Risk factors for hypoglycaemia in non-critical hospitalised diabetic patients.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the risk factors for hypoglycaemia in patients with diabetes on general hospital wards based on a systematic review of the literature since 2013 and meta-analysis. METHODS: Systematic review of the literature focused on the conceptual and methodological aspects of the PRISMA Declaration. The search carried out in Pub Med, Web of Science, Medline, Scielo, Lilacs, OVID, grey literature and Google Academic focused on risk factors for hypoglycaemia in patients with diabetes on general hospital wards. The CASPe (Critical Appraisal Skills Programme Spanish) tool was applied for quality control. RESULTS: From 805 references, 70 potentially eligible articles were identified for review of abstracts and full text. Finally, according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, seven studies with 554,601 patients of Asian, European and North American ethnicity were selected. A meta-analysis performed using the random effects model found an association between the presence of hypoglycaemia and: the use of insulin (OR 2.89 [95% CI: 1.8-4.5]); the use of long-acting insulin (OR 2.27 [95% CI: 1.8-2.8]) or fast-acting insulin (OR 1.4 [95% CI: 1.18-1.85]); nasogastric tube feeding (OR 1.75 [95% CI: 1.33-2.3]); chronic kidney disease (OR 1.65 [95% CI: 1.14-2.38]); congestive heart failure (OR 1.36 [95% CI: 1.10-1.68]); and elevated levels of glycosylated haemoglobin (OR 1.59 [95% CI: 1.32-1.91]). CONCLUSION: The factors associated with the risk of hypoglycaemia in non-critically ill hospitalised patients with type 2 diabetes were: use of any insulin; nasogastric tube feeding; elevated glycosylated haemoglobin levels; history of congestive heart failure; and chronic kidney disease.

Precision Medicine to Redefine Insulin Secretion and Monogenic Diabetes-Randomized Controlled Trial (PRISM-RCT) in Chinese patients with young-onset diabetes: design, methods and baseline characteristics.

INTRODUCTION: We designed and implemented a patient-centered, data-driven, holistic care model with evaluation of its impacts on clinical outcomes in patients with young-onset type 2 diabetes (T2D) for which there is a lack of evidence-based practice guidelines. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In this 3-year Precision Medicine to Redefine Insulin Secretion and Monogenic Diabetes-Randomized Controlled Trial, we evaluate the effects of a multicomponent care model integrating use of information and communication technology (Joint Asia Diabetes Evaluation (JADE) platform), biogenetic markers and patient-reported outcome measures in patients with T2D diagnosed at ≤40 years of age and aged ≤50 years. The JADE-PRISM group received 1 year of specialist-led team-based management using treatment algorithms guided by biogenetic markers (genome-wide single-nucleotide polymorphism arrays, exome-sequencing of 34 monogenic diabetes genes, C-peptide, autoantibodies) to achieve multiple treatment goals (glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <6.2%, blood pressure <120/75 mm Hg, low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol <1.2 mmol/L, waist circumference <80 cm (women) or <85 cm (men)) in a diabetes center setting versus usual care (JADE-only). The primary outcome is incidence of all diabetes-related complications. RESULTS: In 2020-2021, 884 patients (56.6% men, median (IQR) diabetes duration: 7 (3-12) years, current/ex-smokers: 32.5%, body mass index: 28.40±5.77 kg/m2, HbA1c: 7.52%±1.66%, insulin-treated: 27.7%) were assigned to JADE-only (n=443) or JADE-PRISM group (n=441). The profiles of the whole group included positive family history (74.7%), general obesity (51.4%), central obesity (79.2%), hypertension (66.7%), dyslipidemia (76.4%), albuminuria (35.4%), estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 (4.0%), retinopathy (13.8%), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (5.2%), cancer (3.1%), emotional distress (26%-38%) and suboptimal adherence (54%) with 5-item EuroQol for Quality of Life index of 0.88 (0.87-0.96). Overall, 13.7% attained ≥3 metabolic targets defined in secondary outcomes. In the JADE-PRISM group, 4.5% had pathogenic/likely pathogenic variants of monogenic diabetes genes; 5% had autoantibodies and 8.4% had fasting C-peptide <0.2 nmol/L. Other significant events included low/large birth weight (33.4%), childhood obesity (50.7%), mental illness (10.3%) and previous suicide attempts (3.6%). Among the women, 17.3% had polycystic ovary syndrome, 44.8% required insulin treatment during pregnancy and 17.3% experienced adverse pregnancy outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Young-onset diabetes is characterized by complex etiologies with comorbidities including mental illness and lifecourse events. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04049149.

