J M Wang1, Q P Liu1, M L Zhang1, C Gong1, S D Liu1, W Y Chen1, P Shen2, H B Lin2, P Gao1,3, X Tang1. 1. Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Peking University School of Public Health, Beijing 100191, China. 2. Yinzhou District Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Ningbo 315101, Zhejiang, China. 3. Center for Real-World Evidence Evaluation, Clinical Research Institute, Peking University, Beijing 100191, China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of different screening strategies for type 2 diabetes to prevent cardiovascular disease in a community-based Chinese population from economically developed areas based on the Chinese electronic health records research in Yinzhou (CHERRY) study. METHODS: A Markov model was used to simulate different systematic diabetes screening strategies, including: (1) screening among Chinese adults aged 40-70 years recommended by the 2020 Chinese Guideline for the prevention and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes (Strategy 1); (2) screening among Chinese adults aged 35 to 70 years recommended by the 2022 American Diabetes Association Standard of Medical Care in Diabetes (Strategy 2); and (3) screening among Chinese adults aged 35-70 years with overweight or obesity recommended by the 2021 United States Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement on Screening for Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes (Strategy 3). According to the guidelines, individuals who were screened positively (fasting plasma glucose ≥ 7.0 mmol/L) would be introduced to intensive glycemic targets management (glycated hemoglobin < 7.0%).The Markov model simulated different screening scenarios for ten years (cycles) with parameters mainly from the CHERRY study or published literature. Number of cardiovascular disease events or deaths could be prevented and number needed to screen (NNS) were calculated to compare the effectiveness of the different strategies. One-way sensitivity analysis on the sensitivity of screening methods and probabilistic sensitivity analysis on uncertainties of diabetes incidence, the sensitivity of screening methods, and intensive glycemic management effects were conducted. RESULTS: Totally 289 245 Chinese adults aged 35-70 years without cardiovascular diseases or diagnosed diabetes at baseline were enrolled. In terms of the number of cardiovascular disease events could be prevented, Strategy 1 for systematic diabetes screening among the adults aged 35-70 years was 222 (95%UI: 180-264), Strategy 2 for systematic diabetes screening among the adults aged 40-70 years was 227 (95%UI: 185-271), and Strategy 3 for systematic diabetes screening among the adults aged 35-70 years with obesity or overweight (body mass index ≥ 24 kg/m2) was 131 (95%UI: 98-164), compared with opportunistic screening. NNS per cardiovascular disease event for the strategies 1, 2 and 3 were 1 184 (95%UI: 994-1 456), 1 274 (95%UI: 1 067-1 564) and 814 (95%UI: 649-1 091), respectively. Compared with Strategy 1, NNS per cardiovascular disease event for Strategy 2 increased by 90 (95%UI: -197-381) with similar effectiveness of cardiovascular prevention; however, NNS per cardiovascular disease event for Strategy 3 was reduced by 460 (95%UI: 185-724) in contrast to the Strategy 2, suggesting that the Strategy 3 was more efficient. The results were consistent in multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Systematic screening for diabetes based on the latest guidelines in economically developed areas of China can reduce cardiovascular events and deaths. However, merely lowering the starting age of screening from 40 to 35 years seems ineffective for preventing cardiovascular disease, while screening strategy for Chinese adults aged 35-70 years with overweight or obesity is recommended to improve efficiency.