We used metagenomic next-generation sequencing (mNGS) to investigate an outbreak of Fusarium solani meningitis in US patients who had surgical procedures under spinal anesthesia in Matamoros, Mexico, during 2023. Using a novel method called metaMELT (metagenomic multiple extended locus typing), we performed phylogenetic analysis of concatenated mNGS reads from 4 patients (P1-P4) in parallel with reads from 28 fungal reference genomes. Fungal strains from the 4 patients were most closely related to each other and to 2 cultured isolates from P1 and an additional case (P5), suggesting that all cases arose from a point source exposure. Our findings support epidemiologic data implicating a contaminated drug or device used for epidural anesthesia as the likely cause of the outbreak. In addition, our findings show that the benefits of mNGS extend beyond diagnosis of infections to public health outbreak investigation.

INTRODUCTION: Metabolic and bariatric surgery (MBS) is an effective intervention to manage diabetes and obesity. The population-based incidence of MBS is unknown. OBJECTIVE: To estimate the incidence of MBS among US adults with obesity by diabetes status and selected sociodemographic characteristics. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This cross-sectional study used data from the 2016-2020 Nationwide Inpatient Sample and Nationwide Ambulatory Surgery Sample to capture MBS procedures. The National Health Interview Survey was used to establish the denominator for incidence calculations. Participants included US non-pregnant adults aged ≥18 years with obesity. The main outcome was incident MBS without previous MBS, defined by International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision Procedure Codes, Diagnosis Related Group system codes, and Current Procedural Terminology codes. Adjusted incidence and annual percentage change (2016-2019) were estimated using logistic regression. RESULTS: Among US adults with obesity, over 900 000 MBS procedures were performed in inpatient and hospital-owned ambulatory surgical centers in the USA during 2016-2020. The age- and sex-adjusted incidence of MBS per 1000 adults was 5.9 (95% CI 5.4 to 6.4) for adults with diabetes and 2.0 (95% CI 1.9 to 2.1) for adults without diabetes. MBS incidence was significantly higher for women and adults with class III obesity regardless of diabetes status. The highest incidence of MBS occurred in the Northeast region. Sleeve gastrectomy was the most common MBS surgical approach. CONCLUSIONS: Incident MBS procedures were nearly threefold higher among adults with obesity and diabetes than those with obesity but without diabetes. Continued monitoring of the trends of MBS and other treatment modalities can inform our understanding of treatment accessibility to guide prevention efforts aimed at reducing obesity and diabetes.

Background: Free-living amoebas (FLAs) can cause severe and fatal central nervous system infections that are difficult to diagnose. Methods: We present the case of a 74-year-old immunocompetent woman admitted for focal neurological symptoms with enhancing lesions in the right cerebellar hemisphere. A first cerebral biopsy showed granulomatous inflammation, but no microorganisms were identified. After transient clinical improvement, she eventually deteriorated 4 months after initial presentation, with an MRI confirming multiple new masses affecting all cerebral lobes. Results: A second brain biopsy revealed granulomatous and acute inflammation with organisms containing a large central nucleus with prominent karyosome, consistent with FLAs. Immunohistochemical and polymerase chain reaction assays performed at CDC were positive for Acanthamoeba spp, confirming the diagnosis of granulomatous amoebic encephalitis (GAE) caused by Acanthamoeba spp. The patient was treated with combination therapy recommended by CDC, but died a few days later. Upon histopathological rereview, amoebic cysts and trophozoites were identified by histochemical and immunohistochemical methods in the first cerebral biopsy. Conclusion: FLA infections can be challenging to diagnose because of the low incidence, non-specific clinical and radiological presentation, lack of accessible diagnostic tools, and clinicians' unfamiliarity. This case highlights the importance of recognizing FLA as a potential cause of granulomatous encephalitis, even in the absence of risk factors, as early treatment might be associated with favourable outcomes in case reports. When suspected, CDC laboratories offer tests to confirm the diagnosis promptly. | Historique : Les amibes libres peuvent causer des infections du système nerveux central graves et fatales qui sont difficiles à diagnostiquer. Méthodologie : Les auteurs présentent le cas d'une femme immunocompétente de 74 ans hospitalisée à cause de symptômes neurologiques focaux avec lésions rehaussantes dans l'hémisphère cérébelleux droit. Une première biopsie cérébrale a révélé une inflammation granulomateuse, mais aucun microorganisme n'a été décelé. Après une amélioration clinique transitoire, son état s'est détérioré quatre mois après la première consultation, et l'IRM a confirmé de multiples nouvelles masses touchant tous les lobes cérébraux. Résultats : Une deuxième biopsie cérébrale a révélé une inflammation granulomateuse aiguë par des organismes dont les gros noyaux centraux et les caryosomes volumineux étaient évocateurs d'amibes libres. L'immunohistochimie et l'amplification en chaîne par polymérase effectuées aux CDC se sont avérés positives pour Acanthamoeba spp, ce qui a confirmé un diagnostic d'encéphalite amibienne granulomateuse causée par Acanthamoeba spp. La patiente a reçu une polythérapie recommandée par les CDC, mais est malheureusement décédée quelques jours plus tard. À la reprise de l'analyse histopathologique, des kystes amibiens et des trophozoïtes ont été décelés dans la première biopsie cérébrale par des méthodes histochimiques et immunohistochimiques. Conclusion : Les infections par des amibes libres peuvent être difficiles à diagnostiquer en raison de leur faible incidence, de leur présentation clinique et radiologique non spécifique, de l'absence d'outils diagnostiques accessibles et de la méconnaissance des cliniciens. Ce cas renforce l'importance d'inclure les amibes libres dans les causes potentielles d'encéphalite granulomateuse, même en l'absence de facteurs de risque, car un traitement rapide a été associé à des résultats favorables dans certains rapports de cas. Lorsqu'on en soupçonne la présence, les laboratoires des CDC offrent des tests pour confirmer rapidement le diagnostic.

