with poor prognosis. We aimed to assess signs of CAN and autonomic symptoms and to investigate the impact of sensorimotor neuropathy on CAN by examining type 2 diabetes patients with (DPN [distal sensorimotor polyneuropathy]) and without distal sensorimotor polyneuropathy (noDPN) and healthy controls (HC). Secondarily, we aimed to describe the characteristics of patients with CAN. METHODS: A population of 374 subjects from a previously described cohort of the Danish Centre for Strategic Research in Type 2 Diabetes (DD2) were included. Subjects were examined with the Vagus™ device for the diagnosis of CAN, where two or more abnormal cardiovascular autonomic reflex tests indicate definite CAN. Autonomic symptoms were assessed with Composite Autonomic Symptom Score 31 (COMPASS 31) questionnaire. DPN was defined according to the Toronto consensus panel definition. RESULTS: Definite CAN was present in 22% with DPN, 7% without DPN and 3% of HC, and 91% of patients with definite CAN had DPN. Patients with DPN and definite CAN reported higher COMPASS 31 scores compared to patients with noDPN (20.0 vs. 8.3, p < 0.001) and no CAN (22.1 vs. 12.3, p = 0.01). CAN was associated with HbA1c and age in a multivariate logistic regression analysis but was not associated with IEFND or triglycerides. INTERPRETATION: One in five patients with DPN have CAN and specific CAN characteristics may help identify patients at risk for developing this severe diabetic complication. Autonomic symptoms were strongly associated with having both DPN and CAN, but too unspecific for diagnosing CAN.

The characteristics of pain and dysesthesia in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy.

INTRODUCTION/AIMS: Patients with diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) may experience paresthesia, dysesthesia, and pain. We aimed to characterize the predictors, symptoms, somatosensory profile, neuropathy severity, and impact of painful DPN and dysesthetic DPN. METHODS: This study was a cross-sectional study of type 2 diabetes patients with confirmed DPN, diagnosed using widely accepted methods including a clinical examination, skin biopsy, and nerve conduction studies. FINDINGS: Of 126 patients with confirmed DPN, 52 had DPN without pain or dysesthesia, 21 had dysesthetic DPN, and 53 painful DPN. Patients with painful DPN were less physically active and suffered from more pain elsewhere than in the feet compared to patients with DPN without pain. Patients with painful DPN had the largest loss of small and large sensory fiber function, and there was a gradient of larger spatial distribution of sensory loss from DPN without dysesthesia/pain to dysesthetic DPN and to painful DPN. This could indicate that patients with dysesthesia had more severe neuropathy than patients without dysesthesia but less than patients with painful DPN. Patients with dysesthetic and painful DPN had higher symptom scores for depression and fatigue than those without dysesthesia/pain with no difference between dysesthetic and painful DPN. CONCLUSIONS: There was a gradient of increasing sensory loss from DPN without dysesthesia/pain to dysesthetic DPN and to painful DPN. Pain and dysesthesia are common in DPN and both interfere with daily life. It is therefore important to consider dysesthesia when diagnosing and treating patients with neuropathy.

Analysis of Macrophages and Peptidergic Fibers in the Skin of Patients With Painful Diabetic Polyneuropathy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The mechanisms of pain in patients with diabetic polyneuropathy are unknown. Studies have suggested a role of inflammation and increased neuropeptides peripherally in pain generation. This study examined the possible skin markers of painful diabetic polyneuropathy (P-DPN): macrophages, substance P (SP), and calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP). METHODS: The participants were included from a large Danish cross-sectional clinical study of type 2 diabetes. We diagnosed definite diabetic polyneuropathy using the Toronto criteria and used the Neuropathic Pain Special Interest Group classification for defining P-DPN. We included 60 skin biopsies from patients with diabetic polyneuropathy-30 with P-DPN and 30 with nonpainful diabetic polyneuropathy (NP-DPN)-and 30 biopsies from healthy controls of similar age and sex. The biopsies were stained using PGP 9.5, IbA1, and SP and CGRP primary markers. RESULTS: There was increased macrophage density in patients with P-DPN (8.0%) compared with that in patients with NP-DPN (5.1%, p < 0.001), and there was increased macrophage density in patients with NP-DPN (5.1%) compared with that in healthy controls (3.1%, p < 0.001). When controlling for neuropathy severity, body mass index, age, and sex, there was still a difference in macrophage density between patients with P-DPN and patients with NP-DPN. Patients with P-DPN had higher median nerve fiber length density (274.5 and 155 mm-2 for SP and CGRP, respectively) compared with patients with NP-DPN (176 and 121 mm-2 for SP and CGRP, respectively, p = 0.009 and 0.04) and healthy controls (185.5 and 121.5 mm-2 for SP and CGRP, respectively), whereas there was no difference between patients with NP-DPN and controls without diabetes (p = 0.64 and 0.49, respectively). The difference between P-DPN and NP-DPN for SP and CGRP was significant only in female patients, although a trend was seen in male patients. DISCUSSION: The findings point to a possible involvement of the innate immune system in the pathogenesis of neuropathic pain in patients with DPN, although markers of activated macrophages were not measured in this study.

