Outcomes of preexisting diabetes mellitus in breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer.

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Springer Verlag via the DOI in this record.PURPOSE: Preexisting diabetes is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in cancer. We examined the impact of incident cancer on the long-term outcomes of diabetes. METHODS: Using the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we identified three cohorts of diabetes patients subsequently diagnosed with breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer, each matched to diabetic noncancer controls. Patients were required to have survived at least 1 year after cancer diagnosis (cases) or a matched index date (controls), and were followed up to 10 years for incident microvascular and macrovascular complications and mortality. Multivariate competing risks regression analyses were used to compare outcomes between cancer patients and controls. RESULTS: Overall, there were 3382 cancer patients and 11,135 controls with 59,431 person-years of follow-up. In adjusted analyses, there were no statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) differences in diabetes complication rates between cancer patients and their controls in any of the three cancer cohorts. Combined, cancer patients were less likely (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.88; 95% CI = 0.79-0.98) to develop retinopathy. Cancer patients were more likely to die of any cause (including cancer), but prostate cancer patients were less likely to die of causes associated with diabetes (HR 0.61; 95% CI = 0.43-0.88). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: There is no evidence that incident cancer had an adverse impact on the long-term outcomes of preexisting diabetes. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These findings are important for cancer survivors with preexisting diabetes because they suggest that substantial improvements in the relative survival of several of the most common types of cancer are not undermined by excess diabetes morbidity and mortality.This study was funded by the Population Research Committee, Cancer Research UK. Quality and Outcomes of Care for Chronic Conditions in Older Patients Diagnosed with Breast, Colorectal, or Prostate Cancer Compared to Non-Cancer Controls: An Observational Study Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Reference # 16609. 1 July 2013–29 February, 2016. In addition, Dr. Keating is supported by K24CA181510 from the US National Cancer Institute

Outcomes of preexisting diabetes mellitus in breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer.

This is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Springer Verlag via the DOI in this record.PURPOSE: Preexisting diabetes is associated with increased morbidity and mortality in cancer. We examined the impact of incident cancer on the long-term outcomes of diabetes. METHODS: Using the United Kingdom Clinical Practice Research Datalink, we identified three cohorts of diabetes patients subsequently diagnosed with breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer, each matched to diabetic noncancer controls. Patients were required to have survived at least 1 year after cancer diagnosis (cases) or a matched index date (controls), and were followed up to 10 years for incident microvascular and macrovascular complications and mortality. Multivariate competing risks regression analyses were used to compare outcomes between cancer patients and controls. RESULTS: Overall, there were 3382 cancer patients and 11,135 controls with 59,431 person-years of follow-up. In adjusted analyses, there were no statistically significant (p ≤ 0.05) differences in diabetes complication rates between cancer patients and their controls in any of the three cancer cohorts. Combined, cancer patients were less likely (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.88; 95% CI = 0.79-0.98) to develop retinopathy. Cancer patients were more likely to die of any cause (including cancer), but prostate cancer patients were less likely to die of causes associated with diabetes (HR 0.61; 95% CI = 0.43-0.88). CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: There is no evidence that incident cancer had an adverse impact on the long-term outcomes of preexisting diabetes. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These findings are important for cancer survivors with preexisting diabetes because they suggest that substantial improvements in the relative survival of several of the most common types of cancer are not undermined by excess diabetes morbidity and mortality.This study was funded by the Population Research Committee, Cancer Research UK. Quality and Outcomes of Care for Chronic Conditions in Older Patients Diagnosed with Breast, Colorectal, or Prostate Cancer Compared to Non-Cancer Controls: An Observational Study Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Reference # 16609. 1 July 2013–29 February, 2016. In addition, Dr. Keating is supported by K24CA181510 from the US National Cancer Institute

Quality of diabetes care in breast, colorectal, and prostate cancer

This is the final version. Available on open access from Springer via the DOI in this recordPURPOSE: Overlooking other medical conditions during cancer treatment and follow-up could result in excess morbidity and mortality, thereby undermining gains associated with early detection and improved treatment of cancer. We compared the quality of care for diabetes patients subsequently diagnosed with breast, colorectal, or prostate cancer to matched, diabetic non-cancer controls. METHODS: Longitudinal cohort study using primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink, United Kingdom. Patients with pre-existing diabetes were followed for up to 5 years after cancer diagnosis, or after an assigned index date (non-cancer controls). Quality of diabetes care was estimated based on Quality and Outcomes Framework indicators. Mixed effects logistic regression analyses were used to compare the unadjusted and adjusted odds of meeting quality measures between cancer patients and controls, overall and stratified by type of cancer. RESULTS: 3382 cancer patients and 11,135 controls contributed 44,507 person-years of follow-up. In adjusted analyses, cancer patients were less likely to meet five of 14 quality measures, including: total cholesterol ≤ 5 mmol/L (odds ratio [OR] = 0.82; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75-0.90); glycosylated hemoglobin ≤ 59 mmol/mol (adjusted OR = 0.77; 95% CI, 0.70-0.85); and albumin creatinine ratio testing (adjusted OR = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.75-0.91). However, cancer patients were as likely as their matched controls to meet quality measures for other diabetes services, including retinal screening, foot examination, and dietary review. CONCLUSIONS: Although in the short-term, cancer patients were less likely to achieve target thresholds for cholesterol and HbA1c, they continued to receive high-quality diabetes primary care throughout 5 years post diagnosis. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: These findings are important for cancer survivors with pre-existing diabetes because they indicate that high-quality diabetes care is maintained throughout the continuum of cancer diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up.This study was funded by the Population Research Committee, Cancer Research UK. Quality and Outcomes of Care for Chronic Conditions in Older Patients Diagnosed with Breast, Colorectal, or Prostate Cancer Compared to Non-Cancer Controls: An Observational Study Using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD). Reference # 16609. 1 July 2013–29 February, 2016. In addition, Dr. Keating is supported by K24CA181510 from the US National Cancer Institute