OBJECTIVE: We examined national trends in diabetes-related complications (heart failure [HF], myocardial infarction [MI], stroke, end-stage renal disease [ESRD], nontraumatic lower-extremity amputation [NLEA], and hyperglycemic crisis) among U.S. adults with diagnosed diabetes during 2000-2020 by age-group, race and ethnicity, and sex. We also assessed trends in inequalities among those subgroups. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Hospitalization rates for diabetes-related complications among adults (≥18 years) were estimated using the 2000-2020 National (Nationwide) Inpatient Sample. The incidence of diabetes-related ESRD was estimated using the United States Renal Data System. The number of U.S. adults with diagnosed diabetes was estimated from the National Health Interview Survey. Annual percent change (APC) was estimated for assessment of trends. RESULTS: After declines in the early 2000s, hospitalization rates increased for HF (2012-2020 APC 3.9%, P < 0.001), stroke (2009-2020 APC 2.8%, P < 0.001), and NLEA (2009-2020 APC 5.9%, P < 0.001), while ESRD incidence increased (2010-2020 APC 1.0%, P = 0.044). Hyperglycemic crisis increased from 2000 to 2020 (APC 2.2%, P < 0.001). MI hospitalizations declined during 2000-2008 (APC -6.0%, P < 0.001) and were flat thereafter. On average, age inequalities declined for hospitalizations for HF, MI, stroke, and ESRD incidence but increased for hyperglycemic crisis. Sex inequalities increased on average for hospitalizations for stroke and NLEA and for ESRD incidence. Racial and ethnic inequalities declined during 2012-2020 for ESRD incidence but increased for HF, stroke, and hyperglycemic crisis. CONCLUSIONS: There was a continued increase of several complications in the past decade. Age, sex, and racial and ethnic inequalities have worsened for some complications.

We estimated monthly cross-sectional seroprevalence rates of anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) and anti-spike (anti-S) antibodies to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 in two U.S. nationwide studies. The nationwide blood donor seroprevalence (NBDS) study included specimens from blood donors, while the nationwide commercial laboratory seroprevalence (NCLS) study included residual serum specimens tested in commercial laboratories for reasons unrelated to the assessment of coronavirus disease 2019 infection. In September-December 2021, specimens collected from both nationwide studies were tested for anti-N antibodies. In September-October 2021, specimens from both studies within a five-state area were tested for anti-S antibodies. We used raking methods to adjust all seroprevalence estimates by the population distribution of key demographics in included states. Seroprevalence estimates of each antibody type were compared across the two studies for specimens drawn in the same U.S. states during the same time period. Our analysis revealed that over a 4-month period, national NCLS monthly anti-N estimates were 0.5-1.9 percentage points higher than NBDS estimates. In contrast, across five states during a 2-month period, NBDS anti-S estimates were 7.6 and 8.2 percentage points higher than NCLS estimates. The observed differences in seroprevalence estimates between the NBDS and NCLS studies may be attributed to variations in the characteristics of the study sample populations, particularly with respect to health status, health behaviors, and vaccination status. These differences should be considered in the interpretation of seroprevalence study results based on blood donors or commercial lab residual specimens. IMPORTANCE: This study was the first systematic comparison between two nationwide severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) studies which estimated seroprevalence, or the proportion of the population with antibodies to the virus, using differing convenience sample populations. One study tested blood donor specimens; the other study tested specimens left over from clinical blood tests. The seroprevalence of anti-nucleocapsid and anti-spike antibodies was compared in the same states during the same months with statistical adjustments based on state demographics. Similar anti-nucleocapsid antibody seroprevalence estimates produced by two independent studies using differing convenience samples build confidence in the generalizability of their anti-nucleocapsid findings. Due to high blood donor vaccine rates, blood donor SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike antibody estimates might overestimate general population seroprevalence, an important consideration for interpreting national seroprevalence study results. Furthermore, because laboratory residuals and blood donations are two common sources of specimens for seroprevalence studies, study findings may be informative for other respiratory virus seroepidemiology studies.

