-
Pharmacological Research Nov 2022Coptis Chinensis Franch is widely used in the treatment of diabetes, and berberine is the primary bioactive component in it. Evidence from previous studies has shown... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Coptis Chinensis Franch is widely used in the treatment of diabetes, and berberine is the primary bioactive component in it. Evidence from previous studies has shown that berberine supplementation is effective for treating diabetic nephropathy (DN) in animal models. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we evaluated the effects and potential mechanisms of action of berberine in animal models of DN. Relevant studies were searched from the English language databases PubMed, Web of Science, and Embase starting from the establishment of the database till June 2022. Twenty-five studies were included, and the risk of bias tool from SYRCLE was used to assess the methodological quality. Statistical analysis was conducted using STATA 15.1. Fasting blood glucose (FBG), blood urea nitrogen (BUN), serum creatinine (SCR), and the kidney index (KI) were the primary outcomes to be analyzed. The overall results showed that berberine improves the indicators of renal function, such as BUN, SCR, proteinuria, and KI. Meanwhile, berberine also improved inflammatory indicators, such as IL-6 and TNF-α, and oxidative stress indicators, such as the superoxide dismutase activity and malondialdehyde content. Additionally, berberine lowered the levels of known risk factors, including triglyceride (TG), total cholesterol (TC), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL). These beneficial effects of berberine in DN may be related to its anti-fibrotic, anti-inflammatory, and anti-oxidative stress properties. However, to assess the anti-diabetic nephropathy effects and safety of berberine in a more accurate manner, additional large-scale, long-term, and high-quality preclinical trials are needed to confirm these findings before clinical application.
Topics: Animals; Berberine; Diabetic Nephropathies; Creatinine; Triglycerides; Cholesterol, LDL; Diabetes Mellitus
PubMed: 36195307
DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2022.106481 -
Diabetes & Metabolic Syndrome Oct 2022Finerenone is a novel non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonist (MRA) recently approved for the treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in people with type 2 diabetes... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND & AIMS
Finerenone is a novel non-steroidal mineralocorticoid antagonist (MRA) recently approved for the treatment of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We aim to conduct a systematic review of finerenone to know the efficacy and safety of finerenone in CKD with or without T2D.
METHODS
A systematic search in the electronic database of PubMed and Google Scholar was made from inception until September 09, 2022, using several MeSH keywords related to finerenone. Ongoing trials were additionally searched from ClinicalTrials.Gov.
RESULTS
Five phase 2 and three phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo- or active-controlled studies of finerenone have been published to date and several other randomized and real-world studies of finerenone are currently undergoing.
CONCLUSIONS
In short-term studies in patients with CKD and reduced ejection heart failure, with or without T2D, finerenone 20 mg appears to have a better renal outcome compared with spironolactone and a better mortality outcome compared with eplerenone, with significantly lesser hyperkalemia compared to both spironolactone and finerenone. In long-term studies in patients with CKD and T2D, finerenone 10/20 mg significantly reduces the progression of renal disease and reduced CV endpoints (especially heart failure hospitalization) compared to placebo. Finerenone has no effect on HbA1c, body weight, and sexual side effects including gynecomastia, and has only a modest effect on blood pressure. However, hyperkalemia leading to drug withdrawal was significantly higher with finerenone compared to placebo. Safety data in real-world settings is a pressing priority.
Topics: Male; Humans; Mineralocorticoid Receptor Antagonists; Diabetic Nephropathies; Eplerenone; Spironolactone; Hyperkalemia; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Glycated Hemoglobin; Heart Failure; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36223666
DOI: 10.1016/j.dsx.2022.102638 -
The Lancet. Diabetes & Endocrinology Oct 2019Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists differ in their structure and duration of action and have been studied in trials of varying sizes and with different... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Cardiovascular, mortality, and kidney outcomes with GLP-1 receptor agonists in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials.