Variation in antibiotic treatment for diabetic patients with serious foot infections: A retrospective observational study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Diabetic foot infections are common, serious, and diverse. There is uncertainty about optimal antibiotic treatment, and probably substantial variation in practice. Our aim was to document whether this is the case: A finding that would raise questions about the comparative cost-effectiveness of different regimens and also open the possibility of examining costs and outcomes to determine which should be preferred.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We used the Veterans Health Administration (VA) Diabetes Epidemiology Cohorts (DEpiC) database to conduct a retrospective observational study of hospitalized patients with diabetic foot infections. DEpiC contains computerized VA and Medicare patient-level data for VA patients with diabetes since 1998, including demographics, ICD-9-CM diagnostic codes, antibiotics prescribed, and VA facility. We identified all patients with ICD-9-CM codes for cellulitis/abscess of the foot and then sub-grouped them according to whether they had cellulitis/abscess plus codes for gangrene, osteomyelitis, skin ulcer, or none of these. For each facility, we determined: 1) The proportion of patients treated with an antibiotic and the initial route of administration; 2) The first antibiotic regimen prescribed for each patient, defined as treatment with the same antibiotic, or combination of antibiotics, for at least 5 continuous days; and 3) The antibacterial spectrum of the first regimen.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>We identified 3,792 patients with cellulitis/abscess of the foot either alone (16.4%), or with ulcer (32.6%), osteomyelitis (19.0%) or gangrene (32.0%). Antibiotics were prescribed for 98.9%. At least 5 continuous days of treatment with an unchanged regimen of one or more antibiotics was prescribed for 59.3%. The means and (ranges) across facilities of the three most common regimens were: 16.4%, (22.8%); 15.7%, (36.1%); and 10.8%, (50.5%). The range of variation across facilities proved substantially greater than that across the different categories of foot infection. We found similar variation in the spectrum of the antibiotic regimen.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The large variations in regimen appear to reflect differences in facility practice styles rather than case mix. It is unlikely that all regimens are equally cost-effective. Our methods make possible evaluation of many regimens across many facilities, and can be applied in further studies to determine which antibiotic regimens should be preferred.</p

Socioeconomic profile of diabetic patients with and without foot problems

Introduction: To identify the differences in a socioeconomic profile between two cohorts of diabetic patients &#x2013; one with diabetic foot problems and another without diabetic foot problems. Materials and methods: The cohort with diabetic foot problems (including cellulitis, abscess, osteomyelitis, septic arthritis, gangrene, ulcers, or Charcot joint disease) consisted of 122 diabetic patients, while the other cohort without foot problems consisted of 112 diabetic patients. Both were seen at the National University Hospital from January to April 2007. A detailed protocol was designed and the factors studied included patient profile, average monthly household income, education, compliance to diabetic medication, attendance at clinics for diabetic treatment, exercise, smoking, alcohol consumption, gender, and glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1C) level. These were studied for significant differences using univariate and stepwise multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: With multivariate analysis, Malay ethnicity (p&#60;0.001), education of up to secondary school only (p=0.021), low average monthly household income of less than SGD &#x0024;2,000 (p=0.030), lack of exercise (at least once a week, p=0.04), and elevated HbA1C level (&#x003E;7.0%; p=0.015) were found to be significantly higher in the cohort with diabetic foot problems than the cohort without. Conclusions: There are significant differences in the socioeconomic factors between diabetic patients with diabetic foot problems and those without

Clinical significance of the isolation of Staphylococcus epidermidis from bone biopsy in diabetic foot osteomyelitis