Real-world community hospital hyperglycemia management in noncritically ill, type 2 diabetic patients: a comparison between basal-bolus insulin and correctional insulin.

Purpose: This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of two insulin regimens for inpatient hyperglycemia management: combination short-plus long-acting insulin (basal-bolus insulin regimen, BBIR) vs. short-acting insulin only (correctional insulin only regimen, CIOR). Methods: Chart reviews identified noncritically ill patients with pre-existing type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving insulin injections. Study participants (N = 138) were divided into BBIR (N = 104) and CIOR (N = 34) groups. Data for the entire duration of each patient's stay were analyzed. Results: The primary outcome of percent hyperglycemic days was higher in BBIR vs. CIOR (3.97 ± 0.33% vs. 1.22 ± 0.38%). The safety outcome of percent hypoglycemic events was not different between BBIR and CIOR (0.78 ± 0.22% vs. 0.53 ± 0.37%). Regarding secondary outcomes, the percentage of euglycemic days was lower in BBIR vs. CIOR (26.74 ± 2.97% vs. 40.98 ± 5.91%). Overall blood glucose (BG) and daily insulin dose were higher in BBIR vs. CIOR (231.43 ± 5.37 vs. 195.55 ± 6.25 mg/dL and 41.36 ± 3.07 vs. 5.02 ± 0.68 units, respectively). Insulin regimen-associated differences in hyperglycemia and daily insulin dose persisted after adjusting for covariates. Conclusion: Our observations linking BBIR to worse glycemic outcomes differ from those reported in the randomized controlled Rabbit 2 and Rabbit 2 Surgery trials. This discrepancy can be partly explained by the fact that BBIR patients displayed worse glycemic baselines. Also, there was no diabetes stewardship team to monitor BG and modify insulin therapy, which is relevant since achieving euglycemia in BBIR patients requires more dose adjustments. This study highlights challenges with standard inpatient glycemic management and calls for further research assessing the benefits of pharmacist-led diabetes stewardship.

Time In Tight Range in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes: A cross-sectional observational single centre study evaluating efficacy of new advanced technologies.

INTRODUCTION: Early and tight glycaemic control is crucial to prevent long-term complications of Type 1 Diabetes (T1D). The aim of our study was to compare glucose metrics, including Time In Tight Range (TITR), in a real-world setting. METHODS: We performed a single-centre cross-sectional study in 534 children and adolescents with T1D. Participants were divided into four groups (multiple daily injections + real-time Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), multiple daily injections + intermittently scanned CGM, sensor augmented pump (SAP), and Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop (AHCL). Demographical and clinical data were collected and analysed. RESULTS: The group with AHCL showed significantly higher Time In Range (TIR) (71.31% ± 10.88) than SAP (57.82% ± 14.98; p < 0.001), MDI + rtCGM (54.56% ± 17.04; p < 0.001) and MDI + isCGM (52.17% ± 19.36; p < 0.001) groups with a lower Time Above Range (p < 0.001). The group with AHCL also showed lower Time Below Range than MDI + isCGM and SAP groups (p < 0.01). The overall TITR was 37% ± 14 with 19% of participants who reached a TITR ≥50% with a mean TIR of 81%. AHCL had significantly higher TITR (45.46% ± 11.77) than SAP (36.25% ± 13.53; p < 0.001), MDI + rtCGM (34.03% ± 13.89; p < 0.001) and MDI + isCGM (33.37% ± 15.84; p < 0.001) groups with a lower Coefficient of Variation (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Our study indicates that AHCL ensures a better glycaemic control with an improvement in both TIR and TITR, along with a reduction in CV. Implementation of automated insulin delivery systems should be considered in the treatment of children and adolescents with T1D.

Two-sample Mendelian randomization studies revealed a causal relationship between insulin use and osteoporosis: An observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate causal associations between diabetes, insulin treatment and osteoporosis using LDSC analysis with a 2-way Mendelian randomization study. METHODS: LDSC analysis was used to estimate the likelihood-scale heritability of the genome-wide association study used with genetic correlation between the 2 genome-wide association study used. Then a 2-sample Mendelian randomization study was performed using 3 methods including inverse variance weighted, MR Egger, and weighted median. RESULTS: The genetic correlation between diabetes, insulin treatment (h2_Z = 3.70, P = 2.16e-4), osteoporosis (h2_Z = 4.93, h2_p = 8.13e-7) and genes was significant. There was a significant genetic correlation (rg = 0.122, P = 0.0211). There was a causal association between diabetes, insulin treatment and osteoporosis [P = 0.003754, OR (95%CI) = 0.998876 (0.998116-0.999636)], while no causal association existed between osteoporosis and insulin use (P = 0.998116-0.999636) causal association existed (P = 0.333244). CONCLUSION: There was a strong genetic correlation between diabetes, insulin treatment and osteoporosis, a causal association between diabetes, insulin treatment and osteoporosis, and no causal association between osteoporosis and diabetes, insulin treatment.

A Rare Case of Hyperglycemia, Ketoacidosis, and Central Facial Paralysis in a Newly-Diagnosed Diabetic Woman.

BACKGROUND Diabetes mellitus is a chronic disease that occurs when the pancreas does not produce enough insulin or when the body is unable to effectively use the insulin it produces. Uncontrolled diabetes mellitus is usually associated with neurological manifestations, such as hemichorea, focal epileptic seizures, peripheral neuropathy, and peripheral facial paralysis. This report describes a 59-year-old woman presenting with hyperglycemia and ketoacidosis due to newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus, as well as a temporary episode of central facial paralysis, which regressed within a few days after medical treatment and metabolic correction. CASE REPORT A 59-year-old patient with hypertension and a family history of diabetes mellitus presented with polyuro-polydipsic syndrome and signs of metabolic ketoacidosis, with an elevated anion gap, compatible with newly discovered type 1 diabetes mellitus. Six hours after admission, we noted the abrupt onset of left central facial paralysis, with no brain damage shown on magnetic resonance imaging. Initially, the diagnosis was transient ischemic attack. After a second, normal cerebral magnetic resonance image on the fourth day, and clinical improvement on the fifth day after metabolic correction by insulin therapy and rehydration, the diagnosis of a regressive central facial paralysis was retained. CONCLUSIONS Central facial paralysis in diabetic ketoacidosis is a rare neuroendocrine entity. The pathophysiological mechanisms that can explain the occurrence of central facial paralysis are not yet described and require further investigation. This report highlights the importance of diagnosis, early management of hyperglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis, and reversibility of central facial paralysis after treatment.

Efficacy and safety of advanced hybrid closed loop systems in children with type 1 diabetes younger than 6 years.

Background: Tight glycemic control is essential for the normal growth and development of preschool children. The aim of our study was to evaluate the impact of advanced hybrid closed loop (AHCL) systems in a real-life setting in children younger than 6 years. Methods: We conducted a two-center prospective study. We enrolled 19 patients with a median age at disease onset of 2.6 years [interquartile range (IQR) 1.6; 4.4] and a median disease duration of 1.4 years (IQR 0.9; 2.8) who were switched to AHCL from multiple daily injections or open-loop insulin therapy and with a 6-month follow-up. Clinical data, sensor glycemic metrics, and pump settings were collected and analyzed. Results: After 6 months of follow-up, there was a significant reduction in median HbA1c (p = 0.0007) and glucose management indicator (p = 0.03). A reduction in both mild (>180 mg/dL) (p = 0.04) and severe (>250 mg/dL) (p = 0.01) hyperglycemia was observed after 1 month of auto mode, and in mild hyperglycemia, it persisted up to 6 months (p = 0.02). A small increase in time below range (<70 mg/dL) was observed (p = 0.04) without a significant difference in time <54 mg/dL (p = 0.73). Time in range increased significantly, reaching a 10% increment (p = 0.03) compared with baseline. A significant reduction in the average sensor glucose was observed (p = 0.01) while coefficient of glucose variability (CV%) remained stable (p = 0.12). No episodes of ketoacidosis or severe hypoglycemia have been recorded. Conclusion: AHCL systems are effective and safe for children younger than 6 years and should be considered as a valid therapeutic option from diabetes onset.

Diabetes technology: A primer for clinicians.

Diabetes technology is evolving rapidly and is changing the way both patients and clinicians approach the management of diabetes. With more devices gaining US Food and Drug Administration approval and insurance coverage expanding, these new technologies are being widely adopted by people living with diabetes. We provide a summary of the commonly available devices in the market today that clinicians will likely encounter. This includes continuous glucose monitors (CGMs); connected insulin pens, caps, and buttons; and insulin pumps. Clinicians' awareness of and familiarity with this technology will enhance its accessibility for patients with diabetes.

Gestational diabetes mellitus: relationship of adverse outcomes with severity of disease.

AIMS: To derive accurate estimates of risk of maternal and neonatal complications in women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and to investigate the association of the effect size of these risks on subgroups of GDM managed with dietary modification, metformin and insulin therapy. METHODS: This was a large retrospective cohort study undertaken at a large maternity unit in the United Kingdom between January 2010 and June 2022. We included singleton pregnancies that booked at our unit at 11-13 weeks' gestation. The rates of maternal and neonatal complications in pregnancies with GDM that were managed by a multidisciplinary team (MDT) in the specialist high-risk clinic were compared to those in non-diabetic pregnancies. We stratified pregnancies with GDM into those that were managed with diet, metformin and insulin to pregnancies without diabetes. Logistic regression analysis was carried out to determine risks of pregnancy complications in pregnancies with GDM and its treatment subgroups. Risks were expressed as absolute risks (AR) and odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence intervals [CI]). Forest plots were used to graphically demonstrate risks. RESULTS: The study population included 51,211 singleton pregnancies including 2089 (4.1%) with GDM and 49,122 (95.9%) controls without diabetes. In pregnancies with GDM, there were 1247 (59.7%) pregnancies managed with diet, 451 (21.6%) with metformin and 391 (18.7%) who required insulin for maintaining euglycaemia. Pregnancies with GDM had higher maternal age, body mass index (BMI), higher rates of Afro-Caribbean and South Asian racial origin and higher rates of chronic hypertension. In pregnancies with GDM compared to non-diabetic controls, there was an increased rate of preterm delivery, delivery of LGA neonate, polyhydramnios, preeclampsia, need for IOL, elective and emergency CS and PPH whereas the rate of delivery of SGA neonates and likelihood of an unassisted vaginal delivery were lower. In pregnancies with GDM, there is significantly increased risk of maternal and neonatal complications in those that require insulin compared to those that are managed on dietary modification alone. CONCLUSIONS: There is a linear association between the risk of adverse outcomes and the severity of GDM with those on insulin treatment demonstrating an increased association with complications compared to those that have milder disease requiring only dietary modification.

Influence of obesity on blood glucose control using continuous glucose monitoring data among patients with type 1 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: The global increase in the prevalence rates of overweight or obesity has also affected patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D), where this disease had traditionally been associated with a lean phenotype. On the other hand, the effect of obesity on new glycemic control metrics obtained from continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in T1D is poorly understood. We wanted to assess whether there is any relationship between BMI (body mass index) and the different CGM metrics or HbA1c. METHODS: Two hundred and twenty-five patients with T1D (47.1% ♀, mean age 42.9±14.7 years) with a CGM for a minimum of 6 months were analysed by downloading their CGM and collecting clinical and anthropometric variables. RESULTS: 35.1% (79/225) of the T1D patients had overweight and 17.3% (39/225) lived with obesity, while the remaining 47.6% had a normal weight. A negative correlation was found between GMI (glucose management indicator) and BMI (-0.2; p=0.008) and HbA1c (-0.2; p=0.01). In contrast, a positive correlation was observed between the total dose of insulin and the BMI (0.3; p<0.0001). No significant correlations were found between BMI and other CGM metrics. CONCLUSIONS: Overweight or obesity do not imply worse glycemic control in patients with T1D or less use of CGM. Possibly, and in order to achieve a good glycemic control, more units of insulin are necessary in these patients which, in turn, makes weight control more difficult.

