Objective: To estimate the burden of ischemic heart disease (IHD) stratified by gender, age, geographic location, and social-demographic status for 21 regions across the world from 1990 to 2017. Methods: Using the Global Burden of Disease Study (GBD) Results Tool, we extracted data on the incidence, mortality, disability-adjusted life years (DALYs), and age-standardized rates related to IHD, as IHD burden measures. Trend analyzes were conducted for major regions. Risk factors for DALYs (obtained from the GBD comparative risk assessment framework) were also analyzed. Results: Globally, 10.6 million (95% uncertainty interval [UI]: 9.6– 11.8) cases of IHD occurred in 2017, with 8.9 million (95%UI:8.8– 9.1) IHD-related deaths. Both the age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR) and death rate (ASDR) declined from 1990 to 2017 (percentage change: 27.4% and 30.0%, respectively), with average annual percent change (AAPC) values of − 1.2% and − 1.3%, respectively. In 2017, the global number of IHD-related DALYs was 170.3 million (95%UI:167.1– 174.0), and the middle socio-demographic index (SDI) quintile contributed the most to these DALYs. In most regions, indicators (incidence, mortality, and DALYs) declined steadily with SDI increased. High systolic blood pressure (SBP) was the most significant contributor to the DALYs in most regions, accounting for 118.18 million DALYs in 2017 globally, followed by high low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and a diet low in nuts and seeds (101.78 and 52.86 million, respectively). Conclusion: Even though the trend in IHD morbidity and mortality decreased globally, the IHD burden remains high, particularly in regions with lower SDI. It is necessary to learn successful and effective experience in controlling IHD risks and decreasing health disparities to reduce the IHD burden.

Background: The prevalence of diabetes mellitus is rapidly increasing in China, but the secular trends in incidence and mortality remain unknown. This study aims to examine time trends from 1990 to 2017 and the net age, period, and cohort effects on diabetes incidence and mortality. Methods: Incidence and mortality rates of diabetes (1990–2017) were collected for each 5-year age group (from 5–9 to 80–84 age group) stratified by gender from the Global Burden of Disease 2017 Study. The average annual percentage changes in incidence and mortality were analyzed by joinpoint regression analysis; the net age, period, and cohort effects on the incidence and mortality were estimated by age-period-cohort analysis. Results: The joinpoint regression analysis showed that age-standardized incidence significantly rose by 0.92% (95% CI: 0.6%, 1.3%) in men and 0.69% in women (95% CI: 0.3%, 1.0%) from 1990 to 2017; age-standardized mortality rates rose by 0.78% (95% CI: 0.6%, 1.0%) in men and decreased by 0.12% (95% CI: −0.4%, 0.1%) in women. For age-specific rates, incidence increased in most age groups, with exception of 30–34, 60–64, 65–69 and 70–74 age groups in men and 25–29, 30–34, 35–39 and 70–74 age groups in women; mortality in men decreased in the younger age groups (from 20–24 to 45–49 age group) while increased in the older age groups (from 50–54 to 80–84 age group), and mortality in women decreased for all age groups with exception of the age group 75–79 and 80–84. The age effect on incidence showed no obvious changes with advancing age while mortality significantly increased with advancing age; period effect showed that both incidence and mortality increased with advancing time period while the period trend on incidence began to decrease since 2007; cohort effect on incidence and mortality decreased from earlier birth cohorts to more recent birth cohorts while incidence showed no material changes from 1982–1986 to 2012–2016 birth cohort. Conclusions: Mortality decreased in younger age groups but increased in older age groups. Incidence increased in most age groups. The net age or period effect showed an unfavorable trend while the net cohort effect presented a favorable trend. Aging likely drives a continued increase in the mortality of diabetes. Timely population-level interventions aiming for obesity prevention, healthy diet and regular physical activity should be conducted, especially for men and earlier birth cohorts at high risk of diabetes.

Background: The incidence rate of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is rapidly increasing in Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS). The present study analyzed trends in T2DM incidence rate across the BRICS and associations with age, period, and birth cohort. Methods: The incidence rate was estimated by the data obtained from GBD 2019 (Global Burden of Disease Study 2019) and was analyzed with the age-period-cohort framework. Incidence rates of T2DM (1990–2019) were collected for each 5-year age group (from 25 to 29 to 85–89 age group) stratified by gender from the Global Burden of Disease 2019 Study. Results: In 2019, the the incidence rate of T2DM was 280.2 per 100,000 across the BRICS. Between 1990 and 2019, the incidence rate of T2DM among the BRICS population increased by 83.3%. In each period, as age increases, the incidence rate of T2DM in China and Russia first increased and then decreased, while the incidence rate of T2DM in Brazil, India and South Africa first increased and then decreased slightly with age group. Deteriorating period and cohort risks for incidence rate of T2DM were generally found across the BRICS. Conclusions: The number of diabetic patients in the BRICS countries has continued to increase and the growth rate has been stable in the past 30 years, which is dependent on age and some other environmental factors. Some possible factors influencing T2DM incidence are analyzed and hypotheses generated through the age and period effects.

Preclinical studies have suggested the antitumorigenic properties of metformin on prostate cancer; results from epidemiological studies remain contradictory. We aim to investigate the evidence of metformin and the risk of prostate cancer. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science databases were searched for eligible studies. Meta-analyses were carried out using the most fully adjusted hazard ratios and the corresponding 95% confidence intervals. Eighteen cohort studies and six case–control studies representing 2 009 504 male patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus were identified. The pooled HR of prostate cancer for metformin therapy was 0.97 (0.84–1.12) in case–control studies and 0.94 (0.79–1.12) in cohort studies, respectively. In cohort studies, we found that there was a modest association in studies with samples from Europe, but not in studies with samples from North America, Asia, and Oceania. In addition, metformin showed a slightly protective effect compared with sulfonylurea, but not insulin and other comparators. Meta-regression analyses found that obesity and prostate-specific antigen adjustment in statistical models may be the sources of heterogeneity. However, there were no significant differences in subgroups stratified by time-related biases, analytical approaches, types of risk estimates, study quality, publication year, and whether adjusted for smoking, alcohol abuse, hemoglobin A1c, diabetes duration, and other confounding factors. Our study showed that metformin therapy was not associated with the risk of prostate cancer in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, exploratory analyses suggest that metformin use may be protective in a certain subgroup of patients.