End-stage renal disease risk equations for Hong Kong Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Hong Kong Diabetes Registry.

Department of Medicine and Therapeutics, The Prince of Wales Hospital, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, NT, Hong Kong SAR, People's Republic of China.
Diabetologia (Impact Factor: 6.88). 10/2006; 49(10):2299-308. DOI: 10.1007/s00125-006-0376-3
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT The objective of the study was to investigate risk factors and develop risk equations for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes.
A prospective cohort of 4,438 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and without ESRD (median observation period 2.9 years, interquartile range 1.6-4.1 years) was included in the analysis. The end-point (ESRD) was defined by: (1) death due to diabetes with renal manifestations or renal failure; (2) hospitalisation due to renal failure; (3) estimated GFR (eGFR) <15 ml min(-1) 1.73 m(-2). Cox proportional hazards regression was used to develop risk equations. The data were randomly and evenly divided into the training data for development of the risk equations and the test data for validation. The validation was performed using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (aROC), which takes into account follow-up time and censoring.
During the observation period, 159 patients or 12.45 per 1,000 person-years (95% CI 10.52-14.37 per 1,000 person-years) developed ESRD. Known duration of diabetes, systolic blood pressure, log(10) total cholesterol:HDL cholesterol ratio and retinopathy were significant predictors of ESRD. After further adjusting for eGFR, log(10) spot albumin:creatinine ratio (ACR) and haematocrit, only eGFR, haematocrit and log(10) ACR remained as independent predictors of ESRD. The risk equation derived from these three independent predictors had good discrimination, with an aROC of 0.97.
Estimated GFR, haematocrit and ACR were independent predictors of ESRD and the derived risk equation performed well in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes.

