Urinary phenols and parabens and diabetes among US adults, NHANES 2005-2014.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Phenols and parabens are ubiquitous and have been associated with markers of cardiovascular health. However, the literature lacks population-based studies examining the link between these endocrine disruptors and diabetes. We examined the association between paraben/phenol concentrations and diabetes among a nationally representative sample of US adults. METHODS AND RESULTS: We utilized data from the 2005-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (N = 8498). Total urinary concentrations of BPA, triclosan, BP-3, and propyl, butyl, ethyl, and methyl parabens were measured from urine specimens collected during the examination session. Diabetes status was based on self-report of a previous diagnosis or HbA1c≥6.5%. We used logistic regression to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) associated with the difference in log-transformed values of the 75th and 25th percentiles for each phenol/paraben, adjusting for potential confounders. The adjusted ORs (95% CI) of diabetes comparing the 75th to 25th percentiles of each paraben/phenol were 1.09 (0.96-1.23) for BPA, 0.84 (0.72-0.98) for triclosan, 0.69 (0.61-0.79) for BP-3, 0.71 (0.61-0.83) for propyl paraben, 0.66 (0.54-0.80) for butyl paraben, 0.60 (0.51-0.71) for ethyl paraben, and 0.79 (0.68-0.91) for methyl paraben. CONCLUSIONS: Higher concentrations of triclosan, BP-3, and propyl, butyl, ethyl, and methyl parabens were associated with lower odds of diabetes. These findings warrant further investigation into the potential mechanism behind the observed associations and the temporal direction of the associations, given that we cannot rule out reverse causation. Future studies of these endocrine disruptors may improve the understanding of their relationship with diabetes.

RISK FACTORS FOR HEARING IMPAIRMENT IN TYPE 1 DIABETES.

Objective: Studies have demonstrated that glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is a significant predictor of hearing impairment in type 1 diabetes. We identified additional factors associated with hearing impairment in participants with type 1 diabetes from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial and its observational follow-up, the Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) study. Methods: A total of 1,150 DCCT/EDIC participants were recruited for the Hearing Study. A medical history, physical measurements, and a self-administered hearing questionnaire were obtained. Audiometry was performed by study-certified personnel and assessed centrally. Logistic regression models assessed the association of risk factors and comorbidities with speech- and high-frequency hearing impairment. Results: Mean age was 55 ± 7 years, duration of diabetes 34 ± 5 years, and DCCT/EDIC HbA1c 7.9 ± 0.9% (63 mmol/mol). In multivariable models, higher odds of speech-frequency impairment were significantly associated with older age, higher HbA1c, history of noise exposure, male sex, and higher triglycerides. Higher odds of high-frequency impairment were associated with older age, male sex, history of noise exposure, higher skin intrinsic florescence (SIF) as a marker of tissue glycation, higher HbA1c, nonprofessional/nontechnical occupations, sedentary activity, and lower low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol. Among participants who previously completed computed tomography and carotid ultrasonography, coronary artery calcification (CAC) >0 and carotid intima-medial thickness were significantly associated with high-but not speech-frequency impairment. Conclusion: Consistent with previous reports, male sex, age, several metabolic factors, and noise exposure are independently associated with hearing impairment. The association with SIF further emphasizes the importance of glycemia-as a modifiable risk factor-over time. In addition, the macrovascular contribution of CAC is novel and important. Abbreviations: AER = albumin excretion rate; CAC = coronary artery calcification; CVD = cardiovascular disease; DCCT/EDIC = Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications; eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate; ETDRS = Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study; HbA1c = glycated hemoglobin; HDL = high-density lipoprotein; IMT = intima-media thickness; LDL = low-density lipoprotein; NHANES = National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; OR = odds ratio; SIF = skin intrinsic fluorescence; T1D = type 1 diabetes.

Prevalence of Diagnosed Diabetes in Adults by Diabetes Type - United States, 2016.

