Patient errors in use of injectable antidiabetic medications: A need for improved clinic-based education.

OBJECTIVES: This case series was designed to educate and inform health care professionals on the importance of providing adequate education on injectable antidiabetic agents and highlighting common medication errors related to diabetes care seen in ambulatory practice. The discussion following case descriptions will attempt to characterize patients who may be at high risk for these errors and identify ways to reduce the potential for error. CASE SUMMARY: In a diabetes care clinic, 4 cases were identified in which the patient experienced an escalation of insulin or other injectable antidiabetic medication doses with no improvement in glycemic control. Two of the cases involved failure to remove an inner needle cap because of a poor understanding of pen use. One case was attributed to switching formulations without providing proper education for an adult patient with a learning impairment, and the other was attributed to suboptimal absorption of insulin doses from lipohypertrophy. Three of the 4 cases resulted in multiple instances of hypoglycemia, and all 4 patients exhibited markedly improved glycemic control once the injection error was corrected. The clinic pharmacist played an essential role in identifying and correcting administration errors within an interdisciplinary team. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Based on the observations from the 4 cases, clinicians should be prompted to review antidiabetic medication injection techniques before initiation and periodically thereafter with their patients. Factors that should prompt further education include low health literacy, language barrier, initiation of medication by another provider, switch of medication product or formulation, obvious discrepancies between refill history and patient's self-reported adherence, observed lipohypertrophy, and escalation of doses without any improvement in glycemic control. A referral to the clinic pharmacist should be considered to provide more detailed education for these patients.

Clival paragangliomas: a report of two cases involving the midline skull base and review of the literature.

Head and neck paragangliomas are rare neuroendocrine tumors that arise from paraganglion cells of the parasympathetic nervous system. Paragangliomas arising from the midline skull base have only rarely been reported. Surgery is the mainstay of treatment and adjuvant radiation is often recommended. These tumors can rarely secrete metanephrines and normetanephrines which can complicate operative management. Here we present two cases of clival paragangliomas with unique clinical presentations and review the previous literature on skull base paragangliomas.

1,5-ANHYDROGLUCITOL AND NEONATAL COMPLICATIONS IN PREGNANCY COMPLICATED BY DIABETES.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the association of 1,5-anhydroglucitol (1,5-AG) with neonatal birth weight (NBW) and neonatal hypoglycemia (+NH) in pregnancies complicated by diabetes. METHODS: We assessed a retrospective cohort of 102 females, 17 with gestational diabetes (GDM), 48 with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), and 37 with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). 1,5-AG and glycated hemoglobin A1C (A1C) values throughout pregnancy were extracted. Linear regression was used to assess their association with NBWs z-scores adjusting for maternal age, ethnicity and body mass index (BMI). +NH was defined by a note in the infant record, glucose <1.7 mmol/L in the first 24 h, or <2.5 mmol/L in the first 48 h after birth. A t test or Welch's approximate t test was used to compare the mean 1,5-AG and A1C of mothers with +NH versus those without (-NH), adjusted for gestational age and analyzed by diabetes type and across trimesters. RESULTS: Mean 1,5-AG significantly differed across groups: T1DM 3.77 ± 2.82 µg/mL, T2DM 5.73 ± 4.38 µg/mL, GDM 8.89 ± 4.39 µg/mL (P<.0001), suggesting less glucose exposure in GDM relative to T1DM or T2DM. A negative linear association was found between mean 1,5-AG and z-scores (R= -0.28, P = .005. In contrast, the association between mean A1C and z-scores was weaker (R = 0.15, P = .14). The mean 1,5-AG tended to be lower in the +NH cohort versus -NH (P = .08), and this was statistically significant (P = .01) among subjects with GDM. CONCLUSION: The association of 1,5-AG with complications related to glycemic exposure supports the notion of its utility as an adjunct glycemic biomarker in pregnancies complicated by diabetes and across trimesters.

Management of Diabetes in the Patient With Cancer.

During JADPRO Live Virtual 2020, Lorena A. Wright, MD, FACE, reviewed the principles of antihyperglycemic management and discussed the importance of working as a team to collaborate in the management of patients with cancer.

Impact of differences in glucose tolerance on the prevalence of a negative insulinogenic index.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the prevalence of a negative insulinogenic index (change in plasma insulin/change in plasma glucose from 0 to 30 min) from an oral glucose tolerance test according to glucose tolerance category. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the San Antonio Heart Study (n=2494), Japanese American Community Diabetes Study (JACDS; n=594) and Genetics of NIDDM Study (n=1519) were examined. Glucose tolerance was defined by ADA criteria. RESULTS: In the combined cohort, the prevalence of a negative insulinogenic index was significantly higher in diabetes 20/616 (3.2%) compared to normal glucose tolerance 43/2667 (1.6%) (p<0.05). Longitudinally, in the JACDS cohort, the prevalence did not change from baseline (3/594; 0.5%) to 5 (4/505; 0.7%) and 10 years (8/426; 1.9%) (p=0.9) and no subject had a repeat negative insulinogenic index. CONCLUSIONS: A negative insulinogenic index occurs at a low prevalence across glucose tolerance categories although more often in diabetes, but without recurrence over time.

Colesevelam improves oral but not intravenous glucose tolerance by a mechanism independent of insulin sensitivity and ß-cell function.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the mechanism by which the bile acid sequestrant colesevelam improves glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed a frequently sampled intravenous glucose tolerance test (FSIGT) with minimal model analysis and a meal tolerance test (MTT) in 20 subjects with impaired fasting glucose (11 men, 9 women; mean age 60.7 ± 1.9 years, BMI 29.4 ± 0.9 kg/m(2)) in a single-blind study after 2 weeks of placebo treatment and 8 weeks of colesevelam 3.75 g daily. From these tests, insulin sensitivity, ß-cell function, and glucose tolerance were determined, along with gastrointestinal peptide levels during the MTT. RESULTS: Fasting plasma glucose and HbA(1c) decreased with colesevelam (from 5.9 ± 0.1 to 5.7 ± 0.1 mmol/L, P < 0.05, and from 5.86 ± 0.06 to 5.76 ± 0.06%, P = 0.01, respectively), but fasting insulin did not change. Colesevelam had no effect on any FSIGT measures. In contrast, the MTT incremental area under the curve (iAUC) for both glucose (from 249.3 ± 28.5 to 198.8 ± 23.6 mmol/L · min, P < 0.01) and insulin (from 20,130 [13,542-35,292] to 13,086 [9,804-21,138] pmol/L · min, P < 0.05) decreased with colesevelam. However, the ratio of iAUC insulin to iAUC glucose was not changed. iAUC for cholecystokinin (CCK) increased (from 43.2 [0-130.1] to 127.1 [47.2-295.2] pmol/L · min, P < 0.01), while iAUC for fibroblast growth factor 19 decreased (from 11,185 [1,346-17,661] to 2,093 [673-6,707] pg/mL · min, P < 0.01) with colesevelam. However, iAUC for glucagon, glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide, and glucagon-like peptide 1 did not change. CONCLUSIONS: Colesevelam improves oral but not intravenous glucose tolerance without changing insulin sensitivity, ß-cell function, or incretins. This effect may be at least partially explained by the colesevelam-induced increase in CCK.