Patients’, Caregivers’, and Providers’ Perceived Strategies for Diabetes Care

Objectives: To explore strategies to improve type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) self-management among low-income and minority groups. Methods: Focus groups centered on T2DM self-care behaviors were conducted using convenient sample of patients with T2DM (N = 17), caregivers (N = 5) and healthcare providers (N = 15). Results: Patients and caregivers perceived strategies included improving patient-provider communication, providers’ accessibility and compassion, and flexible clinic hours. Strategies identified by providers were realistic patient’s expectations, family support, and community resources. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this study is the first to elicit strategies to improve T2DM self-management through a joint meeting of patients, caregivers, and healthcare providers. Study findings could help inform future efforts to assist patients better manage their T2DM

Diabetes and Co-morbid Depression Among Racially Diverse, Low-Income Adults

Background Research suggests individuals with diabetes are twice as likely as those without diabetes to be clinically depressed. Still unknown is the relationship between diabetes and depression in socioeconomically disadvantaged populations. Purpose We examined the relationship between diabetes and depressive symptoms in a large, racially diverse, low-income cohort in the southeastern USA. Methods A total of 69,068 adults were recruited from community health centers in 12 southeastern states. A fully adjusted polytomous logistic regression model tested the relationship between demographics, lifestyle behaviors, antidepressant use, body mass index, diabetes diagnosis, diabetes duration, diabetes medication compliance, and depressive symptoms using the Centers for Epidemiological Studies Depression scale. Results Diabetes was present in 21.7% of sample. While a diabetes diagnosis was associated with having severe depressive symptoms (AOR, 1.24; 95% CI, 1.14–1.34), demographics, lifestyle behaviors, body mass index and antidepressant use were more strongly associated with severe depressive symptoms than a diabetes diagnosis. Conclusions Having diabetes was associated with the presence and severity of depressive symptoms in a large, low-income sample of racially diverse adults. However, the relationship between diabetes and depressive symptoms was weaker than in other studies with higher socioeconomic groups

Diabetes and Co-morbid Depression Among Racially Diverse, Low-Income Adults

Research suggests individuals with diabetes are twice as likely as those without diabetes to be clinically depressed. Still unknown is the relationship between diabetes and depression in socioeconomically disadvantaged populations

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK.

BACKGROUND: A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. METHODS: This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. FINDINGS: Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0-75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4-97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8-80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3-4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. INTERPRETATION: ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials. FUNDING: UK Research and Innovation, National Institutes for Health Research (NIHR), Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Lemann Foundation, Rede D'Or, Brava and Telles Foundation, NIHR Oxford Biomedical Research Centre, Thames Valley and South Midland's NIHR Clinical Research Network, and AstraZeneca

Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

Background A safe and efficacious vaccine against severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), if deployed with high coverage, could contribute to the control of the COVID-19 pandemic. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine in a pooled interim analysis of four trials. Methods This analysis includes data from four ongoing blinded, randomised, controlled trials done across the UK, Brazil, and South Africa. Participants aged 18 years and older were randomly assigned (1:1) to ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine or control (meningococcal group A, C, W, and Y conjugate vaccine or saline). Participants in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group received two doses containing 5 × 1010 viral particles (standard dose; SD/SD cohort); a subset in the UK trial received a half dose as their first dose (low dose) and a standard dose as their second dose (LD/SD cohort). The primary efficacy analysis included symptomatic COVID-19 in seronegative participants with a nucleic acid amplification test-positive swab more than 14 days after a second dose of vaccine. Participants were analysed according to treatment received, with data cutoff on Nov 4, 2020. Vaccine efficacy was calculated as 1 - relative risk derived from a robust Poisson regression model adjusted for age. Studies are registered at ISRCTN89951424 and ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04324606, NCT04400838, and NCT04444674. Findings Between April 23 and Nov 4, 2020, 23 848 participants were enrolled and 11 636 participants (7548 in the UK, 4088 in Brazil) were included in the interim primary efficacy analysis. In participants who received two standard doses, vaccine efficacy was 62·1% (95% CI 41·0–75·7; 27 [0·6%] of 4440 in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group vs71 [1·6%] of 4455 in the control group) and in participants who received a low dose followed by a standard dose, efficacy was 90·0% (67·4–97·0; three [0·2%] of 1367 vs 30 [2·2%] of 1374; pinteraction=0·010). Overall vaccine efficacy across both groups was 70·4% (95·8% CI 54·8–80·6; 30 [0·5%] of 5807 vs 101 [1·7%] of 5829). From 21 days after the first dose, there were ten cases hospitalised for COVID-19, all in the control arm; two were classified as severe COVID-19, including one death. There were 74 341 person-months of safety follow-up (median 3·4 months, IQR 1·3–4·8): 175 severe adverse events occurred in 168 participants, 84 events in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group and 91 in the control group. Three events were classified as possibly related to a vaccine: one in the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 group, one in the control group, and one in a participant who remains masked to group allocation. Interpretation ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 has an acceptable safety profile and has been found to be efficacious against symptomatic COVID-19 in this interim analysis of ongoing clinical trials