Currently 23 million U.S. adults have been diagnosed with diabetes (1). The two most common forms of diabetes are type 1 and type 2. Type 1 diabetes results from the autoimmune destruction of the pancreas's beta cells, which produce insulin. Persons with type 1 diabetes require insulin for survival; insulin may be given as a daily shot or continuously with an insulin pump (2). Type 2 diabetes is mainly caused by a combination of insulin resistance and relative insulin deficiency (3). A small proportion of diabetes cases might be types other than type 1 or type 2, such as maturity-onset diabetes of the young or latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (3). Although the majority of prevalent cases of type 1 and type 2 diabetes are in adults, national data on the prevalence of type 1 and type 2 in the U.S. adult population are sparse, in part because of the previous difficulty in classifying diabetes by type in surveys (2,4,5). In 2016, supplemental questions to help distinguish diabetes type were added to the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) (6). This study used NHIS data from 2016 to estimate the prevalence of diagnosed diabetes among adults by primary type. Overall, based on self-reported type and current insulin use, 0.55% of U.S. adults had diagnosed type 1 diabetes, representing 1.3 million adults; 8.6% had diagnosed type 2 diabetes, representing 21.0 million adults. Of all diagnosed cases, 5.8% were type 1 diabetes, and 90.9% were type 2 diabetes; the remaining 3.3% of cases were other types of diabetes. Understanding the prevalence of diagnosed diabetes by type is important for monitoring trends, planning public health responses, assessing the burden of disease for education and management programs, and prioritizing national plans for future type-specific health services.

Detecting prediabetes among Hispanics/Latinos from diverse heritage groups: Does the test matter? Findings from the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos.

The objectives of this analysis were to compare the ability of fasting plasma glucose (FPG), post oral load plasma glucose (2hPG), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) to identify U.S. Hispanic/Latino individuals with prediabetes, and to assess its cardiovascular risk factor correlates. This is a cross-sectional analysis of baseline data from 15,507 adults without self-reported diabetes mellitus from six Hispanic/Latino heritage groups, enrolled in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos, which takes place in four U.S. communities. The prevalence of prediabetes was determined according to individual or combinations of ADA-defined cut points: FPG=5.6-7.0mmol/L, 2hPG=7.8-11.1mmol/L, and HbA1c=5.7%-6.4% (39-46mmol/mol). The sensitivity of these criteria to detect prediabetes was estimated. The prevalence ratios (PRs) for selected cardiovascular risk factors were compared among alternative categories of prediabetes versus normoglycemia [FPG<5.6mmol/L and 2hPG<7.8mmol/L and HbA1c<5.7% (39mmol/mol)]. Approximately 36% of individuals met any of the ADA prediabetes criteria. Using 2hPG as the gold standard, the sensitivity of FPG was 40.1%, HbA1c was 45.6%, and that of HbA1c+FPG was 62.2%. The number of significant PRs for cardiovascular risk factors was higher among individuals with isolated 2hPG=7.8-11.1mmol/L, FPG=5.6-7.0mmol/L+HbA1c=5.7%-6.4%, or those who met the three prediabetes criteria. Assessing FPG, HbA1c, and cardiovascular risk factors in Hispanics/Latinos at risk might enhance the early prevention of diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular complications in this young and growing population, independent of their heritage group.

HEMOGLOBIN A1C, BLOOD PRESSURE, AND LDL-CHOLESTEROL CONTROL AMONG HISPANIC/LATINO ADULTS WITH DIABETES: RESULTS FROM THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY HEALTH STUDY/STUDY OF LATINOS (HCHS/SOL).

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of Hispanic/Latino adults with diabetes who meet target hemoglobin A1c, blood pressure (BP), and low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) recommendations, and angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) and statin medication use by heritage and sociodemographic and diabetes-related characteristics. METHODS: Data were cross-sectional, collected between 2008 and 2011, and included adults age 18 to 74 years who reported a physician diagnosis of diabetes in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (N = 2,148). Chi-square tests compared the prevalence of hemoglobin A1c, BP, and LDL-C targets and ACE/ARB and statin use across participant characteristics. Predictive margins regression was used to determine the prevalence adjusted for sociodemographic characteristics. RESULTS: The overall prevalence of A1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol), BP <130/80 mm Hg, and LDL-C <100 mg/dL was 43.0, 48.7, and 36.6%, respectively, with 8.4% meeting all three targets. Younger adults aged 18 to 39 years with diabetes were less likely to have A1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol) or LDL-C <100 mg/dL compared to those aged 65 to 74 years; younger adults were more likely to have BP <130/80 mm Hg (P<.05 for all). Individuals of Mexican heritage were significantly less likely to have A1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol) compared to those with Cuban heritage, but they were more likely to have BP <130/80 mm Hg compared to those with Dominican, Cuban, or Puerto Rican heritage (P<.05 for all); there was no difference in LDL-C by heritage. Overall, 38.2% of adults with diabetes were taking a statin, and 50.5% were taking ACE/ARB medications. CONCLUSION: Hemoglobin A1c, BP, and LDL-C control are suboptimal among Hispanic/Latinos with diabetes living in the U.S. With 8.4% meeting all three recommendations, substantial opportunity exists to improve diabetes control in this population. ABBREVIATIONS: A1c = hemoglobin A1c; ABC = hemoglobin A1c, blood pressure, low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol; ACE = angiotensin-converting enzyme; ADA = American Diabetes Association; ARB = angiotensin receptor blocker; BMI = body mass index; BP = blood pressure; CHD = coronary heart disease; CVD = cardiovascular disease; HCHS/SOL = Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos; LDL-C = low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol; NHANES = National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey; PAD = peripheral artery disease.

