Dataset Information

Poor glycemic control of diabetes mellitus is associated with higher risk of prostate cancer detection in a biopsy population.

ABSTRACT: To evaluate the impact of glycemic control of diabetes mellitus (DM) on prostate cancer detection in a biopsy population.We retrospectively reviewed the records of 1,368 men who underwent prostate biopsy at our institution. We divided our biopsy population into three groups according to their history of DM, and their Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level: a no-DM (DM-) group; a good glycemic control (DM+GC) group (HbA1c <6.5%); and a poor glycemic control (DM+PC) group (HbA1c ≥6.5%). For sub-analyses, the DM+PC group was divided into a moderately poor glycemic control (DM+mPC) group (6.5≤ HbA1c <7.5%) and a severely poor glycemic control (DM+sPC) group (HbA1c ≥7.5%).Among 1,368 men, 338 (24.7%) had a history of DM, and 393 (28.7%) had a positive biopsy. There was a significant difference in prostatic specific antigen density (PSAD) (P = 0.037) and the frequency of abnormal DRE findings (P = 0.031) among three groups. The occurrence rate of overall prostate cancer (P<0.001) and high-grade prostate cancer (P = 0.016) also presented with a significantly difference. In the multivariate analysis, the DM+PC group was significantly associated with a higher rate of overall prostate cancer detection in biopsy subjects compared to the DM- group (OR = 2.313, P = 0.001) but the DM+PC group was not associated with a higher rate of high-grade (Gleason score ≥7) diseases detected during the biopsy (OR = 1.297, P = 0.376). However, in subgroup analysis, DM+sPC group was significantly related to a higher risk of high-grade diseases compared to the DM- group (OR = 2.446, P = 0.048).Poor glycemic control of DM was associated with a higher risk of prostate cancer detection, including high-grade disease, in the biopsy population.

SUBMITTER: Park J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4157745 | biostudies-other | 2014

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeTo examine the association of individual and combined indicators of diabetes control with diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema.Materials and methodsIn this clinical, cross-sectional study, 613 adults with type 2 diabetes (372 any diabetic retinopathy; 183 any diabetic macular edema) were examined. Diabetic retinopathy was assessed from fundus photographs; diabetic macular edema from Ocular Coherence Tomography scans; and HbA1c and serum lipid values from fasting blood samples. Poor glucose control was defined as HbA1c?7%; poor blood pressure control as SBP?130/DBP?80; and poor lipid control as total cholesterol:HDL ratio?4.0. The association of poor glucose control, poor blood pressure control and poor lipid control alone and in combination (poor glucose & blood pressure control; poor glucose & lipid control; poor blood pressure & lipid control; and poor glucose, blood pressure & lipid control) with diabetic retinopathy/diabetic macular edema was examined using multiple logistic regression models.ResultsPatients' mean±standard deviation age was 64.9±11.6 years (57% male). In adjusted models, compared to those with good control of all indicators (n = 99, 18.3%), the odds ratio (95% Confidence Interval) of having any diabetic retinopathy was 2.44 (1.34-4.46), 3.75 (1.75-8.07), 4.64 (2.13-10.12) and 2.28 (1.01-5.16) for poor glucose control only; poor glucose & blood pressure control; poor glucose & lipid control; and poor glucose, blood pressure & lipid control, respectively. Correspondingly for diabetic macular edema, they were 3.19 (1.55-6.59); 3.60 (1.58-8.22); 2.76 (1.18-6.44); and 3.01 (1.18-7.67), respectively. Odds were not significantly increased for other indicators.DiscussionCompared to individual indicators of poor diabetes control, risk of diabetic retinopathy and diabetic macular edema increased three to fourfold with a combination of these indicators. Targeting combined diabetes control indicators is important to reduce risk of diabetic retinopathy/diabetic macular edema.

Project description:In older adults with multiple serious comorbidities and functional limitations, the harms of intensive glycemic control likely exceed the benefits.To examine glycemic control levels among older adults with diabetes mellitus by health status and to estimate the prevalence of potential overtreatment of diabetes.Cross-sectional analysis of the data on 1288 older adults (?65 years) with diabetes from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) from 2001 through 2010 who had a hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurement. All analyses incorporated complex survey design to produce nationally representative estimates.Health status categories: very complex/poor, based on difficulty with 2 or more activities of daily living or dialysis dependence; complex/intermediate, based on difficulty with 2 or more instrumental activities of daily living or presence of 3 or more chronic conditions; and relatively healthy if none of these were present.Tight glycemic control (HbA1c level, <7%) and use of diabetes medications likely to result in hypoglycemia (insulin or sulfonylureas).Of 1288 older adults with diabetes, 50.7% (95% CI, 46.6%-54.8%), representing 3.1 million (95% CI, 2.7-3.5), were relatively healthy, 28.1% (95% CI, 24.8%-31.5%), representing 1.7 million (95% CI, 1.4-2.0), had complex/intermediate health, and 21.2% (95% CI, 18.3%-24.4%), representing 1.3 million (95% CI, 1.1-1.5), had very complex/poor health. Overall, 61.5% (95% CI, 57.5%-65.3%), representing 3.8 million (95% CI, 3.4-4.2), had an HbA1c level of less than 7%; this proportion did not differ across health status categories (62.8% [95% CI, 56.9%-68.3%]) were relatively healthy, 63.0% (95% CI, 57.0%-68.6%) had complex/intermediate health, and 56.4% (95% CI, 49.7%-62.9%) had very complex/poor health (P?=?.26). Of the older adults with an HbA1c level of less than 7%, 54.9% (95% CI, 50.4%-59.3%) were treated with either insulin or sulfonylureas; this proportion was similar across health status categories (50.8% [95% CI, 45.1%-56.5%] were relatively healthy, 58.7% [95% CI, 49.4%-67.5%] had complex/intermediate health, and 60.0% [95% CI, 51.4%-68.1%] had very complex/poor health; P?=?.14). During the 10 study years, there were no significant changes in the proportion of older adults with an HbA1c level of less than 7% (P?=?.34), the proportion with an HbA1c level of less than 7% who had complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health (P?=?.27), or the proportion with an HbA1c level of less than 7% who were treated with insulin or sulfonylureas despite having complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health (P?=?.65).Although the harms of intensive treatment likely exceed the benefits for older patients with complex/intermediate or very complex/poor health status, most of these adults reached tight glycemic targets between 2001 and 2010. Most of them were treated with insulin or sulfonylureas, which may lead to severe hypoglycemia. Our findings suggest that a substantial proportion of older adults with diabetes were potentially overtreated.

Dataset Information

Poor glycemic control of diabetes mellitus is associated with higher risk of prostate cancer detection in a biopsy population.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure