Corresponding author: Trevor J. Orchard,
Diabetes Care. 2013 Oct;36(10):2974-80. doi: 10.2337/dc13-0266. Epub 2013 Jul 8.
To determine whether type A behavior predicts all-cause mortality and incident coronary artery disease (CAD) in a type 1 diabetic population.
Follow-up data (22 years) from the Pittsburgh Epidemiology of Diabetes Complications (EDC) study of childhood-onset type 1 diabetes were analyzed for the 506 participants who completed the Bortner Rating Scale (measuring type A behavior) and Beck Depression Inventory (BDI) at baseline (1986-1988). CAD comprised myocardial infarction as determined by hospital records/Q waves on electrocardiogram (ECG), CAD death (determined by a mortality classification committee), angiographic stenosis, ischemic ECG, and angina.
There were 128 deaths (25.3%) during follow-up. Univariate analysis showed an inverse relationship between Bortner scores and all-cause mortality (P=0.01), which remained significant after allowing for age, sex, duration, HbA1c, education, smoking, BMI, and physical activity (P=0.03). However, the addition of BDI scores attenuated the relationship (P=0.11) with a significant interaction (P=0.03) such that any protective effect against mortality was limited among individuals with lower BDI scores (bottom three quintiles) (P=0.07), whereas no effect was seen in those with higher BDI scores (P=0.97). Bortner scores showed only a borderline association with incident CAD (P=0.09).
Those with higher type A behavior have lower all-cause mortality in our type 1 diabetic population, an effect that interacts with depressive symptomatology such that it is only operative in those with low BDI scores. Further research should focus on understanding this interaction.
确定 A 型行为是否可预测 1 型糖尿病患者的全因死亡率和冠心病(CAD)事件。
对匹兹堡儿童期 1 型糖尿病并发症流行病学研究(EDC)的随访数据(22 年)进行分析,该研究共纳入了 506 名参与者,他们在基线(1986-1988 年)时完成了博特纳评分量表(测量 A 型行为)和贝克抑郁量表(BDI)。CAD 包括由医院记录/Q 波心电图(ECG)确定的心肌梗死、CAD 死亡(由死亡率分类委员会确定)、血管造影狭窄、缺血性 ECG 和心绞痛。
随访期间有 128 人死亡(25.3%)。单因素分析显示,Bortner 评分与全因死亡率呈负相关(P=0.01),在考虑年龄、性别、病程、HbA1c、教育程度、吸烟、BMI 和体力活动后,这种相关性仍然显著(P=0.03)。然而,BDI 评分的加入削弱了这种关系(P=0.11),且存在显著的交互作用(P=0.03),即对死亡率的任何保护作用仅在 BDI 评分较低的个体(底部三个五分位数)中有限(P=0.07),而在 BDI 评分较高的个体中则没有影响(P=0.97)。Bortner 评分仅与 CAD 事件呈边缘相关(P=0.09)。
在我们的 1 型糖尿病患者群体中,A型行为较高的患者全因死亡率较低,这种效应与抑郁症状相互作用,仅在 BDI 评分较低的患者中起作用。进一步的研究应集中于理解这种相互作用。