RESUMEN
Most data on the burden of diabetes and prediabetes are from countries where local infrastructure can support reliable estimates of the burden of non-communicable diseases. Countries in the Middle East and Africa, together with Russia, have a total population of almost 2 billion, but have been relatively overlooked by authors in this field. We reviewed the prevalence and drivers of prediabetes and diabetes across this large region. A large, and variable, burden of dysglycaemia exists, especially in Middle Eastern and North African countries, associated with high levels of obesity and sedentariness, with a generally lower prevalence in most other parts of Africa. The design and size of studies are highly variable, and more research to quantify the scale of the problem is needed. Local barriers to care relating to issues concerned with gender, consanguinity, lack of understanding of diabetes, lack of understanding of obesity as a health issue, and limited resource at a national level for tracking and intervention for diabetes and other non-communicable diseases. Lifestyle interventions with proven local cost-effectiveness, enhanced access to pharmacologic intervention, and societal interventions to promote better diet and more activity will be an important element in strategies to combat these adverse trends.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Salud Global , Promoción de la Salud/organización & administración , Estilo de Vida Saludable , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Estado Prediabético/terapia , Conducta de Reducción del Riesgo , Adulto , África/epidemiología , Comorbilidad , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/diagnóstico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Femenino , Humanos , Estilo de Vida , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Medio Oriente/epidemiología , Estado Prediabético/diagnóstico , Estado Prediabético/epidemiología , Prevalencia , Pronóstico , Factores Protectores , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Federación de Rusia/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: VIRTUE was a prospective, observational study assessing the effectiveness and safety of vildagliptin vs sulfonylureas (SUs) (both as monotherapy and in combination with metformin) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who fasted during Ramadan. A post hoc analysis was carried out to assess the effect of treatment with/without metformin and age (<65 years or ≥65 years). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were recruited from the Middle East and Asia. The primary end point was proportion of patients with one or more hypoglycemic event (HE) during Ramadan. Secondary end points included change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight, and safety. RESULTS: Overall, 684 patients received vildagliptin and 631 received SUs. Most patients received dual therapy with metformin (n=1,148) and were aged <65 years (n=1,189). A few patients experienced one or more HE with vildagliptin vs SU monotherapy (6.5% vs 14.5%) and with vildagliptin + metformin vs SUs + metformin (5.3% vs 20.6%); the latter achieved statistical significance (P<0.001) in both age subgroups (<65 years: 5.5% vs 18.4%, P<0.001; ≥65 years: 2.8% vs 30.9%, P<0.001). Vildagliptin was associated with numerically greater HbA1c and body weight reductions vs SUs, regardless of the therapy type or age. A higher proportion of SU- vs vildagliptin-treated patients experienced adverse events across all subgroups. CONCLUSION: A few patients experienced HEs with vildagliptin vs SUs regardless of age, and in patients on dual therapy. Vildagliptin ± metformin was also associated with good glycemic and weight control and was well tolerated. Vildagliptin might be a useful treatment option for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, particularly high-risk populations such as the elderly fasting during Ramadan.