BACKGROUND: Because COVID-19 case data do not capture most SARS-CoV-2 infections, the actual risk of severe disease and death per infection is unknown. Integrating sociodemographic data into analysis can show consequential health disparities. METHODS: Data were merged from September 2020 to November 2021 from 6 national surveillance systems in matched geographic areas and analyzed to estimate numbers of COVID-19-associated cases, emergency department visits, and deaths per 100 000 infections. Relative risks of outcomes per infection were compared by sociodemographic factors in a data set including 1490 counties from 50 states and the District of Columbia, covering 71% of the US population. RESULTS: Per infection with SARS-CoV-2, COVID-19-related morbidity and mortality were higher among non-Hispanic American Indian and Alaska Native persons, non-Hispanic Black persons, and Hispanic or Latino persons vs non-Hispanic White persons; males vs females; older people vs younger; residents in more socially vulnerable counties vs less; those in large central metro areas vs rural; and people in the South vs the Northeast. DISCUSSION: Meaningful disparities in COVID-19 morbidity and mortality per infection were associated with sociodemography and geography. Addressing these disparities could have helped prevent the loss of tens of thousands of lives.

OBJECTIVE: We conducted a national US study of SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence by Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) that included pediatric data and compared the Delta and Omicron periods during the COVID-19 pandemic. The objective of the current study was to assess the association between SVI and seroprevalence of infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibodies by period (Delta vs Omicron) and age group. METHODS: We used results of infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibody assays of clinical sera specimens (N = 406 469) from 50 US states from September 2021 through February 2022 to estimate seroprevalence overall and by county SVI tercile. Bivariate analyses and multilevel logistic regression models assessed the association of seropositivity with SVI and its themes by age group (0-17, ≥18 y) and period (Delta: September-November 2021; Omicron: December 2021-February 2022). RESULTS: Aggregate infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence increased at all 3 SVI levels; it ranged from 25.8% to 33.5% in September 2021 and from 53.1% to 63.5% in February 2022. Of the 4 SVI themes, socioeconomic status had the strongest association with seroprevalence. During the Delta period, we found significantly more infections per reported case among people living in a county with high SVI (odds ratio [OR] = 2.76; 95% CI, 2.31-3.21) than in a county with low SVI (OR = 1.65; 95% CI, 1.33-1.97); we found no significant difference during the Omicron period. Otherwise, findings were consistent across subanalyses by age group and period. CONCLUSIONS: Among both children and adults, and during both the Delta and Omicron periods, counties with high SVI had significantly higher SARS-CoV-2 antibody seroprevalence than counties with low SVI did. These disparities reinforce SVI's value in identifying communities that need tailored prevention efforts during public health emergencies and resources to recover from their effects.

INTRODUCTION: Screening for prediabetes and type 2 diabetes may allow earlier detection, diagnosis, and treatment. The US Preventive Services Task Force recommends screening every 3 years for abnormal blood glucose among adults aged 40 to 70 years with overweight or obesity. Using IQVIA Ambulatory Electronic Medical Records, we estimated the proportion of adults aged 40 to 70 years with overweight or obesity who received blood glucose testing within 3 years from baseline in 2016. METHODS: We identified 1,338,509 adults aged 40 to 70 years with overweight or obesity in 2016 and without pre-existing diabetes. We included adults whose records were present in the data set for at least 2 years before their index body mass index (BMI) in 2016 and 3 years after the index BMI (2017-2019), during which we examined the occurrence of blood glucose testing. We calculated the unadjusted and adjusted prevalence of receiving blood glucose testing. RESULTS: The unadjusted prevalence of receiving blood glucose testing was 33.4% when it was defined as having a hemoglobin A(1c) or fasting plasma glucose measure. The unadjusted prevalence was 74.3% when we expanded the definition of testing to include random plasma glucose and unspecified glucose measures. Adults with obesity were more likely to receive the test than those with overweight. Men (vs women) and adults aged 50 to 59 years (vs other age groups) had higher testing rates. CONCLUSION: Our findings could inform clinical and public health promotion efforts to improve screening for blood glucose levels among adults with overweight or obesity.

The epidemic of diabetes continues to exert great burden and cost on affected people, their families, and society. Current estimates of the burden of prediabetes and diabetes in youth and adults for the U.S. are made available through the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) (https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/statistics-report/index.html and https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/diabetes/DiabetesAtlas.html) and for regions of the world by the International Diabetes Federation (https://diabetesatlas.org/2022-reports/). These data are typically updated every year or two. | | CDC’s estimates for the prevalence of both diagnosed and undiagnosed diabetes, prevalence of prediabetes among adults, incidence of newly diagnosed diabetes, risk factors for diabetes-related complications, and burden of coexisting conditions and complications provide valuable information, but many questions are not addressed in these national data. Therefore, commencing with this month’s issue, Diabetes Care and CDC begin a partnership to enhance knowledge among the journal’s readership by highlighting important aspects of the national burden of diabetes that expand upon the data and information provided on the CDC’s website. Through this collaboration, we will at least twice a year publish in Diabetes Care in-depth explorations of timely and clinically significant topics authored by members of CDC. As with all original manuscripts submitted to Diabetes Care, they will undergo peer review to ensure they are scientifically rigorous and informative.

