Recalibration of a Non-Laboratory-Based Risk Model to Estimate Pre-Diabetes/Diabetes Mellitus Risk in Primary Care in Hong Kong.

INTRODUCTION/OBJECTIVES: A non-laboratory-based pre-diabetes/diabetes mellitus (pre-DM/DM) risk prediction model developed from the Hong Kong Chinese population showed good external discrimination in a primary care (PC) population, but the estimated risk level was significantly lower than the observed incidence, indicating poor calibration. This study explored whether recalibrating/updating methods could improve the model's accuracy in estimating individuals' risks in PC. METHODS: We performed a secondary analysis on the model's predictors and blood test results of 919 Chinese adults with no prior DM diagnosis recruited from PC clinics from April 2021 to January 2022 in HK. The dataset was randomly split in half into a training set and a test set. The model was recalibrated/updated based on a seven-step methodology, including model recalibrating, revising and extending methods. The primary outcome was the calibration of the recalibrated/updated models, indicated by calibration plots. The models' discrimination, indicated by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC-ROC), was also evaluated. RESULTS: Recalibrating the model's regression constant, with no change to the predictors' coefficients, improved the model's accuracy (calibration plot intercept: -0.01, slope: 0.69). More extensive methods could not improve any further. All recalibrated/updated models had similar AUC-ROCs to the original model. CONCLUSION: The simple recalibration method can adapt the HK Chinese pre-DM/DM model to PC populations with different pre-test probabilities. The recalibrated model can be used as a first-step screening tool and as a measure to monitor changes in pre-DM/DM risks over time or after interventions.

The comparative effects of metabolic surgery, SGLT2i, or GLP-1RA in patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: New antidiabetic agents (sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor [SGLT2i] and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist [GLP-1RA]) and metabolic surgery have protective effects on metabolic syndromes. OBJECTIVES: To compare the changes of metabolic parameters and costs among patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes undergoing metabolic surgery and initiating new antidiabetic agents over 12 months. SETTING: Hong Kong Hospital Authority database from 2006-2017. METHODS: This is a population-wide retrospective cohort study consisting of 2616 patients (1810 SGLT2i, 528 GLP-1RA, 278 metabolic surgery). Inverse probability treatment weighting of propensity score was applied to balance baseline covariates of patients with obesity and type 2 diabetes who underwent metabolic surgery, or initiated SGLT2i or GLP-1RA. Metabolic parameters and direct medical costs were measured and compared from baseline to 12 months in metabolic surgery, SGLT2i, and GLP-1RA groups. RESULTS: Patients in all 3 groups had improved metabolic parameters over a 12-month period. Patients with metabolic surgery achieved significantly better outcomes in BMI (-5.39, -.56, -.40 kg/m2, P < .001), % total weight loss (15.16%, 1.34%, 1.63%, P < .001), systolic (-2.21, -.59, 1.28 mm Hg, P < .001) and diastolic (-1.16, .50, -.13 mm Hg, P < .001) blood pressure, HbA1c (-1.80%, -.77%, -.80%, P < .001), triglycerides (-.64, -.11, -.09 mmol/L, P < .001), and estimated glomerular filtration rate (3.08, -1.37, -.41 mL/min/1.73m2, P < .001) after 12 months compared with patients with SGLT2i and GLP1-RA. Although the metabolic surgery group incurred the greatest direct medical costs (US$33,551, US$10,945, US$10,627, P < .001), largely due to the surgery itself and related hospitalization, the total monthly direct medical expenditure of metabolic surgery group became lower than that of SGLT2i and GLP-1RA groups at 7 months. CONCLUSION: Beneficial weight loss and metabolic outcomes at 12 months were observed in all 3 groups, among which the metabolic surgery group showed the most remarkable effects but incurred the greatest medical costs. However, studies with a longer follow-up period are warranted to show long-term outcomes.

DPP4i, thiazolidinediones, or insulin and risks of cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on metformin-sulfonylurea dual therapy with inadequate control.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to compare the risks of cancer among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on metformin-sulfonylurea dual therapy intensified with dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4i), thiazolidinediones, or insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We assembled a retrospective cohort data of 20 577 patients who were free of cancer and on metformin-sulfonylurea dual therapy, and whose drug treatments were intensified with DPP4i (n=9957), insulin (n=7760), or thiazolidinediones (n=2860) from January 2006 to December 2017. Propensity-score weighting was used to balance out baseline covariates across the three groups. HRs for any types of cancer, cancer mortality, and all-cause mortality were assessed using Cox proportional-hazards models. RESULTS: Over a mean follow-up period of 34 months with 58 539 person-years, cumulative incidences of cancer, cancer mortality, and all-cause mortality were 0.028, 0.009, and 0.072, respectively. Patients intensified with insulin had the highest incidence of all-cause mortality (incidence rate=3.22/100 person-years) and the insulin itself posed the greatest risk (HR 2.46, 95% CI 2.25 to 2.70, p<0.001; 2.44, 95% CI 2.23 to 2.67) compared with thiazolidinediones and DPP4i, respectively. Comparing between thiazolidinediones and DPP4i, thiazolidinediones was associated with higher risk of cancer (HR 1.43, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.63) but not cancer mortality (HR 1.21, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.58) and all-cause mortality (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.11). Insulin was associated with the greatest risk of cancer mortality (HR 1.36, 95% CI 1.09 to 1.71; 1.65, 95% CI 1.31 to 2.07) compared with thiazolidinediones and DPP4i, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: For patients with T2DM on metformin-sulfonylurea dual therapy, the addition of DPP4i was the third-line medication least likely to be associated with cancer mortality and cancer effect among three options, and posed no increased risk for all-cause mortality when compared with thiazolidinediones.

