Search

Introduction: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a highly heterogeneous and complex metabolic disease harbouring different metabolic characteristics. Adequate characterisation of subjects is essential to allow the implementation of precision medicine for the prevention, diagnosis, prognosis and treatment of this condition., Methods and Analysis: This prospective observational cohort study aims to identify and characterise relevant clinical clusters that are reproducibly associated with various clinical outcomes in T2DM in our Mediterranean region. The COPERNICAN study will include 1200 subjects with newly diagnosed T2DM from 28 primary care centres from the city of Barcelona and the healthcare district of Lleida in Catalonia (Spain). Participants will undergo a comprehensive phenotypic evaluation including, among others, six relevant variables: age, antibodies against glutamic acid decarboxylase, body mass index, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), indexes of insulin sensibility (HOMA2-IR) and secretion (HOMA2-beta). We will collect additional comprehensive data on glucose-lowering and other drug treatments, clinical evaluation (including complications), laboratory parameters, advanced lipoprotein profile, dietary habits and physical activity. The linkage with the population database will be done to perform a pragmatic follow-up of participants as part of their usual clinical care. A state-of-the-art cluster analysis (k-means and hierarchical clustering) will be performed., Ethics and Dissemination: The present study complies with all the ethical aspects and protection of participant subjects complying with all current local and European Union legislation. All Ethics Committees from the institutions involved in the study (IR Sant Pau Ethics Committee, Ethics Committee for Drug Research at IDIAP Jordi Gol and University Hospital of Bellvitge Ethics Committee for Research) approved this protocol. Confidentiality and anonymity of the data are ensured according to the current Spanish Organic Law 3/2018 of 05 December., Trial Registration Number: ClinicalTrials.gov. registration number NCT05333718, 27 January 2023., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: The impact of dietary niacin on metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD) is elusive. This sub-study aimed to investigate the relationship between dietary niacin intake and the presence of MASLD in participants from two Catalonian cohorts., Methods: A total of 222 subjects with MASLD were age- and sex-matched to 222 non-MASLD subjects. Dietary nutrients were analyzed using a validated food frequency questionnaire (FFQ). Dietary niacin and other nutrients were adjusted for total energy intake. MASLD was defined by a Fatty Liver Index (FLI) of >60 and by having at least one component of metabolic syndrome. The association between niacin intake (distributed into tertiles) and the presence of MASLD was assessed using multivariate logistic regression. Potential non-linear relationships were also analyzed through restricted cubic spline regression (RCS)., Results: Our data revealed that subjects with MASLD had worse metabolic profiles. The dietary intake of niacin did not differ between subjects with and without MASLD. Even after adjusting for different confounding variables, i.e., sociodemographic variables, smoking status, physical activity, and cardiometabolic comorbidities, no significant associations were observed between higher intakes of niacin (tertiles 2 and 3) and the presence of MASLD: odds ratio (95% confidence) second tertile: 0.99 (0.89-1.09); third tertile: 0.98 (0.89-1.10). However, RCS analysis uncovered a significant non-linear dose-response association between dietary niacin intake and odds of MASLD. Specifically, such analysis revealed that MASLD risk was decreased in subjects with niacin intake values of <35 mg/day., Conclusions: Our data showed that dietary niacin intake was associated with lower odds of MASLD in a Mediterranean population; however, our logistic regression analysis failed to reveal significant associations between the intake of niacin and the risk of MASLD. Further research is warranted to establish a causal relationship between dietary niacin interventions and MASLD.

Background: Our study aimed to evaluate the performance of primary healthcare physicians (PCPs) in managing glycemia, lipids, and blood pressure in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Catalonia, Spain. Methods: We included 3267 PCPs with 367,132 T2DM subjects in a cross-sectional analysis of the SIDIAP (Sistema d'Informació per al Desenvolupament de la Investigació en Atenció Primària) database for the year 2017. Results : 63.1% of PCPs were female, with an average practice size of 1512 subjects. T2DM individuals had a mean (standard deviation) age of 70 (±12.2) years old, a mean body mass index (BMI) of 30.2 (±5.21) kg/m 2 , and a median diabetes duration of 8.8 years. Overall, 42.6% of subjects achieved target glycemic control (glycated hemoglobin < 7%). Notably, 59.2% maintained blood pressure < 140/90 mmHg during the 12-month study period. The multivariable analysis identified positive associations between glycemic control and female PCPs, practice sizes (1000-1500 people), a higher proportion of patients aged ≥ 65 years, and rural practices. Combined glycemic, lipid, and blood pressure target attainment was associated with medium-sized practices and those with a higher proportion of patients aged ≥ 65 years. Conclusions: Practice size, patient age distribution, and rurality are factors associated with the performance of PCPs in the control of glycemia, lipids, and blood pressure in T2DM subjects in primary health care centers in our region.