INTRODUCTION: The American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommends screening for prediabetes and diabetes (dysglycemia) starting at age 35, or younger than 35 years among adults with overweight or obesity and other risk factors. Diabetes risk differs by sex, race, and ethnicity, but performance of the recommendation in these sociodemographic subgroups is unknown. METHODS: Nationally representative data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys (2015-March 2020) were analyzed from 5,287 nonpregnant US adults without diagnosed diabetes. Screening eligibility was based on age, measured body mass index, and the presence of diabetes risk factors. Dysglycemia was defined by fasting plasma glucose ≥100mg/dL (≥5.6 mmol/L) or haemoglobin A1c ≥5.7% (≥39mmol/mol). The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of the ADA screening criteria were examined by sex, race, and ethnicity. RESULTS: An estimated 83.1% (95% CI=81.2-84.7) of US adults were eligible for screening according to the 2023 ADA recommendation. Overall, ADA's screening criteria exhibited high sensitivity [95.0% (95% CI=92.7-96.6)] and low specificity [27.1% (95% CI=24.5-29.9)], which did not differ by race or ethnicity. Sensitivity was higher among women [97.8% (95% CI=96.6-98.6)] than men [92.4% (95% CI=88.3-95.1)]. Racial and ethnic differences in sensitivity and specificity among men were statistically significant (P=0.04 and P=0.02, respectively). Among women, guideline performance did not differ by race and ethnicity. DISCUSSION: The ADA screening criteria exhibited high sensitivity for all groups and was marginally higher in women than men. Racial and ethnic differences in guideline performance among men were small and unlikely to have a significant impact on health equity. Future research could examine adoption of this recommendation in practice and examine its effects on treatment and clinical outcomes by sex, race, and ethnicity.

