Prediction of type 2 diabetes risk in people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia: model derivation and validation using UK primary care data. Issue 10 (23rd October 2020)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Coles, Briana; Khunti, Kamlesh; Booth, Sarah; Zaccardi, Francesco; Davies, Melanie J; Gray, Laura J
• Is Part Of: BMJ open. Volume 10:Issue 10(2020)
• Publication Date: 2020-10-23
• Subjects: general diabetes -- primary care -- epidemiology -- health policy -- risk management -- diabetes & endocrinology; Medicine -- Research -- Periodicals; 610.72
• DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2020-037937
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 2044-6055

Abstract

Abstract : Objective: Using primary care data, develop and validate sex-specific prognostic models that estimate the 10-year risk of people with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia developing type 2 diabetes. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Primary care. Participants: 154 705 adult patients with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia. Primary outcome: Development of type 2 diabetes. Methods: This study used data routinely collected in UK primary care from general practices contributing to the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Patients were split into development (n=109 077) and validation datasets (n=45 628). Potential predictor variables, including demographic and lifestyle factors, medical and family history, prescribed medications and clinical measures, were included in survival models following the imputation of missing data. Measures of calibration at 10 years and discrimination were determined using the validation dataset. Results: In the development dataset, 9332 patients developed type 2 diabetes during 293 238 person-years of follow-up (31.8 (95% CI 31.2 to 32.5) per 1000 person-years). In the validation dataset, 3783 patients developed type 2 diabetes during 115 113 person-years of follow-up (32.9 (95% CI 31.8 to 33.9) per 1000 person-years). The final prognostic models comprised 14 and 16 predictor variables for males and females, respectively. Both models had good calibration and high levels of discrimination. The performance statistics for the male model were: Harrell's C statistic of 0.700 in the development and 0.701 in the validation dataset, with a calibration slope of 0.974 (95% CI 0.905 to 1.042) in the validation dataset. For the female model, Harrell's C statistics were 0.720 and 0.718, respectively, while the calibration slope was 0.994 (95% CI 0.931 to 1.057) in the validation dataset. Conclusion: These models could be used in primary care to identify those with non-diabetic hyperglycaemia most at risk of developing type 2 diabetes for targeted referral to the National Health Service Diabetes Prevention Programme.