ClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT02569151Updated Oct 6, 2015

20 Years Results by HBP and DBP in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus After Following-up

An observational study in Diabetes Mellitus, sponsored by Kyuzi Kamoi. Not yet recruiting. Open to participants aged 20 Years to 100 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2015-10-06.

Sponsored by Kyuzi Kamoi · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
600
Ages
20 Years to 100 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

Participants were examined using the methods reported previous. All chemical laboratory data were obtained at each clinic visit in the morning in a non-fasting state. A single specimen at each visit was used to assess urinary albumin levels based on the 2009 guidelines of the ADA. CBP was measured once in each clinic visit. HBP was measured every day in the morning within 10 minutes after awakening in the sitting position, but HBP value assessed for this study used the value measured once in the same morning at each clinic visit.

Clinic hypertension (CH) and morning hypertension (MH) were defined as systolic BP (SBP) 130 mmHg and/or diastolic BP (DBP) 85 mmHg; clinic normotension (CN) and morning normotension (MN) were defined as SBP \<130 mmHg and DBP \<85 mmHg, respectively. The reason underlying that same threshold was used for both clinic and morning values was based on criteria of the 1999 WHO-International Society of Hypertension guidelines, because this study started in 1999. Based on HBP, subjects were divided into MH and MN patients, and anti-hypertensive drug use was determined in each group. In addition, based on CBP, subjects were divided into CH and CN patients. These patients were followed using the same methods used for MH and MN patients.

Outcome considered only the first event in each subject. Primary end-point was death from any cause. Secondary end-points were new, worsened, or improved microvascular and macrovascular events.

Risk factors related to each outcome were determined, and therapy which was added to baseline used for each disease in patients with MH was recorded at base- and end-points.

All results are presented as means ± SD. Mean values were compared using the paired or unpaired student t test. To compare the prevalence of events or medical treatment in patients with and without HT on basis of HBP or CBP, Fisher's exact test with two-tailed P values was used, and then hazard ratio and 95% confidence intervals were calculated.

Differences in outcomes between patients with HT and NT on basis of HBP or CBP at base- and end-points in the home or in the clinic, respectively, were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and then compared by hazard rate using the log-rank test.

Risk factors determined to be statistically related to outcomes were assessed by Cox proportional hazard analysis.

Read the detailed description

Microalbuminuria and clinical albuminuria were defined as urinary albumin excretion rate 30 mg/g creatinine and 300 mg/g creatinine, respectively (6).

CBP was measured once in each clinic visit. HBP was measured every day in the morning within 10 minutes after awakening in the sitting position, but HBP value assessed for this study used the value measured once in the same morning at each clinic visit.

Clinic hypertension (CH) and morning hypertension (MH) were defined as systolic BP (SBP) 130 mmHg and/or diastolic BP (DBP) 85 mmHg; clinic normotension (CN) and morning normotension (MN) were defined as SBP \<130 mmHg and DBP \<85 mmHg, respectively. .

Microvascular complications included nephropathy, neuropathy, and retinopathy. Severity of nephropathy was determined based on albuminuria using four categories: normal, 0 points; microalbuminuria, 1 point; clinical albuminuria, 2 points; and dialysis, 3 points. Severity of neuropathy was categorized as normal, 0 points; chronic sensorimotor distal symmetric polyneuropathy and/or cardiac autonomic neuropathy, 1 point. Severity of retinopathy was determined using four categories: normal, 0 points; simple, 1 point; pre-proliferative, 2 points; and proliferative, 3 points. Development of new, worsened, or improved microangiopathy was defined according to a change of at least one step from baseline.

Macrovascular complications included coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease and peripheral artery obstruction. Severity of macrovascular events was categorized using two categories: normal, 0 points; and coronary heart disease, cerebrovascular disease, or peripheral artery obstruction, 1 point (3). New, worsened (recurrent), or improved events were defined based on clinical manifestations and treatment throughout the study.

For ethical reasons, patients were treated with various anti-hypertensive, anti-diabetic, anti-dyslipidemia, anti-hypercoagulation and other agents during course of the study by their own doctors.

