Advertisement

Diabetologia

, Volume 57, Issue 6, pp 1119–1123 | Cite as

The effectiveness of structured personal care of type 2 diabetes on recurrent outcomes: a 19 year follow-up of the study Diabetes Care in General Practice (DCGP)

  • Hanna Lundström
  • Volkert Siersma
  • Anni B. Sternhagen Nielsen
  • John Brodersen
  • Susanne Reventlow
  • Per K. Andersen
  • Niels de Fine Olivarius
Short Communication

Abstract

Aims/hypothesis

The estimation of effect size in clinical trials commonly disregards recurrent outcomes. We investigated the effectiveness of a complex intervention on recurrent outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Methods

In the Diabetes Care in General Practice (DCGP) randomised controlled trial, 1,381 patients newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes were randomised to 6 years of structured personal care or routine care (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01074762). The trial had 19 years of registry-based follow-up and was analysed with Cox regression models. Repeated occurrences in the same patient of outcomes (any diabetes-related endpoint, myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, peripheral vascular disease and microvascular disease) were accounted for with the Wei, Lin and Weissfeld method.

Results

As previously shown, the intervention reduced the rates of first occurrence of both MI and any diabetes-related endpoint. However, for all outcomes, the HR for a second event showed a statistically non-significant tendency to be increased. We estimated a combined HR for all marginal failure times, regardless of whether they were first, second or later events. This showed that the intervention had no effect on the rate of any of the outcomes, including MI (HR 0.89, 95% CI 0.76, 1.05) and any diabetes-related endpoint (HR 0.98, 95% CI 0.87, 1.09).

Conclusions/interpretation

In the DCGP study, a smaller proportion of patients who received structured care experienced a first occurrence of MI or any diabetes-related endpoint compared with patients who received routine care. However, the patients who received structured care tended to experience more recurrent outcomes, so the total outcome rate was not affected by the intervention.

Keywords

Any diabetes-related endpoint Myocardial infarction Randomised controlled trial Recurrent events Type 2 diabetes Wei, Lin and Weissfeld method 

Abbreviations

ADDITION

Anglo–Danish–Dutch Study of Intensive Treatment in People with Screen Detected Diabetes in Primary Care

CVD

Cardiovascular disease

DCGP

Diabetes Care in General Practice

MI

Myocardial infarction

WLW

Wei, Lin and Weissfeld

Notes

Acknowledgements

We thank the patients and general practitioners who volunteered to take part in this study. We acknowledge the assistance of Willy Karlslund, The Research Unit for General Practice, Copenhagen, Denmark.

Funding

Funding of post-trial study: The Novo Nordisk Foundation, The Health Insurance Foundation, The Pharmacy Foundation, The A P Møller Foundation for the Advancement of Medical Science, Ernst Fischer’s Trust, The Danish Medical Research Council and The Danish Research Foundation for General Practice. Funding of the main trial: The Danish Medical Research Council, The Danish Research Foundation for General Practice, The Health Insurance Foundation, The Danish Ministry of Health, Novo Nordisk Farmaka Denmark Ltd, The Pharmacy Foundation, The Foundation for General Practice in Copenhagen, Frederiksberg, Tårnby and Dragør, The Doctor Sofus Carl Emil Friis and his Wife Olga Doris Friis Trust, The Danish Medical Association Research Fund, The Velux Foundation, The Rockwool Foundation, Novo Nordisk Ltd, The Danish Diabetes Association, Oda and Hans Svenningsen’s Fund, The A P Møller Foundation for the Advancement of Medical Science, The Novo Nordisk Foundation, Captain Axel Viggo Mørch and his Wife’s Trust, The Danish Eye Health Society, Mogens and Jenny Vissing’s Trust and Bernhard and Marie Klein’s Trust.

Duality of interest

The authors declare that they have no duality of interest associated with this manuscript.

Contribution statement

NDFO, HL and VS developed the research question for this study. VS performed the statistical analyses. NDFO was responsible for study design, randomisation, intervention delivery and data collection. All authors contributed to the analysis and interpretation of data. The paper was written by HL and NDFO with support from the other authors, and all authors revised the paper critically for important intellectual content. NDFO obtained funding. All authors have approved the version of the manuscript to be published. NDFO is the guarantor for this paper.

Supplementary material

125_2014_3204_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (69 kb)
ESM Table 1 (PDF 69 kb)
125_2014_3204_MOESM2_ESM.pdf (52 kb)
ESM Table 2 (PDF 51 kb)
125_2014_3204_MOESM3_ESM.pdf (18 kb)
ESM Table 3 (PDF 17 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    van der Heijden AA, Van’t Riet E, Bot SD et al (2013) Risk of a recurrent cardiovascular event in individuals with type 2 diabetes or intermediate hyperglycemia: the Hoorn Study. Diabetes Care 36:3498–3502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Simmons RK, Sharp SJ, Sandbaek A et al (2012) Does early intensive multifactorial treatment reduce total cardiovascular burden in individuals with screen-detected diabetes? Findings from the ADDITION-Europe cluster-randomized trial. Diabet Med 29:e409–e416PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wei LJ, Lin DY, Weissfeld L (1989) Regression analysis of multivariate incomplete failure time data by modeling marginal distributions. J Am Stat Assoc 84:1065–1073CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hansen LJ, Siersma V, Beck-Nielsen H, de Fine Olivarius N (2013) Structured personal care of type 2 diabetes: a 19 year follow-up of the study Diabetes Care in General Practice (DCGP). Diabetologia 56:1243–1253PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Griffin SJ, Borch-Johnsen K, Davies MJ et al (2011) Effect of early intensive multifactorial therapy on 5-year cardiovascular outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes detected by screening (ADDITION-Europe): a cluster-randomised trial. Lancet 378:156–167PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kohli P, Wallentin L, Reyes E et al (2013) Reduction in first and recurrent cardiovascular events with ticagrelor compared with clopidogrel in the PLATO Study. Circulation 127:673–680PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    LaRosa JC, Deedwania PC, Shepherd J et al (2010) Comparison of 80 versus 10 mg of atorvastatin on occurrence of cardiovascular events after the first event (from the Treating to New Targets [TNT] trial). Am J Cardiol 105:283–287PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Murphy SA, Antman EM, Wiviott SD et al (2008) Reduction in recurrent cardiovascular events with prasugrel compared with clopidogrel in patients with acute coronary syndromes from the TRITON-TIMI 38 trial. Eur Heart J 29:2473–2479PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pandeya N, Purdie DM, Green A, Williams G (2005) Repeated occurrence of basal cell carcinoma of the skin and multifailure survival analysis: follow-up data from the Nambour Skin Cancer Prevention Trial. Am J Epidemiol 161:748–754PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mendis S, Thygesen K, Kuulasmaa K et al (2011) World Health Organization definition of myocardial infarction: 2008–09 revision. Int J Epidemiol 40:139–146PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wei LJ, Glidden DV (1997) An overview of statistical methods for multiple failure time data in clinical trials. Stat Med 16:833–839PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hanna Lundström
    • 1
  • Volkert Siersma
    • 1
  • Anni B. Sternhagen Nielsen
    • 1
  • John Brodersen
    • 1
  • Susanne Reventlow
    • 1
  • Per K. Andersen
    • 2
  • Niels de Fine Olivarius
    • 1
  1. 1.The Research Unit for General Practice and Section of General Practice, Department of Public HealthUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagen KDenmark
  2. 2.Section of Biostatistics, Department of Public HealthUniversity of CopenhagenCopenhagenDenmark

Personalised recommendations