Achievement of goals in U.S. diabetes care, 1999-2010.

BACKGROUND: Tracking national progress in diabetes care may aid in the evaluation of past efforts and identify residual gaps in care. METHODS: We analyzed data for adults with self-reported diabetes from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey and the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to examine risk-factor control, preventive practices, and risk scores for coronary heart disease over the 1999-2010 period. RESULTS: From 1999 through 2010, the weighted proportion of survey participants who met recommended goals for diabetes care increased, by 7.9 percentage points (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.8 to 15.0) for glycemic control (glycated hemoglobin level <7.0%), 9.4 percentage points (95% CI, 3.0 to 15.8) for individualized glycemic targets, 11.7 percentage points (95% CI, 5.7 to 17.7) for blood pressure (target, <130/80 mm Hg), and 20.8 percentage points (95% CI, 11.6 to 30.0) for lipid levels (target level of low-density lipoprotein [LDL] cholesterol, <100 mg per deciliter [2.6 mmol per liter]). Tobacco use did not change significantly, but the 10-year probability of coronary heart disease decreased by 2.8 to 3.7 percentage points. However, 33.4 to 48.7% of persons with diabetes still did not meet the targets for glycemic control, blood pressure, or LDL cholesterol level. Only 14.3% met the targets for all three of these measures and for tobacco use. Adherence to the recommendations for annual eye and dental examinations was unchanged, but annual lipid-level measurement and foot examination increased by 5.5 percentage points (95% CI, 1.6 to 9.4) and 6.8 percentage points (95% CI, 4.8 to 8.8), respectively. Annual vaccination for influenza and receipt of pneumococcal vaccination for participants 65 years of age or older rose by 4.5 percentage points (95% CI, 0.8 to 8.2) and 6.9 percentage points (95% CI, 3.4 to 10.4), respectively, and daily glucose monitoring increased by 12.7 percentage points (95% CI, 10.3 to 15.1). CONCLUSIONS: Although there were improvements in risk-factor control and adherence to preventive practices from 1999 to 2010, tobacco use remained high, and almost half of U.S. adults with diabetes did not meet the recommended goals for diabetes care.

IDENTIFYING PROBABLE DIABETES MELLITUS AMONG HISPANICS/LATINOS FROM FOUR U.S. CITIES: FINDINGS FROM THE HISPANIC COMMUNITY HEALTH STUDY/STUDY OF LATINOS.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to compare the ability of American Diabetes Association (ADA) diagnostic criteria to identify U.S. Hispanics/Latinos from diverse heritage groups with probable diabetes mellitus and assess cardiovascular risk factor correlates of those criteria. METHODS: Cross-sectional analysis of data from 15,507 adults from 6 Hispanic/Latino heritage groups, enrolled in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos. The prevalence of probable diabetes mellitus was estimated using individual or combinations of ADA-defined cut points. The sensitivity and specificity of these criteria at identifying diabetes mellitus from ADA-defined prediabetes and normoglycemia were evaluated. Prevalence ratios of hypertension, abnormal lipids, and elevated urinary albumin-creatinine ratio for unrecognized diabetes mellitus-versus prediabetes and normoglycemia-were calculated. RESULTS: Among Hispanics/Latinos (mean age, 43 years) with diabetes mellitus, 39.4% met laboratory test criteria for probable diabetes, and the prevalence varied by heritage group. Using the oral glucose tolerance test as the gold standard, the sensitivity of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and hemoglobin A1c-alone or in combination-was low (18, 23, and 33%, respectively) at identifying probable diabetes mellitus. Individuals who met any criterion for probable diabetes mellitus had significantly higher (P<.05) prevalence of most cardiovascular risk factors than those with normoglycemia or prediabetes, and this association was not modified by Hispanic/Latino heritage group. CONCLUSION: FPG and hemoglobin A1c are not sensitive (but are highly specific) at detecting probable diabetes mellitus among Hispanics/Latinos, independent of heritage group. Assessing cardiovascular risk factors at diagnosis might prompt multitarget interventions and reduce health complications in this young population. ABBREVIATIONS: 2hPG = 2-hour post-glucose load plasma glucose ADA = American Diabetes Association BMI = body mass index CV = cardiovascular FPG = fasting plasma glucose HbA1c = hemoglobin A1c HCHS/SOL = Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos HDL-C = high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol NGT = normal glucose tolerance NHANES = National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey OGTT = oral glucose tolerance test TG = triglyceride UACR = urine albumin-creatinine ratio.

Relationship of hepatitis C virus infection with diabetes in the U.S. population.

UNLABELLED: An association of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection with diabetes has been reported in many studies, but few have been population based and applied standard criteria for diabetes diagnosis. We examined this relationship using recent population-based data from the U.S. National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. Adult participants (15,128) in the 1999-2010 surveys had data on diabetes status and serum HCV antibody (anti-HCV) or HCV RNA. Using American Diabetes Association criteria, diabetes was defined as a health care provider diagnosis, serum hemoglobin A1C (A1C) ≥6.5%, or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥126 mg/dL, prediabetes as A1C 5.7%-<6.5% or FPG 100-<126 mg/dL, and normal glucose as A1C <5.7% and FPG <100 mg/dL. Odds ratios (ORs) for diabetes and prediabetes, comparing persons with HCV infection to those without, were adjusted for demographics, BMI, C-reactive protein, smoking, drinking, and blood transfusion before 1992. Among participants without diabetes, we compared mean insulin resistance (IR), estimated using homeostasis model assessment (HOMA-IR), by HCV status. The overall prevalence of anti-HCV+ was 1.7%, of HCV RNA(+) 1.1%, of diabetes 10.5%, and of prediabetes 32.8%. The prevalence of diabetes and prediabetes did not differ by HCV status. In multivariate-adjusted analysis, diabetes remained unassociated with anti-HCV (OR, 1.0; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.6-1.7) or with HCV RNA (OR, 1.1; 95% CI: 0.6-1.9). In contrast, elevated alanine aminotransferase and gamma glutamyltransferase activities were associated with diabetes regardless of HCV status. HOMA-IR was not associated with HCV markers in unadjusted or multivariate-adjusted analyses (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: In the U.S. population, HCV was not associated with diabetes or with IR among persons with normal glucose. Previously reported relationships of HCV with diabetes were possibly attributable to the effect of elevated liver enzymes.

Leukocyte telomere length and diabetes status, duration, and control: the 1999-2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey.

BACKGROUND: Studies investigating the association between telomere length and diabetes have been inconsistent, and there are few data available investigating the associations of telomere length with diabetes duration and control. We evaluated the relationship of leukocyte telomere length with diabetes, and the relationship of leukocyte telomere length with diabetes duration and poor glucose control among people with diabetes. METHODS: We used data from the 1999-2002 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, a representative sample of the US civilian non-institutionalized population. In 3921 participants, leukocyte telomere length was measured and diabetes status was determined based on a previous diagnosis, hemoglobin A1c ≥ 6.5 %, or fasting glucose ≥ 126 mg/dL. RESULTS: The odds ratios (95 % confidence intervals) of diabetes associated with the first, second, and third quartile of leukocyte telomere length, compared to the highest quartile, was 2.09 (1.46-2.98), 1.74 (1.30-2.31), and 1.08 (0.76-1.54), respectively (p-trend < 0.01), in unadjusted models and 0.74 (0.48-1.14), 0.91 (0.61-1.34), and 0.87 (0.59-1.29), respectively (p-trend = 0.20), in multivariable adjusted models. Among participants with diabetes, unadjusted and adjusted leukocyte telomere length was not associated with diabetes duration or glucose control based on an hemoglobin A1c < 7 or < 8 % (all p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In this study of the US general population, leukocyte telomere length was not associated with diabetes status, diabetes duration, or diabetes control.

