Effectiveness of DialBetesPlus, a self-management support system for diabetic kidney disease: Randomized controlled trial.

We evaluated the effectiveness of a mobile health (mHealth) intervention for diabetic kidney disease patients by conducting a 12-month randomized controlled trial among 126 type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with moderately increased albuminuria (urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR): 30-299 mg/g creatinine) recruited from eight clinical sites in Japan. Using a Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) behavior change theory framework, the intervention provides patients detailed information in order to improve patient control over exercise and dietary behaviors. In addition to standard care, the intervention group received DialBetesPlus, a self-management support system allowing patients to monitor exercise, blood glucose, diet, blood pressure, and body weight via a smartphone application. The primary outcome, change in UACR after 12 months (used as a surrogate measure of renal function), was 28.8% better than the control group's change (P = 0.029). Secondary outcomes also improved in the intervention group, including a 0.32-point better change in HbA1c percentage (P = 0.041). These improvements persisted when models were adjusted to account for the impacts of coadministration of drugs targeting albuminuria (GLP-1 receptor agonists, SGLT-2 inhibitors, ACE inhibitors, and ARBs) (UACR: -32.3% [95% CI: -49.2%, -9.8%] between-group difference in change, P = 0.008). Exploratory multivariate regression analysis suggests that the improvements were primarily due to levels of exercise. This is the first trial to show that a lifestyle intervention via mHealth achieved a clinically-significant improvement in moderately increased albuminuria.

Comparison of the Effectiveness of Once-Daily Alogliptin/Metformin and Twice-Daily Anagliptin/Metformin Combination Tablet in a Randomized, Parallel-Group, Open-Label Trial in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: The combination tablets of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and metformin are used for both once-daily and twice-daily agents in Japan. If there is no difference in effectiveness between the once-daily and twice-daily DPP-4 inhibitor/metformin combination tablets, the once-daily agent is advantageous in terms of frequency of administration. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness of once-daily alogliptin/metformin combination tablet (alogliptin 25 mg/metformin 500 mg) and twice-daily anagliptin/metformin combination tablet low dose (LD) (anagliptin 100 mg/metformin 250 mg). METHODS: Forty-eight Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes whose metformin administration of 250 mg twice daily had remained unchanged for at least 8 weeks, except when using DPP-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, or insulin, were randomized to either the once-daily alogliptin/metformin combination tablet group or the twice-daily anagliptin/metformin combination tablet LD group. The primary endpoint was the difference in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels from baseline to week 12 of administration, whereas the secondary endpoints were fasting blood glucose, body mass index (BMI), and adherence. RESULTS: Forty-four patients completed the study, and intention-to-treat analyses were performed. The adjusted mean value (standard error) for the change in HbA1c from week 0 to 12, was - 0.75 (0.109)% for the once-daily alogliptin/metformin combination tablet group and - 0.65 (0.109)% for the twice-daily anagliptin/metformin combination tablet LD group, with an intergroup difference of - 0.10% (95% confidence interval, CI - 0.407, 0.215). The upper limit of the bilateral 95% CI was 0.215%, below the 0.40% pre-defined as the non-inferiority margin. Fasting blood glucose, BMI, and adherence were not significantly different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The once-daily alogliptin/metformin combination tablet was non-inferior to the twice-daily anagliptin/metformin combination tablet LD in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trial Registry (UMIN-CTR) (registration number: UMIN000034951).

Efficacy of the Self-management Support System DialBetesPlus for Diabetic Kidney Disease: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is one of the main complications of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). DKD is a known risk factor for end-stage renal disease, cardiovascular disease, and all-cause death. Effective intervention for early-stage DKD is vital to slowing down the progression of kidney disease and improve prognoses. Mobile health (mHealth) is reportedly effective in supporting patients' self-care and improving glycemic control, but the impact of mHealth on DKD has yet to be shown. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of standard therapy with the addition of a self-management support system, DialBetesPlus, in patients with DKD and microalbuminuria. METHODS: This study is a prospective, randomized, open-label, multicenter clinical trial. The target population consists of 160 patients diagnosed with T2DM accompanied by microalbuminuria. We randomly assigned the patients to 2 groups-the intervention group using DialBetesPlus in addition to conventional therapy and the control group using conventional therapy alone. DialBetesPlus is a smartphone application that supports patients' self-management of T2DM. The study period was 12 months, with a follow-up survey at 18 months. The primary outcome was a change in albuminuria levels at 12 months. Secondary outcomes included changes in physical parameters, blood test results (glycemic control, renal function, and lipid metabolism), lifestyle habits, self-management scores, medication therapy, and quality of life. RESULTS: The study was approved in April 2018. We began recruiting patients in July 2018 and completed recruiting in August 2019. The final 18-month follow-up was conducted in March 2021. We recruited 159 patients and randomly allocated 70 into the intervention group and 61 into the control group, with 28 exclusions due to withdrawal of consent, refusal to continue, or ineligibility. The first results are expected to be available in 2021. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first randomized controlled trial assessing the efficacy of mHealth on early-stage DKD. We expect that albuminuria levels will decrease significantly in the intervention group due to improved glycemic control with ameliorated self-care behaviors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: UMIN-CTR UMIN000033261; https://upload.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000037924. INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID): DERR1-10.2196/31061.

Efficacy and safety of insulin degludec U100 and insulin glargine U100 in combination with meal-time bolus insulin in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes: an open-label, randomized controlled study.

The short-term efficacy and safety of insulin degludec U100 (IDeg) in patients with type 2 diabetes have not been reported widely. We compared insulin IDeg and insulin glargine U100 (IGla) for glycemic control and glucose variability in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes. In an open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled trial, 74 patients were randomly assigned to either the IDeg (36 patients) or IGla (38 patients) group and were administered with basal-bolus therapy during hospitalization. Following the start of the treatment, on day 11, glucose variability was assessed by continuous glucose monitoring. A fasting blood glucose level of 110 mg/dL and 2-hour postprandial blood glucose level of 180 mg/dL throughout at least one day during the observation period were achieved in 31.3% (10/32) and 30.6% (11/36) of the patients in the IDeg and IGla groups, respectively. The 6-point self-monitoring of blood glucose profiles showed a significant difference between the two groups. On day 7, the intra-day variation was larger in the IDeg group than in the IGla group. The incidence of hypoglycemia or glucose variability was comparable in the two groups. This study suggests that short-term efficacy and safety of IDeg and IGla in patients with type 2 diabetes during the initial phase of basal-bolus therapy were comparable, and these results can help in deciding which treatment to opt for.

Association of usual sleep quality and glycemic control in type 2 diabetes in Japanese: A cross sectional study. Sleep and Food Registry in Kanagawa (SOREKA).

OBJECTIVES: Excessively short and long sleep durations are associated with type 2 diabetes, but there is limited information about the association between sleep quality and diabetes. Accordingly, the present study was performed to investigate this relationship. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The subjects were 3249 patients with type 2 diabetes aged 20 years or older. Sleep quality was assessed by using the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). A higher global PSQI score indicates worse sleep quality, and a global PSQI score >5 differentiates poor sleepers from good sleepers. RESULTS: The mean global PSQI score was 5.94 ± 3.33, and 47.6% of the patients had a score of 6 or higher. Regarding the components of the PSQI, the score was highest for sleep duration, followed by subjective sleep quality and then sleep latency in decreasing order. When the patients were assigned to HbA1c quartiles (≤ 6.5%, 6.6-7.0%, 7.1-7.8%, and ≥ 7.9%), the top quartile had a significantly higher global PSQI score than the other quartiles. The top HbA1c quartile had a sleep duration of only 6.23 ± 1.42 hours, which was significantly shorter than in the other quartiles. Also, sleep latency was 25.3 ± 31.8 minutes in the top quartile, which was significantly longer (by approximately 20 minutes) than in the other quartiles. When analysis was performed with adjustment for age, gender, BMI, smoking, and other confounders, the global PSQI score was still significantly higher and sleep duration was shorter in the top HbA1c quartile (HbA1c ≥ 7.9%). CONCLUSIONS: Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes were found to have poor subjective sleep quality independently of potential confounders, especially those with inadequate glycemic control. Impairment of sleep quality was associated with both increased sleep latency and a shorter duration of sleep.