Impact of Self-Monitoring Blood Glucose on Glycaemic Control Among Insulin-Treated Patients With Diabetes Mellitus in Northeastern Tanzania: A Randomised Controlled Trial.

Introduction: Tracking of blood glucose levels by patients and care providers remains an integral component in the management of diabetes mellitus (DM). Evidence, primarily from high-income countries, has illustrated the effectiveness of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in controlling DM. However, there is limited data on the feasibility and impact of SMBG among patients in the rural regions of sub-Saharan Africa. This study is aimed at assessing SMBG, its adherence, and associated factors on the effect of glycaemic control among insulin-treated patients with DM in northeastern Tanzania. Materials and Methods: This was a single-blinded, randomised clinical trial conducted from December 2022 to May 2023. The study included patients with DM who had already been on insulin treatment for at least 3 months. A total of 85 participants were recruited into the study and categorised into the intervention and control groups by a simple randomization method using numbered envelopes. The intervention group received glucose metres, test strips, logbooks, and extensive SMBG training. The control group received the usual care at the outpatient clinic. Each participant was followed for a period of 12 weeks, with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and fasting blood glucose (FBG) being checked both at the beginning and at the end of the study follow-up. The primary and secondary outcomes were adherence to the SMBG schedule, barriers associated with the use of SMBG, and the ability to self-manage DM, logbook data recording, and change in HbA1c. The analysis included descriptive statistics, paired t-tests, and logistic regression. Results: Eighty participants were analysed: 39 in the intervention group and 41 in the control group. In the intervention group, 24 (61.5%) of patients displayed favourable adherence to SMBG, as evidenced by tests documented in the logbooks and glucometer readings. Education on SMBG was significantly associated with adherence. Structured SMBG improved glycaemic control with a HbA1c reduction of -1.01 (95% confidence interval (CI) -1.39, -0.63) in the intervention group within 3 months from baseline compared to controls of 0.18 (95% CI -0.07, 0.44) (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Structured SMBG positively impacted glycaemic control among insulin-treated patients with DM in the outpatient clinic. The results suggest that implementing a structured testing programme can lead to significant reductions in HbA1c and FBG levels. Trial Registration: Pan African Clinical Trials Registry identifier: PACTR202402642155729.

Novel Autologous Dendritic Cell Therapy AVT001 for Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: CD8+ T regulatory (Treg) cells that recognize the nonclassical class 1b molecule Qa-1/human leukocyte antigen E (Q/E CD8+ Treg cells) are important in maintaining self-tolerance. We sought to investigate the role that these T cells play in type 1 diabetes (T1D) pathogenesis and whether an intervention targeting this mechanism may delay T1D progression. METHODS: We conducted a phase 1/2, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the autologous dendritic cell therapy AVT001 that included participants at least 16 years of age, within 1 year of T1D diagnosis, and with ex vivo evidence of a defect in Q/E CD8+ Treg function. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to AVT001 or placebo, which was administered in three monthly intravenous infusions. The primary end point was safety; efficacy end points included changes from baseline in C-peptide area under the curve (AUC) during a 4-hour mixed meal, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), and insulin dose. RESULTS: Sixteen patients received AVT001, and nine received placebo. Similar rates and severity of adverse events were observed in both groups. None of the patients in the AVT001 group had serious adverse events through visit day 360. Compared with placebo, treatment with ATV001 was associated with less decline from baseline log-transformed C-peptide AUC (nmol/l), with the treatment effect between AVT001 and placebo at day 150 of 0.09 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.03 to 0.15) and at day 360 of 0.10 (95% CI, 0.04 to 0.15). No clear differences in change in HbA1c and insulin dose from baseline were observed between groups. Estimated treatment effects of AVT001 versus placebo at day 360 were -0.17% (95% CI, -0.60 to 0.26%) for HbA1c and -0.06 U/kg/day (95% CI, -0.14 to 0.02) for daily insulin dose. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 1/2 trial, AVT001 did not result in dose-limiting adverse events. Potential signals of efficacy observed here warrant further evaluation in a fully powered trial. (Funded by Avotres Inc. and the Division of Diabetes, Endocrinology, and Metabolic Diseases; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03895996.).

