OBJECTIVE -The aims of this study were to update previous estimates of the congestive heart failure (CHF) incidence rate in patients with type 2 diabetes, compare it with an age-and sex-matched nondiabetic group, and describe risk factors for developing CHF in diabetic patients over 6 years of follow-up.RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS -We performed a retrospective cohort study of 8,231 patients with type 2 diabetes and 8,845 nondiabetic patients of similar age and sex who did not have CHF as of 1 January 1997, following them for up to 72 months to estimate the CHF incidence rate. In the diabetic cohort, we constructed a Cox regression model to identify risk factors for CHF development.RESULTS -Patients with diabetes were much more likely to develop CHF than patients without diabetes (incidence rate 30.9 vs. 12.4 cases per 1,000 person-years, rate ratio 2.5, 95% CI 2.3-2.7). The difference in CHF development rates between persons with and without diabetes was much greater in younger age-groups. In addition to age and ischemic heart disease, poorer glycemic control (hazard ratio 1.32 per percentage point of HbA 1c ) and greater BMI (1.12 per 2.5 units of BMI) were important predictors of CHF development.CONCLUSIONS -The CHF incidence rate in type 2 diabetes may be much greater than previously believed. Our multivariate results emphasize the importance of controlling modifiable risk factors for CHF, namely hyperglycemia, elevated blood pressure, and obesity. Younger patients may benefit most from risk factor modification.
OBJECTIVE—To describe the changes in demographics, antidiabetic treatment, and glycemic control among the prevalent U.S. adult diagnosed type 2 diabetes population between the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) III (1988–1994) and the initial release of NHANES 1999–2000.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—The study population was derived from NHANES III (n = 1,215) and NHANES 1999–2000 (n = 372) subjects who reported a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes with available data on diabetes medication and HbA1c. Four therapeutic regimens were defined: diet only, insulin only, oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) only, or OADs plus insulin. Multiple logistic regression was used to examine changes in antidiabetic regimens and glycemic control rates over time, adjusted for demographic and clinical risk factors. The outcome measure for glycemic control was HbA1c. Glycemic control rates were defined as the proportion of type 2 diabetic patients with HbA1c level <7%.
RESULTS—Dietary treatment in individuals with diabetes decreased as the sole therapy from 27.4 to 20.2% between the surveys. Insulin use also decreased from 24.2 to 16.4%, while those on OADs only increased from 45.4 to 52.5%. Combination of OADs and insulin increased from 3.1 to 11.0%. Glycemic control rates declined from 44.5% in NHANES III (1988–1994) to 35.8% in NHANES 1999–2000.
CONCLUSIONS—Treatment regimens among U.S. adults diagnosed with type 2 diabetes have changed substantially over the past 10 years. However, a decrease in glycemic control rates was also observed during this time period. This trend may contribute to increased rates of macrovascular and microvascular diabetic complications, which may impact health care costs. Our data support the public health message of implementation of early, aggressive management of diabetes.
We observed a strong association between olanzapine exposure and hyperlipidemia in schizophrenic patients. The possible metabolic consequences of olanzapine use should be given serious consideration by treating physicians.
Our findings suggest that the effect of TZDs on the likelihood of development of the cancers studied (colon, prostate and breast) appears to be neutral and do not support a beneficial or deleterious effect of TZD on the cancers studied.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.