Development and validation of QDiabetes-2018 risk prediction algorithm to estimate future risk of type 2 diabetes: cohort study

Hippisley-Cox, Julia and Coupland, Carol (2017) Development and validation of QDiabetes-2018 risk prediction algorithm to estimate future risk of type 2 diabetes: cohort study. BMJ, 359 . J5019/1-J5019/18. ISSN 1756-1833

[img]
Preview
PDF - Requires a PDF viewer such as GSview, Xpdf or Adobe Acrobat Reader
Available under Licence Creative Commons Attribution.
Download (844kB) | Preview

Abstract

Objectives: To derive and validate updated QDiabetes-2018 prediction algorithms to estimate the 10 year risk of type 2 diabetes in men and women, taking account of potential new risk factors, and to compare their performance with current approaches.

Design: Prospective open cohort study.

Setting: Routinely collected data from 1457 general practices in England contributing to the QResearch database: 1094 were used to develop the scores and a separate set of 363 were used to validate the scores.

Participants: 11.5 million people aged 25-84 and free of diabetes at baseline: 8.87 million in the derivation cohort and 2.63 million in the validation cohort.

Methods: Cox proportional hazards models were used in the derivation cohort to derive separate risk equations in men and women for evaluation at 10 years. Risk factors considered included those already in QDiabetes (age, ethnicity, deprivation, body mass index, smoking, family history of diabetes in a first degree relative, cardiovascular disease, treated hypertension, and regular use of corticosteroids) and new risk factors: atypical antipsychotics, statins, schizophrenia or bipolar affective disorder, learning disability, gestational diabetes, and polycystic ovary syndrome. Additional models included fasting blood glucose and glycated haemoglobin (HBA1c). Measures of calibration and discrimination were determined in the validation cohort for men and women separately and for individual subgroups by age group, ethnicity, and baseline disease status.

Main outcome measure: Incident type 2 diabetes recorded on the general practice record.

Results: In the derivation cohort, 178 314 incident cases of type 2 diabetes were identified during follow-up arising from 42.72 million person years of observation. In the validation cohort, 62 326 incident cases of type 2 diabetes were identified from 14.32 million person years of observation. All new risk factors considered met our model inclusion criteria. Model A included age, ethnicity, deprivation, body mass index, smoking, family history of diabetes in a first degree relative, cardiovascular disease, treated hypertension, and regular use of corticosteroids, and new risk factors: atypical antipsychotics, statins, schizophrenia or bipolar affective disorder, learning disability, and gestational diabetes and polycystic ovary syndrome in women. Model B included the same variables as model A plus fasting blood glucose. Model C included HBA1c instead of fasting blood glucose. All three models had good calibration and high levels of explained variation and discrimination. In women, model B explained 63.3% of the variation in time to diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (R2), the D statistic was 2.69 and the Harrell’s C statistic value was 0.89. The corresponding values for men were 58.4%, 2.42, and 0.87. Model B also had the highest sensitivity compared with current recommended practice in the National Health Service based on bands of either fasting blood glucose or HBA1c. However, only 16% of patients had complete data for blood glucose measurements, smoking, and body mass index.

Conclusions: Three updated QDiabetes risk models to quantify the absolute risk of type 2 diabetes were developed and validated: model A does not require a blood test and can be used to identify patients for fasting blood glucose (model B) or HBA1c (model C) testing. Model B had the best performance for predicting 10 year risk of type 2 diabetes to identify those who need interventions and more intensive follow-up, improving on current approaches. Additional external validation of models B and C in datasets with more completely collected data on blood glucose would be valuable before the models are used in clinical practice.

Item Type: Article
Keywords: QDiabetes; Risk Prediction Algorithm; Primary Care; Type 2 Diabetes
Schools/Departments: University of Nottingham, UK > Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences > School of Medicine > Division of Primary Care
Identification Number: 10.1136/bmj.j5019
Related URLs:
Depositing User: McCambridge, Mrs April
Date Deposited: 04 Dec 2017 09:26
Last Modified: 04 Dec 2017 09:31
URI: http://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/id/eprint/48482

Actions (Archive Staff Only)

Edit View Edit View