OBJECTIVE: Preventive care services are important to prevent or delay complications associated with diabetes. We report trends in receipt of six American Diabetes Association-recommended preventive care services during 2008-2020. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We used 2008-2020 data from the cross-sectional Medical Expenditures Panel Survey to calculate the proportion of U.S. adults ≥18 years of age with diagnosed diabetes who reported receiving preventive care services, overall and by subpopulation (n = 25,616). We used joinpoint regression to identify trends during 2008-2019. The six services completed in the past year included at least one dental examination, dilated-eye examination, foot examination, and cholesterol test; at least two A1C tests, and an influenza vaccine. RESULTS: From 2008 to 2020, proportions of U.S. adults with diabetes receiving any individual preventive care service ranged from 32.6% to 89.9%. From 2008 to 2019, overall trends in preventive services among these adults were flat except for an increase in influenza vaccination (average annual percent change: 2.6% [95% CI 1.1%, 4.2%]). Trend analysis of subgroups was heterogeneous: influenza vaccination and A1C testing showed improvements among several subgroups, whereas cholesterol testing (patients aged 45-64 years; less than a high school education; Medicaid insurance) and dental visits (uninsured) declined. In 2020, 8.2% (95% CI 4.5%, 11.9%) of those with diabetes received none of the recommended preventive care services. CONCLUSIONS: Other than influenza vaccination, we observed no improvement in preventive care service use among U.S. adults with diabetes. These data highlight services and specific subgroups that could be targeted to improve preventive care among adults with diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: In 2019 among US adults, 1 in 9 had diagnosed diabetes and 1 in 5 had diagnosed depression. Since these conditions frequently coexist, compounding their health and economic burden, we examined state-specific trends in depression prevalence among US adults with and without diagnosed diabetes. METHODS: We used data from the 2011 through 2019 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System to evaluate self-reported diabetes and depression prevalence. Joinpoint regression estimated state-level trends in depression prevalence by diabetes status. RESULTS: In 2019, the overall prevalence of depression in US adults with and without diabetes was 29.2% (95% CI, 27.8%-30.6%) and 17.9% (95% CI, 17.6%-18.1%), respectively. From 2011 to 2019, the depression prevalence was relatively stable for adults with diabetes (28.6% versus 29.2%) but increased for those without diabetes from 15.5% to 17.9% (average annual percent change [APC] over the 9-year period = 1.6%, P = .015). The prevalence of depression was consistently more than 10 percentage points higher among adults with diabetes than those without diabetes. The APC showed a significant increase in some states (Illinois: 5.9%, Kansas: 3.5%) and a significant decrease in others (Arizona: -5.1%, Florida: -4.0%, Colorado: -3.4%, Washington: -0.9%). In 2019, although it varied by state, the depression prevalence among adults with diabetes was highest in states with a higher diabetes burden such as Kentucky (47.9%), West Virginia (47.0%), and Maine (41.5%). CONCLUSION: US adults with diabetes are more likely to report prevalent depression compared with adults without diabetes. These findings highlight the importance of screening and monitoring for depression as a potential complication among adults with diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: This study examined national trends in age, sex, racial and ethnic, and socioeconomic inequalities for diagnosed diabetes prevalence and incidence among US adults from 2008-2021. METHODS: Adults (≥18 years) were from the National Health Interview Survey (2008-2021). The annual between-group variance (BGV) for sex, race, and ethnicity, and the slope index of inequality (SII) for age, education, and poverty-to-income ratio (PIR) along with the average annual percent change (AAPC) were estimated in 2023 to assess trends in inequalities over time in diabetes prevalence and incidence. For BGV and SII, a value of 0 represents no inequality while a value further from 0 represents greater inequality. RESULTS: On average over time, PIR inequalities in diabetes prevalence worsened (SII: -8.24 in 2008 and -9.80 in 2021; AAPC for SII: -1.90%, p=0.003) while inequalities in incidence for age (SII: 17.60 in 2008 and 8.85 in 2021; AAPC for SII: -6.47%, p<0.001), sex (BGV: 0.09 in 2008, 2.05 in 2009, 1.24 in 2010, and 0.27 in 2021; AAPC for BGV: -12.34%, p=0.002), racial and ethnic (BGV: 4.80 in 2008 and 2.17 in 2021; AAPC for BGV: -10.59%, p=0.010), and education (SII: -9.89 in 2008 and -2.20 in 2021; AAPC for SII: 8.27%, p=0.001) groups improved. CONCLUSIONS: From 2008-2021, age, sex, racial and ethnic, and education inequalities in the incidence of diagnosed diabetes improved but persisted. Income-related diabetes prevalence inequalities worsened over time. To close these gaps, future research could focus on identifying factors driving these trends including the contribution of morbidity and mortality.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a microsimulation model to estimate the health effects, costs, and cost-effectiveness of public health and clinical interventions for preventing/managing type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We combined newly developed equations for complications, mortality, risk factor progression, patient utility, and cost-all based on U.S. studies-in a microsimulation model. We performed internal and external validation of the model. To demonstrate the model's utility, we predicted remaining life-years, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and lifetime medical cost for a representative cohort of 10,000 U.S. adults with type 2 diabetes. We then estimated the cost-effectiveness of reducing HbA1c from 9% to 7% among adults with type 2 diabetes, using low-cost, generic, oral medications. RESULTS: The model performed well in internal validation; the average absolute difference between simulated and observed incidence for 17 complications was less than 8%. In external validation, the model was better at predicting outcomes in clinical trials than in observational studies. The cohort of U.S. adults with type 2 diabetes was projected to have an average of 19.95 remaining life-years (from mean age 61), incur $187,729 in discounted medical costs, and accrue 8.79 discounted QALYs. The intervention to reduce HbA1c increased medical costs by $1,256 and QALYs by 0.39, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $9,103 per QALY. CONCLUSIONS: Using equations exclusively derived from U.S. studies, this new microsimulation model achieves good prediction accuracy in U.S. POPULATIONS: The model can be used to estimate the long-term health impact, costs, and cost-effectiveness of interventions for type 2 diabetes in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: In 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) recommended prediabetes and diabetes screening for asymptomatic adults aged 35-70 years with overweight/obesity, lowering the age from 40 years in its 2015 recommendation. The USPSTF suggested considering earlier screening in racial and ethnic groups with high diabetes risk at younger ages or lower BMI. This study examined the clinical performance of these USPSTF screening recommendations as well as alternative age and BMI cutoffs in the U.S. adult population overall, and separately by race and ethnicity. METHODS: Nationally representative data were collected from 3,243 nonpregnant adults without diagnosed diabetes in January 2017-March 2020 and analyzed from 2021 to 2022. Screening eligibility was based on age and measured BMI. Collectively, prediabetes and undiagnosed diabetes were defined by fasting plasma glucose ≥100 mg/dL or hemoglobin A(1c) ≥5.7%. The sensitivity, specificity, and predictive values of alternate screening criteria were examined overall, and by race and ethnicity. RESULTS: The 2021 criteria exhibited marginally higher sensitivity (58.6%, 95% CI=55.5, 61.6 vs 52.9%, 95% CI=49.7, 56.0) and lower specificity (69.3%, 95% CI=65.7, 72.2 vs 76.4%, 95% CI=73.3, 79.2) than the 2015 criteria overall, and within each racial and ethnic group. Screening at lower age and BMI thresholds resulted in even greater sensitivity and lower specificity, especially among Hispanic, non-Hispanic Black, and Asian adults. Screening all adults aged 35-70 years regardless of BMI yielded the most equitable performance across all racial and ethnic groups. CONCLUSIONS: The 2021 USPSTF screening criteria will identify more adults with prediabetes and diabetes in all racial and ethnic groups than the 2015 criteria. Screening all adults aged 35-70 years exhibited even higher sensitivity and performed most similarly by race and ethnicity, which may further improve early detection of prediabetes and diabetes in diverse populations.

This article describes a significant decline in emergency department visits for acute life-threatening conditions during the COVID-19 pandemic, suggesting that patients may be delaying or avoiding care or unable to access care during the pandemic.

AIMS: Recent USPSTF and ADA guidelines expanded criteria of whom to test to identify prediabetes and diabetes. We described which Americans are eligible and report receiving glucose testing by USPSTF 2015 and 2021 as well as ADA 2003 and 2022 recommendations, and performance of each guideline. METHODS: We analyzed cross-sectional data from 6,007 non-pregnant U.S. adults without diagnosed diabetes in the 2013-2018 National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys. We reported proportions of adults who met each guideline's criteria for glucose testing and reported receiving glucose testing in the past three years, overall and by key population subgroups,. Defining prediabetes (FPG 100-125mg/dL and/or HbA1c 5.7-6.4%) or previously undiagnosed diabetes (FPG≥126mg/dL and/or HbA1c≥6.5%), we assessed sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: During 2013-2018, 76.7 million, 90.4 million, 157.7 million, and 169.5 million US adults met eligibility for glucose testing by USPSTF 2015, 2021, and ADA 2003 and 2022 guidelines, respectively. On average, 52% of adults reported receiving glucose testing within the past 3 years. Likelihood of receiving glucose testing was lower among younger adults, men, Hispanic adults, those with less than high school completion, those living in poverty, and those without health insurance or a usual place of care than their respective counterparts. ADA recommendations were most sensitive (range: 91.0% to 100.0%) and least specific (range: 18.3% to 35.3%); USPSTF recommendations exhibited lower sensitivity (51.9% to 66.6%), but higher specificity (56.6% to 74.5%). CONCLUSIONS: An additional 12-14 million US adults are eligible for diabetes screening. USPSTF 2021 criteria provide balanced sensitivity and specificity while ADA 2022 criteria maximize sensitivity. Glucose testing does not align with guidelines and disparities remain.

