@article{DoerhoeferLammertKraneetal.2013, author = {D{\"o}rh{\"o}fer, Lena and Lammert, Alexander and Krane, Vera and Gorski, Mathias and Banas, Bernhard and Wanner, Christoph and Kr{\"a}mer, Bernhard K. and Heid, Iris M. and B{\"o}ger, Carsten A.}, title = {Study design of DIACORE (DIAbetes COhoRtE) - a cohort study of patients with diabetes mellitus type 2}, series = {BMC Medical Genetics}, volume = {14}, journal = {BMC Medical Genetics}, number = {25}, issn = {1471-2350}, doi = {10.1186/1471-2350-14-25}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-122040}, year = {2013}, abstract = {Background: Diabetes mellitus type 2 (DM2) is highly associated with increased risk for chronic kidney disease (CKD), end stage renal disease (ESRD) and cardiovascular morbidity. Epidemiological and genetic studies generate hypotheses for innovative strategies in DM2 management by unravelling novel mechanisms of diabetes complications, which is essential for future intervention trials. We have thus initiated the DIAbetes COhoRtE study (DIACORE). Methods: DIACORE is a prospective cohort study aiming to recruit 6000 patients of self-reported Caucasian ethnicity with prevalent DM2 for at least 10 years of follow-up. Study visits are performed in University-based recruiting clinics in Germany using standard operating procedures. All prevalent DM2 patients in outpatient clinics surrounding the recruiting centers are invited to participate. At baseline and at each 2-year follow-up examination, patients are subjected to a core phenotyping protocol. This includes a standardized online questionnaire and physical examination to determine incident micro-and macrovascular DM2 complications, malignancy and hospitalization, with a primary focus on renal events. Confirmatory outcome information is requested from patient records. Blood samples are obtained for a centrally analyzed standard laboratory panel and for biobanking of aliquots of serum, plasma, urine, mRNA and DNA for future scientific use. A subset of the cohort is subjected to extended phenotyping, e. g. sleep apnea screening, skin autofluorescence measurement, non-mydriatic retinal photography and non-invasive determination of arterial stiffness. Discussion: DIACORE will enable the prospective evaluation of factors involved in DM2 complication pathogenesis using high-throughput technologies in biosamples and genetic epidemiological studies.}, language = {en} } @article{RahimiBhalaKamphuisenetal.2012, author = {Rahimi, Kazem and Bhala, Neeraj and Kamphuisen, Pieter and Emberson, Jonathan and Biere-Rafi, Sara and Krane, Vera and Robertson, Michele and Wikstrand, John and McMurray, John}, title = {Effect of Statins on Venous Thromboembolic Events: A Meta-analysis of Published and Unpublished Evidence from Randomised Controlled Trials}, series = {PLoS Medicine}, volume = {9}, journal = {PLoS Medicine}, number = {9}, doi = {10.1371/journal.pmed.1001310}, url = {http://nbn-resolving.de/urn:nbn:de:bvb:20-opus-134279}, pages = {e1001310}, year = {2012}, abstract = {Background: It has been suggested that statins substantially reduce the risk of venous thromboembolic events. We sought to test this hypothesis by performing a meta-analysis of both published and unpublished results from randomised trials of statins. Methods and Findings: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane CENTRAL up to March 2012 for randomised controlled trials comparing statin with no statin, or comparing high dose versus standard dose statin, with 100 or more randomised participants and at least 6 months' follow-up. Investigators were contacted for unpublished information about venous thromboembolic events during follow-up. Twenty-two trials of statin versus control (105,759 participants) and seven trials of an intensive versus a standard dose statin regimen (40,594 participants) were included. In trials of statin versus control, allocation to statin therapy did not significantly reduce the risk of venous thromboembolic events (465 [0.9\%] statin versus 521 [1.0\%] control, odds ratio [OR] = 0.89, 95\% CI 0.78-1.01, p = 0.08) with no evidence of heterogeneity between effects on deep vein thrombosis (266 versus 311, OR 0.85, 95\% CI 0.72-1.01) and effects on pulmonary embolism (205 versus 222, OR 0.92, 95\% CI 0.76-1.12). Exclusion of the trial result that provided the motivation for our meta-analysis (JUPITER) had little impact on the findings for venous thromboembolic events (431 [0.9\%] versus 461 [1.0\%], OR = 0.93 [95\% CI 0.82-1.07], p = 0.32 among the other 21 trials). There was no evidence that higher dose statin therapy reduced the risk of venous thromboembolic events compared with standard dose statin therapy (198 [1.0\%] versus 202 [1.0\%], OR = 0.98, 95\% CI 0.80-1.20, p = 0.87). Risk of bias overall was small but a certain degree of effect underestimation due to random error cannot be ruled out. Conclusions: The findings from this meta-analysis do not support the previous suggestion of a large protective effect of statins (or higher dose statins) on venous thromboembolic events. However, a more moderate reduction in risk up to about one-fifth cannot be ruled out. Please see later in the article for the Editors' Summary.}, language = {en} }