Recommendations for recognizing, risk stratifying, treating, and managing children and adolescents with hypoglycemia.

There has been continuous progress in diabetes management over the last few decades, not least due to the widespread dissemination of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and automated insulin delivery systems. These technological advances have radically changed the daily lives of people living with diabetes, improving the quality of life of both children and their families. Despite this, hypoglycemia remains the primary side-effect of insulin therapy. Based on a systematic review of the available scientific evidence, this paper aims to provide evidence-based recommendations for recognizing, risk stratifying, treating, and managing patients with hypoglycemia. The objective of these recommendations is to unify the behavior of pediatric diabetologists with respect to the timely recognition and prevention of hypoglycemic episodes and the correct treatment of hypoglycemia, especially in patients using CGM or advanced hybrid closed-loop systems. All authors have long experience in the specialty and are members of the Italian Society of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetology. The goal of treating hypoglycemia is to raise blood glucose above 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) and to prevent further decreases. Oral glucose at a dose of 0.3 g/kg (0.1 g/kg for children using "smart pumps" or hybrid closed loop systems in automated mode) is the preferred treatment for the conscious individual with blood glucose <70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L), although any form of carbohydrate (e.g., sucrose, which consists of glucose and fructose, or honey, sugary soft drinks, or fruit juice) containing glucose may be used. Using automatic insulin delivery systems, the oral glucose dose can be decreased to 0.1 g/kg. Practical flow charts are included to aid clinical decision-making. Although representing the official position of the Italian Society of Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetology (ISPED), these guidelines are applicable to the global audience and are especially pertinent in the era of CGM and other advanced technologies.

Treating Type 2 Diabetes With Early, Intensive, Multimodal Pharmacotherapy: Real-World Evidence From an International Collaborative Database.

Aims: We compared the glycaemic and cardiorenal effects of combination therapy involving metformin, pioglitazone, sodium-glucose-linked-cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i), and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) versus a more conventional glucocentric treatment approach combining sulphonylureas (SU) and insulin from the point of type 2 diabetes (T2D) diagnosis. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study using the Global Collaborative Network in TriNetX. We included individuals prescribed metformin, pioglitazone, an SGLT2i, and a GLP-1 RA for at least 1-year duration, within 3 years of a T2D diagnosis, and compared with individuals prescribed insulin and a SU within the same temporal pattern. Individuals were followed up for 3 years. Results: We propensity score-matched (PSM) for 26 variables. A total of 1762 individuals were included in the final analysis (n = 881 per cohort). At 3-years, compared to the insulin/SU group, the metformin/pioglitazone/SGLT2i/GLP-1 RA group had a lower risk of heart failure (HR 0.34, 95% CI 0.13-0.87, p = 0.018), acute coronary syndrome (HR 0.29, 95% CI 0.12-0.67, p = 0.002), stroke (HR 0.17, 95% CI 0.06-0.49, p < 0.001), chronic kidney disease (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.25-0.99, p = 0.042), and hospitalisation (HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.46-0.77, p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this real-world study, early, intensive polytherapy, targeting the distinct pathophysiological defects in T2D, is associated with significantly more favourable cardiorenal outcomes, compared to insulin and SU therapy.

Maternal poor glycemic control increases risk of neonatal left ventricular hypertrophy.

BACKGROUND: Left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) is an important complication of infants of diabetic mothers (IDMs). However, the defined factors, such as the influence of glycemic control, insulin administration of diabetic mothers and large for gestational age (LGA) in infants, are largely unknown on the incidence of LVH. Therefore, this study aimed to evaluate the prevalence of maternal and neonatal risk factors associated with LVH in IDMs. METHODS: This prospective analytic study was conducted at tertiary care hospitals in a 1-year period. Inborn IDMs were enrolled, and ventricular hypertrophy was identified by 2D echocardiography in the first 72 hours after birth. RESULTS: A total of 160 IDMs met the inclusion criteria, 33 (20.6%) of which had LVH. The incidence of infants with LVH born to mothers with poor glycemic control (fasting blood sugar >95 mg/dL) was significantly elevated than those with good glycemic control (45.5% vs. 14.4%, P<0.001). Twelve IDMs (12/33, 36.5%) of LVH and 17 IDMs (17/127, 13.4%) of non-LVH were LGA. IDMs with LVH, compared those with non-LVH, had significantly increased left ventricular (LV) geometry; IVSd (6.5±0.8 vs. 4.0±0, 7 mm), LV IDd (16.8±3.3 mm vs. 18.4±1.1), left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) (68.3±8.5% vs. 62.9±17.5%), left ventricular fraction shortening (LVFS) (35.9±6.6% vs. 32.2±5.5%), LV mass (15.3±11.6 vs. 9.3±2.5 g) and LV mass index (66.2±17.5 vs. 46.6±9.7 g/m2), all with P<0.001. There was significant correlation in LV mass with infants' weight, height and body surface area (BSA) (r=0.408, 0.337 and 0.424, respectively; P<0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The prevalence of neonatal ventricular hypertrophy in IDMs was 20.6%. Maternal poor glycemic control and LGA status in IDMs were dominant risk factors of LVH.

Factors associated with glycemic control in patients with T2DM: evidence from a cross-sectional study in China.

OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the factors influencing glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: Baseline data, encompassing basic information, lifestyle habits, and treatment of 305 T2DM patients from March 2021 to January 2023, were collected and analyzed using SPSS 26.0 software. RESULTS: Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses identified insulin therapy (OR = 2.233; 95%Cl = 1.013-4.520; P = 0.026) and regular clinic visits (OR = 0.567; 95%Cl = 0.330-0.973; P = 0.040) as independent factors influencing glycemic control. No observed interactions between the two variables were noted. CONCLUSION: History of insulin therapy and regular clinic visits were significantly and independently associated with glycated hemoglobin control in T2DM patients. Tailored interventions based on individual circumstances are recommended to optimize glycemic control.

Real-world effectiveness of early insulin therapy on the incidence of cardiovascular events in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes.

Early insulin therapy is capable to achieve glycemic control and restore ß-cell function in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D), but its effect on cardiovascular outcomes in these patients remains unclear. In this nationwide real-world study, we analyzed electronic health record data from 19 medical centers across China between 1 January 2000, and 26 May 2022. We included 5424 eligible patients (mean age 56 years, 2176 women/3248 men) who were diagnosed T2D within six months and did not have prior cardiovascular disease. Multivariable Cox regression models were used to estimate the associations of early insulin therapy (defined as the first-line therapy for at least two weeks in newly diagnosed T2D patients) with the incidence of major cardiovascular events including coronary heart disease (CHD), stroke, and hospitalization for heart failure (HF). During 17,158 persons years of observation, we documented 834 incident CHD cases, 719 stroke cases, and 230 hospitalized cases for HF. Newly diagnosed T2D patients who received early insulin therapy, compared with those who did not receive such treatment, had 31% lower risk of incident stroke, and 28% lower risk of hospitalization for HF. No significant difference in the risk of CHD was observed. We found similar results when repeating the aforesaid analysis in a propensity-score matched population of 4578 patients and with inverse probability of treatment weighting models. These findings suggest that early insulin therapy in newly diagnosed T2D may have cardiovascular benefits by reducing the risk of incident stroke and hospitalization for HF.

MDI versus CSII in Chinese adults with type 1 diabetes in a real-world situation: based on propensity score matching method.

BACKGROUND: Compared with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI), continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) is significantly more expensive and has not been widely used in Chinese type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) patients. So there are still significant knowledge gaps regarding clinical and patient-reported outcomes in China. AIMS: This study aims to compare the glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C), insulin therapy related quality of life (ITR-QOL), fear of hypoglycemia (FOH) of adult T1DM patients treated with MDI and CSII based on propensity score matching in real-world conditions in China. METHODS: Four hundred twenty adult T1DM patients who were treated with MDI or CSII continuously for more than 12 months in a national metabolic center from June 2021 to June 2023 were selected as the study subjects. Their QOL and FOH were evaluated with Insulin Therapy Related Quality of Life Measure Questionnaire-Chinese version (ITR-QOL-CV) and the Chinese Version Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-Worry Scale (CHFSII-WS), and their HbA1C were collected at the same time. Potential confounding variables between the two groups were matched using propensity score matching. RESULTS: Of the 420 patients included in the study, 315 were in MDI group and 105 were in CSII group. 102 pairs were successfully matched. After matching, the total score of ITR-QOL-CV scale in CSII group was significantly higher than that in MDI group (87.08 ± 13.53 vs. 80.66 ± 19.25, P = 0.006). Among them, the dimensions of daily life, social life, and psychological state were all statistically different (P < 0.05). The scores of CHFSII-WS (8.33 ± 3.49 vs. 11.77 ± 5.27, P = 0.003) and HbA1C (7.19 ± 1.33% vs. 7.71 ± 1.93%, P = 0.045) in CSII group were lower than those in MDI group. CONCLUSIONS: 25.0% of T1DM adults are treated with CSII. Compared with adult T1DM patients treated with MDI, those treated with CSII have higher ITR-QOL, less FoH, and better control of HbA1C in real-world conditions in China. Therefore, regardless of economic factors, CSII is recommended for adult T1DM patients to optimize the therapeutic effect and outcomes.

