Teresa Gisinger, Alexandra Kautzky-Willer, Michael Leutner
{"title":"Cluster-Based Immunization Patterns in Diabetes Mellitus: Insights for Personalized Preventive Care.","authors":"Teresa Gisinger, Alexandra Kautzky-Willer, Michael Leutner","doi":"10.3390/jpm15090441","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background</b>: We investigated immunization status and preventive care among diabetes mellitus (DM) patients by stratifying them into clinically distinct risk clusters based on comorbidities, reflecting a personalized medicine approach. <b>Methods</b>: Using the Austrian health interview survey 2019, we identified four groups: cluster 1 (DM, arterial hypertension (aHTN), dyslipidemia; <i>n</i> = 215), cluster 2 (DM, aHTN, dyslipidemia, obesity class II; <i>n</i> = 33), cluster 3 (DM, aHTN, dyslipidemia, depression; <i>n</i> = 65), and a control cohort (DM without hyperlipidemia, hypertension, depression, or obesity class II; <i>n</i> = 214). The cohorts were compared by chi<sup>2</sup> tests. By logistic regression the association of the cluster-related variables and the vaccination status/preventive care variables were analyzed. <b>Results:</b> Significant differences in intact diphtheria immunization between the cohorts exist (cluster 1: 45.6%, cluster 2: 27.3%, cluster 3: 52.3%, control: 51.9%, <i>p</i>-value 0.047). Differences in intact tetanus (42.4% vs. 64%, <i>p</i> = 0.027) and diphtheria (27.3% vs. 51.9%, <i>p</i> = 0.013) immunization between cluster 2 and control cohort were investigated. Cluster 2 was negatively associated with tetanus (OR 0.83, <i>p</i> = 0.009) and diphtheria (OR 0.85, <i>p</i> = 0.018) immunization. Cluster 1 reports higher rates of fecal occult blood test (50.7% vs. 39.3%, <i>p</i> = 0.022) and cluster 2 reports a higher rate of colonoscopy (24.2% vs. 8.9%, <i>p</i> = 0.015) in comparison to the control cohort. <b>Conclusions</b>: A personalized medicine approach reveals that DM patients with specific comorbidity patterns, particularly those with hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obesity class II, have lower immunization rates-highlighting the need for targeted preventive strategies.</p>","PeriodicalId":16722,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Personalized Medicine","volume":"15 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12470910/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Personalized Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/jpm15090441","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: We investigated immunization status and preventive care among diabetes mellitus (DM) patients by stratifying them into clinically distinct risk clusters based on comorbidities, reflecting a personalized medicine approach. Methods: Using the Austrian health interview survey 2019, we identified four groups: cluster 1 (DM, arterial hypertension (aHTN), dyslipidemia; n = 215), cluster 2 (DM, aHTN, dyslipidemia, obesity class II; n = 33), cluster 3 (DM, aHTN, dyslipidemia, depression; n = 65), and a control cohort (DM without hyperlipidemia, hypertension, depression, or obesity class II; n = 214). The cohorts were compared by chi2 tests. By logistic regression the association of the cluster-related variables and the vaccination status/preventive care variables were analyzed. Results: Significant differences in intact diphtheria immunization between the cohorts exist (cluster 1: 45.6%, cluster 2: 27.3%, cluster 3: 52.3%, control: 51.9%, p-value 0.047). Differences in intact tetanus (42.4% vs. 64%, p = 0.027) and diphtheria (27.3% vs. 51.9%, p = 0.013) immunization between cluster 2 and control cohort were investigated. Cluster 2 was negatively associated with tetanus (OR 0.83, p = 0.009) and diphtheria (OR 0.85, p = 0.018) immunization. Cluster 1 reports higher rates of fecal occult blood test (50.7% vs. 39.3%, p = 0.022) and cluster 2 reports a higher rate of colonoscopy (24.2% vs. 8.9%, p = 0.015) in comparison to the control cohort. Conclusions: A personalized medicine approach reveals that DM patients with specific comorbidity patterns, particularly those with hypertension, dyslipidemia, and obesity class II, have lower immunization rates-highlighting the need for targeted preventive strategies.
期刊介绍:
Journal of Personalized Medicine (JPM; ISSN 2075-4426) is an international, open access journal aimed at bringing all aspects of personalized medicine to one platform. JPM publishes cutting edge, innovative preclinical and translational scientific research and technologies related to personalized medicine (e.g., pharmacogenomics/proteomics, systems biology). JPM recognizes that personalized medicine—the assessment of genetic, environmental and host factors that cause variability of individuals—is a challenging, transdisciplinary topic that requires discussions from a range of experts. For a comprehensive perspective of personalized medicine, JPM aims to integrate expertise from the molecular and translational sciences, therapeutics and diagnostics, as well as discussions of regulatory, social, ethical and policy aspects. We provide a forum to bring together academic and clinical researchers, biotechnology, diagnostic and pharmaceutical companies, health professionals, regulatory and ethical experts, and government and regulatory authorities.