Safety and tolerability of diazoxide in Japanese patients with hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia.

Diazoxide is a non-diuretic benzothiadiazine derivative, one of a group of substances introduced into clinical practice in the 1950s for the treatment of hypertension. Fajans reported the use of diazoxide for the treatment of insulinoma in 1979. Although patients with hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia worldwide have been treated with diazoxide for more than 30 years, there are no recent reports about the adverse effects of this drug in Asian patients, including Japanese patients. Herein, we report the results of our retrospective clinical record review of 6 Japanese patients (3 females and 3 males, ranging in age from 58 to 91 years) with hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia and inoperable insulinoma treated with diazoxide. Diazoxide improved control of hypoglycemic symptoms and maintained normoglycemia in 5 of the 6 patients, and was ineffective in one patient. Surprisingly, although all 6 patients received diazoxide according to the treatment strategy recommended in Western patients, 5 of the 6 patients developed edema and two developed congestive heart failure. Thus, when starting treatment with diazoxide in Japanese patients, the symptoms and signs of fluid retention should be evaluated carefully. Also, appropriate protocols for treatment with diazoxide should be evaluated by means of clinical trials in Japanese patients with hyperinsulinemic hypoglycemia.

Second-line treatments for dyslipidemia in patients at risk of cardiovascular disease.

Previous studies have shown that approximately 50% patients at risk of cardiovascular disease do not achieve lipid management goals. Thus, improvements dyslipidemia management are needed. We investigated the clinical choice and efficacy of second-line treatments for dyslipidemia in the Japanese clinical setting. Using a retrospective cohort design, we collected lipid profile data from patients who had been treated with hypolipidemic agents at a stable dosage for at least 12 weeks. These patients had then been administered a second-line treatment for dyslipidemia because they had not achieved the low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) management goals. We included data from 641 patients in our analysis. The top three choices for second-line treatment were adding ezetimibe, switching to strong statins (statin switching), and doubling the original statin dosage (statin doubling). Adding ezetimibe, statin switching, and statin doubling decreased LDL-C levels by 28.2 ± 14.5%, 23.2 ± 24.4%, and 23.5 ± 17.2%, respectively. Among these three strategies, adding ezetimibe decreased LDL-C levels to the maximum extent. In patients with dysglycemia, baseline-adjusted change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels decreased slightly in the adding-ezetimibe, statin-switching, and statin-doubling groups, but the differences were not statistically significant among the groups (-0.10 ± 0.62%, -0.22 ± 0.54%, and -0.12 ± 0.52%, p = 0.19). In conclusion, the most common second-line treatment options for dyslipidemia were adding ezetimibe, statin switching, or statin doubling. Adding ezetimibe resulted in the highest reduction in LDL-C levels. These strategies did not increase HbA1c levels when administered with conventional diabetes treatment.

Influence of pitavastatin on glucose tolerance in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

AIM: We previously reported that glycemic control deteriorated in patients receiving atorvastatin, which is useful for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia in patients with type 2 diabetes. Pitavastatin has a strong lipid-lowering effect, comparable to that of atorvastatin, but it is unknown whether pitavastatin has an adverse influence on glycemic control. The aim of this study was to examine. The effects of three different statins (pravastatin, atorvastatin, and pitavastatin) on blood glucose and HbA(1C) levels in diabetic patients. METHODS: We retrospectively compared glycemic control between groups receiving atorvastatin (10 mg/day, group A, n=99), pravastatin (10 mg/day, group Pr, n=85), and pitavastatin (2 mg/day, group Pi, n=95) from the start of treatment until 3 months later. Patients were excluded if the dosage of their antidiabetic drugs was changed, if their drug therapy was altered within 3 months before starting statin therapy, or if events occurred that could affect glycemic control such as hospitalization. RESULTS: The subjects available for analysis were 74 patients from group A, 71 patients from group Pr, and 74 patients from group Pi. Arbitrary blood glucose levels increased from 147+/-51 mg/dL (mean+/-SD) to 176+/-69 mg/dL in group A, but only changed minimally from 136+/-31 to 134+/-32 mg/dL in group Pr and from 155+/-53 to 154+/-51 mg/dL in group Pi. HbA(1C) increased from 7.0+/-1.1% to 7.4+/-1.2% in group A, while it was 6.9+/-0.9% versus 6.9+/-1.0% in group Pr, and 7.3+/-1.0% versus 7.2+/-1.0% in group Pi. There was no correlation between Delta LDL-C and Delta HbA(1C) (the change from baseline to 3 months) in any of the groups. CONCLUSION: The glycemic parameters only increased significantly in group A, suggesting that pitava-statin and pravastatin did not have an adverse influence on glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients.

Effect of colestimide therapy for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus with hypercholesterolemia.

Colestimide is a new anion-exchange resin used to lower serum cholesterol in Japan. Because of its excellent compliance, colestimide can replace cholestyramine. To clarify the effect of colestimide on glycemic controls, colestimide (3 g/day) or pravastatin (10 mg) was given orally to patients with type 2 diabetes treated with oral hypoglycemic agents or insulin who had low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels exceeding 3.6 mmol/l. In the colestimide groups, fasting plasma glucose concentrations had decreased significantly from 8.5 +/- 1.4 to 7.7 +/- 1.5 mmol/l at 3 months (P<0.05), as had glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from 7.7 +/- 0.7% to 6.8 +/- 0.5%, for an 8% reduction (P<0.01). Fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c did not change in the pravastatin group. Total cholesterol and LDL-cholesterol decreased significantly (P<0.01) with either medication, with similar reduction rates for both drugs. Doses of oral hypoglycemic agents and insulin did not change during the study, and body weight remained stable. Considering that patients with type 2 diabetes often have hyperlipidemia, colestimide therapy may have a clinically useful dual action in such patients.

Influences of statins on glucose tolerance in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Atorvastatin is frequently administered for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus. However, a marked deterioration of glycemic control has been reported in some patients treated with atorvastatin. No study has been done to determine whether atorvastatin adversely affects glycemic control. In this study, we retrospectively compared an atorvastatin-treated group (Group A, n = 76) with a pravastatin-treated group (Group P, n = 78) to examine the effects of the 2 statins on glycemic control from the onset of administration to 3 months thereafter. No change occurred in the antidiabetic drug dose in 62 patients of Group A and 68 patients of Group P. In those patients, arbitrary blood glucose levels increased from 147 +/- 50 (mean +/- SD) mg/dL to 177 +/- 70 mg/dL in Group A and from 140 +/- 38 mg/dL to 141 +/- 32 mg/dL in Group P. HbA(1c) increased from 6.8 +/- 0.9% to 7.2 +/- 1.1% in Group A and from 6.9 +/- 0.9% to 6.9 +/- 1.0% in Group P. The increase was significant only in Group A, and the extent of the increase was also significantly greater in Group A. These results suggest a predisposition to a deterioration of glycemic control in type 2 diabetic patients treated with atorvastatin.

Normal delivery following an uneventful pregnancy in a Japanese acromegalic patient after discontinuation of octreotide long acting release formulation at an early phase of pregnancy.

We report a 35-year-old woman with active acromegaly despite pituitary surgery and irradiation who received continuous octreotide LAR treatment for the control of GH excess until discovery of her pregnancy. The patient delivered a healthy boy following an uneventful pregnancy after discontinuing octreotide LAR as soon as possible at the early phase of pregnancy. Despite a substantial maternal-fetal transfer of octreotide, postnatal development was normal at 3 years of age. In almost all previously described cases, octreotide was discontinued after pregnancy was confirmed. No side-effects of mother or fetus have been reported. Octreotide treatment in pregnancy seems to be feasible and safe. Due to the still-limited number of reported cases treated with octreotide LAR, the potential benefits of octreotide LAR treatment should be weighed carefully against its possible risks.