Regional variation in diabetic retinopathy and associated factors in Spectrum of Eye Disease in Diabetes (SPEED) study in India-Report 5.

PURPOSE: To study the zonal variations in diabetic retinopathy (DR) and associated factors in people with known type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) attending large eye care facilities in different regions of India. METHODS: In this cross-sectional eye-care facility-based study, India was divided into five zones; large eye care facilities with a good referral base and offering an entire range of care for patients with DR were invited. First-time T2DM attendees aged ≥18 years were recruited. All subjects received a comprehensive systemic and ophthalmic examination. DR and systemic diseases were classified as per the international/national standards. Findings were compared between the zones and with the national average. RESULTS: Fourteen eye-care facilities (15% public) from five zones participated. In the cohort of 11,173 people, there were more males (59%); the average age was above 45 years, and in 57%, DM had been diagnosed more than 5 years earlier. Compared with the overall study population, the proportion of people with any DR, sight-threatening DR, and blind were higher in the east zone (42.5%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 40.2-44.8; 24.3%, 95% CI 22.3-26.3, and 11.5%, respectively); diabetic macular edema was more frequent in the south zone (12.2%, 95% CI 11.2-13.2); people with moderate-to-severe visual impairment were more in the west zone (32.1%) and higher proportion of people in the south-central zone had systemic hypertension (56.8%, 95% CI 54.8-58.9). CONCLUSION: The zonal variation in DR and related vision loss could be related to variable health-seeking behavior, availability, and confidence in the available services

Development and validation of resource-driven risk prediction models for incident chronic kidney disease in type 2 diabetes

Prediction models for population-based screening need, for global usage, to be resource-driven, involving predictors that are affordably resourced. Here, we report the development and validation of three resource-driven risk models to identify people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) at risk of stage 3 CKD defined by a decline in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) to below 60 mL/min/1.73m2. The observational study cohort used for model development consisted of data from a primary care dataset of 20,510 multi-ethnic individuals with T2DM from London, UK (2007–2018). Discrimination and calibration of the resulting prediction models developed using cox regression were assessed using the c-statistic and calibration slope, respectively. Models were internally validated using tenfold cross-validation and externally validated on 13,346 primary care individuals from Wales, UK. The simplest model was simplified into a risk score to enable implementation in community-based medicine. The derived full model included demographic, laboratory parameters, medication-use, cardiovascular disease history (CVD) and sight threatening retinopathy status (STDR). Two less resource-intense models were developed by excluding CVD and STDR in the second model and HbA1c and HDL in the third model. All three 5-year risk models had good internal discrimination and calibration (optimism adjusted C-statistics were each 0.85 and calibration slopes 0.999–1.002). In Wales, models achieved excellent discrimination(c-statistics ranged 0.82–0.83). Calibration slopes at 5-years suggested models over-predicted risks, however were successfully updated to accommodate reduced incidence of stage 3 CKD in Wales, which improved their alignment with the observed rates in Wales (E/O ratios near to 1). The risk score demonstrated similar model performance compared to direct evaluation of the cox model. These resource-driven risk prediction models may enable universal screening for Stage 3 CKD to enable targeted early optimisation of risk factors for CKD

Development and validation of predictive risk models for sight threatening diabetic retinopathy in patients with type 2 diabetes to be applied as triage tools in resource limited settings.

Background: Delayed diagnosis and treatment of sight threatening diabetic retinopathy (STDR) is a common cause of visual impairment in people with Type 2 diabetes. Therefore, systematic regular retinal screening is recommended, but global coverage of such services is challenging. We aimed to develop and validate predictive models for STDR to identify 'at-risk' population for retinal screening. Methods: Models were developed using datasets obtained from general practices in inner London, United Kingdom (UK) on adults with type 2 Diabetes during the period 2007-2017. Three models were developed using Cox regression and model performance was assessed using C statistic, calibration slope and observed to expected ratio measures. Models were externally validated in cohorts from Wales, UK and India. Findings: A total of 40,334 people were included in the model development phase of which 1427 (3·54%) people developed STDR. Age, gender, diabetes duration, antidiabetic medication history, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), and history of retinopathy were included as predictors in the Model 1, Model 2 excluded retinopathy status, and Model 3 further excluded HbA1c. All three models attained strong discrimination performance in the model development dataset with C statistics ranging from 0·778 to 0·832, and in the external validation datasets (C statistic 0·685 - 0·823) with calibration slopes closer to 1 following re-calibration of the baseline survival. Interpretation: We have developed new risk prediction equations to identify those at risk of STDR in people with type 2 diabetes in any resource-setting so that they can be screened and treated early. Future testing, and piloting is required before implementation. Funding: This study was funded by the GCRF UKRI (MR/P207881/1) and supported by the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at Moorfields Eye Hospital NHS Foundation Trust and UCL Institute of Ophthalmology

Effects of antiplatelet therapy on stroke risk by brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases: subgroup analyses of the RESTART randomised, open-label trial

Background Findings from the RESTART trial suggest that starting antiplatelet therapy might reduce the risk of recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage compared with avoiding antiplatelet therapy. Brain imaging features of intracerebral haemorrhage and cerebral small vessel diseases (such as cerebral microbleeds) are associated with greater risks of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage. We did subgroup analyses of the RESTART trial to explore whether these brain imaging features modify the effects of antiplatelet therapy

