Targets and teamwork: Understanding differences in pediatric diabetes centers treatment outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: The reason for center differences in metabolic control of childhood diabetes is still unknown. We sought to determine to what extent the targets, expectations, and goals that diabetes care professionals have for their patients is a determinant of center differences in metabolic outcomes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Children, under the age of 11 with type 1 diabetes and their parents treated at the study centers participated. Clinical, medical, and demographic data were obtained, along with blood sample for centralized assay. Parents and all members of the diabetes care team completed questionnaires on treatment targets for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and recommended frequency of blood glucose monitoring. RESULTS: Totally 1113 (53% male) children (mean age 8.0 ± 2.1 years) from 18 centers in 17 countries, along with parents and 113 health-care professionals, participated. There were substantial differences in mean HbA1c between centers ranging from 7.3 ± 0.8% (53 mmol/mol ± 8.7) to 8.9 ± 1.1% (74 mmol/mol ± 12.0). Centers with lower mean HbA1c had (1) parents who reported lower targets for their children, (2) health-care professionals that reported lower targets and more frequent testing, and (3) teams with less disagreement about recommended targets. Multiple regression analysis indicated that teams reporting higher HbA1c targets and more target disagreement had parents reporting higher treatment targets. This seemed to partially account for center differences in Hb1Ac. CONCLUSIONS: The diabetes care teams' cohesiveness and perspectives on treatment targets, expectations, and recommendations have an influence on parental targets, contributing to the differences in pediatric diabetes center outcomes.

Metabolic outcomes in young children with type 1 diabetes differ between treatment centers: the Hvidoere Study in Young Children 2009.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether center differences in glycemic control are present in prepubertal children <11 yr with type 1 diabetes mellitus. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study involved 18 pediatric centers worldwide. All children, <11 y with a diabetes duration ≥12 months were invited to participate. Case Record Forms included information on clinical characteristics, insulin regimens, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), severe hypoglycemia, language difficulties, and comorbidities. Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was measured centrally by liquid chromatography (DCCT aligned, range: 4.4-6.3%; IFFC: 25-45 mmol/mol). RESULTS: A total of 1133 children participated (mean age: 8.0 ± 2.1 y; females: 47.5%, mean diabetes duration: 3.8 ± 2.1 y). HbA1c (overall mean: 8.0 ± 1.0%; range: 7.3-8.9%) and severe hypoglycemia frequency (mean 21.7 events per 100 patient-years), but not DKA, differed significantly between centers (p < 0.001 resp. p = 0.179). Language difficulties showed a negative relationship with HbA1c (8.3 ± 1.2% vs. 8.0 ± 1.0%; p = 0.036). Frequency of blood glucose monitoring demonstrated a significant but weak association with HbA1c (r = -0.17; p < 0.0001). Although significant different HbA1c levels were obtained with diverse insulin regimens (range: 7.3-8.5%; p < 0.001), center differences remained after adjusting for insulin regimen (p < 0.001). Differences between insulin regimens were no longer significant after adjusting for center effect (p = 0.199). CONCLUSIONS: Center differences in metabolic outcomes are present in children <11 yr, irrespective of diabetes duration, age, or gender. The incidence of severe hypoglycemia is lower than in adolescents despite achieving better glycemic control. Insulin regimens show a significant relationship with HbA1c but do not explain center differences. Each center's effectiveness in using specific treatment strategies remains the key factor for outcome.

