Evidence Hub

Abstract P131: Individualized Risk Prediction for Type 2 Diabetes: A Secondary Analysis of the Diabetes Prevention Program

B. Jaeger, Ramon Casanova, Brian Wells, Yitbarek Demesie, Jeanette M. Stafford, Michael P Bancks

Circulation, 2024

2,640 participants

Abstract

Introduction:

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) risk prediction models that predict risk with individualized preventive intervention effects can help targeted prevention.

Hypothesis:

An individualized T2D risk prediction model developed in the Diabetes Prevention Program (DPP) randomized trial that incorporates differential treatment effects based on an individual’s fasting glucose (FG) level and body mass index (BMI) will provide more accurate predictions than a model without individualized treatment effects.

Methods:

We included 2640 DPP participants randomized to the placebo, metformin, or lifestyle arms. Using 50% of the DPP sample, we developed a non-individualized Cox model predicting T2D risk over 3 years with adjustment for sex, hemoglobin A1c, triglycerides, FG, BMI, and treatment, and an individualized model with adjustment for these variables plus interactions between treatment and age, FG, and BMI. In the remaining 50%, we evaluated the prediction accuracy of both models using the concordance (C)-statistic. We repeated this process 100 times with different random splits. We externally validated models among Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA) adults with prediabetes (n=1067) where model predictions were computed for each intervention scenario and averaged for all participants.

Results:

Mean (standard deviation) age of participants was 51 (11) years in the DPP and 64 (10) in MESA, with 67% and 54% women, respectively. Mean C-statistics for our individualized and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 2,640 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free