Associations between trends in race/ethnicity, aging, and body mass index with diabetes prevalence in the United States: a series of cross-sectional studies.

BACKGROUND: The increase in the prevalence of diabetes over the past few decades has coincided with an increase in certain risk factors for diabetes, such as a changing race/ethnicity distribution, an aging population, and a rising obesity prevalence. OBJECTIVE: To determine the extent to which the increase in diabetes prevalence is explained by changing distributions of race/ethnicity, age, and obesity prevalence in U.S. adults. DESIGN: Cross-sectional, using data from 5 NHANES (National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys): NHANES II (1976-1980), NHANES III (1988-1994), and the continuous NHANES 1999-2002, 2003-2006, and 2007-2010. SETTING: Nationally representative samples of the U.S. noninstitutionalized civilian population. PATIENTS: 23 932 participants aged 20 to 74 years. MEASUREMENTS: Diabetes was defined as a self-reported diagnosis or fasting plasma glucose level of 7.0 mmol/L (126 mg/dL) or more. RESULTS: Between 1976 to 1980 and 2007 to 2010, diabetes prevalence increased from 4.7% to 11.2% in men and from 5.7% to 8.7% in women (P for trends for both groups < 0.001). After adjustment for age, race/ethnicity, and body mass index, diabetes prevalence increased in men (6.2% to 9.6%; P for trend < 0.001) but not women (7.6% to 7.5%; P for trend = 0.69). Body mass index was the greatest contributor among the 3 covariates to the change in prevalence estimates after adjustment. LIMITATION: Some possible risk factors, such as physical activity, waist circumference, and mortality, could not be studied because data on these variables were not collected in all surveys. CONCLUSION: The increase in the prevalence of diabetes was greater in men than in women in the U.S. population between 1976 to 1980 and 2007 to 2010. After changes in age, race/ethnicity, and body mass index were controlled for, the increase in diabetes prevalence over time was approximately halved in men and diabetes prevalence was no longer increased in women. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and National Institutes of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases.

Prevalence of and Trends in Diabetes Among Adults in the United States, 1988-2012.

IMPORTANCE: Previous studies have shown increasing prevalence of diabetes in the United States. New US data are available to estimate prevalence of and trends in diabetes. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the recent prevalence and update US trends in total diabetes, diagnosed diabetes, and undiagnosed diabetes using National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Cross-sectional surveys conducted between 1988-1994 and 1999-2012 of nationally representative samples of the civilian, noninstitutionalized US population; 2781 adults from 2011-2012 were used to estimate recent prevalence and an additional 23,634 adults from 1988-2010 were used to estimate trends. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The prevalence of diabetes was defined using a previous diagnosis of diabetes or, if diabetes was not previously diagnosed, by (1) a hemoglobin A1c level of 6.5% or greater or a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) level of 126 mg/dL or greater (hemoglobin A1c or FPG definition) or (2) additionally including 2-hour plasma glucose (2-hour PG) level of 200 mg/dL or greater (hemoglobin A1c, FPG, or 2-hour PG definition). Prediabetes was defined as a hemoglobin A1c level of 5.7% to 6.4%, an FPG level of 100 mg/dL to 125 mg/dL, or a 2-hour PG level of 140 mg/dL to 199 mg/dL. RESULTS: In the overall 2011-2012 population, the unadjusted prevalence (using the hemoglobin A1c, FPG, or 2-hour PG definitions for diabetes and prediabetes) was 14.3% (95% CI, 12.2%-16.8%) for total diabetes, 9.1% (95% CI, 7.8%-10.6%) for diagnosed diabetes, 5.2% (95% CI, 4.0%-6.9%) for undiagnosed diabetes, and 38.0% (95% CI, 34.7%-41.3%) for prediabetes; among those with diabetes, 36.4% (95% CI, 30.5%-42.7%) were undiagnosed. The unadjusted prevalence of total diabetes (using the hemoglobin A1c or FPG definition) was 12.3% (95% CI, 10.8%-14.1%); among those with diabetes, 25.2% (95% CI, 21.1%-29.8%) were undiagnosed. Compared with non-Hispanic white participants (11.3% [95% CI, 9.0%-14.1%]), the age-standardized prevalence of total diabetes (using the hemoglobin A1c, FPG, or 2-hour PG definition) was higher among non-Hispanic black participants (21.8% [95% CI, 17.7%-26.7%]; P < .001), non-Hispanic Asian participants (20.6% [95% CI, 15.0%-27.6%]; P = .007), and Hispanic participants (22.6% [95% CI, 18.4%-27.5%]; P < .001). The age-standardized percentage of cases that were undiagnosed was higher among non-Hispanic Asian participants (50.9% [95% CI, 38.3%-63.4%]; P = .004) and Hispanic participants (49.0% [95% CI, 40.8%-57.2%]; P = .02) than all other racial/ethnic groups. The age-standardized prevalence of total diabetes (using the hemoglobin A1c or FPG definition) increased from 9.8% (95% CI, 8.9%-10.6%) in 1988-1994 to 10.8% (95% CI, 9.5%-12.0%) in 2001-2002 to 12.4% (95% CI, 10.8%-14.2%) in 2011-2012 (P < .001 for trend) and increased significantly in every age group, in both sexes, in every racial/ethnic group, by all education levels, and in all poverty income ratio tertiles. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In 2011-2012, the estimated prevalence of diabetes was 12% to 14% among US adults, depending on the criteria used, with a higher prevalence among participants who were non-Hispanic black, non-Hispanic Asian, and Hispanic. Between 1988-1994 and 2011-2012, the prevalence of diabetes increased in the overall population and in all subgroups evaluated.