Intensification with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, insulin, or thiazolidinediones and risks of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular diseases, and severe hypoglycemia in patients on metformin-sulfonylurea dual therapy: A retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Although patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) may fail to achieve adequate hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) control despite metformin-sulfonylurea (Met-SU) dual therapy, a third-line glucose-lowering medication-including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4i), insulin, or thiazolidinedione (TZD)-can be added to achieve this. However, treatment effects of intensification with the medications on the risk of severe hypoglycemia (SH), cardiovascular disease (CVD), and all-cause mortality are uncertain. Study aim was to compare the risks of all-cause mortality, CVD, and SH among patients with T2DM on Met-SU dual therapy intensified with DPP4i, insulin, or TZD. METHODS AND FINDINGS: We analyzed a retrospective cohort data of 17,293 patients with T2DM who were free from CVD and on Met-SU dual therapy and who were intensified with DPP4i (n = 8,248), insulin (n = 6,395), or TZD (n = 2,650) from 2006 to 2017. Propensity-score weighting was used to balance out baseline covariates across groups. Hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause mortality, CVD, and SH were assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. Mean age of all patients was 58.56 ± 11.41 years. All baseline covariates achieved a balance across the 3 groups. Over a mean follow-up period of 34 months with 49,299 person-years, cumulative incidences of all-cause mortality, SH, and CVD were 0.061, 0.119, and 0.074, respectively. Patients intensified with insulin had higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 2.648, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.367-2.963, p < 0.001; 2.352, 95% CI 2.123-2.605, p < 0.001) than those intensified with TZD and DPP4i, respectively. Insulin users had the greatest risk of SH (HR = 1.198, 95% CI 1.071-1.340, p = 0.002; 1.496, 95% CI 1.342-1.668, p < 0.001) compared with TZD and DPP4i users, respectively. Comparing between TZDs and DPP4i, TZDs were associated with a higher risk of SH (HR = 1.249, 95% CI 1.099-1.419, p < 0.001) but not all-cause mortality (HR = 0.888, 95% CI 0.776-1.016, p = 0.084) or CVD (HR = 1.005, 95% CI 0.915-1.104, p = 0.925). Limitations of this study included the lack of data regarding lifestyle, drug adherence, time-varying factors, patients' motivation, and cost considerations. A limited duration of patients intensifying with TZD might also weaken the strength of study results. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicated that, for patients with T2DM who are on Met-SU dual therapy, the addition of DPP4i was a preferred third-line medication among 3 options, with the lowest risks of mortality and SH and posing no increased risk for CVD events when compared to insulin and TZD. Intensification with insulin had the greatest risk of mortality and SH events.

Direct medical costs in the preceding, event and subsequent years of a first severe hypoglycaemia episode requiring hospitalization: A population-based cohort study.

AIMS: We aimed to estimate the use of healthcare services and the direct medical costs accrued by patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) during the year of the first severe hypoglycaemia (SH) event, as well as during the years before and after the event year. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analysed a population-based, retrospective cohort including all adults with DM managed in the primary care setting from the Hong Kong Hospital Authority between 2006 and 2013. DM patients for whom SH was first recorded during the designated period were identified and matched to a control group of patients who had not experienced an SH event using the propensity score method. Direct medical costs in the years before, during and after the first SH event were determined by totalling the costs of health services utilized within respective years. RESULTS: After matching, a total of 22 694 DM patients were divided into the first recorded-SH group (n = 11 347) and the non-SH control group (n = 11 347). Patients for whom SH was first recorded, on average, made 7.85 outpatient clinic visits, made 1.89 emergency visits and spent 17.75 nights hospitalized during the event year. Mean direct medical costs during the event year were 11 751 US$, more than 2-fold that during the preceding year (4846 US$; P < 0.001) and subsequent years (4198-4700 US$; P < 0.001) and was 4.5 times that 2 years before the event (2481 US$; P < 0.001). Incremental costs of SH patients vs matched controls during the event year and the preceding year were 10 873 US$ (P < 0.001) and 3974 US$ (P < 0.001), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: SH is associated with excessive hospital admission rates and direct medical costs during the event year and, in particular, during the year before as compared to patients who had not experienced an SH event.