Introduction: Coagulase-negative staphylococci are considered as microorganisms with little virulence and usually as contaminants. In order to establish the role of Staphylococcus epidermidis as a pathogen in diabetic foot osteomyelitis, in addition to the isolation of the sole bacterium from the bone it will be necessary to demonstrate the histopathological changes caused by the infection. Methods: A consecutive series of 222 diabetic patients with foot osteomyelitis treated surgically in the Diabetic Foot Unit at La Paloma Hospital (Las Palmas de Gran Canaria, Canary Islands, Spain) between 1 October 2002 and 31 October 2008. From the entire series including 213 bone cultures with 241 isolated organisms, we have analyzed only the 139 cases where Staphylococci were found. We analyzed several variables between the two groups: Staphylococcus aureus versus Staphylococcus epidermidis. Results: Of the 134 patients included in this study, Staphlylococcus epidermidis was found as the sole bacterium isolated in 11 cases and accompanied by other bacteria in 12 cases. Staphlylococcus aureus was found as the sole bacterium isolated in 72 cases and accompanied by other bacteria in 39 cases. Histopathological changes were found in the cases of osteomyelitis where Staphylococcus epidermidis was the sole bacterium isolated. Acute osteomyelitis was found to a lesser extent when Staphylococcus epidermidis was the sole bacterium isolated but without significant differences with the cases where Staphylococcus aureus was the sole bacterium isolated. Conclusion: Staphylococcus epidermidis should be considered as a real pathogen, not only a contaminant, in diabetic patients with foot osteomyelitis when the bacterium is isolated from the bone. No differences in the outcomes of surgical treatment have been found with cases which Staphlylococcus aureus was isolated

A classification of diabetic foot infections using ICD-9-CM codes: application to a large computerized medical database

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Diabetic foot infections are common, serious, and varied. Diagnostic and treatment strategies are correspondingly diverse. It is unclear how patients are managed in actual practice and how outcomes might be improved. Clarification will require study of large numbers of patients, such as are available in medical databases. We have developed and evaluated a system for identifying and classifying diabetic foot infections that can be used for this purpose.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We used the (VA) Diabetes Epidemiology Cohorts (DEpiC) database to conduct a retrospective observational study of patients with diabetic foot infections. DEpiC contains computerized VA and Medicare patient-level data for patients with diabetes since 1998. We determined which ICD-9-CM codes served to identify patients with different types of diabetic foot infections and ranked them in declining order of severity: Gangrene, Osteomyelitis, Ulcer, Foot cellulitis/abscess, Toe cellulitis/abscess, Paronychia. We evaluated our classification by examining its relationship to patient characteristics, diagnostic procedures, treatments given, and medical outcomes.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were 61,007 patients with foot infections, of which 42,063 were classifiable into one of our predefined groups. The different types of infection were related to expected patient characteristics, diagnostic procedures, treatments, and outcomes. Our severity ranking showed a monotonic relationship to hospital length of stay, amputation rate, transition to long-term care, and mortality.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>We have developed a classification system for patients with diabetic foot infections that is expressly designed for use with large, computerized, ICD-9-CM coded administrative medical databases. It provides a framework that can be used to conduct observational studies of large numbers of patients in order to examine treatment variation and patient outcomes, including the effect of new management strategies, implementation of practice guidelines, and quality improvement initiatives.</p

Diabetic foot infections: a team-oriented review of medical and surgical management

As the domestic and international incidence of diabetes and metabolic syndrome continues to rise, health care providers need to continue improving management of the long-term complications of the disease. Emergency department visits and hospital admissions for diabetic foot infections are increasingly commonplace, and a like-minded multidisciplinary team approach is needed to optimize patient care. Early recognition of severe infections, medical stabilization, appropriate antibiotic selection, early surgical intervention, and strategic plans for delayed reconstruction are crucial components of managing diabetic foot infections. The authors review initial medical and surgical management and staged surgical reconstruction of diabetic foot infections in the inpatient setting

One step closer to understanding the role of bacteria in diabetic foot ulcers: characterising the microbiome of ulcers

Background: The aim of this study was to characterise the microbiome of new and recurrent diabetic foot ulcers using 16S amplicon sequencing (16S AS), allowing the identification of a wider range of bacterial species that may be important in the development of chronicity in these debilitating wounds. Twenty patients not receiving antibiotics for the past three months were selected, with swabs taken from each individual for culture and 16S AS. DNA was isolated using a combination of bead beating and kit extraction. Samples were sequenced on the Illumina Hiseq 2500 platform. Results: Conventional laboratory culture showed positive growth from only 55 % of the patients, whereas 16S AS was positive for 75 % of the patients (41 unique genera, representing 82 different operational taxonomic units (OTU’s). S. aureus was isolated in 72 % of culture-positive samples, whereas the most commonly detected bacteria in all ulcers were Peptoniphilusspp., Anaerococcus spp. and Corynebacterium spp., with the addition of Staphylococcus spp. in new ulcers. The majority of OTU’s residing in both new and recurrent ulcers (over 67 %) were identified as facultative or strict anaerobic Gram-positive organisms. Principal component analysis (PCA) showed no difference in clustering between the two groups (new and recurrent ulcers). Conclusions: The abundance of anaerobic bacteria has important implications for treatment as it suggests that the microbiome of each ulcer “starts afresh” and that, although diverse, are not distinctly different from one another with respect to new or recurrent ulcers. Therefore, when considering antibiotic therapy the duration of current ulceration may be a more important consideration than a history of healed ulcer