SummaryBackgroundOne of the global targets for non-communicable diseases is to halt, by 2025, the rise in the age-standardised adult prevalence of diabetes at its 2010 levels. We aimed to estimate worldwide trends in diabetes, how likely it is for countries to achieve the global target, and how changes in prevalence, together with population growth and ageing, are affecting the number of adults with diabetes.MethodsWe pooled data from population-based studies that had collected data on diabetes through measurement of its biomarkers. We used a Bayesian hierarchical model to estimate trends in diabetes prevalence—defined as fasting plasma glucose of 7·0 mmol/L or higher, or history of diagnosis with diabetes, or use of insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs—in 200 countries and territories in 21 regions, by sex and from 1980 to 2014. We also calculated the posterior probability of meeting the global diabetes target if post-2000 trends continue.FindingsWe used data from 751 studies including 4 372 000 adults from 146 of the 200 countries we make estimates for. Global age-standardised diabetes prevalence increased from 4·3% (95% credible interval 2·4–7·0) in 1980 to 9·0% (7·2–11·1) in 2014 in men, and from 5·0% (2·9–7·9) to 7·9% (6·4–9·7) in women. The number of adults with diabetes in the world increased from 108 million in 1980 to 422 million in 2014 (28·5% due to the rise in prevalence, 39·7% due to population growth and ageing, and 31·8% due to interaction of these two factors). Age-standardised adult diabetes prevalence in 2014 was lowest in northwestern Europe, and highest in Polynesia and Micronesia, at nearly 25%, followed by Melanesia and the Middle East and north Africa. Between 1980 and 2014 there was little change in age-standardised diabetes prevalence in adult women in continental western Europe, although crude prevalence rose because of ageing of the population. By contrast, age-standardised adult prevalence rose by 15 percentage points in men and women in Polynesia and Micronesia. In 2014, American Samoa had the highest national prevalence of diabetes (>30% in both sexes), with age-standardised adult prevalence also higher than 25% in some other islands in Polynesia and Micronesia. If post-2000 trends continue, the probability of meeting the global target of halting the rise in the prevalence of diabetes by 2025 at the 2010 level worldwide is lower than 1% for men and is 1% for women. Only nine countries for men and 29 countries for women, mostly in western Europe, have a 50% or higher probability of meeting the global target.InterpretationSince 1980, age-standardised diabetes prevalence in adults has increased, or at best remained unchanged, in every country. Together with population growth and ageing, this rise has led to a near quadrupling of the number of adults with diabetes worldwide. The burden of diabetes, both in terms of prevalence and number of adults affected, has increased faster in low-income and middle-income countries than in high-income countries.FundingWellcome Trust.

Malaysia has a much higher prevalence of MetS compared with other Asian countries and, unless there is immediate intervention to reduce risk factors, this may pose serious implications on the country's healthcare costs and services.

SummaryBackgroundDiabetes has been defined on the basis of different biomarkers, including fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-h plasma glucose in an oral glucose tolerance test (2hOGTT), and HbA1c. We assessed the effect of different diagnostic definitions on both the population prevalence of diabetes and the classification of previously undiagnosed individuals as having diabetes versus not having diabetes in a pooled analysis of data from population-based health examination surveys in different regions.MethodsWe used data from 96 population-based health examination surveys that had measured at least two of the biomarkers used for defining diabetes. Diabetes was defined using HbA1c (HbA1c ≥6·5% or history of diabetes diagnosis or using insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs) compared with either FPG only or FPG-or-2hOGTT definitions (FPG ≥7·0 mmol/L or 2hOGTT ≥11·1 mmol/L or history of diabetes or using insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs). We calculated diabetes prevalence, taking into account complex survey design and survey sample weights. We compared the prevalences of diabetes using different definitions graphically and by regression analyses. We calculated sensitivity and specificity of diabetes diagnosis based on HbA1c compared with diagnosis based on glucose among previously undiagnosed individuals (ie, excluding those with history of diabetes or using insulin or oral hypoglycaemic drugs). We calculated sensitivity and specificity in each survey, and then pooled results using a random-effects model. We assessed the sources of heterogeneity of sensitivity by meta-regressions for study characteristics selected a priori.FindingsPopulation prevalence of diabetes based on FPG-or-2hOGTT was correlated with prevalence based on FPG alone (r=0·98), but was higher by 2–6 percentage points at different prevalence levels. Prevalence based on HbA1c was lower than prevalence based on FPG in 42·8% of age–sex–survey groups and higher in another 41·6%; in the other 15·6%, the two definitions provided similar prevalence estimates. The variation across studies in the relation between glucose-based and HbA1c-based prevalences was partly related to participants' age, followed by natural logarithm of per person gross domestic product, the year of survey, mean BMI, and whether the survey population was national, subnational, or from specific communities. Diabetes defined as HbA1c 6·5% or more had a pooled sensitivity of 52·8% (95% CI 51·3–54·3%) and a pooled specificity of 99·74% (99·71–99·78%) compared with FPG 7·0 mmol/L or more for diagnosing previously undiagnosed participants; sensitivity compared with diabetes defined based on FPG-or-2hOGTT was 30·5% (28·7–32·3%). None of the preselected study-level characteristics explained the heterogeneity in the sensitivity of HbA1c versus FPG.InterpretationDifferent biomarkers and definitions for diabetes can provide different estimates of population prevalence of diabetes, and differentially identify people without previous diagnosis as having diabetes. Using an HbA1c-based definition alo...

BackgroundSouth East Asia (SEA) is home to over 30 tribes of indigenous population groups who are currently facing rapid socio-economic change. Epidemiological transition and increased prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCD) has occured. In Peninsular Malaysia, the Orang Asli (OA) indigenous people comprise 0 · 6% (150,000) of the population and live in various settlements. OA comprise three distinct large tribes with smaller sub-tribes. The three large tribes include Proto-Malay (sub-tribes: Orang Seletar and Jakun), Senoi (sub-tribes: Mahmeri and Semai), and Negrito (sub-tribes: Jehai, Mendriq and Batek).MethodsWe studied the health of 636 OA from seven sub-tribes in the Peninsular. Parameters that were assessed included height, weight, BMI and waist circumference whilst blood pressure, cholesterols, fasting blood glucose and HbA1c levels were recorded. We then analysed cardio-metabolic risk factor prevalences and performed multiple pair-wise comparisons among different sub-tribes and socio-economic clusters.ResultsCardio-metabolic risk factors were recorded in the seven sub-tribes.. Prevalence for general and abdominal obesity were highest in the urbanized Orang Seletar (31 · 6 ± 5 · 7%; 66 · 1 ± 5 · 9%). Notably, hunter gatherer Jehai and Batek tribes displayed the highest prevalence for hypertension (43 · 8 ± 9 · 29% and 51 · 2 ± 15 · 3%) despite being the leanest and most remote, while the Mendriq sub-tribe, living in the same jungle area with access to similar resources as the Batek were less hypertensive (16.3 ± 11.0%), but displayed higher prevalence of abdominal obesity (27.30 ± 13.16%).ConclusionsWe describe the cardio-metabolic risk factors of seven indigenous communities in Malaysia. We report variable prevalence of obesity, cholesterol, hypertension and diabetes in the OA in contrast to the larger ethnic majorities such as Malays, Chinese and Indians in Malaysia These differences are likely to be due to socio-economic effects and lifestyle changes. In some sub-tribes, other factors including genetic predisposition may also play a role. It is expected that the cardio-metabolic risk factors may worsen with further urbanization, increase the health burden of these communities and strain the government’s resources.

No abstract