Key result
Diabetes Risk Score predicts incident type 2 diabetes with 0.78 AUC, outperforming fasting plasma glucose.
Why the study?
Does the Diabetes Risk Score (DRS) improve the prediction of incident type 2 diabetes mellitus compared to traditional risk assessment tools in the Inter99 and Botnia cohorts?
Cohort
Yes
Does the Diabetes Risk Score (DRS) improve the prediction of incident type 2 diabetes mellitus compared to traditional risk assessment tools in the Inter99 and Botnia cohorts?
Effect estimate: AUC 0.78
p-value: p=<0.0001
The biomarker-based Diabetes Risk Score (DRS) provides a more accurate assessment of 5-year type 2 diabetes risk than traditional methods like fasting plasma glucose or Framingham risk scores.
May refine diabetes risk stratification in cohorts; extends DRS validation but leaves clinical utility open pending trials.
PURPOSE: To assess performance of a biomarker-based score that predicts the five-year risk of diabetes (Diabetes Risk Score, DRS) in an independent cohort that included 15-year follow-up. METHOD: DRS was developed on the Inter99 cohort, and validated on the Botnia cohort. Performance was benchmarked against other risk-assessment tools comparing calibration, time to event analysis, and net reclassification. RESULTS: The area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) was 0.84 for the Inter99 cohort and 0.78 for the Botnia cohort. In the Botnia cohort, DRS provided better discrimination than fasting plasma glucose (FPG), homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, oral glucose tolerance test or risk scores derived from Framingham or San Antonio Study cohorts. Overall reclassification with DRS was significantly better than using FPG and glucose tolerance status (p < 0.0001). In time to event analysis, rates of conversion to diabetes in low, moderate, and high DRS groups were significantly different (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study validates DRS performance in an independent population, and provides a more accurate assessment of T2DM risk than other methods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Lyssenko et al. (2011) conducted a cohort in Type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Risk Score (DRS) vs. Fasting plasma glucose, HOMA-IR, OGTT, and Framingham or San Antonio risk scores was evaluated on Incident type 2 diabetes mellitus (AUC 0.78, p=<0.0001). The Diabetes Risk Score (DRS) predicted incident type 2 diabetes with an AUC of 0.78 in the validation cohort, providing significantly better reclassification than fasting plasma glucose (p<0.0001).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: