Abstract
Aims The aim of this study was to evaluate longitudinal associations between the mean and variability of HbA1c levels in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and major depressive disorder (MDD).
Methods Individuals with T2D from the UK Biobank with linked primary care records were analysed. An HbA1c measurement within +/- 6-months of T2D diagnosis was taken as baseline, with subsequent HbA1c measurements used as the outcome in generalised least squares regression to evaluate longitudinal associations with a three-level MDD diagnosis variable (MDD controls, pre-T2D MDD cases and post-T2D MDD cases).
Results Using 7,968 T2D individuals, we show that MDD has utility in explaining mean HbA1c levels (p=6.53E-08). This is attributable to MDD diagnosis interacting with baseline T2D medication (p=3.36E-04) and baseline HbA1c (p=2.66E-05), but not with time-when all else is equal, the temporal trend in expected HbA1c did not differ by MDD diagnosis. However, joint consideration with baseline T2D medication showed that each additional medication prescribed was associated with a +4 mmol/mol (2.5%) increase in expected HbA1c across follow up for post-T2D MDD cases, relative to pre-T2D MDD cases and MDD controls. Furthermore, variability in HbA1c increased across time for post-T2D MDD cases but decreased for MDD controls and pre-T2D MDD cases.
Conclusions These findings suggest closer monitoring of individuals with both T2D and MDD is essential to improve their diabetic control, particularly for those who develop MDD after T2D diagnosis.
What is already known?Comorbid T2D and MDD is associated with poorer diabetic control and worse prognosis.
What this study has found?We demonstrate a strong complex relationship between MDD and diabetic control, influenced by diabetic medication and baseline HbA1c levels. We showed that individuals who develop MDD after their T2D diagnosis have greater variability in HbA1c levels over time.
What are the implications of the study?This study shows the importance of closer monitoring of HbA1c in individuals with both T2D and MDD, particularly those who develop MDD after diabetes, to improve diabetic control and reduce complications associated comorbid T2D and MDD.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This paper represents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Maudsley Biomedical Research Centre at South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust and Kings College London. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the NHS, the NIHR, or the Department of Health and Social Care. The authors acknowledge use of the research computing facility at Kings College London, Rosalind (https://rosalind.kcl.ac.uk), which is delivered in partnership with the NIHR Biomedical Research Centre at South London & Maudsley and Guys & St. Thomas NHS Foundation Trusts, and part-funded by capital equipment grants from the Maudsley Charity (Grant Ref. 980) and Guys & St. Thomas Charity (TR130505). SPH was supported by the Medical Research Council (MR/S0151132). JT and FC are supported by an Academy of Medical Sciences (AMS) Springboard award, which is supported by the AMS, the Wellcome Trust, GCRF, the Government Department of Business, Energy and Industrial strategy, the British Heart Foundation and Diabetes UK [SBF004\1079]. KGY is supported by Research Englands Expanding Excellence in England (E3) fund. HG is funded by an E3 Independent Research Fellowship.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
Ethical approval was granted by the NHS North West Research Ethics Committee (REC reference 11/NW/0382). Written informed consent was obtained from all participants.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
Data is available from UK Biobank subject to standard access procedures (www.ukbiobank.ac.uk).