Mammography use among women with and without diabetes: Results from the Southern Community Cohort Study

Studies have shown an increased risk of breast cancer associated with diabetes which may be due to differences in mammography use among women who have diabetes compared with women who do not have diabetes. Baseline data was used from the Southern Community Cohort Study – a prospective cohort study conducted primarily among low-income persons in the southeastern United States – to examine the association between diabetes and mammography use. In-person interviews collected information on diabetes and mammography use from 14,665 white and 30,846 black women aged 40–79 years between 2002 and 2009. After adjustment for potential confounding, white women with diabetes were no more likely (odds ratio [OR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.85–1.06) to undergo mammography within the past 12 months than white women without diabetes. Nor was there an association between diabetes and mammography use among black women (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.93–1.07). An increase in mammography use was seen within one year following diabetes diagnosis, more so among white than black women, but this was offset by decreases thereafter. Although there was some evidence of an increase in mammography use within one year of diabetes diagnosis, these results suggest that mammography use is not related to diabetes

Plasma Selenium Biomarkers in Low Income Black and White Americans from the Southeastern United States

Biomarkers of selenium are necessary for assessing selenium status in humans, since soil variation hinders estimation of selenium intake from foods. In this study, we measured the concentration of plasma selenium, selenoprotein P (SEPP1), and glutathione peroxidase (GPX3) activity and their interindividual differences in 383 low-income blacks and whites selected from a stratified random sample of adults aged 40–79 years, who were participating in a long-term cohort study in the southeastern United States (US). We assessed the utility of these biomarkers to determine differences in selenium status and their association with demographic, socio-economic, dietary, and other indicators. Dietary selenium intake was assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire designed for the cohort, matched with region-specific food selenium content, and compared with the US Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA) set at 55 µg/day. We found that SEPP1, a sensitive biomarker of selenium nutritional status, was significantly lower among blacks than whites (mean 4.4±1.1 vs. 4.7±1.0 mg/L, p = 0.006), with blacks less than half as likely to have highest vs. lowest quartile SEPP1 concentration (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.4, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.2–0.8). The trend in a similar direction was observed for plasma selenium among blacks and whites, (mean 115±15.1 vs. 118±17.7 µg/L, p = 0.08), while GPX3 activity did not differ between blacks and whites (136±33.3 vs. 132±33.5 U/L, p = 0.320). Levels of the three biomarkers were not correlated with estimated dietary selenium intake, except for SEPP1 among 10% of participants with the lowest selenium intake (≤57 µg/day). The findings suggest that SEPP1 may be an effective biomarker of selenium status and disease risk in adults and that low selenium status may disproportionately affect black and white cohort participants

Plasma selenium biomarkers in low income black and white americans from the southeastern United States.

Biomarkers of selenium are necessary for assessing selenium status in humans, since soil variation hinders estimation of selenium intake from foods. In this study, we measured the concentration of plasma selenium, selenoprotein P (SEPP1), and glutathione peroxidase (GPX3) activity and their interindividual differences in 383 low-income blacks and whites selected from a stratified random sample of adults aged 40-79 years, who were participating in a long-term cohort study in the southeastern United States (US). We assessed the utility of these biomarkers to determine differences in selenium status and their association with demographic, socio-economic, dietary, and other indicators. Dietary selenium intake was assessed using a validated food frequency questionnaire designed for the cohort, matched with region-specific food selenium content, and compared with the US Recommended Dietary Allowances (RDA) set at 55 µg/day. We found that SEPP1, a sensitive biomarker of selenium nutritional status, was significantly lower among blacks than whites (mean 4.4 ± 1.1 vs. 4.7 ± 1.0 mg/L, p = 0.006), with blacks less than half as likely to have highest vs. lowest quartile SEPP1 concentration (Odds Ratio (OR) 0.4, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.2-0.8). The trend in a similar direction was observed for plasma selenium among blacks and whites, (mean 115 ± 15.1 vs. 118 ± 17.7 µg/L, p = 0.08), while GPX3 activity did not differ between blacks and whites (136 ± 33.3 vs. 132 ± 33.5 U/L, p = 0.320). Levels of the three biomarkers were not correlated with estimated dietary selenium intake, except for SEPP1 among 10% of participants with the lowest selenium intake (≤ 57 µg/day). The findings suggest that SEPP1 may be an effective biomarker of selenium status and disease risk in adults and that low selenium status may disproportionately affect black and white cohort participants