16 research outputs found

    OGTT Glucose Response Curves, Insulin Sensitivity, and β-Cell Function in RISE: Comparison Between Youth and Adults at Randomization and in Response to Interventions to Preserve β-Cell Function

    Get PDF
    We examined the glucose response curves (biphasic [BPh], monophasic [MPh], incessant increase [IIn]) during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) and their relationship to insulin sensitivity (IS) and β-cell function (βCF) in youth versus adults with impaired glucose tolerance or recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was both a cross-sectional and a longitudinal evaluation of participants in the RISE study randomized to metformin alone for 12 months or glargine for 3 months followed by metformin for 9 months. At baseline/randomization, OGTTs (85 youth, 353 adults) were categorized as BPh, MPh, or IIn. The relationship of the glucose response curves to hyperglycemic clamp-measured IS and βCF at baseline and the change in glucose response curves 12 months after randomization were assessed. RESULTS: At randomization, the prevalence of the BPh curve was significantly higher in youth than adults (18.8% vs. 8.2%), with no differences in MPh or IIn. IS did not differ across glucose response curves in youth or adults. However, irrespective of curve type, youth had lower IS than adults (P < 0.05). βCF was lowest in IIn versus MPh and BPh in youth and adults (P < 0.05), yet compared with adults, youth had higher βCF in BPh and MPh (P < 0.005) but not IIn. At month 12, the change in glucose response curves did not differ between youth and adults, and there was no treatment effect. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a twofold higher prevalence of the more favorable BPh curve in youth at randomization, RISE interventions did not result in beneficial changes in glucose response curves in youth compared with adults. Moreover, the typical β-cell hypersecretion in youth was not present in the IIn curve, emphasizing the severity of β-cell dysfunction in youth with this least favorable glucose response curve

    COVID-19 Symptoms by Variant Period in the North Carolina COVID-19 Community Research Partnership, North Carolina, USA

    No full text
    In North Carolina, USA, the SARS-CoV-2 Omicron variant was associated with changing symptomology in daily surveys, including increasing rates of self-reported cough and sore throat and decreased rates of loss of taste and smell. Compared with the pre-Delta period, Delta and Omicron (pre-BA.4/BA.5) variant periods were associated with shorter symptom duration

    Comparison of ETDRS 7-field to 4-widefield digital imaging in the evaluation of diabetic retinopathy severity

    Get PDF
    Purpose: To compare Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) severity levels between two digital fundus imaging protocols for research studies of diabetic retinopathy: the gold standard 7-field (7F) imaging and the more recent 4-widefield (4W) imaging. Methods: Two hundred twenty-two participants enrolled in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study underwent concurrent 7F and 4W imaging. The ETDRS levels from 220 paired gradable images were determined by masked graders. Each image was graded by two independent graders with adjudication by a senior grader, if necessary. Percent agreement between graders and between imaging protocols was evaluated with kappa statistics and weighted kappa statistics. Results: Of 220 gradable eyes, diabetic retinopathy was seen in 11.8%; this was mild in 10.4% and more than mild in 1.4% using 7F imaging. The ETDRS levels showed exact agreement of 95% between 7F and 4W imaging (weighted kappa 0.86). Intergrader agreement for each modality had exact agreement of 89% (weighted kappa of 0.73) for 7F and 91% (weighted kappa 0.77) for 4W. Conclusions: There is substantial agreement in the ETDRS severity level between the 7F and 4W digital imaging protocols, demonstrating that the two imaging protocols are interchangeable. Both 4W and 7F digital imaging protocols can be used for assessing ETDRS levels, even in populations with minimal diabetic retinopathy. Translational Relevance: The 4W protocol requires fewer images than the 7F, is more comfortable for the patients, is easier for photographic capture, and provides diabetic retinopathy data that is equivalent to the 7F imaging protocol

    Comparison of ETDRS 7-Field to 4-Widefield Digital Imaging in the Evaluation of Diabetic Retinopathy Severity