Breast-feeding and childhood-onset type 1 diabetes: a pooled analysis of individual participant data from 43 observational studies.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if there is a reduced risk of type 1 diabetes in children breastfed or exclusively breastfed by performing a pooled analysis with adjustment for recognized confounders. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Relevant studies were identified from literature searches using MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Authors of relevant studies were asked to provide individual participant data or conduct prespecified analyses. Meta-analysis techniques were used to combine odds ratios (ORs) and investigate heterogeneity between studies. RESULTS: Data were available from 43 studies including 9,874 patients with type 1 diabetes. Overall, there was a reduction in the risk of diabetes after exclusive breast-feeding for >2 weeks (20 studies; OR = 0.75, 95% CI 0.64-0.88), the association after exclusive breast-feeding for >3 months was weaker (30 studies; OR = 0.87, 95% CI 0.75-1.00), and no association was observed after (nonexclusive) breast-feeding for >2 weeks (28 studies; OR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.81-1.07) or >3 months (29 studies; OR = 0.88, 95% CI 0.78-1.00). These associations were all subject to marked heterogeneity (I(2) = 58, 76, 54, and 68%, respectively). In studies with lower risk of bias, the reduced risk after exclusive breast-feeding for >2 weeks remained (12 studies; OR = 0.86, 95% CI 0.75-0.99), and heterogeneity was reduced (I(2) = 0%). Adjustments for potential confounders altered these estimates very little. CONCLUSIONS: The pooled analysis suggests weak protective associations between exclusive breast-feeding and type 1 diabetes risk. However, these findings are difficult to interpret because of the marked variation in effect and possible biases (particularly recall bias) inherent in the included studies.

Interbirth interval is associated with childhood type 1 diabetes risk.

Short interbirth interval has been associated with maternal complications and childhood autism and leukemia, possibly due to deficiencies in maternal micronutrients at conception or increased exposure to sibling infections. A possible association between interbirth interval and subsequent risk of childhood type 1 diabetes has not been investigated. A secondary analysis of 14 published observational studies of perinatal risk factors for type 1 diabetes was conducted. Risk estimates of diabetes by category of interbirth interval were calculated for each study. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled odds ratios (ORs) and investigate heterogeneity between studies. Overall, 2,787 children with type 1 diabetes were included. There was a reduction in the risk of childhood type 1 diabetes in children born to mothers after interbirth intervals <3 years compared with longer interbirth intervals (OR 0.82 [95% CI 0.72-0.93]). Adjustments for various potential confounders little altered this estimate. In conclusion, there was evidence of a 20% reduction in the risk of childhood diabetes in children born to mothers after interbirth intervals <3 years.

Birth order and childhood type 1 diabetes risk: a pooled analysis of 31 observational studies.

BACKGROUND: The incidence rates of childhood onset type 1 diabetes are almost universally increasing across the globe but the aetiology of the disease remains largely unknown. We investigated whether birth order is associated with the risk of childhood diabetes by performing a pooled analysis of previous studies. METHODS: Relevant studies published before January 2010 were identified from MEDLINE, Web of Science and EMBASE. Authors of studies provided individual patient data or conducted pre-specified analyses. Meta-analysis techniques were used to derive combined odds ratios (ORs), before and after adjustment for confounders, and investigate heterogeneity. RESULTS: Data were available for 6 cohort and 25 case-control studies, including 11,955 cases of type 1 diabetes. Overall, there was no evidence of an association prior to adjustment for confounders. After adjustment for maternal age at birth and other confounders, a reduction in the risk of diabetes in second- or later born children became apparent [fully adjusted OR = 0.90 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-0.98; P = 0.02] but this association varied markedly between studies (I² = 67%). An a priori subgroup analysis showed that the association was stronger and more consistent in children < 5 years of age (n = 25 studies, maternal age adjusted OR = 0.84 95% CI 0.75, 0.93; I² = 23%). CONCLUSION: Although the association varied between studies, there was some evidence of a lower risk of childhood onset type 1 diabetes with increasing birth order, particularly in children aged < 5 years. This finding could reflect increased exposure to infections in early life in later born children.

Multinational study in children and adolescents with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes: association of age, ketoacidosis, HLA status, and autoantibodies on residual beta-cell function and glycemic control 12 months after diagnosis.