Opioid prescription and diabetes among Medicare beneficiaries.

AIMS: To determine the prevalence of opioid prescriptions among U.S. Medicare beneficiaries by diabetes status, and predictors of opioid prescription among those with diabetes. METHODS: This retrospective study used claims data from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services among beneficiaries age ≥ 65 years who were continuously enrolled in Part A, Part B, and Part D Medicare between 2017 and 2019 (N = 709,374). Logistic regression was used to determine the odds of opioid prescription among those with vs without diabetes; and, among those with diabetes, significant predictors of opioid prescription. RESULTS: Overall, the prevalence of any opioid prescription was 30.8 % among persons with diabetes and 24.2 % in those without diabetes (p < 0.001); chronic use was 8.0 % and 7.4 %, respectively (p < 0.001). Those with diabetes had a 45 % higher odds of having an opioid prescription compared to those without diabetes after adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics (OR = 1.45, 1.44-1.47). After adjustment for comorbidities/complications, the association reversed (OR = 0.83, 0.82-0.84). Persons with diabetes who had hypertension, obesity, CVD, neuropathy, amputation, liver disease, COPD, cancer, osteoporosis, depression, or alcohol/drug abuse had a 20 %-140 % higher odds of opioid prescription compared to those without these conditions. CONCLUSIONS: Comorbidities and complications accounted for the higher odds of opioid prescriptions among those with diabetes.

New models for large prospective studies: is there a better way?

Large prospective cohort studies are critical for identifying etiologic factors for disease, but they require substantial long-term research investment. Such studies can be conducted as multisite consortia of academic medical centers, combinations of smaller ongoing studies, or a single large site such as a dominant regional health-care provider. Still another strategy relies upon centralized conduct of most or all aspects, recruiting through multiple temporary assessment centers. This is the approach used by a large-scale national resource in the United Kingdom known as the "UK Biobank," which completed recruitment/examination of 503,000 participants between 2007 and 2010 within budget and ahead of schedule. A key lesson from UK Biobank and similar studies is that large studies are not simply small studies made large but, rather, require fundamentally different approaches in which "process" expertise is as important as scientific rigor. Embedding recruitment in a structure that facilitates outcome determination, utilizing comprehensive and flexible information technology, automating biospecimen processing, ensuring broad consent, and establishing essentially autonomous leadership with appropriate oversight are all critical to success. Whether and how these approaches may be transportable to the United States remain to be explored, but their success in studies such as UK Biobank makes a compelling case for such explorations to begin.

Risk of Foot Ulcer and Lower-Extremity Amputation Among Participants in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications Study.