BACKGROUND
Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists differ in their structure and duration of action and have been studied in trials of varying sizes and with different patient populations, with inconsistent effects on cardiovascular outcomes reported. We aimed to synthesise the available evidence by doing a systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials of these drugs.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE (via PubMed) and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for eligible placebo-controlled trials reporting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; ie, cardiovascular death, stroke, or myocardial infarction) up to June 15, 2019. We did a meta-analysis using a random-effects model to estimate overall hazard ratios (HRs) for MACE, its components, death from any cause, hospital admission for heart failure, kidney outcomes, and key safety outcomes (severe hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis, and pancreatic cancer). We also examined MACE in several subgroups based on patient characteristics (history of cardiovascular disease, BMI, age, baseline HbA1c, and baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate), trial duration, treatment dosing interval, and structural homology.
FINDINGS
Of 27 publications screened, seven trials, with a combined total of 56 004 participants, were included: ELIXA (lixisenatide), LEADER (liraglutide), SUSTAIN-6 (semaglutide), EXSCEL (exenatide), Harmony Outcomes (albiglutide), REWIND (dulaglutide), and PIONEER 6 (oral semaglutide). Overall, GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment reduced MACE by 12% (HR 0·88, 95% CI 0·82-0·94; p<0·0001). There was no statistically significant heterogeneity across the subgroups examined. HRs were 0·88 (95% CI 0·81-0·96; p=0·003) for death from cardiovascular causes, 0·84 (0·76-0·93; p<0·0001) for fatal or non-fatal stroke, and 0·91 (0·84-1·00; p=0·043) for fatal or non-fatal myocardial infarction. GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment reduced all-cause mortality by 12% (0·88, 0·83-0·95; p=0·001), hospital admission for heart failure by 9% (0·91, 0·83-0·99; p=0·028), and a broad composite kidney outcome (development of new-onset macroalbuminuria, decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate [or increase in creatinine], progression to end-stage kidney disease, or death attributable to kidney causes) by 17% (0·83, 0·78-0·89; p<0·0001), mainly due to a reduction in urinary albumin excretion. There was no increase in risk of severe hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis, or pancreatic cancer.
INTERPRETATION
Treatment with GLP-1 receptor agonists has beneficial effects on cardiovascular, mortality, and kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Angiopathies; Diabetic Nephropathies; Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor; Humans; Hypoglycemic Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 31422062
DOI: 10.1016/S2213-8587(19)30249-9 -
Endocrinology, Diabetes & Metabolism Jan 2021The aim of this systematic review was to identify the best footwear and insole design features for offloading the plantar surface of the foot to prevent foot ulceration... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The aim of this systematic review was to identify the best footwear and insole design features for offloading the plantar surface of the foot to prevent foot ulceration in people with diabetic peripheral neuropathy. We searched multiple databases for published and unpublished studies reporting offloading footwear and insoles for people with diabetic neuropathy and nonulcerated feet. Primary outcome was foot ulcer incidence; other outcome measures considered were any standardized kinetic or kinematic measure indicating loading or offloading the plantar foot. Fifty-four studies, including randomized controlled studies, cohort studies, case-series, and a case-controlled and cross-sectional study were included. Three meta-analyses were conducted and random-effects modelling found peak plantar pressure reduction of arch profile (37 kPa (MD, -37.5; 95% CI, -72.29 to -3.61; < .03), metatarsal addition (35.96 kPa (MD, -35.96; 95% CI, -57.33 to -14.60; < .001) and pressure informed design 75.4 kPa (MD, -75.4 kPa; 95% CI, -127.4 to -23.44 kPa; < .004).The remaining data were presented in a narrative form due to heterogeneity. This review highlights the difficulty in differentiating the effect of different insole and footwear features in offloading the neuropathic diabetic foot. However, arch profiles, metatarsal additions and apertures are effective in reducing plantar pressure. The use of pressure analysis to enhance the effectiveness of the design of footwear and insoles, particularly through modification, is recommended.
Topics: Diabetic Foot; Diabetic Nephropathies; Equipment Design; Foot Orthoses; Humans; Shoes; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33532602
DOI: 10.1002/edm2.132 -
Lancet (London, England) Jan 2019The magnitude of effect of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) on specific cardiovascular and renal outcomes and whether heterogeneity is based on key... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
SGLT2 inhibitors for primary and secondary prevention of cardiovascular and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcome trials.
BACKGROUND
The magnitude of effect of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) on specific cardiovascular and renal outcomes and whether heterogeneity is based on key baseline characteristics remains undefined.