Outcome results considered only the first event in each subject (3). Primary end-point was death from any cause (3). Secondary end-points were new, worsened, or improved microvascular and macrovascular events (3).

4) Risk factor assessment for outcomes. Risk factors at end-point in ? participants related to each outcome were determined, and therapy which was added to baseline therapy used for each disease in patients with MH was recorded at base- and end-points (3). The 6-month interval minimizes bias due to the fall or rise in the HBP or CBP measurement (10).

Statistical analysis.

1) Baseline. All results are presented as means ± SD. Mean values were compared using the paired or unpaired student t test. To compare the prevalence of micro- and macrovascular complications or medical treatment in patients with and without HT on basis of HBP or CBP (3), Fisher's exact test with two-tailed P values was used, and then hazard ratio and 95% confidence intervals were calculatein.

End-points and outcome measures. Differences in outcomes for each end-point of death, and micro- and macrovascular complications between patients with HT and NT on basis of HBP or CBP at base- and end-points in the home or in the clinic, respectively, were assessed using Kaplan-Meier survival curves and then compared by hazard rate using the log-rank test.

Risk factor assessment for outcomes. Risk factors determined to be statistically related to outcomes were assessed by Cox proportional hazard analysis.

Analysis was performed using the Prism version software (GraphPad Software, CA, USA) and the Statistical Package for the Bioscience (ComWorks Co,Tokyo,Japan). Two-tailed values of P\<0.05 were considered statistically significant.

02

Conditions studied

  • Diabetes Mellitus

Browse trials for

03

In context

Diabetes Mellitus

11,089 studies on the registry are indexed under Diabetes Mellitus; 1,319 are open to participants now.

This study's planned enrollment of 600 is above the median of 234 across 2,254 observational studies indexed under Diabetes Mellitus.

Browse Diabetes Mellitus studies →

Lead sponsor

This is the only study on the registry with Kyuzi Kamoi as lead sponsor.

Counted across the registry records on this site, refreshed daily.

04

Who can participate

Ages eligible
20 Years to 100 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

600 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Go through the criteria one by one — yes, no or not sure — and take the list to your doctor or the study team. Kept in this browser only.

Inclusion criteria

  • Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and with other diseases except diabetes mellitus
05

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
600 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Interventions

  • DeviceHBP & CBP measurement using systo 130 mmHg
06

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Death

    Time frame: 20 years

Secondary outcomes

  1. new, worsened, or improved microvascular and macrovascular events

    Time frame: 20 years

07

Study locations

No study locations are listed for this record.

08

References and documents

Publications

  • Kamoi K, Miyakoshi M, Soda S, Kaneko S, Nakagawa O. Usefulness of home blood pressure measurement in the morning in type 2 diabetic patients. Diabetes Care. 2002 Dec;25(12):2218-23. doi: 10.2337/diacare.25.12.2218. PubMed 12453964 ↗
  • Kamoi K. Usefulness of morning home blood pressure measurements in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: results of a 10-year, prospective, longitudinal study. Clin Exp Hypertens. 2015;37(2):122-7. doi: 10.3109/10641963.2014.913606. Epub 2014 Apr 30. PubMed 24786228 ↗
09

Updates

Tracking since Sep 25, 2026
No changes since tracking began. The registry record was last updated on Oct 6, 2015, before this site started recording changes on Sep 25, 2026. Its history is on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
10

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT02569151
Lead sponsor
Kyuzi Kamoi
Responsible party
Kyuzi Kamoi (eMD & Chief, Nagaoka Red Cross Hospital) — Sponsor-investigator
First posted
Oct 6, 2015
Start date
Apr 2016
Primary completion
Mar 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Apr 2027 (estimated)
Last update
Oct 6, 2015

Study contacts

Kyuzi Kamoi, MD
Contact
kkam-int@echigo.ne.jp
+81-0258-36-3968
Kyuzi Kamoi, MD
Contact
kkam-int@echigo.ne.jp
+81-0258-36-3986
Kyuzi Kamoi, MD
principal investigator · Jyoetsu General Hospital

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Oct 2015. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion