Aims/hypothesis The aim of this work was to examine whether glycaemic control has improved in those with type 1 diabetes in Scotland between 2004 and 2016, and whether any trends differed by sociodemographic factors. Methods We analysed records from 30,717 people with type 1 diabetes, registered anytime between 2004 and 2016 in the national diabetes database, which contained repeated measures of HbA 1c . An additive mixed regression model was used to estimate calendar time and other effects on HbA 1c . Results Overall, median (IQR) HbA 1c decreased from 72 (21) mmol/mol [8.7 (4.1)%] in 2004 to 68 (21) mmol/mol (8.4 [4.1]%) in 2016. However, all of the improvement across the period occurred in the latter 4 years: the regression model showed that the only period of significant change in HbA 1c was 2012–2016 where there was a fall of 3 (95% CI 1.82, 3.43) mmol/mol. The largest reductions in HbA 1c in this period were seen in children, from 69 (16) mmol/mol (8.5 [3.6]%) to 63 (14) mmol/mol (7.9 [3.4]%), and adolescents, from 75 (25) mmol/mol (9.0 [4.4]%) to 70 (23) mmol/mol (8.6 [4.3]%). Socioeconomic status (according to Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation) affected the HbA 1c values: from the regression model, the 20% of people living in the most-deprived areas had HbA 1c levels on average 8.0 (95% CI 7.4, 8.9) mmol/mol higher than those of the 20% of people living in the least-deprived areas. However this difference did not change significantly over time. From the regression model HbA 1c was on average 1.7 (95% CI 1.6, 1.8) mmol/mol higher in women than in men. This sex difference did not narrow over time. Conclusions/interpretation In this high-income country, we identified a modest but important improvement in HbA 1c since 2012 that was most marked in children and adolescents. These changes coincided with national initiatives to reduce HbA 1c including an expansion of pump therapy. However, in most people, overall glycaemic control remains far from target levels and further improvement is badly needed, particularly in those from more-deprived areas. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00125-019-4900-7) contains peer-reviewed but unedited supplementary material, which is available to authorised users.

OBJECTIVE To quantify the relationship of residual C-peptide secretion to glycemic outcomes and microvascular complications in type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS C-peptide was measured in an untimed blood sample in the Scottish Diabetes Research Network Type 1 Bioresource (SDRNT1BIO) cohort of 6,076 people with type 1 diabetes monitored for an average of 5.2 years. RESULTS In regression models adjusted for age at onset and duration, effect sizes for C-peptide ≥200 vs. <5 pmol/L were as follows: insulin dose at baseline, 9% lower (P = 2 × 10−17); HbA1c during follow-up, 4.9 mmol/mol lower (P = 3 × 10−13); hazard ratio for hospital admission for diabetic ketoacidosis during follow-up, 0.44 (P = 0.0001); odds ratio for incident retinopathy, 0.51 (P = 0.0003). Effects on the risk of serious hypoglycemic episodes were detectable at lower levels of C-peptide, and the form of the relationship was continuous down to the limit of detection (3 pmol/L). In regression models contrasting C-peptide 30 to <200 pmol/L with <5 pmol/L, the odds ratio for self-report of at least one serious hypoglycemic episode in the last year was 0.56 (P = 6 × 10−8), and the hazard ratio for hospital admission for hypoglycemia during follow-up was 0.52 (P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS These results in a large representative cohort suggest that even minimal residual C-peptide secretion could have clinical benefit in type 1 diabetes, in contrast to a follow-up study of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) intensively treated cohort where an effect on hypoglycemia was seen only at C-peptide levels ≥130 pmol/L. This has obvious implications for the design and evaluation of trials of interventions to preserve or restore pancreatic islet function in type 1 diabetes.

Objective. To investigate whether low-dose naproxen sodium (220 mg twice a day) interferes with aspirin's antiplatelet effect in healthy subjects.Methods. We performed a crossover, open-label study in 9 healthy volunteers. They received for 6 days 3 different treatments separated by 14 days of washout: 1) naproxen 2 hours before aspirin, 2) aspirin 2 hours before naproxen, and 3) aspirin alone. The primary end point was the assessment of serum thromboxane B 2 (TXB 2 ) 24 hours after the administration of naproxen 2 hours before aspirin on day 6 of treatment. In 5 volunteers, the rate of recovery of TXB 2 generation (up to 72 hours after drug discontinuation) was assessed in serum and in platelet-rich plasma stimulated with arachidonic acid (AA) or collagen. Conclusion. Sequential administration of 220 mg naproxen twice a day and low-dose aspirin interferes with the irreversible inhibition of platelet cyclooxygenase 1 afforded by aspirin. The interaction was smaller when giving naproxen 2 hours after aspirin. The clinical consequences of these 2 schedules of administration of aspirin with naproxen remain to be studied in randomized clinical trials. Results. Twenty-four hoursArthritis in general and osteoarthritis in particular are increasingly becoming global problems; however, at this time, there is no known cure for osteoarthritis. Most forms of treatment therefore have dealt with the alleviation and management of chronic pain, which can affect normal functioning and quality of life of patients.