OBJECTIVE: Intensive glycemic control reduces the risk of kidney, retinal, and neurologic complications in type 1 diabetes (T1D), but whether it reduces the risk of lower-extremity complications is unknown. We examined whether former intensive versus conventional glycemic control among Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) participants with T1D reduced the long-term risk of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) and lower-extremity amputations (LEAs) in the subsequent Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (EDIC) study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: DCCT participants (n = 1,441) completed 6.5 years on average of intensive versus conventional diabetes treatment, after which 1,408 were enrolled in EDIC and followed annually over 23 years for DFU and LEA occurrences by physical examination. Multivariable Cox proportional hazard regression models estimated associations of DCCT treatment assignment and time-updated exposures with DFU or LEA. RESULTS: Intensive versus conventional glycemic control was associated with a significant risk reduction for all DFUs (hazard ratio 0.77 [95% CI 0.60, 0.97]) and a similar magnitude but nonsignificant risk reduction for first-recorded DFUs (0.78 [0.59, 1.03]) and first LEAs (0.70 [0.36, 1.36]). In adjusted Cox models, clinical neuropathy, lower sural nerve conduction velocity, and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy were associated with higher DFU risk; estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2, albuminuria, and macular edema with higher LEA risk; and any retinopathy and greater time-weighted mean DCCT/EDIC HbA1c with higher risk of both outcomes (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Early intensive glycemic control decreases long-term DFU risk, the most important antecedent in the causal pathway to LEA.

Cardiometabolic Risk Factors and Incident Cardiovascular Disease Events in Women vs Men With Type 1 Diabetes.

Importance: The lower risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) among women compared with men in the general population may be diminished among those with diabetes. Objective: To evaluate cardiometabolic risk factors and their management in association with CVD events in women vs men with type 1 diabetes enrolled in the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications (DCCT/EDIC) study. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study used data obtained during the combined DCCT (randomized clinical trial, conducted 1983-1993) and EDIC (observational study, conducted 1994 to present) studies through April 30, 2018 (mean [SD] follow-up, 28.8 [5.8] years), at 27 clinical centers in the US and Canada. Data analyses were performed between July 2021 and April 2022. Exposure: During the DCCT phase, patients were randomized to intensive vs conventional diabetes therapy. Main Outcomes and Measures: Cardiometabolic risk factors and CVD events were assessed via detailed medical history and focused physical examinations. Blood and urine samples were assayed centrally. CVD events were adjudicated by a review committee. Linear mixed models and Cox proportional hazards models evaluated sex differences in cardiometabolic risk factors and CVD risk over follow-up. Results: A total of 1441 participants with type 1 diabetes (mean [SD] age at DCCT baseline, 26.8 [7.1] years; 761 [52.8%] men; 1390 [96.5%] non-Hispanic White) were included. Over the duration of the study, compared with men, women had significantly lower body mass index (BMI, calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared; ß = -0.43 [SE, 0.16]; P = .006), waist circumference (ß = -10.56 cm [SE, 0.52 cm]; P < .001), blood pressure (systolic: ß = -5.77 mm Hg [SE, 0.35 mm Hg]; P < .001; diastolic: ß = -3.23 mm Hg [SE, 0.26 mm Hg]; P < .001), and triglyceride levels (ß = -10.10 mg/dL [SE, 1.98 mg/dL]; P < .001); higher HDL cholesterol levels (ß = 9.36 mg/dL [SE, 0.57 mg/dL]; P < .001); and similar LDL cholesterol levels (ß = -0.76 mg/dL [SE, 1.22 mg/dL]; P = .53). Women, compared with men, achieved recommended targets more frequently for blood pressure (ie, <130/80 mm Hg: 90.0% vs 77.4%; P < .001) and triglycerides (ie, <150 mg/dL: 97.3% vs 90.5%; P < .001). However, sex-specific HDL cholesterol targets (ie, ≥50 mg/dL for women, ≥40 mg/dL for men) were achieved less often (74.3% vs 86.6%; P < .001) and cardioprotective medications were used less frequently in women than men (ie, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin II receptor blocker: 29.6% [95% CI, 25.7%-33.9%] vs 40.0% [95% CI, 36.1%-44.0%]; P = .001; lipid-lowering medication: 25.3% [95% CI, 22.1%-28.7%] vs 39.6% [95% CI, 36.1%-43.2%]; P < .001). Women also had significantly higher pulse rates (mean [SD], 75.2 [6.8] beats per minute vs 71.8 [6.9] beats per minute; P < .001) and hemoglobin A1c levels (mean [SD], 8.3% [1.0%] vs 8.1% [1.0%]; P = .01) and achieved targets for tighter glycemic control less often than men (ie, hemoglobin A1c <7%: 11.2% [95% CI, 9.3%-13.3%] vs 14.0% [95% CI, 12.0%-16.3%]; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance: These findings suggest that despite a more favorable cardiometabolic risk factor profile, women with type 1 diabetes did not have a significantly lower CVD event burden than men, suggesting a greater clinical impact of cardiometabolic risk factors in women vs men with diabetes. These findings call for conscientious optimization of the control of CVD risk factors in women with type 1 diabetes.