Introduction: Clinical practice guidelines are helpful for clinicians, and their proper implementation could improve the quality of care and management of participants with diabetes. This study aimed to evaluate the degree of adherence to the Clinical Practice Guidelines (CPG) recommendations among obese, frail, or recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) participants in primary care centers in Spain., Methods: We perform a cross-sectional study on a national level in two phases. In the first phase, study participants were recruited, and their clinical data were collected. In the second phase, data related to the participating physicians were collected., Results: In total, 882 participants from 240 physicians were analyzed. According to the study questionnaire, most participants from all three clinical groups had adequate adherence to the CPG. This percentage was highest among the recently diagnosed T2DM (91.6%) and lowest percent of frail T2DM persons (74.7%). The inadequate adherence to the guidelines was observed mainly among the obese and frail participants with T2DM from medical doctors with low CPG knowledge (3.4% and 3.5%, respectively). Regarding the patient's characteristics and degree of adherence to the guidelines, the participants with inadequate adherence were generally older, with higher BMI, poorer HbA1c control, and fewer visits with primary care physicians. Most (57%) primary care physicians had moderate CPG knowledge. In our multivariable logistic model, we did not observe statistically significant odds ratios for different characteristics related to the physicians/consultation and low CPG knowledge., Discussion: The results of our cross-sectional study observe adequate adherence to the clinical guidelines by the primary care physicians for the majority of the participants with obesity, frailty, or newly diagnosed with T2DM., Competing Interests: MM-C has received advisory and or speaking fees from Astra-Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; he has received research grants to the institution from Astra-Zeneca, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. JF-N has received advisory and or speaking fees from Astra-Zeneca, Ascensia, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; he has received research grants to the institution from Astra-Zeneca, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Boehringer. The remaining authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest., (Copyright © 2023 Vlacho, Mata-Cases, Fernandez-Camins, Romera Liébana, Barrot-de la Puente and Franch-Nadal.)

Aim: We estimate the incidence and risk factors for fatal and non-fatal events among the COVID-19 infected subjects based on the presence of obesity or diabetes during the initial three epidemiological waves in our region., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study. A primary care database was used to identify persons with COVID-19. We stratified for subjects who either had diabetes mellitus or obesity. The follow-up period for study events was up to 90 days from inclusion., Results: In total, 1238,710 subjects were analysed. Subjects with diabetes mellitus or obesity were older and had a worse comorbidity profile compared with groups without these conditions. Fatal events were more frequent among people with diabetes and during the first wave. In the second and third waves, the number of study events decreased. Diabetes was a risk factor for fatal events in all models, while obesity was only in the model adjusted for age, sex, diabetes and COVID-19 waves. HIV, cancer, or autoimmune diseases were risk factors for mortality among subjects with COVID-19 in the fully-adjusted model., Conclusions: Diabetes was an independent risk factor for mortality among people with COVID-19. The number of fatal events decreased during the second and third waves in our region, both in those with diabetes or obesity., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: E.O has received advisory and or speaking fees from Astra-Zeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Lilly, MSD, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Amgen; they received research grants for the institution from MSD and Amgen. M. M-C. has received an advisory honorarium from Astra-Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; they received speaker honoraria from Astra-Zeneca, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Lilly, Menarini, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; he received research grants for the institution from Astra-Zeneca, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. J. F-N has received advisory and or speaking fees from Astra-Zeneca, Ascensia, Boehringer Ingelheim, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; he received research grants for the institution from Astra-Zeneca, GSK, Lilly, MSD, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Boehringer. D. M. has received advisory and/or speaking fees from Almirall, Esteve, Ferrer, Lilly, Janssen, Menarini, Lilly, MSD, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. B. V, FX.C-C, J.R, and BF-C have no conflict of interest to declare. Conflict of interest The funders had no role in the design of the study, in the collection, analysis, or interpretation of data, in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results., (Copyright © 2022 Primary Care Diabetes Europe. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)