Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Non-invasive risk scores for prediction of type 2 diabetes (EPIC-InterAct): A validation of existing models

  • A.P. Kengne
  • , J.W.J. Beulens*
  • , L.M. Peelen
  • , K.G.M. Moons
  • , Y.T. van der Schouw
  • , M.B. Schulze
  • , A.M. Spijkerman
  • , S.J. Griffin
  • , D.E. Grobbee
  • , L. Palla
  • , M.J. Tormo
  • , L. Arriola
  • , N.C. Barengo
  • , A. Barricarte
  • , H. Boeing
  • , C. Bonet
  • , F. Clavel Chapelon
  • , L. Dartois
  • , G. Fagherazzi
  • , P.W. Franks
  • J.M. Huerta, R. Kaaks, T.J. Key, K.T. Khaw, K. Li
*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleAcademicpeer-review

4 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background The comparative performance of existing models for prediction of type 2 diabetes across populations has not been investigated. We validated existing non-laboratory-based models and assessed variability in predictive performance in European populations.

Methods We selected non-invasive prediction models for incident diabetes developed in populations of European ancestry and validated them using data from the EPIC-InterAct case-cohort sample (27 779 individuals from eight European countries, of whom 12 403 had incident diabetes). We assessed model discrimination and calibration for the first 10 years of follow-up. The models were first adjusted to the country-specific diabetes incidence. We did the main analyses for each country and for subgroups defined by sex, age (= 60 years), BMI (= 25 kg/m(2)), and waist circumference (men = 102 cm; women = 88 cm).

Findings We validated 12 prediction models. Discrimination was acceptable to good: C statistics ranged from 0.76 (95% CI 0.72-0.80) to 0.81 (0.77-0.84) overall, from 0.73 (0.70-0.76) to 0.79 (0.74-0.83) in men, and from 0.78 (0.74-0.82) to 0.81 (0.80-0.82) in women. We noted significant heterogeneity in discrimination (p(heterogeneity) 0.05) except for three models. However, two models overestimated risk, DPoRT by 34% (95% CI 29-39%) and Cambridge by 40% (28-52%). Discrimination was always better in individuals younger than 60 years or with a low waist circumference than in those aged at least 60 years or with a large waist circumference. Patterns were inconsistent for BMI. All models overestimated risks for individuals with a BMI of

Interpretation Existing diabetes prediction models can be used to identify individuals at high risk of type 2 diabetes in the general population. However, the performance of each model varies with country, age, sex, and adiposity.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)19-29
Number of pages11
JournalThe Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology
Volume2
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2014

Keywords

  • LIFE-STYLE INTERVENTIONS
  • IDENTIFYING INDIVIDUALS
  • EXTERNAL VALIDATION
  • FOLLOW-UP
  • PREVENTION
  • MELLITUS
  • COHORT
  • TOOL
  • METAANALYSIS
  • VALIDITY

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Non-invasive risk scores for prediction of type 2 diabetes (EPIC-InterAct): A validation of existing models'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this