ReviewDiabetology & metabolic syndrome2025
Type 1 diabetes in Brazil: a narrative overview of the Brazilian Type 1 Diabetes Study Group.
Review in Diabetology & metabolic syndrome, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Correction: Type 1 diabetes in Brazil: a narrative overview of the Brazilian Type 1 Diabetes Study Group.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundTo evaluate the real-world care of Brazilian individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D).
methodsThe Brazilian Type 1 Diabetes Study Group (BrazDiab1SG), was conducted in two waves, in all Brazilian geographical regions. The first enrolled 3,591 individuals with data obtained from medical records. The second evaluated 1,760 individuals with laboratory and genetic data performed at State University of Rio de Janeiro.
resultsIn the first and second waves, the average HbA1c was 9.3% and 9.0%, HbA1c above 10%, 32.2% and 26.3%, and individuals with HbA1c < 7.0%, 13.2% and 13.5%, respectively. Intermediate/long plus short acting insulins was the commonest used treatment modality. Less than 30% of the individuals achieved good glycemic control. Individuals in pumps and insulin analogs had lower mean HbA1c. Diabetic retinopathy, chronic kidney disease, cardiac autonomic neuropathy, peripheral neuropathy and macrovascular diseases were found in 35.7%; 25.2%; 23.4%; 14.8% and 2,1%, respectively. The 10-year Steno type 1 risk engine (S1TRE) showing moderate and high risk was noted in 18.0% and 11.3% of individuals. Diabetic retinopathy was associated with all diabetes-related chronic complications. Severe hypoglycemia was reported by 19%, periodontal disease by 4. % and autoimmune diseases by 19.5% of individuals. European genomic ancestry prevailed in the whole sample even in those Black self-reported. HLA-DRB1*03:01 ~ DQA1*05:01 ~ DQB1*02:01 was the most frequent risk haplotype with the highest frequency in individuals who self-reported as White and the haplotype HLA-DRB1*09:01 ~ DQA1*03:01 g ~ DQB1*02:02 had the highest frequency among those self-reported as Black. European genomic ancestry was associated with the risk alleles: DRB1*03:01; DRB1*04:01; DRB1*04:02; DQA1*05:01 DQB1*02:01; DQB1*03:02 and African genomic ancestry with the protective alleles: DRB1*03:02; DRB1*11:01; and DRB1*15:03. Amerindian (43.6%, haplogroup C) and African (38.2%, haplogroup L3) were the most frequent matrilineal ancestries (MtDNA). European patrilineal ancestry was predominant, in approximately 85%, followed by African ancestry in approximately 9%. European haplogroups R1b and E1b were the most prevalent.
conclusionsIn both waves, Brazilian individuals with T1D presented poor glycemic control and high rates of diabetes-related acute and chronic complications. Our data has been used to improve T1D management driving public health policies in Brazil.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.