Falls and fractures associated with type 2 diabetic polyneuropathy: A cross-sectional nationwide questionnaire study.

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: To examine the prevalence of falls and fractures, and the association with symptoms of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) in patients with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A detailed questionnaire on neuropathy symptoms and falls was sent to 6,726 patients enrolled in the Danish Center for Strategic Research in Type 2 Diabetes cohort (median age 65 years, diabetes duration 4.6 years). Complete data on fractures and patient characteristics were ascertained from population-based health registries. We defined possible DPN as a score ≥4 on the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instruments questionnaire. Using Poisson regression analyses, we estimated the adjusted prevalence ratio (aPR) of falls and fractures, comparing patients with and without DPN. RESULTS: In total, 5,359 patients (80%) answered the questions on the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instruments questionnaire and falls. Within the year preceding the questionnaire response, 17% (n = 933) reported at least one fall and 1.4% (n = 76) suffered from a fracture. The prevalence ratio of falls was substantially increased in patients with possible DPN compared with those without (aPR 2.33, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.06-2.63). The prevalence ratio increased with the number of falls from aPR 1.51 (95% CI 1.22-1.89) for one fall to aPR 5.89 (95% CI 3.84-9.05) for four or more falls within the preceding year. Possible DPN was associated with a slightly although non-significantly increased risk of fractures (aPR 1.32, 95% CI 0.75-2.33). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes and symptoms of DPN had a highly increased risk of falling. These results emphasize the need for preventive interventions to reduce fall risk among patients with type 2 diabetes and possible DPN.

Small and large fiber sensory polyneuropathy in type 2 diabetes: Influence of diagnostic criteria on neuropathy subtypes.

Diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) can be classified based on fiber diameter into three subtypes: small fiber neuropathy (SFN), large fiber neuropathy (LFN), and mixed fiber neuropathy (MFN). We examined the effect of different diagnostic models on the frequency of polyneuropathy subtypes in type 2 diabetes patients with DPN. This study was based on patients from the Danish Center for Strategic Research in Type 2 Diabetes cohort. We defined DPN as probable or definite DPN according to the Toronto Consensus Criteria. DPN was then subtyped according to four distinct diagnostic models. A total of 277 diabetes patients (214 with DPN and 63 with no DPN) were included in the study. We found a considerable variation in polyneuropathy subtypes by applying different diagnostic models independent of the degree of certainty of DPN diagnosis. For probable and definite DPN, the frequency of subtypes across diagnostic models varied from: 1.4% to 13.1% for SFN, 9.3% to 21.5% for LFN, 51.4% to 83.2% for MFN, and 0.5% to 14.5% for non-classifiable neuropathy (NCN). For the definite DPN group, the frequency of subtypes varied from: 1.6% to 13.5% for SFN, 5.6% to 20.6% for LFN, 61.9% to 89.7% for MFN, and 0.0% to 6.3% for NCN. The frequency of polyneuropathy subtypes depends on the type and number of criteria applied in a diagnostic model. Future consensus criteria should clearly define sensory functions to be tested, methods of testing, and how findings should be interpreted for both clinical practice and research purpose.

A randomized, controlled trial of a ß2-agonist in painful polyneuropathy.