OBJECTIVE: To identify predictors of residual beta-cell function and glycemic control during the first 12 months after the diagnosis of type 1 diabetes (T1D). SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Clinical information and blood samples were collected from 275 children. HbA1c, antibodies, HLA typing and mixed meal-stimulated C-peptide levels 1, 6, and 12 months after diagnosis were analyzed centrally. RESULTS: Mean age at diagnosis was 9.1 yr. DKA with standard bicarbonate <15 mmol/L was associated with significantly poorer residual beta-cell function 1 (p = 0.004) and 12 months (p = 0.0003) after diagnosis. At 12 months, the decline in stimulated C-peptide levels compared with the levels at 1 month was 69% in the youngest age group and 50% in patients 10 yr and above (p < 0.001). Stimulated C-peptide at 12 months was predicted by younger age (p < 0.02) and bicarbonate levels at diagnosis (p = 0.005), and by stimulated C-peptide (p < 0.0001), postmeal blood glucose (p = 0.0004), insulin antibodies (IA; p = 0.02) and glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies (GADA; p = 0.0004) at 1 month. HbA1c at 12 months was predicted by HbA1c at diagnosis (p < 0.0001), GADA at 1 month (p = 0.01), and non-white Caucasian ethnicity (p = 0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Younger age, ketoacidosis at diagnosis, and IA and GADA 1 month after diagnosis were the strongest explanatory factors for residual beta-cell function at 12 months. Glycemic control at 12 months was influenced predominantly by ethnicity, HbA1c at diagnosis, and GADA at 1 month.

Maternal age at birth and childhood type 1 diabetes: a pooled analysis of 30 observational studies.

OBJECTIVE: The aim if the study was to investigate whether children born to older mothers have an increased risk of type 1 diabetes by performing a pooled analysis of previous studies using individual patient data to adjust for recognized confounders. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Relevant studies published before June 2009 were identified from MEDLINE, Web of Science, and EMBASE. Authors of studies were contacted and asked to provide individual patient data or conduct prespecified analyses. Risk estimates of type 1 diabetes by maternal age were calculated for each study, before and after adjustment for potential confounders. Meta-analysis techniques were used to derive combined odds ratios and to investigate heterogeneity among studies. RESULTS: Data were available for 5 cohort and 25 case-control studies, including 14,724 cases of type 1 diabetes. Overall, there was, on average, a 5% (95% CI 2-9) increase in childhood type 1 diabetes odds per 5-year increase in maternal age (P = 0.006), but there was heterogeneity among studies (heterogeneity I(2) = 70%). In studies with a low risk of bias, there was a more marked increase in diabetes odds of 10% per 5-year increase in maternal age. Adjustments for potential confounders little altered these estimates. CONCLUSIONS: There was evidence of a weak but significant linear increase in the risk of childhood type 1 diabetes across the range of maternal ages, but the magnitude of association varied between studies. A very small percentage of the increase in the incidence of childhood type 1 diabetes in recent years could be explained by increases in maternal age.

Continuing stability of center differences in pediatric diabetes care: do advances in diabetes treatment improve outcome? The Hvidoere Study Group on Childhood Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To reevaluate the persistence and stability of previously observed differences between pediatric diabetes centers and to investigate the influence of demography, language communication problems, and changes in insulin regimens on metabolic outcome, hypoglycemia, and ketoacidosis. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was an observational cross-sectional international study in 21 centers, with clinical data obtained from all participants and A1C levels assayed in one central laboratory. All individuals with diabetes aged 11-18 years (49.4% female), with duration of diabetes of at least 1 year, were invited to participate. Fourteen of the centers participated in previous Hvidoere Studies, allowing direct comparison of glycemic control across centers between 1998 and 2005. RESULTS: Mean A1C was 8.2 +/- 1.4%, with substantial variation between centers (mean A1C range 7.4-9.2%; P < 0.001). There were no significant differences between centers in rates of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis. Language difficulties had a significant negative impact on metabolic outcome (A1C 8.5 +/- 2.0% vs. 8.2 +/- 1.4% for those with language difficulties vs. those without, respectively; P < 0.05). After adjustement for significant confounders of age, sex, duration of diabetes, insulin regimen, insulin dose, BMI, and language difficulties, the center differences persisted, and the effect size for center was not reduced. Relative center ranking since 1998 has remained stable, with no significant change in A1C. CONCLUSIONS: Despite many changes in diabetes management, major differences in metabolic outcome between 21 international pediatric diabetes centers persist. Different application between centers in the implementation of insulin treatment appears to be of more importance and needs further exploration.