METHODS
We did a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, placebo-controlled, cardiovascular outcome trials of SGLT2i in patients with type 2 diabetes. We searched PubMed and Embase for trials published up to Sept 24, 2018. Data search and extraction were completed with a standardised data form and any discrepancies were resolved by consensus. Efficacy outcomes included major adverse cardiovascular events (myocardial infarction, stroke, or cardiovascular death), the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure, and progression of renal disease. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CIs were pooled across trials, and efficacy outcomes were stratified by baseline presence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and degree of renal function.
FINDINGS
We included data from three identified trials and 34 322 patients (60·2% with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease), with 3342 major adverse cardiovascular events, 2028 cardiovascular deaths or hospitalisation sfor heart failure events, and 766 renal composite outcomes. SGLT2i reduced major adverse cardiovascular events by 11% (HR 0·89 [95% CI 0·83-0·96], p=0·0014), with benefit only seen in patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (0·86 [0·80-0·93]) and not in those without (1·00 [0·87-1·16], p for interaction=0·0501). SGLT2i reduced the risk of cardiovascular death or hospitalisation for heart failure by 23% (0·77 [0·71-0·84], p<0·0001), with a similar benefit in patients with and without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and with and without a history of heart failure. SGLT2i reduced the risk of progression of renal disease by 45% (0·55 [0·48-0·64], p<0·0001), with a similar benefit in those with and without atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. The magnitude of benefit of SGLT2i varied with baseline renal function, with greater reductions in hospitalisations for heart failure (p for interaction=0·0073) and lesser reductions in progression of renal disease (p for interaction=0·0258) in patients with more severe kidney disease at baseline.
INTERPRETATION
SGLT2i have moderate benefits on atherosclerotic major adverse cardiovascular events that seem confined to patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. However, they have robust benefits on reducing hospitalisation for heart failure and progression of renal disease regardless of existing atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease or a history of heart failure.
FUNDING
None.
Topics: Cardiovascular Diseases; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Humans; Primary Prevention; Secondary Prevention; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors
PubMed: 30424892
DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)32590-X -
Diabetes Care Apr 2020Identifying patients at high risk of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) helps improve clinical outcome. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Identifying patients at high risk of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) helps improve clinical outcome.
PURPOSE
To establish a model for predicting DKD.
DATA SOURCES
The derivation cohort was from a meta-analysis. The validation cohort was from a Chinese cohort.
STUDY SELECTION
Cohort studies that reported risk factors of DKD with their corresponding risk ratios (RRs) in patients with type 2 diabetes were selected. All patients had estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) <30 mg/g at baseline.
DATA EXTRACTION
Risk factors and their corresponding RRs were extracted. Only risk factors with statistical significance were included in our DKD risk prediction model.
DATA SYNTHESIS
Twenty cohorts including 41,271 patients with type 2 diabetes were included in our meta-analysis. Age, BMI, smoking, diabetic retinopathy, hemoglobin A, systolic blood pressure, HDL cholesterol, triglycerides, UACR, and eGFR were statistically significant. All these risk factors were included in the model except eGFR because of the significant heterogeneity among studies. All risk factors were scored according to their weightings, and the highest score was 37.0. The model was validated in an external cohort with a median follow-up of 2.9 years. A cutoff value of 16 was selected with a sensitivity of 0.847 and a specificity of 0.677.
LIMITATIONS
There was huge heterogeneity among studies involving eGFR. More evidence is needed to power it as a risk factor of DKD.
CONCLUSIONS
The DKD risk prediction model consisting of nine risk factors established in this study is a simple tool for detecting patients at high risk of DKD.
Topics: Adult; Age of Onset; Aged; Blood Pressure; Cohort Studies; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Diabetic Retinopathy; Female; Glomerular Filtration Rate; Glycated Hemoglobin; Humans; Kidney Function Tests; Male; Middle Aged; Models, Statistical; Prognosis; Risk Factors; Time Factors
PubMed: 32198286
DOI: 10.2337/dc19-1897 -
Renal Failure Dec 2023The safety of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in elderly patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is still controversial. This study aimed to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Comparative safety of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and diabetic kidney disease: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
The safety of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in elderly patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is still controversial. This study aimed to analyze the safety of SGLT2 inhibitors in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and DKD. We systematically searched PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library from inception to March 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. Data including patient characteristics and interesting outcomes were extracted, and the dichotomous data and continuous variables were evaluated using risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and mean difference (MD) with 95% CIs, respectively. A total of 14 RCTs with 59874 participants were finally included. There were 38,252 males (63.9%) and 21,622 females (36.1%). The patients' mean age was > 64.6 years. SGLT2 inhibitors could delay the further decline of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) when eGFR ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73m (MD: 2.36; 95%CI [1.15-3.57]). SGLT2 inhibitors in elderly patients with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m (RR: 0.86; 95%CI [0.67-1.11]) may have a relatively increased risk of acute kidney injury compared to eGFR ≥ 60 ml/min/1.73m. SGLT2 inhibitors increased the incidence of genital mycotic infections (RR: 3.47; 95%CI [2.97-4.04]) and diabetic ketoacidosis (RR: 2.25; 95%CI [1.57-3.24]). Except for genital mycotic infections and diabetic ketoacidosis, other adverse reactions were few, indicating that SGLT2 inhibitors are relatively safe for elderly patients with T2DM and DKD. Safety and renoprotection may be diminished when SGLT2 inhibitors are used in elderly patients with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73m.
Topics: Male; Female; Humans; Aged; Middle Aged; Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors; Diabetic Nephropathies; Diabetic Ketoacidosis; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Symporters; Glucose; Sodium; Hypoglycemic Agents
PubMed: 37246403
DOI: 10.1080/0886022X.2023.2217287 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Feb 2023Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is characterised by neurovascular degeneration as a result of chronic hyperglycaemia. Proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) is the most... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Diabetic retinopathy (DR) is characterised by neurovascular degeneration as a result of chronic hyperglycaemia. Proliferative diabetic retinopathy (PDR) is the most serious complication of DR and can lead to total (central and peripheral) visual loss. PDR is characterised by the presence of abnormal new blood vessels, so-called "new vessels," at the optic disc (NVD) or elsewhere in the retina (NVE). PDR can progress to high-risk characteristics (HRC) PDR (HRC-PDR), which is defined by the presence of NVD more than one-fourth to one-third disc area in size plus vitreous haemorrhage or pre-retinal haemorrhage, or vitreous haemorrhage or pre-retinal haemorrhage obscuring more than one disc area. In severe cases, fibrovascular membranes grow over the retinal surface and tractional retinal detachment with sight loss can occur, despite treatment. Although most, if not all, individuals with diabetes will develop DR if they live long enough, only some progress to the sight-threatening PDR stage. OBJECTIVES: To determine risk factors for the development of PDR and HRC-PDR in people with diabetes and DR.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register; 2022, Issue 5), Ovid MEDLINE, and Ovid Embase. The date of the search was 27 May 2022. Additionally, the search was supplemented by screening reference lists of eligible articles. There were no restrictions to language or year of publication. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included prospective or retrospective cohort studies and case-control longitudinal studies evaluating prognostic factors for the development and progression of PDR, in people who have not had previous treatment for DR. The target population consisted of adults (≥18 years of age) of any gender, sexual orientation, ethnicity, socioeconomic status, and geographical location, with non-proliferative diabetic retinopathy (NPDR) or PDR with less than HRC-PDR, diagnosed as per standard clinical practice. Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts, and full-text articles, to determine eligibility; discrepancies were resolved through discussion. We considered prognostic factors measured at baseline and any other time points during the study and in any clinical setting. Outcomes were evaluated at three and eight years (± two years) or lifelong. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data from included studies using a data extraction form that we developed and piloted prior to the data collection stage. We resolved any discrepancies through discussion. We used the Quality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool to assess risk of bias. We conducted meta-analyses in clinically relevant groups using a random-effects approach. We reported hazard ratios (HR), odds ratios (OR), and risk ratios (RR) separately for each available prognostic factor and outcome, stratified by different time points. Where possible, we meta-analysed adjusted prognostic factors. We evaluated the certainty of the evidence with an adapted version of the GRADE framework. MAIN RESULTS: We screened 6391 records. From these, we identified 59 studies (87 articles) as eligible for inclusion. Thirty-five were prospective cohort studies, 22 were retrospective studies, 18 of which were cohort and six were based on data from electronic registers, and two were retrospective case-control studies. Twenty-three studies evaluated participants with type 1 diabetes (T1D), 19 with type 2 diabetes (T2D), and 17 included mixed populations (T1D and T2D). Studies on T1D included between 39 and 3250 participants at baseline, followed up for one to 45 years. Studies on T2D included between 100 and 71,817 participants at baseline, followed up for one to 20 years. The studies on mixed populations of T1D and T2D ranged from 76 to 32,553 participants at baseline, followed up for four to 25 years. We found evidence indicating that higher glycated haemoglobin (haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c)) levels (adjusted OR ranged from 1.11 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93 to 1.32) to 2.10 (95% CI 1.64 to 2.69) and more advanced stages of retinopathy (adjusted OR ranged from 1.38 (95% CI 1.29 to 1.48) to 12.40 (95% CI 5.31 to 28.98) are independent risk factors for the development of PDR in people with T1D and T2D. We rated the evidence for these factors as of moderate certainty because of moderate to high risk of bias in the studies. There was also some evidence suggesting several markers for renal disease (for example, nephropathy (adjusted OR ranged from 1.58 (95% CI not reported) to 2.68 (2.09 to 3.42), and creatinine (adjusted meta-analysis HR 1.61 (95% CI 0.77 to 3.36)), and, in people with T1D, age at diagnosis of diabetes (< 12 years of age) (standardised regression estimate 1.62, 95% CI 1.06 to 2.48), increased triglyceride levels (adjusted RR 1.55, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.95), and larger retinal venular diameters (RR 4.28, 95% CI 1.50 to 12.19) may increase the risk of progression to PDR. The certainty of evidence for these factors, however, was low to very low, due to risk of bias in the included studies, inconsistency (lack of studies preventing the grading of consistency or variable outcomes), and imprecision (wide CIs). There was no substantial and consistent evidence to support duration of diabetes, systolic or diastolic blood pressure, total cholesterol, low- (LDL) and high- (HDL) density lipoproteins, gender, ethnicity, body mass index (BMI), socioeconomic status, or tobacco and alcohol consumption as being associated with incidence of PDR. There was insufficient evidence to evaluate prognostic factors associated with progression of PDR to HRC-PDR. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Increased HbA1c is likely to be associated with progression to PDR; therefore, maintaining adequate glucose control throughout life, irrespective of stage of DR severity, may help to prevent progression to PDR and risk of its sight-threatening complications. Renal impairment in people with T1D or T2D, as well as younger age at diagnosis of diabetes mellitus (DM), increased triglyceride levels, and increased retinal venular diameters in people with T1D may also be associated with increased risk of progression to PDR. Given that more advanced DR severity is associated with higher risk of progression to PDR, the earlier the disease is identified, and the above systemic risk factors are controlled, the greater the chance of reducing the risk of PDR and saving sight.
Topics: Adult; Female; Humans; Male; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 1; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Retinopathy; Glycated Hemoglobin; Prognosis; Prospective Studies; Retinal Hemorrhage; Retrospective Studies; Triglycerides; Vitreous Hemorrhage
PubMed: 36815723
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013775.pub2 -
A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Outcomes of Pregnancy in CKD and CKD Outcomes in Pregnancy.Clinical Journal of the American... Nov 2015We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of published cohort studies and case-control studies to estimate (1) the risk of pregnancy complications among... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES
We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis of published cohort studies and case-control studies to estimate (1) the risk of pregnancy complications among patients with CKD versus those without CKD and (2) the risk of CKD progression among pregnant patients versus nonpregnant controls with CKD.
DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS
We searched electronic databases for studies published between 1946 and 2014, and we reviewed articles using validity criteria. Random-effects analytical methods were used.