Simple meal announcements and pramlintide delivery versus carbohydrate counting in type 1 diabetes with automated fast-acting insulin aspart delivery: a randomised crossover trial in Montreal, Canada.

BACKGROUND: In type 1 diabetes, carbohydrate counting is the standard of care to determine prandial insulin needs, but it can negatively affect quality of life. We developed a novel insulin-and-pramlintide closed-loop system that replaces carbohydrate counting with simple meal announcements. METHODS: We performed a randomised crossover trial assessing 14 days of (1) insulin-and-pramlintide closed-loop system with simple meal announcements, (2) insulin-and-placebo closed-loop system with carbohydrate counting, and (3) insulin-and-placebo closed-loop system with simple meal announcements. Participants were recruited at McGill University Health Centre (Montreal, QC, Canada). Eligible participants were adults (aged ≥18 years) and adolescents (aged 12-17 years) with type 1 diabetes for at least 1 year. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1:1:1 ratio to a sequence of the three interventions, with faster insulin aspart used in all interventions. Each intervention was separated by a 14-45-day wash-out period, during which participants reverted to their usual insulin. During simple meal announcement interventions, participants triggered a prandial bolus at mealtimes based on a programmed fixed meal size, whereas during carbohydrate counting interventions, participants manually entered the carbohydrate content of the meal and an algorithm calculated the prandial bolus based on insulin-to-carbohydrate ratio. Two primary comparisons were predefined: the percentage of time in range (glucose 3·9-10·0 mmol/L) with a non-inferiority margin of 6·25% (non-inferiority comparison); and the mean Emotional Burden subscale score of the Diabetes Distress Scale (superiority comparison), comparing the insulin-and-placebo system with carbohydrate counting minus the insulin-and-pramlintide system with simple meal announcements. Analyses were performed on a modified intention-to-treat basis, excluding participants who did not complete all interventions. Serious adverse events were assessed in all participants. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04163874. FINDINGS: 32 participants were enrolled between Feb 14, 2020, and Oct 5, 2021; two participants withdrew before study completion. 30 participants were analysed, including 15 adults (nine female, mean age 39·4 years [SD 13·8]) and 15 adolescents (eight female, mean age 15·7 years [1·3]). Non-inferiority of the insulin-and-pramlintide system with simple meal announcements relative to the insulin-and-placebo system with carbohydrate counting was reached (difference -5% [95% CI -9·0 to -0·7], non-inferiority p<0·0001). No statistically significant difference was found in the mean Emotional Burden score between the insulin-and-pramlintide system with simple meal announcements and the insulin-and-placebo system with carbohydrate counting (difference 0·01 [SD 0·82], p=0·93). With the insulin-and-pramlintide system with simple meal announcements, 14 (47%) participants reported mild gastrointestinal symptoms and two (7%) reported moderate symptoms, compared with two (7%) participants reporting mild gastrointestinal symptoms on the insulin-and-placebo system with carbohydrate counting. No serious adverse events occurred. INTERPRETATION: The insulin-and-pramlintide system with simple meal announcements alleviated carbohydrate counting without degrading glucose control, although quality of life as measured by the Emotional Burden score was not improved. Longer and larger studies with this novel approach are warranted. FUNDING: Juvenile Diabetes Research Foundation.