    No full text
    Purpose: To compare Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study (ETDRS) severity levels between two digital fundus imaging protocols for research studies of diabetic retinopathy: the gold standard 7-field (7F) imaging and the more recent 4-widefield (4W) imaging. Methods: Two hundred twenty-two participants enrolled in the Diabetes Prevention Program Outcomes Study underwent concurrent 7F and 4W imaging. The ETDRS levels from 220 paired gradable images were determined by masked graders. Each image was graded by two independent graders with adjudication by a senior grader, if necessary. Percent agreement between graders and between imaging protocols was evaluated with kappa statistics and weighted kappa statistics. Results: Of 220 gradable eyes, diabetic retinopathy was seen in 11.8%; this was mild in 10.4% and more than mild in 1.4% using 7F imaging. The ETDRS levels showed exact agreement of 95% between 7F and 4W imaging (weighted kappa 0.86). Intergrader agreement for each modality had exact agreement of 89% (weighted kappa of 0.73) for 7F and 91% (weighted kappa 0.77) for 4W. Conclusions: There is substantial agreement in the ETDRS severity level between the 7F and 4W digital imaging protocols, demonstrating that the two imaging protocols are interchangeable. Both 4W and 7F digital imaging protocols can be used for assessing ETDRS levels, even in populations with minimal diabetic retinopathy. Translational Relevance: The 4W protocol requires fewer images than the 7F, is more comfortable for the patients, is easier for photographic capture, and provides diabetic retinopathy data that is equivalent to the 7F imaging protocol

    Self-reported mask use among persons with or without SARS CoV-2 vaccination -United States, December 2020-August 2021

    No full text
    Wearing a facemask can help to decrease the transmission of COVID-19. We investigated self-reported mask use among subjects aged 18 years and older participating in the COVID-19 Community Research Partnership (CRP), a prospective longitudinal COVID-19 surveillance study in the mid-Atlantic and southeastern United States. We included those participants who completed ≥5 daily surveys each month from December 1, 2020 through August 31, 2021. Mask use was defined as self-reported use of a face mask or face covering on every interaction with others outside the household within a distance of less than 6 feet. Participants were considered vaccinated if they reported receiving ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose. Participants (n = 17,522) were 91% non-Hispanic White, 68% female, median age 57 years, 26% healthcare workers, with 95% self-reported receiving ≥1 COVID-19 vaccine dose through August 2021; mean daily survey response was 85%. Mask use was higher among vaccinated than unvaccinated participants across the study period, regardless of the month of the first dose. Mask use remained relatively stable from December 2020 through April (range 71-80% unvaccinated; 86-93% vaccinated) and declined in both groups beginning in mid-May 2021 to 34% and 42% respectively in June 2021; mask use increased again since July 2021. Mask use by all was lower during weekends and on Christmas and Easter, regardless of vaccination status. Independent predictors of higher mask use were vaccination, age ≥65 years, female sex, racial or ethnic minority group, and healthcare worker occupation, whereas a history of self-reported prior COVID-19 illness was associated with lower use

    Persistence of antibody responses to COVID-19 vaccines among participants in the COVID-19 Community Research Partnership

    No full text
    INTRODUCTION: High levels of immunity to SARS-CoV-2 in the community correlate with protection from COVID-19 illness. Measuring COVID-19 antibody seroprevalence and persistence may elucidate the level and length of protection afforded by vaccination and infection within a population. METHODS: We measured the duration of detectable anti-spike antibodies following COVID-19 vaccination in a multistate, longitudinal cohort study of almost 13,000 adults who completed daily surveys and submitted monthly dried blood spots collected at home. RESULTS: Overall, anti-spike antibodies persisted up to 284 days of follow-up with seroreversion occurring in only 2.4% of the study population. In adjusted analyses, risk of seroreversion increased with age (adults aged 55-64: adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.19 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.22, 3.92] and adults aged \u3e 65: aHR 3.59 [95% CI: 2.07, 6.20] compared to adults aged 18-39). Adults with diabetes had a higher risk of seroreversion versus nondiabetics (aHR 1.77 [95% CI: 1.29, 2.44]). Decreased risk of seroreversion was shown for non-Hispanic Black versus non-Hispanic White (aHR 0.32 [95% CI: 0.13, 0.79]); college degree earners versus no college degree (aHR 0.61 [95% CI: 0.46, 0.81]); and those who received Moderna mRNA-1273 vaccine versus Pfizer-BioNTech BNT162b2 (aHR 0.35 [95% CI: 0.26, 0.47]). An interaction between healthcare worker occupation and sex was detected, with seroreversion increased among male, non-healthcare workers. CONCLUSION: We established that a remote, longitudinal, multi-site study can reliably detect antibody durability following COVID-19 vaccination. The survey platform and measurement of antibody response using at-home collection at convenient intervals allowed us to explore sociodemographic factors and comorbidities and identify predictors of antibody persistence, which has been demonstrated to correlate with protection against disease. Our findings may help inform public health interventions and policies to protect those at highest risk for severe illness and assist in determining the optimal timing of booster doses.Clinical trials registry: NCT04342884
    corecore