Advanced

Validation of a multi-marker model for the prediction of incident type 2 diabetes mellitus: Combined results of the Inter99 and Botnia studies.

Lyssenko, Valeriya LU ; Jørgensen, Torben; Gerwien, Robert W; Hansen, Torben; Rowe, Michael W; McKenna, Michael P; Kolberg, Janice; Pedersen, Oluf; Borch-Johnsen, Knut and Groop, Leif LU (2012) In Diabetes & Vascular Disease Research 9. p.59-67
Abstract
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... (More)
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. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
author
organization
publishing date
type
Contribution to journal
publication status
published
subject
in
Diabetes & Vascular Disease Research
volume
9
pages
59 - 67
publisher
SAGE Publications Inc.
external identifiers
  • wos:000299721400008
  • pmid:22058089
  • scopus:83455258052
ISSN
1752-8984
DOI
10.1177/1479164111424762
language
English
LU publication?
yes
id
ec75184d-27fa-4848-a04f-bee5842958d4 (old id 2221083)
alternative location
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22058089?dopt=Abstract
date added to LUP
2011-12-02 19:37:44
date last changed
2017-01-01 07:31:40
@article{ec75184d-27fa-4848-a04f-bee5842958d4,
  abstract     = {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 &lt; 0.0001). In time to event analysis, rates of conversion to diabetes in low, moderate, and high DRS groups were significantly different (p &lt; 0.001). Conclusion: This study validates DRS performance in an independent population, and provides a more accurate assessment of T2DM risk than other methods.},
  author       = {Lyssenko, Valeriya and Jørgensen, Torben and Gerwien, Robert W and Hansen, Torben and Rowe, Michael W and McKenna, Michael P and Kolberg, Janice and Pedersen, Oluf and Borch-Johnsen, Knut and Groop, Leif},
  issn         = {1752-8984},
  language     = {eng},
  pages        = {59--67},
  publisher    = {SAGE Publications Inc.},
  series       = {Diabetes & Vascular Disease Research},
  title        = {Validation of a multi-marker model for the prediction of incident type 2 diabetes mellitus: Combined results of the Inter99 and Botnia studies.},
  url          = {http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1479164111424762},
  volume       = {9},
  year         = {2012},
}