There are many plausible biological reasons why T2D might increase LDD via increased protein glycation, with advanced glycation end-product accumulation shown to accelerate LDD in animal models [6, 13]. This is the first epidemiological study of the association between LDD and T2D in humans. The phenotyping for LDD in this study was the gold standard T2 weighted MR scan. There is no international consensus on how degenerative change should be coded, and there is a move towards using individual MR scan features to improve biological relevance [2, 10, 11]. An initial, unadjusted, comparison between LDD scores in T2D and controls in this predominantly female sample did show greater LDD in those having T2D. When the other risk factors were taken into account, however, only age and BMI remained associated with LDD. An association was not detected with smoking, gender or alcohol consumption in this sample, although the first two have been found associated in TwinsUK [2] and other studies [14]. In linear regression T2D was not associated with LDD; the effect appeared to be mediated by BMI—this was shown by mutually excluding T2D and BMI from the regression models. That is to say, the apparent predisposition to LDD in T2D was entirely accounted for by BMI. Results are consistent with a prior investigation in nine pairs of identical male twins that found no effect of insulin-dependent (type 1) diabetes on disc degeneration [15]. While type 1 and type 2 diabetes have distinct aetiologies they both result in hyperglycaemia so may have similar influence on LDD. Together, these studies support the notion that T2D risk factors including increased BMI may have more important influence on LDD than hyperglycaemia per se. BMI remains a consistent risk factor in the absence of T2D, a finding consistent with others’ work [5].
The possibility of other unidentified risk factors (both environmental and genetic) confounding an association with LDD are well controlled for using a discordant twin analysis. There were only a few monozygotic pairs affected by T2D so we included dizygotic pairs as well (total n = 33 pairs). This analysis did not show evidence of difference in LDD between T2D cases and their co-twin controls.
There are several weaknesses to this study, with the main ones being the limited sample size, fairly low prevalence of T2D and the predominance of females in the sample, for historical reasons. The prevalence of T2D was 6.6 % in the TwinsUK sample but 9 % in the general population—perhaps reflecting relatively healthy registry volunteers. The limited differences in HbA1C between cases and controls is suggestive of pre-diabetes in controls, and is indicative of reasonably good glycaemic control in cases—so less power to detect a difference between the two. We have not adjusted for diabetic medication or factored in the degree of blood sugar control. Finally, for historical reasons TwinsUK has a small proportion of males, making it difficult comment on the influence of T2D in men.
This is the first study to investigate in humans the influence of T2D on LDD. Our data do not provide evidence of a direct effect of T2D on LDD despite the study having the power to detect small changes in summary degenerative change score on MR spine scans. Our results—based on a predominantly female population sample—suggest that the association seen is mediated by increased BMI which is a well-documented risk factor for both traits. Our work suggests that research efforts for managing low back pain should be directed not at the study of hyperglycaemia on intervertebral disc but towards the control of BMI, at least in women.