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

Background: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. Methods: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). Findings: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29–146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0– 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25–1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39–1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65–1·60]; p=0·92). Interpretation: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention

Effects of antiplatelet therapy after stroke due to intracerebral haemorrhage (RESTART): a randomised, open-label trial

BACKGROUND: Antiplatelet therapy reduces the risk of major vascular events for people with occlusive vascular disease, although it might increase the risk of intracranial haemorrhage. Patients surviving the commonest subtype of intracranial haemorrhage, intracerebral haemorrhage, are at risk of both haemorrhagic and occlusive vascular events, but whether antiplatelet therapy can be used safely is unclear. We aimed to estimate the relative and absolute effects of antiplatelet therapy on recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage and whether this risk might exceed any reduction of occlusive vascular events. METHODS: The REstart or STop Antithrombotics Randomised Trial (RESTART) was a prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded endpoint, parallel-group trial at 122 hospitals in the UK. We recruited adults (≥18 years) who were taking antithrombotic (antiplatelet or anticoagulant) therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage, discontinued antithrombotic therapy, and survived for 24 h. Computerised randomisation incorporating minimisation allocated participants (1:1) to start or avoid antiplatelet therapy. We followed participants for the primary outcome (recurrent symptomatic intracerebral haemorrhage) for up to 5 years. We analysed data from all randomised participants using Cox proportional hazards regression, adjusted for minimisation covariates. This trial is registered with ISRCTN (number ISRCTN71907627). FINDINGS: Between May 22, 2013, and May 31, 2018, 537 participants were recruited a median of 76 days (IQR 29-146) after intracerebral haemorrhage onset: 268 were assigned to start and 269 (one withdrew) to avoid antiplatelet therapy. Participants were followed for a median of 2·0 years (IQR [1·0- 3·0]; completeness 99·3%). 12 (4%) of 268 participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had recurrence of intracerebral haemorrhage compared with 23 (9%) of 268 participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (adjusted hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·25-1·03]; p=0·060). 18 (7%) participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy experienced major haemorrhagic events compared with 25 (9%) participants allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (0·71 [0·39-1·30]; p=0·27), and 39 [15%] participants allocated to antiplatelet therapy had major occlusive vascular events compared with 38 [14%] allocated to avoid antiplatelet therapy (1·02 [0·65-1·60]; p=0·92). INTERPRETATION: These results exclude all but a very modest increase in the risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage with antiplatelet therapy for patients on antithrombotic therapy for the prevention of occlusive vascular disease when they developed intracerebral haemorrhage. The risk of recurrent intracerebral haemorrhage is probably too small to exceed the established benefits of antiplatelet therapy for secondary prevention. FUNDING: British Heart Foundation

Effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor and angiotensin receptor blocker initiation on organ support-free days in patients hospitalized with COVID-19

IMPORTANCE Overactivation of the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) may contribute to poor clinical outcomes in patients with COVID-19. Objective To determine whether angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB) initiation improves outcomes in patients hospitalized for COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In an ongoing, adaptive platform randomized clinical trial, 721 critically ill and 58 non–critically ill hospitalized adults were randomized to receive an RAS inhibitor or control between March 16, 2021, and February 25, 2022, at 69 sites in 7 countries (final follow-up on June 1, 2022). INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to receive open-label initiation of an ACE inhibitor (n = 257), ARB (n = 248), ARB in combination with DMX-200 (a chemokine receptor-2 inhibitor; n = 10), or no RAS inhibitor (control; n = 264) for up to 10 days. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was organ support–free days, a composite of hospital survival and days alive without cardiovascular or respiratory organ support through 21 days. The primary analysis was a bayesian cumulative logistic model. Odds ratios (ORs) greater than 1 represent improved outcomes. RESULTS On February 25, 2022, enrollment was discontinued due to safety concerns. Among 679 critically ill patients with available primary outcome data, the median age was 56 years and 239 participants (35.2%) were women. Median (IQR) organ support–free days among critically ill patients was 10 (–1 to 16) in the ACE inhibitor group (n = 231), 8 (–1 to 17) in the ARB group (n = 217), and 12 (0 to 17) in the control group (n = 231) (median adjusted odds ratios of 0.77 [95% bayesian credible interval, 0.58-1.06] for improvement for ACE inhibitor and 0.76 [95% credible interval, 0.56-1.05] for ARB compared with control). The posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitors and ARBs worsened organ support–free days compared with control were 94.9% and 95.4%, respectively. Hospital survival occurred in 166 of 231 critically ill participants (71.9%) in the ACE inhibitor group, 152 of 217 (70.0%) in the ARB group, and 182 of 231 (78.8%) in the control group (posterior probabilities that ACE inhibitor and ARB worsened hospital survival compared with control were 95.3% and 98.1%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE In this trial, among critically ill adults with COVID-19, initiation of an ACE inhibitor or ARB did not improve, and likely worsened, clinical outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0273570

Does tight control of systemic factors help in the management ofdiabetic retinopathy?

Diabetic retinopathy (DR), one of the leading causes of preventable blindness, is associated with many systemic factors that contribute to the development and progression of this microvascular complication of diabetes. While the duration of diabetes is the major risk factor for the development of DR, the main modifiable systemic risk factors for development and progression of DR are hyperglycemia, hypertension, and dyslipidemia. This review article looks at the evidence that control of these systemic factors has significant benefits in delaying the onset and progression of DR