BACKGROUND: West Nile virus (WNV), primarily vectored by mosquitoes of the genus Culex, is the most important mosquito-borne pathogen in North America, having infected thousands of humans and countless wildlife since its arrival in the USA in 1999. In locations with dedicated mosquito control programs, surveillance methods often rely on frequent testing of mosquitoes collected in a network of gravid traps (GTs) and CO(2)-baited light traps (LTs). Traps specifically targeting oviposition-seeking (e.g. GTs) and host-seeking (e.g. LTs) mosquitoes are vulnerable to trap bias, and captured specimens are often damaged, making morphological identification difficult. METHODS: This study leverages an alternative mosquito collection method, the human landing catch (HLC), as a means to compare sampling of potential WNV vectors to traditional trapping methods. Human collectors exposed one limb for 15 min at crepuscular periods (5:00-8:30 am and 6:00-9:30 pm daily, the time when Culex species are most actively host-seeking) at each of 55 study sites in suburban Chicago, Illinois, for two summers (2018 and 2019). RESULTS: A total of 223 human-seeking mosquitoes were caught by HLC, of which 46 (20.6%) were mosquitoes of genus Culex. Of these 46 collected Culex specimens, 34 (73.9%) were Cx. salinarius, a potential WNV vector species not thought to be highly abundant in upper Midwest USA. Per trapping effort, GTs and LTs collected > 7.5-fold the number of individual Culex specimens than HLC efforts. CONCLUSIONS: The less commonly used HLC method provides important insight into the complement of human-biting mosquitoes in a region with consistent WNV epidemics. This study underscores the value of the HLC collection method as a complementary tool for surveillance to aid in WNV vector species characterization. However, given the added risk to the collector, novel mitigation methods or alternative approaches must be explored to incorporate HLC collections safely and strategically into control programs.

Seroprevalence studies provide useful information about the proportion of the population either vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2, previously infected with the virus, or both. Numerous studies have been conducted in the United States, but differ substantially by dates of enrollment, target population, geographic location, age distribution, and assays used. This can make it challenging to identify and synthesize available seroprevalence data by geographic region or to compare infection-induced versus combined infection- and vaccination-induced seroprevalence. To facilitate public access and understanding, the National Institutes of Health and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed the COVID-19 Seroprevalence Studies Hub (COVID-19 SeroHub, https://covid19serohub.nih.gov/ ), a data repository in which seroprevalence studies are systematically identified, extracted using a standard format, and summarized through an interactive interface. Within COVID-19 SeroHub, users can explore and download data from 178 studies as of September 1, 2022. Tools allow users to filter results and visualize trends over time, geography, population, age, and antigen target. Because COVID-19 remains an ongoing pandemic, we will continue to identify and include future studies.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data on the risk of SARS-CoV-2 infection in the U.S. by occupation. We identified occupations at higher risk for prior SARS-CoV-2 infection as defined by the presence of infection-induced antibodies among U.S. blood donors. METHODS: Using a nested case-control study design, blood donors during May-December 2021 with anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) testing were sent an electronic survey on employment status, vaccination, and occupation. The association between previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and occupation-specific in-person work was estimated using multivariable logistic regression adjusting for sex, age, month of donation, race/ethnicity, education, vaccination, and telework. RESULTS: Among 85,986 included survey respondents, 9,504 (11.1%) were anti-N reactive. Healthcare support (20.3%), protective service (19.9%), and food preparation and serving related occupations (19.7%) had the highest proportion of prior infection. After adjustment, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection was associated with healthcare practitioners (adjusted OR [aOR] 2.10, 95% CI 1.74-2.54) and healthcare support (aOR 1.83, 95% CI 1.39-2.40) occupations compared with computer and mathematical occupations as the referent group. Lack of COVID-19 vaccination (aOR 16.13, 95% CI 15.01-17.34) and never teleworking (aOR 1.17, 95% CI 1.05-1.30) were also independently associated with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Protective service occupations had the highest proportion of unvaccinated workers (30.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Workers in healthcare, protective services, and food preparation had the highest prevalence of prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Occupational risks for SARS-CoV-2 infection remained after adjusting for vaccination, telework, and demographic factors. These findings underscore the need for mitigation measures and personal protection in healthcare settings and other workplaces.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effect of diabetes comorbidities by baseline healthcare utilization on receipt of recommended eye examinations. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of 310691 nonelderly adults with type 2 diabetes in the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database from 2016 to 2019. Patients were grouped based on diabetes-concordant (related) or -discordant (unrelated) comorbidities. Logistic regression was used to estimate the prevalence ratio (PR) for eye examinations by comorbidity status, healthcare utilization, and an interaction between comorbidities and utilization, controlling for age, sex, region, and major eye disease. RESULTS: Prevalence of biennial eye examinations varied by the four comorbidity groups: 43.5% (diabetes only), 52.7% (concordant+discordant comorbidities), 48.0% (concordant comorbidities only), and 45.3% (discordant comorbidities only). In the lowest healthcare utilization tertile, the concordant-only and concordant+discordant groups had lower prevalence of examinations compared to diabetes only (PR 0.95 [95% CI 0.92-0.98] and PR 0.91 [95% CI 0.88-0.95], respectively). In the medium utilization tertile, the discordant-only and concordant+discordant groups had lower prevalence of examinations (PR 0.89 [0.83-0.95] and PR 0.94 [0.90-0.98], respectively). In the highest utilization tertile, the concordant-only and concordant+discordant groups had higher prevalence of examinations. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with low healthcare utilization, having comorbid conditions is associated with lower prevalence of eye examinations. Among those with medium healthcare utilization, patients with diabetes-discordant comorbidities are particularly vulnerable. This study highlights populations of diabetes patients who would benefit from increased assistance in receiving vision-preserving eye examinations.

