Three-question set from Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument adds independent prognostic information on cardiovascular outcomes: analysis of ALTITUDE trial

Aims/hypothesis

The self-administered Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument (MNSI) is used to diagnose diabetic peripheral neuropathy. We examined whether the MNSI might also provide information on risk of death and cardiovascular outcomes.

Methods

In this post hoc analysis of the Aliskiren Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Using Cardio-Renal Endpoints (ALTITUDE) trial, we divided 8463 participants with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD) and/or cardiovascular disease (CVD) into independent training (n = 3252) and validation (n = 5211) sets. In the training set, we identified specific questions that were independently associated with a cardiovascular composite outcome (cardiovascular death, resuscitated cardiac arrest, non-fatal myocardial infarction/stroke, heart failure hospitalisation). We then evaluated the performance of these questions in the validation set.

Results

In the training set, three questions (‘Are your legs numb?’, ‘Have you ever had an open sore on your foot?’ and ‘Do your legs hurt when you walk?’) were significantly associated with the cardiovascular composite outcome. In the validation set, after multivariable adjustment for key covariates, one or more positive responses (n = 3079, 59.1%) was associated with a higher risk of the cardiovascular composite outcome (HR 1.54 [95% CI 1.28, 1.85], p < 0.001), heart failure hospitalisation (HR 1.74 [95% CI 1.29, 2.35], p < 0.001), myocardial infarction (HR 1.81 [95% CI 1.23, 2.69], p = 0.003), stroke (HR 1.75 [95% CI 1.20, 2.56], p = 0.003) and three-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) (cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke) (HR 1.49 [95% CI 1.20, 1.85], p < 0.001) relative to no positive responses to all questions. Associations were stronger if participants answered positively to all three questions (n = 552, 11%). The addition of the total number of affirmative responses to existing models significantly improved Harrell’s C statistic for the cardiovascular composite outcome (0.70 vs 0.71, p = 0.010), continuous net reclassification improvement (+22% [+10%, +31%], p = 0.027) and integrated discrimination improvement (+0.9% [+0.4%, +2.1%], p = 0.007).

Conclusions/interpretation

We identified three questions from the MNSI that provide additional prognostic information for individuals with type 2 diabetes and CKD and/or CVD. If externally validated, these questions may be integrated into the clinical history to augment prediction of CV events in high-risk individuals with type 2 diabetes.