Suppr超能文献

早期强化多因素治疗对筛查发现的2型糖尿病患者5年心血管结局影响及成本效益的随机试验:初级保健中筛查发现糖尿病患者强化治疗的英-丹-荷研究(ADDITION-Europe)

A randomised trial of the effect and cost-effectiveness of early intensive multifactorial therapy on 5-year cardiovascular outcomes in individuals with screen-detected type 2 diabetes: the Anglo-Danish-Dutch Study of Intensive Treatment in People with Screen-Detected Diabetes in Primary Care (ADDITION-Europe) study.

作者信息

Simmons Rebecca K, Borch-Johnsen Knut, Lauritzen Torsten, Rutten Guy Ehm, Sandbæk Annelli, van den Donk Maureen, Black James A, Tao Libo, Wilson Edward Cf, Davies Melanie J, Khunti Kamlesh, Sharp Stephen J, Wareham Nicholas J, Griffin Simon J

机构信息

Medical Research Council Epidemiology Unit, School of Clinical Medicine, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Holbæk Hospital, Holbæk, Denmark.

出版信息

Health Technol Assess. 2016 Aug;20(64):1-86. doi: 10.3310/hta20640.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Intensive treatment (IT) of cardiovascular risk factors can halve mortality among people with established type 2 diabetes but the effects of treatment earlier in the disease trajectory are uncertain.

OBJECTIVE

To quantify the cost-effectiveness of intensive multifactorial treatment of screen-detected diabetes.

DESIGN

Pragmatic, multicentre, cluster-randomised, parallel-group trial.

SETTING

Three hundred and forty-three general practices in Denmark, the Netherlands, and Cambridge and Leicester, UK.

PARTICIPANTS

Individuals aged 40-69 years with screen-detected diabetes.

INTERVENTIONS

Screening plus routine care (RC) according to national guidelines or IT comprising screening and promotion of target-driven intensive management (medication and promotion of healthy lifestyles) of hyperglycaemia, blood pressure and cholesterol.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary end point was a composite of first cardiovascular event (cardiovascular mortality/morbidity, revascularisation and non-traumatic amputation) during a mean [standard deviation (SD)] follow-up of 5.3 (1.6) years. Secondary end points were (1) all-cause mortality; (2) microvascular outcomes (kidney function, retinopathy and peripheral neuropathy); and (3) patient-reported outcomes (health status, well-being, quality of life, treatment satisfaction). Economic analyses estimated mean costs (UK 2009/10 prices) and quality-adjusted life-years from an NHS perspective. We extrapolated data to 30 years using the UK Prospective Diabetes Study outcomes model [version 1.3; (©) Isis Innovation Ltd 2010; see www.dtu.ox.ac.uk/outcomesmodel (accessed 27 January 2016)].

RESULTS

We included 3055 (RC, n = 1377; IT, n = 1678) of the 3057 recruited patients [mean (SD) age 60.3 (6.9) years] in intention-to-treat analyses. Prescription of glucose-lowering, antihypertensive and lipid-lowering medication increased in both groups, more so in the IT group than in the RC group. There were clinically important improvements in cardiovascular risk factors in both study groups. Modest but statistically significant differences between groups in reduction in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels, blood pressure and cholesterol favoured the IT group. The incidence of first cardiovascular event [IT 7.2%, 13.5 per 1000 person-years; RC 8.5%, 15.9 per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65 to 1.05] and all-cause mortality (IT 6.2%, 11.6 per 1000 person-years; RC 6.7%, 12.5 per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio 0.91, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.21) did not differ between groups. At 5 years, albuminuria was present in 22.7% and 24.4% of participants in the IT and RC groups, respectively [odds ratio (OR) 0.87, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.07), retinopathy in 10.2% and 12.1%, respectively (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.10), and neuropathy in 4.9% and 5.9% (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.34), respectively. The estimated glomerular filtration rate increased between baseline and follow-up in both groups (IT 4.31 ml/minute; RC 6.44 ml/minute). Health status, well-being, diabetes-specific quality of life and treatment satisfaction did not differ between the groups. The intervention cost £981 per patient and was not cost-effective at costs ≥ £631 per patient.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with RC, IT was associated with modest increases in prescribed treatment, reduced levels of risk factors and non-significant reductions in cardiovascular events, microvascular complications and death over 5 years. IT did not adversely affect patient-reported outcomes. IT was not cost-effective but might be if delivered at a reduced cost. The lower than expected event rate, heterogeneity of intervention delivery between centres and improvements in general practice diabetes care limited the achievable differences in treatment between groups. Further follow-up to assess the legacy effects of early IT is warranted.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00237549.

FUNDING DETAILS

This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 64. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

摘要

背景

强化治疗心血管危险因素可使已确诊的2型糖尿病患者的死亡率减半,但在疾病进程早期进行治疗的效果尚不确定。

目的

量化筛查发现的糖尿病强化多因素治疗的成本效益。

设计

实用、多中心、整群随机、平行组试验。

地点

丹麦、荷兰以及英国剑桥和莱斯特的343家全科诊所。

参与者

年龄在40 - 69岁之间、筛查发现患有糖尿病的个体。

干预措施

根据国家指南进行筛查加常规护理(RC),或强化治疗(IT),包括筛查以及促进针对高血糖、血压和胆固醇的目标导向强化管理(药物治疗和促进健康生活方式)。

主要结局指标

主要终点是在平均[标准差(SD)]5.3(1.6)年的随访期间首次发生心血管事件(心血管死亡/发病、血运重建和非创伤性截肢)的复合指标。次要终点为:(1)全因死亡率;(2)微血管结局(肾功能、视网膜病变和周围神经病变);(3)患者报告的结局(健康状况、幸福感、生活质量、治疗满意度)。经济分析从英国国民健康服务体系(NHS)的角度估计了平均成本(2009/10年英国价格)和质量调整生命年。我们使用英国前瞻性糖尿病研究结局模型[版本1.3;(©)Isis Innovation Ltd 2010;见www.dtu.ox.ac.uk/outcomesmodel(访问日期:2016年1月27日)]将数据外推至30年。

结果

在意向性分析中,我们纳入了3057名招募患者中的3055名(RC组,n = 1377;IT组,n = 1678)[平均(SD)年龄60.3(6.9)岁]。两组中降糖、降压和降脂药物的处方量均增加,IT组比RC组增加得更多。两个研究组的心血管危险因素均有临床上重要的改善。两组在糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)水平、血压和胆固醇降低方面存在适度但具有统计学意义的差异,IT组更具优势。首次心血管事件的发生率[IT组7.2%,每1000人年13.5例;RC组8.5%,每1000人年15.9例;风险比0.83,95%置信区间(CI)0.65至1.05]和全因死亡率(IT组6.2%,每1000人年11.6例;RC组6.7%,每1000人年12.5例;风险比0.91,95%CI 0.69至1.21)在两组之间无差异。在5年时,IT组和RC组分别有22.7%和24.4%的参与者出现蛋白尿[优势比(OR)0.87,95%CI 0.72至1.07],分别有10.2%和12.1%出现视网膜病变(OR 0.84,95%CI 0.64至1.10),分别有4.9%和5.9%出现神经病变(OR 0.95,95%CI 0.68至1.34)。两组从基线到随访期间估计的肾小球滤过率均有所增加(IT组4.31毫升/分钟;RC组6.44毫升/分钟)。两组在健康状况、幸福感、糖尿病特异性生活质量和治疗满意度方面无差异。干预措施每位患者花费981英镑,在成本≥每位患者631英镑时不具有成本效益。

结论

与常规护理相比,强化治疗与处方治疗适度增加、危险因素水平降低以及5年内心血管事件、微血管并发症和死亡非显著减少相关。强化治疗未对患者报告的结局产生不利影响。强化治疗不具有成本效益,但如果以降低的成本提供可能具有成本效益。低于预期的事件发生率、各中心干预实施的异质性以及全科诊所糖尿病护理的改善限制了两组间可实现治疗差异。有必要进行进一步随访以评估早期强化治疗的遗留效应。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00237549。

资金详情

本项目由英国国家卫生研究院(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目资助,将在《卫生技术评估》全文发表;第20卷,第64期。有关进一步的项目信息,请参阅NIHR期刊图书馆网站。

相似文献

6
Metformin in non-diabetic hyperglycaemia: the GLINT feasibility RCT.
Health Technol Assess. 2018 Apr;22(18):1-64. doi: 10.3310/hta22180.
10
Benefits of aldosterone receptor antagonism in chronic kidney disease: the BARACK-D RCT.
Health Technol Assess. 2025 Mar;29(5):1-130. doi: 10.3310/PYFT6977.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验