OBJECTIVES: To assess if state-issued nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) are associated with reduced rates of SARS-CoV-2 infection as measured through anti-nucleocapsid (anti-N) seroprevalence, a proxy for cumulative prior infection that distinguishes seropositivity from vaccination). METHODS: Monthly anti-N seroprevalence during August 1, 2020 - March 30, 2021 was estimated using a nationwide blood donor serosurvey. Using multivariable logistic regression models, we measured the association of seropositivity and state-issued, county-specific NPIs for mask mandates, gathering bans, and bar closures. RESULTS: Compared with individuals living in a county with all three NPIs in place, the odds of having anti-N antibodies were 2.2 (95% CI: 2.0-2.3) times higher for people living in a county that did not have any of the three NPIs, 1.6 (95% CI: 1.5-1.7) times higher for people living in a county that only had a mask mandate and gathering ban policy, and 1.4 (95% CI: 1.3-1.5) times higher for people living in a county that had only a mask mandate. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with studies assessing NPIs relative to COVID-19 incidence and mortality, the presence of NPIs were associated with lower SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence indicating lower rates of cumulative infections. Multiple NPIs are likely more effective than single NPIs.

This cross-sectional study examines monthly blood donations from individuals aged 16 years and older to estimate the population with antibodies to SARS-CoV-2 from infection or vaccination.

AIMS: To report the national proportions and trends of adult hospitalizations with diabetes in the United States during 2000-2018. METHODS: We used the 2000-2018 National Inpatient Sample to identify hospital discharges with any listed and primary diagnoses for diabetes, based on International Classification of Diseases, 9th revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-9-CM) and ICD-10-CM codes. We calculated proportions and trends of adult hospitalizations with diabetes, overall and by subpopulations. We used the Nationwide Readmissions Database to assess calendar-year and 30-day readmission rates. RESULTS: From 2000 to 2018, the proportion of hospitalizations among adults ≥18 years increased from 17.1% to 27.3% (average annual percentage change [AAPC] 2.5%; P < 0.001) for any listed diabetes codes and from 1.5% to 2.1% (AAPC 2.2%; P < 0.001) for primary diagnosis of diabetes. Men, non-Hispanic Black patients, and those from poorer zip codes had higher proportions of hospitalizations with diabetes codes. CONCLUSION: In recent years, approximately one-quarter of adult hospitalizations in the United States had a listed diabetes code, increasing about 2.5% per year from 2000 to 2018. These data are important for benchmarking purposes, especially due to disruptions in health care utilization from the COVID-19 pandemic.

INTRODUCTION: Heart failure (HF) is a major contributor to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in people with diabetes. In this study, we estimated trends in the incidence of HF inpatient admissions and emergency department (ED) visits by diabetes status. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Population-based age-standardized HF rates in adults with and without diabetes were estimated from the 2006-2017 National Inpatient Sample, Nationwide ED Sample and year-matched National Health Interview Survey, and stratified by age and sex. Trends were assessed using Joinpoint. RESULTS: HF inpatient admissions did not change in adults with diabetes between 2006 and 2013 (from 53.9 to 50.4 per 1000 persons; annual percent change (APC): -0.3 (95% CI -2.5 to 1.9) but increased from 50.4 to 62.3 between 2013 and 2017 (APC: 4.8 (95% CI 0.3 to 9.6)). In adults without diabetes, inpatient admissions initially declined (from 14.8 in 2006 to 12.9 in 2014; APC -2.3 (95% CI -3.2 to -1.2)) and then plateaued. Patterns were similar in men and women, but relative increases were greatest in young adults with diabetes. HF-related ED visits increased overall, in men and women, and in all age groups, but increases were greater in adults with (vs without) diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Causes of increased HF rates in hospital settings are unknown, and more detailed data are needed to investigate the aetiology and determine prevention strategies, particularly among adults with diabetes and especially young adults with diabetes.