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of different screening strategies for type 2 diabetes to prevent cardiovascular disease in a community-based Chinese population from economically developed areas based on the Chinese electronic health records research in Yinzhou (CHERRY) study. METHODS: A Markov model was used to simulate different systematic diabetes screening strategies, including: (1) screening among Chinese adults aged 40-70 years recommended by the 2020 Chinese Guideline for the prevention and Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes (Strategy 1); (2) screening among Chinese adults aged 35 to 70 years recommended by the 2022 American Diabetes Association Standard of Medical Care in Diabetes (Strategy 2); and (3) screening among Chinese adults aged 35-70 years with overweight or obesity recommended by the 2021 United States Preventive Services Task Force Recommendation Statement on Screening for Prediabetes and Type 2 Diabetes (Strategy 3). According to the guidelines, individuals who were screened positively (fasting plasma glucose ≥ 7.0 mmol/L) would be introduced to intensive glycemic targets management (glycated hemoglobin < 7.0%).The Markov model simulated different screening scenarios for ten years (cycles) with parameters mainly from the CHERRY study or published literature. Number of cardiovascular disease events or deaths could be prevented and number needed to screen (NNS) were calculated to compare the effectiveness of the different strategies. One-way sensitivity analysis on the sensitivity of screening methods and probabilistic sensitivity analysis on uncertainties of diabetes incidence, the sensitivity of screening methods, and intensive glycemic management effects were conducted. RESULTS: Totally 289 245 Chinese adults aged 35-70 years without cardiovascular diseases or diagnosed diabetes at baseline were enrolled. In terms of the number of cardiovascular disease events could be prevented, Strategy 1 for systematic diabetes screening among the adults aged 35-70 years was 222 (95%UI: 180-264), Strategy 2 for systematic diabetes screening among the adults aged 40-70 years was 227 (95%UI: 185-271), and Strategy 3 for systematic diabetes screening among the adults aged 35-70 years with obesity or overweight (body mass index ≥ 24 kg/m2) was 131 (95%UI: 98-164), compared with opportunistic screening. NNS per cardiovascular disease event for the strategies 1, 2 and 3 were 1 184 (95%UI: 994-1 456), 1 274 (95%UI: 1 067-1 564) and 814 (95%UI: 649-1 091), respectively. Compared with Strategy 1, NNS per cardiovascular disease event for Strategy 2 increased by 90 (95%UI: -197-381) with similar effectiveness of cardiovascular prevention; however, NNS per cardiovascular disease event for Strategy 3 was reduced by 460 (95%UI: 185-724) in contrast to the Strategy 2, suggesting that the Strategy 3 was more efficient. The results were consistent in multiple sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Systematic screening for diabetes based on the latest guidelines in economically developed areas of China can reduce cardiovascular events and deaths. However, merely lowering the starting age of screening from 40 to 35 years seems ineffective for preventing cardiovascular disease, while screening strategy for Chinese adults aged 35-70 years with overweight or obesity is recommended to improve efficiency.
Authors: Richard Kahn; Peter Alperin; David Eddy; Knut Borch-Johnsen; John Buse; Justin Feigelman; Edward Gregg; Rury R Holman; M Sue Kirkman; Michael Stern; Jaakko Tuomilehto; Nick J Wareham Journal: Lancet Date: 2010-03-29 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: J Quan; T K Li; H Pang; C H Choi; S C Siu; S Y Tang; N M S Wat; J Woo; J M Johnston; G M Leung Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2016-11-29 Impact factor: 4.359
Authors: Frank L J Visseren; François Mach; Yvo M Smulders; David Carballo; Konstantinos C Koskinas; Maria Bäck; Athanase Benetos; Alessandro Biffi; José-Manuel Boavida; Davide Capodanno; Bernard Cosyns; Carolyn Crawford; Constantinos H Davos; Ileana Desormais; Emanuele Di Angelantonio; Oscar H Franco; Sigrun Halvorsen; F D Richard Hobbs; Monika Hollander; Ewa A Jankowska; Matthias Michal; Simona Sacco; Naveed Sattar; Lale Tokgozoglu; Serena Tonstad; Konstantinos P Tsioufis; Ineke van Dis; Isabelle C van Gelder; Christoph Wanner; Bryan Williams Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2021-09-07 Impact factor: 35.855
Authors: Adina L Feldman; Simon J Griffin; Eva Fhärm; Margareta Norberg; Patrik Wennberg; Lars Weinehall; Olov Rolandsson Journal: Diabetologia Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 10.122