Maternal microchimerism in cord blood and risk of childhood-onset type 1 diabetes

Background Maternal microchimerism (MMc), the transmission of small quantities of maternal cells to the fetus, is relatively common and persistent. MMc has been detected with increased frequency in the circulation and pancreas of type 1 diabetes (T1D) patients. We investigated for the first time whether MMc levels at birth predict future T1D risk. We also tested whether cord blood MMc predicted MMc in samples taken at T1D diagnosis. Methods Participants in the Norwegian Mother and Child Cohort study were human leukocyte antigen (HLA) class II typed to determine non‐inherited, non‐shared maternal alleles (NIMA). Droplet digital (dd) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) assays specific for common HLA class II NIMA (HLADQB1*03:01, *04:02, and *06:02/03) were developed and validated. MMc was estimated as maternal DNA quantity in the fetal circulation, by NIMA specific ddPCR, measured in cord blood DNA from 71 children who later developed T1D and 126 controls within the cohort. Results We found detectable quantities of MMc in 34/71 future T1D cases (48%) and 53/126 controls (42%) (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68‐2.36), and no significant difference in ranks of MMc quantities between cases and controls (Mann‐Whitney P = .46). There was a possible association in the NIMA HLA‐DQB1*03:01 subgroup with later T1D (aOR 3.89, 95%CI 1.05‐14.4). MMc in cord blood was not significantly associated with MMc at T1D diagnosis. Conclusions Our findings did not support the hypothesis that the degree of MMc in cord blood predict T1D risk. The potential subgroup association with T1D risk should be replicated in a larger cohort

Time Trends in Deaths Before Age 50 Years in People with Type 1 Diabetes:a nationwide analysis from Scotland 2004–2017

Acknowledgements We thank the SDRN Epidemiology Group: J. Chalmers (Diabetes Centre, Victoria Hospital, Kirkcaldy, UK), C. Fischbacher (Information Services Division, NHS National Services Scotland, Edinburgh, UK), B. Kennon (Queen Elizabeth University Hospital, Glasgow, UK), G. Leese (Ninewells Hospital, Dundee, UK), R. Lindsay (British Heart Foundation Glasgow Cardiovascular Research Centre, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK), J. McKnight (Western General Hospital, NHS, UK), J. Petrie (Institute of Cardiovascular & Medical Sciences, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK), R. McCrimmon (Division of Molecular and Clinical Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK), S. Philip (Grampian Diabetes Research Unit, Diabetes Centre, Aberdeen Royal Infirmary, Aberdeen, UK), D. McAllister (Institute of Health & Wellbeing, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, UK), E. Pearson (Population Health and Genomics, School of Medicine, University of Dundee, Dundee, UK) and S. Wild (Usher Institute, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, UK). The SDRN Epidemiology Group resource was originally set up under Ethics ref. 11/AL/0225, PAC 33/11 now running under PBPP ref. 1617-0147. Funding This study was supported by funding from Diabetes UK (17/0005627).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Suspected retinopathies in Norwegian optometric practice with emphasis on patients with diabetes: a cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The scope of optometry differs worldwide. In Norway the vast majority of optometrists perform ophthalmoscopy as part of their routine examinations. The aim of this study was to describe the frequency of <it>suspected </it>retinopathies in patients seen for routine optometric examination and to determine how optometrists deal with these patients.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>212 optometrists participated in a questionnaire survey and a practice registration during November 2004 – May 2005. In the practice registration, details for 20 consecutive patient encounters were recorded. Data were analysed by chi-square tests and multiple logistic regression.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>All optometrist stated that ocular history taking was an integrated part of their routine examination, while general health and diabetes history were routinely addressed by 59% and 42% of the optometrists, respectively. During the practice registration 4,052 patient encounters were recorded. Ophthalmoscopy was performed in 88% of the patients, of which 2% were dilated fundus examinations. Retinopathy was <it>suspected </it>in 106 patients, of whom 31 did not report a previous history of ocular or systemic disease. Old age (75+), hypertension and diabetes strongly predicted retinopathy with odds ratio (95% CI) of 6.4 (4.2 to 9.9), 3.8 (2.4 to 6.0) and 2.5 (1.4 to 4.7), respectively. Diabetic retinopathy was seen in 10% of diabetic patients and <it>suspected </it>in 0.2% of patients with no established history of diabetes. Retinopathy was not confirmed in 9 out 18 patients with a history of diabetic retinopathy; seven of these had undergone laser treatment. Out of the 106 patients with findings of retinopathy, 28 were referred to an ophthalmologist or a general practitioner (GP), written reports were sent to a GP in 16 cases, ten patients were urged to contact their GP for further follow up, while 52 were considered in need of routine optometric follow up only.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Optometric practice provides a low threshold setting for detecting cases of ocular disease and retinal manifestations of systemic disease in the population. At present diagnosis of retinopathy in Norwegian optometric practice is unreliable. There are potentials for improving the optometrists' routine examination, their patient management patterns and collaboration routines with medical doctors.</p

Risk Factors Related to Inflammation and Endothelial Dysfunction in the DCCT/EDIC Cohort and Their Relationship With Nephropathy and Macrovascular Complications