IMPORTANCE: People who have been infected with or vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2 have reduced risk of subsequent infection, but the proportion of people in the US with SARS-CoV-2 antibodies from infection or vaccination is uncertain. OBJECTIVE: To estimate trends in SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence related to infection and vaccination in the US population. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In a repeated cross-sectional study conducted each month during July 2020 through May 2021, 17 blood collection organizations with blood donations from all 50 US states; Washington, DC; and Puerto Rico were organized into 66 study-specific regions, representing a catchment of 74% of the US population. For each study region, specimens from a median of approximately 2000 blood donors were selected and tested each month; a total of 1 594 363 specimens were initially selected and tested. The final date of blood donation collection was May 31, 2021. EXPOSURE: Calendar time. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Proportion of persons with detectable SARS-CoV-2 spike and nucleocapsid antibodies. Seroprevalence was weighted for demographic differences between the blood donor sample and general population. Infection-induced seroprevalence was defined as the prevalence of the population with both spike and nucleocapsid antibodies. Combined infection- and vaccination-induced seroprevalence was defined as the prevalence of the population with spike antibodies. The seroprevalence estimates were compared with cumulative COVID-19 case report incidence rates. RESULTS: Among 1 443 519 specimens included, 733 052 (50.8%) were from women, 174 842 (12.1%) were from persons aged 16 to 29 years, 292 258 (20.2%) were from persons aged 65 years and older, 36 654 (2.5%) were from non-Hispanic Black persons, and 88 773 (6.1%) were from Hispanic persons. The overall infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence estimate increased from 3.5% (95% CI, 3.2%-3.8%) in July 2020 to 20.2% (95% CI, 19.9%-20.6%) in May 2021; the combined infection- and vaccination-induced seroprevalence estimate in May 2021 was 83.3% (95% CI, 82.9%-83.7%). By May 2021, 2.1 SARS-CoV-2 infections (95% CI, 2.0-2.1) per reported COVID-19 case were estimated to have occurred. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Based on a sample of blood donations in the US from July 2020 through May 2021, vaccine- and infection-induced SARS-CoV-2 seroprevalence increased over time and varied by age, race and ethnicity, and geographic region. Despite weighting to adjust for demographic differences, these findings from a national sample of blood donors may not be representative of the entire US population.

More than 30 million people in the U.S. have diabetes, and approximately 7.4 million (30% of those with diabetes) regularly use one or more insulin formulations. For those who rely on it, i.e., all patients with type 1 diabetes and many patients with type 2 diabetes, insulin is a lifesaving medication. Between 2007 and 2016, the average annual total Medicare Part D payment on insulin per person increased by 358%, which resulted in an 81% increase for the out-of-pocket (OOP) payment (1). The consequences of unaffordability for insulin can be severe and costly. High OOP payments may force individuals to choose between purchasing their medication and paying for other necessities. To date, there are limited data on how total insulin payment and the corresponding OOP payment changed in the commercially insured population within the same period. The objective of this study is to delineate total and patients’ OOP payment trends for insulin among privately insured U.S. adults.

INTRODUCTION: Little is known about the role diabetes (type 1 (T1D) and type 2 (T2D)) plays in modifying prognosis among kidney transplant recipients. Here, we compare mortality among transplant recipients with T1D, T2D and non-diabetes-related end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We included 254 188 first-time single kidney transplant recipients aged ≥18 years from the US Renal Data System (2000-2018). Diabetes status, as primary cause of ESKD, was defined using International Classification of Disease 9th and 10th Clinical Modification codes. Multivariable-adjusted Cox regression models (right-censored) computed risk of death associated with T1D and T2D relative to non-diabetes. Trends in standardized mortality ratios (SMRs) (2000-2017), relative to the general US population, were assessed using Joinpoint regression. RESULTS: A total of 72 175 (28.4%) deaths occurred over a median survival time of 14.6 years. 5-year survival probabilities were 88%, 85% and 77% for non-diabetes, T1D and T2D, respectively. In adjusted models, mortality was highest for T1D (HR=1.95, (95% CI: 1.88 to 2.03)) and then T2D (1.65 (1.62 to 1.69)), as compared with non-diabetes. SMRs declined for non-diabetes, T1D, and T2D. However, in 2017, SMRs were 2.38 (2.31 to 2.45), 6.55 (6.07 to 7.06), and 3.82 (3.68 to 3.98), for non-diabetes, T1D and T2D, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In the USA, diabetes type is an important modifier in mortality risk among kidney transplant recipients with highest rates among people with T1D-related ESKD. Development of effective interventions that reduce excess mortality in transplant recipients with diabetes is needed, especially for T1D.

Estimates based on the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) showed that diabetes-related nontraumatic lower- extremity amputation (NLEA) rates declined among hospitalized patients between 2000 and 2009, followed by an increasing NLEA rate between 2009 and 2015 (1). The increase was largely observed in young and middle-aged adults (1). However, the NIS dataset includes only inpatient admissions; minor amputation surgeries that were performed in ambulatory settings were not included in these estimates. In addition, NIS data are event-based, and multiple amputations in the same person are considered as a new event each time. In the current study, we used the IBM MarketScan Commercial Database to examine NLEA occurring in inpatient and outpatient settings among privately insured adults 18–64 years of age with diabetes.