Diabetes Incidence Among Hispanic/Latino Adults in the Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos (HCHS/SOL).

OBJECTIVE: To examine diabetes incidence in a diverse cohort of U.S. Hispanic/Latinos. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The Hispanic Community Health Study/Study of Latinos is a prospective cohort study with participants aged 18-74 years from four U.S. metropolitan areas. Participants were assessed for diabetes at the baseline examination (2008-2011), annually via telephone interview, and at a second examination (2014-2017). RESULTS: A total of 11,619 participants returned for the second examination. The overall age-adjusted diabetes incidence rate was 22.1 cases/1,000 person-years. The incidence was high among those with Puerto Rican and Mexican backgrounds as well as those aged ≥45 years and with a BMI ≥30 kg/m2. Significant differences in diabetes awareness, treatment, and health insurance coverage, but not glycemic control, were observed across Hispanic/Latino background groups, age groups, and BMI categories. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in diabetes incidence by Hispanic/Latino background, age, and BMI suggest the susceptibility of these factors.

Cognitive function among older adults with diabetes and prediabetes, NHANES 2011-2014.

AIMS: To determine the association between diabetes status, glycemia, and cognitive function among a national U.S. sample of older adults in the 2011-2014 National Health and Nutrition Examinations Surveys. METHODS: Among 1,552 adults age ≥ 60 years, linear and multivariable logistic regressions were used to determine the association between diabetes status (diabetes, prediabetes, normoglycemia) and cognitive function [Consortium to Establish a Registry for Alzheimer's Disease-Word Learning (CERAD W-L), Animal Fluency test, Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST)]. RESULTS: Overall, diabetes was associated with mild cognitive dysfunction. In age-adjusted models, adults with diabetes had significantly poorer performance on the delayed and total word recalls (CERAD W-L) compared to those with normoglycemia (5.8 vs. 6.8 words; p = 0.002 and 24.5 vs. 27.6 words; p < 0.001, respectively); the association was non-significant after adjusting for cardiovascular disease. Among all adults, cognitive function scores decreased with increasing HbA1c for all assessments, but remained significant in the fully adjusted model for the Animal Fluency and DSST [beta coefficient = -0.44;-1.11, p < 0.05, respectively]. As measured by the DSST, the proportion with cognitive impairment was significantly higher for older adults with HbA1c ≥ 8.0% (≥64 mmol/mol) vs. HbA1c < 7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) (14.6% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.04). CONCLUSIONS: Dysglycemia, as measured by HbA1c, was associated with poorer executive function and processing speed.

The Association Between Heart Rate and Glycemic Status in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys.

CONTEXT: Evidence suggests that heart rate (HR) is a prognostic factor for cardiovascular disease (CVD), for which persons with diabetes are at increased risk. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this article is to determine the association between HR and glycemic status in a nationally representative sample of US adults, and, among adults with diagnosed diabetes, the association between HR and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted. SETTING: The setting of this study is the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys, 2011 to 2016. PARTICIPANTS: US general adult (age ≥ 20 years) population who had information on glycemic status based on self-report, HbA1c, and fasting plasma glucose (N = 8562). INTERVENTION: There was no intervention. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: The main outcome measure of this study was mean HR (beats per minute). RESULTS: After adjustment for examination time, age, other demographic characteristics, health insurance, health behaviors, body mass index, CVD and kidney disease, and taking antihypertensive medications, mean HR was significantly higher for those with diagnosed (75 bpm), undiagnosed diabetes (75 bpm), and prediabetes (73 bpm) compared to those with normoglycemia (71 bpm, P < .05 for all); this association was robust both for men and women. Mean HR increased with increasing HbA1c level among individuals with diagnosed diabetes independent of other risk factors (HbA1c < 7.0% [< 53 mmol/mol], 73 bpm vs A1c ≥ 11.0% [≥ 97mmol/mol], 79 bpm, P < .001); this association was most pronounced for women. CONCLUSIONS: Adjusted mean HR was higher among individuals with diabetes and increased glycemia, which may reflect underlying autonomic and/or myocardial dysfunction among those with diabetes.