Teresa Gisinger, Alexandra Kautzky-Willer, Michael Leutner
{"title":"基于集群的糖尿病免疫模式:个性化预防护理的见解。","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":"{\"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}","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
摘要
背景:我们调查了糖尿病(DM)患者的免疫状况和预防保健,根据合并症将他们分为临床不同的风险群,反映了个性化的医疗方法。方法:利用奥地利健康访谈调查2019,我们确定了四组:1组(DM,动脉高血压(aHTN),血脂异常;n = 215),第2组(DM, aHTN,血脂异常,肥胖II类;n = 33),第3组(DM, aHTN,血脂异常,抑郁;n = 65),和一个对照队列(DM无高脂血症,高血压,抑郁,或肥胖II类;n = 214)。采用chi2试验对两组进行比较。通过logistic回归分析聚类相关变量与疫苗接种状况/预防保健变量的相关性。结果:各组间完整白喉免疫率存在显著差异(聚类1:45.6%,聚类2:27.3%,聚类3:52.3%,对照组:51.9%,p值0.047)。第2群与对照组的破伤风(42.4% vs. 64%, p = 0.027)和白喉(27.3% vs. 51.9%, p = 0.013)免疫接种差异。聚类2与破伤风(OR 0.83, p = 0.009)和白喉(OR 0.85, p = 0.018)免疫接种呈负相关。与对照组相比,第1组的粪便隐血检查率更高(50.7%对39.3%,p = 0.022),第2组的结肠镜检查率更高(24.2%对8.9%,p = 0.015)。结论:个性化医疗方法表明,具有特定合并症模式的糖尿病患者,特别是高血压、血脂异常和II级肥胖患者,免疫接种率较低,这突出了有针对性预防策略的必要性。
Cluster-Based Immunization Patterns in Diabetes Mellitus: Insights for Personalized Preventive Care.
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.