OBJECTIVE—Because endothelial cell dysfunction and inflammation are key contributors to the development of complications in type 1 diabetes, we studied risk factors related to endothelial dysfunction and inflammation (C-reactive protein and fibrinogen, soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule-1, intracellular adhesion molecule-1, and E-selectin, and fibrinolytic markers) in a subgroup of patients from the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT)/Epidemiology of Diabetes Intervention and Complications (EDIC) study cohort

Care of vision and ocular health in diabetic members of a national diabetes organization: A cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Regular examination and early treatment of diabetic retinopathy can prevent visual loss. The aim of the study was to describe the care of vision and ocular health in people with diabetes in Norway.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A cross-sectional questionnaire survey of a random sample (n = 1,887) of the Norwegian Diabetic Associations' (NDA) members was carried out in 2005. Questions were asked about care of vision and ocular health, history of ocular disease and visual symptoms, general medical history and diabetes management. The study was approved by the Regional Committee for Medical Research Ethics.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The response rate was 74%. Forty-four questionnaires with incomplete data regarding gender, age or type of diabetes were excluded, leaving 1352 cases (52% females) for analysis. 451 (33%) had type 1 and 901 (67%) had type 2 diabetes, the mean duration of diabetes was respectively, 22 (sd ± 14) and 10 (sd ± 9) years. In all 1,052 (78%) had their eyes examined according to guidelines and 1,169 (87%) confirmed to have received information about regular eye examinations. One in two recalled to have received such information from their general practitioner. To have received information about the importance of eye examinations (PR 3.1, 95% CI 2.4 to 4.0), and diabetes duration > 10 years (PR 1.2, 95% CI 1.2 to 1.3), were independently associated with reporting regular eye examinations. A history of diabetic retinopathy was reported by 178 (13%) responders, of which 101 (57%) reported a history of laser treatment. Responders who had regular eye examinations reported more frequently a history of diabetic retinopathy (19% vs. 5%, p < 0.001). The frequency of retinopathy was significantly higher in responders with reported HbA1c values above treatment target (23% vs. 13%, p = 0.001). However, in responders who were not regularly examined, there was no difference in reported frequency of retinopathy with regard to HbA1c level.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Eight out of ten diabetic members of the NDA had their eyes examined according to current guidelines and the majority was well informed about the risk of vision loss due to diabetes. The results indicate that the reported history of diabetic retinopathy likely underestimates the prevalence of retinopathy.</p

Center Size and Glycemic Control: An International Study With 504 Centers From Seven Countries

The variance in glycemic control between different childhood diabetes centers is not fully understood. Although the International Society for Pediatric and Adolescent Diabetes guidelines from 2014 recommended center sizes of more than 150 patients (1), it has not been thoroughly investigated whether glycemic control is associated with center size (2–4). We have data from more than 500 childhood diabetes centers from seven different countries and thereby a unique opportunity to elaborate further on this association. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the relationship between center size and glycemic control in children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Patient data have been described previously (5). Briefly, the population comprised children with T1D in the age-group 3 months from seven high-income countries during 2013–2014: Austria, Denmark, England, Germany, Norway, Sweden, and Wales. Data were anonymized and obtained from five national registries/audits on children with T1D (Austria and Germany use the same electronic health record and England and Wales have a common National Paediatric Diabetes Audit, while Denmark, Norway, and Sweden have national registries). Mean HbA1c was compared between groups after adjusting for sex, age (<6 years, 6 to <12 years, and 12–18 years), duration of diabetes (<2 years, 2 to <5 years, and ≥5 years), and minority status (yes/no) (HbA1c adj) before and after stratifying for treatment modality (insulin injection/pump). Center size was defined as the number of patients with diabetes reported to be cared for in a center. Center size groupings were 1) <20, 2) 20 to <50, 3) 50 to <100, 4) 100 to <200, and 5) ≥200 patients. In total 54,494 children (48% females) with T1D across 504 centers in seven countries were included in the study. The number of centers per country varied between 14 (Wales) and 219 (Germany). Mean (SD) for age was 12.5 (3.9) years, mean age at T1D onset was 7.5 (4.0) years, and mean T1D duration was 5.0 (3.7) years. A total of 21% of patients had minority status, which varied between 5% (Wales) and 28% (Austria). A total of 38.1% of patients were on pump treatment, and the percentage varied between 25% (England) and 69% (Denmark). National coverage of T1D patients was >95% in all countries, apart from Austria, which had ∼80% data coverage. Included patients had 100% data coverage for all of the following variables: sex, age, diabetes duration, minority status, and HbA1c. Data on treatment modality were not available for 2,428 patients (4.5%); of these, 2,130 were from England and 154 were from Sweden. A total of 23.2% of centers had 200 patients, representing 12.3% of all centers. The distribution of small and large centers in the seven countries varied. England and Sweden had few small centers (34%). HbA1c adj was significantly higher in the centers with 50 patients, in both pen users (P 50 patients managed equally well; therefore, centralizing to very-high-volume diabetes centers may not necessarily be an advantage. Future research should focus on identifying reasons leading to differences in glycemic control in T1D patients cared for in small and large centers, e.g., the lack or presence of an updated multidisciplinary diabetes team