ABSTRACT: Experimental data have suggested that in neuropathic pain, tricyclic antidepressants may work solely through a ß2-agonist action. The aim of this study was to test if the ß2-agonist terbutaline relieves painful polyneuropathy. The study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled and active-controlled, 3-way, cross-over trial among patients with painful polyneuropathy. The treatment periods were of 5 weeks' duration and were preceded by 1 week for washout and 1 week for baseline observations. The patients received terbutaline (5-15 mg), imipramine (30-150 mg), or placebo in a random order. Drug doses depended on age and metabolizer status. The change in total pain recorded from ratings in diaries (numeric rating scale [NRS] 0-10) was the primary outcome, and the change in rating of specific pain symptoms (NRS 0-10), patient global impression of change, and sleep disturbance were secondary outcomes. Forty-seven patients were randomized. The median score for total pain changed from NRS 6.4 to 6.1 from baseline to week 5 on terbutaline with an average effect during the treatment period as compared with placebo of 0.13 (95% confidence interval -0.12 to 0.38, P = 0.32). The median score for total pain on imipramine changed from NRS 6.6 to 4.8 with an average effect as compared with placebo of -1.17 (95% confidence interval -1.42 to -0.92, P < 0.001). Secondary outcomes were also unaltered by terbutaline but improved by imipramine. The ß2-agonist terbutaline has no effect in painful polyneuropathy. ß2-agonism seems not to be an important mechanism of action of tricyclic antidepressants in neuropathic pain.

Diabetic polyneuropathy and pain, prevalence, and patient characteristics: a cross-sectional questionnaire study of 5,514 patients with recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

Most studies of diabetic polyneuropathy (DPN) and painful DPN are conducted in persons with longstanding diabetes. This cross-sectional study aimed to estimate the prevalence of DPN and painful DPN, important risk factors, and the association with mental health in recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes. A total of 5514 (82%) patients (median diabetes duration 4.6 years) enrolled in the Danish Centre for Strategic Research in Type 2 Diabetes cohort responded to a detailed questionnaire on neuropathy and pain. A score ≥4 on the MNSI questionnaire determined possible DPN, whereas pain presence in both feet together with a score ≥3 on the DN4 questionnaire determined possible painful DPN. The prevalence of possible DPN and possible painful DPN was 18% and 10%, respectively. Female sex, age, diabetes duration, body mass index, and smoking were associated with possible DPN, whereas only smoking showed a clear association with possible painful DPN (odds ratio 1.52 [95% confidence interval: 1.20-1.93]). Possible DPN and painful DPN were independently and additively associated with lower quality of life, poorer sleep, and symptoms of depression and anxiety. Possible DPN itself had greater impact on mental health than neuropathic pain. This large study emphasizes the importance of careful screening for DPN and pain early in the course of type 2 diabetes.

Painful and non-painful diabetic polyneuropathy: Clinical characteristics and diagnostic issues.

Diabetic neuropathy (DN) is a common complication of diabetes and can be either painful or non-painful. It is challenging to diagnose this complication, as no biomarker or clear consensus on the clinical definition of either painful or non-painful DN exists. Hence, a hierarchical classification has been developed categorizing the probability of the diagnosis into: possible, probable or definite, based on the clinical presentation of symptoms and signs. Pain is a warning signal of tissue damage, and non-painful DN therefore represents a clinical and diagnostic challenge because it often goes unnoticed until irreversible nerve damage has occurred. Simple clinical tests seem to be the best for evaluation of DN in the general care for diabetes. Screening programs at regular intervals might be the most optimal strategy for early detection and interventions to possibly prevent further neuronal damage and to lower the economic burden of this complication.

A PRPH splice-donor variant associates with reduced sural nerve amplitude and risk of peripheral neuropathy.

Nerve conduction (NC) studies generate measures of peripheral nerve function that can reveal underlying pathology due to axonal loss, demyelination or both. We perform a genome-wide association study of sural NC amplitude and velocity in 7045 Icelanders and find a low-frequency splice-donor variant in PRPH (c.996+1G>A; MAF = 1.32%) associating with decreased NC amplitude but not velocity. PRPH encodes peripherin, an intermediate filament (IF) protein involved in cytoskeletal development and maintenance of neurons. Through RNA and protein studies, we show that the variant leads to loss-of-function (LoF), as when over-expressed in a cell line devoid of other IFs, it does not allow formation of the normal filamentous structure of peripherin, yielding instead punctate protein inclusions. Recall of carriers for neurological assessment confirms that from an early age, homozygotes have significantly lower sural NC amplitude than non-carriers and are at risk of a mild, early-onset, sensory-negative, axonal polyneuropathy.