  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Multi-causality and heterogeneity of phenotypes and genotypes characterize complex diseases. In a database with comprehensive collection of phenotypes and genotypes, we compared the performance of common machine learning methods to generate mathematical models to predict diabetic kidney disease (DKD). In a prospective cohort of type 2 diabetic patients, we selected 119 subjects with DKD and 554 without DKD at enrolment and after a median follow-up period of 7.8 years for model training, testing and validation using seven machine learning methods (partial least square regression, the classification and regression tree, the C5.0 decision tree, random forest, naive Bayes classification, neural network and support vector machine). We used 17 clinical attributes and 70 single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) of 54 candidate genes to build different models. The top attributes selected by the best-performing models were then used to build models with performance comparable to those using the entire dataset. Age, age of diagnosis, systolic blood pressure and genetic polymorphisms of uteroglobin and lipid metabolism were selected by most methods. Models generated by support vector machine (svmRadial) and random forest (cforest) had the best prediction accuracy whereas models derived from naive Bayes classifier and partial least squares regression had the least optimal performance. Using 10 clinical attributes (systolic and diastolic blood pressure, age, age of diagnosis, triglyceride, white blood cell count, total cholesterol, waist to hip ratio, LDL cholesterol, and alcohol intake) and 5 genetic attributes (UGB G38A, LIPC -514C > T, APOB Thr71Ile, APOC3 3206T > G and APOC3 1100C > T), selected most often by SVM and cforest, we were able to build high-performance models. Amongst different machine learning methods, svmRadial and cforest had the best performance. Genetic polymorphisms related to inflammation and lipid metabolism warrant further investigation for their associations with DKD.
    BMC Nephrology 07/2013; 14(1):162. DOI:10.1186/1471-2369-14-162 · 1.52 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (DM) is a common chronic disease associated with multiple clinical complications. Management guidelines have been established which recommend a risk-stratified approach to managing these patients in primary care. This study aims to evaluate the quality of care (QOC) and effectiveness of a multi-disciplinary risk assessment and management programme (RAMP) for type 2 diabetic patients attending government-funded primary care clinics in Hong Kong. The evaluation will be conducted using a structured and comprehensive evidence-based evaluation framework. Method/design For evaluation of the quality of care, a longitudinal study will be conducted using the Action Learning and Audit Spiral methodologies to measure whether the pre-set target standards for criteria related to the structure and process of care are achieved. Each participating clinic will be invited to complete a Structure of Care Questionnaire evaluating pre-defined indicators which reflect the setting in which care is delivered, while process of care will be evaluated against the pre-defined indicators in the evaluation framework. Effectiveness of the programme will be evaluated in terms of clinical outcomes, service utilization outcomes, and patient-reported outcomes. A cohort study will be conducted on all eligible diabetic patients who have enrolled into RAMP for more than one year to compare their clinical and public service utilization outcomes of RAMP participants and non-participants. Clinical outcome measures will include HbA1c, blood pressure (both systolic and diastolic), lipids (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol) and future cardiovascular diseases risk prediction; and public health service utilization rate will include general and specialist outpatient, emergency department attendances, and hospital admissions annually within 5 years. For patient-reported outcomes, a total of 550 participants and another 550 non-participants will be followed by telephone to monitor quality of life, patient enablement, global rating of change in health and private health service utilization at baseline, 6, 12, 36 and 60 months. Discussion The quality of care and effectiveness of the RAMP in enhancing the health for patients with type 2 diabetes will be determined. Possible areas for quality enhancement will be identified and standards of good practice can be established. The information will be useful in guiding service planning and policy decision making.
    BMC Family Practice 12/2012; 13(1):116. DOI:10.1186/1471-2296-13-116 · 1.74 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Annual screening for adults with type 2 diabetes to detect the early onset of kidney disease is widely recommended, but the recommendations are based on a limited methodological approach. In addition, there are continuing uncertainties about underlying rates of progression of the condition and the benefits of treatments with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers. We aimed to estimate the clinical value and cost-effectiveness of different screening intervals to diagnose early diabetic kidney disease. We used the following databases for the literature review (searched January 2005 to August 2010): MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Individual patient data were obtained from the Oxford Regional Prospective Diabetes Study and the Collaborative Atorvastatin Diabetes Study. Data from systematically identified randomised trials reporting the impact on renal outcomes of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors and angiotensin 2 receptor blockers for type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients with normoalbuminuria and microalbuminuria were pooled to derive estimates of effect. Individual patient data for type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients were used to obtain parameters describing progression and variability of measurement over time for the albumin-to-creatinine ratio (ACR) and estimated glomerular filtration rate. Based on accepted diagnostic thresholds, we modelled whether these tests accurately identified patients who were developing early diabetic kidney disease and required intensification of treatment. Cost-effectiveness analyses were carried out using simulation outcome models to estimate the incremental costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for different screening intervals. In total, 49 trials (n = 34,082 patients) were eligible for inclusion in the systematic review. For type 1 diabetes, pooled estimates of urinary albumin excretion (UAE) for treated patients with microalbuminuria were on average 67% [95% confidence interval (CI) 54% to 77%] lower at the end of the trial than for untreated patients. There was no significant treatment effect for patients with normoalbuminuria (p interaction = 0.006). For treated patients with type 2 diabetes and normoalbuminuria or microalbuminuria, UAE was lower by, on average, 21% (95% CI 97% to 32%) or 27% (95% CI 15% to 38%), respectively. The proportion (95% CI) of men and women with type 1 diabetes screened annually for microalbuminuria over 6 years and inaccurately identified as having microalbuminuria would be 48% (43% to 53%) and 55% (48% to 61%), respectively. The corresponding proportions for type 2 diabetes are 36% (32% to 42%) and 48% (41% to 55%). Decreasing the screening interval to 3-yearly would reduce this for men with type 1 diabetes to 38% (33% to 44%), with an increase in those not identified over 6 years from 1.5% (95% CI 1% to 2%) to 4% (95% CI 3% to 5%). For type 1 diabetes, incremental cost per QALY [standard deviation (SD)] of a 5-yearly compared with a 4-yearly screening interval was £3612 (£6586), increasing to £9601 (£34,112) for annual compared with 2-yearly screening. The probability that the intervention is cost saving is around 25%, and it has around an 80% chance of being below a cost-effectiveness threshold of £30,000. For type 2 diabetes, incremental cost per QALY (SD) of a yearly compared with a 2-yearly screening interval was £606 (£1782). The intervention is almost certainly below a cost-effectiveness threshold of £5000. These results support current UK guidance, which recommends annual screening with ACR to identify early kidney disease in patients with diabetes, despite a high false-positive rate leading to, at worst, unnecessary or, at best, early therapeutic intervention. For type 1 diabetes, screening costs for annual compared with 2-yearly screening are well within the bounds of accepted cost-effectiveness. Annual screening is even more cost-effective in type 2 diabetes than in type 1 diabetes. Identification of alternative markers for developing diabetic nephropathy may improve targeting of treatment for those at high risk. The National Institute for Health Research Health Technology Assessment programme.
    02/2014; 18(14):1-128. DOI:10.3310/hta18140

Full-text (2 Sources)

Available from
May 26, 2014