RESULTS
Twenty-three studies (14 with data for adverse pregnancy outcomes and 9 for renal outcomes) with 506,340 pregnancies were included. Pregnancy with CKD had greater odds of preeclampsia (odds ratio [OR], 10.36; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 6.28 to 17.09), premature delivery (OR, 5.72; 95% CI, 3.26 to 10.03), small for gestational age/low birth weight (OR, 4.85; 95% CI, 3.03 to 7.76), cesarean section (OR, 2.67; 95% CI, 2.01 to 3.54), and failure of pregnancy (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.03 to 3.13). Subgroup analysis showed that odds of preeclampsia (P<0.01) and premature delivery (P<0.01) were higher in women with nondiabetic nephropathy compared with diabetic nephropathy, and the odds of preeclampsia (P=0.01) and premature delivery (P<0.01) were higher in women with macroproteinuria compared with microproteinuria. The median for follow-up time for renal events was 5 years (interquartile range, 5-14.7 years). There were no significant differences in the occurrence of renal events between CKD pregnant women and those without pregnancy (OR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.69 to 1.35). Subgroup analysis showed that publication year, sample size, follow-up years, type of primary disease, CKD classification, level of serum creatinine at baseline, proteinuria, and level of systolic BP did not modify the renal outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
The risks of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes in pregnancy are higher for women with CKD versus pregnant women without CKD. However, pregnancy was not a risk factor for progression of renal disease in women with CKD before pregnancy.
Topics: Case-Control Studies; Cohort Studies; Disease Progression; Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Complications; Pregnancy Outcome; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic
PubMed: 26487769
DOI: 10.2215/CJN.09250914 -
BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) Sep 2021To identify and assess the quality and accuracy of prognostic models for nephropathy and to validate these models in external cohorts of people with type 2 diabetes.
OBJECTIVES
To identify and assess the quality and accuracy of prognostic models for nephropathy and to validate these models in external cohorts of people with type 2 diabetes.
DESIGN
Systematic review and external validation.
DATA SOURCES
PubMed and Embase.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA
Studies describing the development of a model to predict the risk of nephropathy, applicable to people with type 2 diabetes.
METHODS
Screening, data extraction, and risk of bias assessment were done in duplicate. Eligible models were externally validated in the Hoorn Diabetes Care System (DCS) cohort (n=11 450) for the same outcomes for which they were developed. Risks of nephropathy were calculated and compared with observed risk over 2, 5, and 10 years of follow-up. Model performance was assessed based on intercept adjusted calibration and discrimination (Harrell's C statistic).
RESULTS
41 studies included in the systematic review reported 64 models, 46 of which were developed in a population with diabetes and 18 in the general population including diabetes as a predictor. The predicted outcomes included albuminuria, diabetic kidney disease, chronic kidney disease (general population), and end stage renal disease. The reported apparent discrimination of the 46 models varied considerably across the different predicted outcomes, from 0.60 (95% confidence interval 0.56 to 0.64) to 0.99 (not available) for the models developed in a diabetes population and from 0.59 (not available) to 0.96 (0.95 to 0.97) for the models developed in the general population. Calibration was reported in 31 of the 41 studies, and the models were generally well calibrated. 21 of the 64 retrieved models were externally validated in the Hoorn DCS cohort for predicting risk of albuminuria, diabetic kidney disease, and chronic kidney disease, with considerable variation in performance across prediction horizons and models. For all three outcomes, however, at least two models had C statistics >0.8, indicating excellent discrimination. In a secondary external validation in GoDARTS (Genetics of Diabetes Audit and Research in Tayside Scotland), models developed for diabetic kidney disease outperformed those for chronic kidney disease. Models were generally well calibrated across all three prediction horizons.
CONCLUSIONS
This study identified multiple prediction models to predict albuminuria, diabetic kidney disease, chronic kidney disease, and end stage renal disease. In the external validation, discrimination and calibration for albuminuria, diabetic kidney disease, and chronic kidney disease varied considerably across prediction horizons and models. For each outcome, however, specific models showed good discrimination and calibration across the three prediction horizons, with clinically accessible predictors, making them applicable in a clinical setting.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
PROSPERO CRD42020192831.
Topics: Aged; Albuminuria; Calibration; Clinical Decision Rules; Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2; Diabetic Nephropathies; Female; Humans; Kidney Failure, Chronic; Male; Middle Aged; Predictive Value of Tests; Prognosis; Renal Insufficiency, Chronic; Reproducibility of Results; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors
PubMed: 34583929
DOI: 10.1136/bmj.n2134