Exploring in-vivo infrared spectroscopy for nail-based diabetes screening.

Diabetes screening is traditionally complex, inefficient, and reliant on invasive sampling. This study evaluates near-infrared spectroscopy for non-invasive detection of glycated keratin in nails in vivo. Glycation of keratin, prevalent in tissues like nails and skin, is a key indicator of T2DM risk. In this study involving 200 participants (100 with diabetes, 100 without), NIR's efficacy was compared against a point-of-care HbA1c analyzer. Results showed a specificity of 92.9% in diabetes risk assessment. This study highlights the proposed NIR system potential as a simple, reliable tool for early diabetes screening and risk management in various healthcare settings.

Early combination versus initial metformin monotherapy in the management of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: An East Asian perspective.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the East Asian population is characterized by phenotypes such as low body mass index, an index of ß-cell dysfunction, and higher percentage of body fat, an index of insulin resistance. These phenotypes/pathologies may predispose people to early onset of diabetes with increased risk of stroke and renal disease. Less than 50% of patients with T2D in East Asia achieve glycaemic targets recommended by national or regional guidelines, which may be attributable to knowledge and/or implementation gaps. Herein, we review the latest evidence with special reference to East Asian patients with T2D and present arguments for the need to use early combination therapy to intensify glycaemic control. This strategy is supported by the 5-year worldwide VERIFY study, which reported better glycaemic durability in newly diagnosed patients with T2D with a mean HbA1c of 6.9% treated with early combination therapy of vildagliptin plus metformin versus those treated with initial metformin monotherapy followed by addition of vildagliptin only with worsening glycaemic control. This paradigm shift of early intensified treatment is now recommended by the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes. In order to translate these evidence to practice, increased awareness and strengthening of the healthcare system are needed to diagnose and manage patients with T2D early for combination therapy.

Evaluating the Evidence behind the Novel Strategy of Early Combination from Vision to Implementation.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a complex and progressive chronic disease characterised by elevating hyperglycaemia and associated need to gradually intensify therapy in order to achieve and maintain glycaemic control. Treating hyperglycaemia with sequential therapy is proposed to allow holistic assessment of the efficacy and risk-to-benefit ratio of each added component. However, there is an array of evidence supporting the scientific rationale for using synergistic, earlier, modern drug combinations to achieve glycaemic goals, delay the deterioration of glycaemic control, and, therefore, potentially preserve or slow down the declining ß-cell function. Additionally, implementation of early combination(s) may lead to opportunities to combat clinical inertia and other hurdles to optimised disease management outcomes. This review aims to discuss the latest empirical evidence for long-term clinical benefits of this novel strategy of early combination in people with newly diagnosed T2DM versus the current widely-implemented treatment paradigm, which focuses on control of hyperglycaemia using lifestyle interventions followed by sequentially intensified (mostly metformin-based) monotherapy. The recent reported Vildagliptin Efficacy in combination with metfoRmin For earlY treatment of T2DM (VERIFY) study results have provided significant new evidence confirming long-term glycaemic durability and tolerability of a specific early combination in the management of newly diagnosed, treatment-naïve patients worldwide. These results have also contributed to changes in clinical treatment guidelines and standards of care while clinical implementation and individualised treatment decisions based on VERIFY results might face barriers beyond the existing scientific evidence.

Insights from VERIFY: Early Combination Therapy Provides Better Glycaemic Durability Than a Stepwise Approach in Newly Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes.

The treatment aims for type 2 diabetes are to prevent complications and premature mortality, and improve quality of life. Glycaemic control is central to these aims; clinical guidelines have sought to achieve this with a stepwise approach starting with lifestyle measures and metformin, adding further medications once glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels rise above a predefined threshold. However, treatment intensification can be delayed when HbA1c levels increase, and HbA1c levels become inadequately controlled in many patients. Clinical inertia can result in sustained elevated levels of HbA1c; when combined with a late diagnosis, this negatively impacts patients' prognosis. Early combination therapy using medications with complementary modes of action could achieve optimal glycaemic targets and alter the course of the disease more than metformin alone. The multinational VERIFY study (clinicaltrials.gov NCT01528254) provided evidence accrued over 5 years, demonstrating the potential of early combination therapy: time to loss of glycaemic control was nearly doubled, and more than twice the number of patients experienced extended glycaemic control, with a vildagliptin-metformin combination therapy versus metformin alone. The study also showed a delay in secondary treatment failure in patients receiving the combination. Early combination therapy therefore offers a different trajectory to the stepwise approach. Translating these findings into clinical practice will require early detection and diagnosis of type 2 diabetes plus a shift in disease management. Nonetheless, the potential benefits of sustained and continuous disease control that early combination therapy offers represent the start of a new era in early diagnosis and intensive management, to achieve the treatment aims of type 2 diabetes.

Blood glucose progressively increases over time in type 2 diabetes and is currently treated in a stepwise fashion, with more medications added when a single treatment fails. The VERIFY trial studied people with newly or recently diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Treating people early with two glucose-lowering drugs given together could slow the worsening of blood glucose levels, compared with starting with metformin first and then adding a second treatment later. Taking the two treatments together was as well tolerated as taking the single treatment alone. Starting treatment with two glucose-lowering drugs given together lengthened the time before insulin was needed, compared with starting with metformin and then adding a second treatment later. This is important to people with diabetes, as early treatment is straightforward but becomes increasingly complicated in later stages. The long-term benefits of this early combination treatment are awaited. In the meantime, the VERIFY trial has shown that combination therapy given at the start of treatment with medication can improve blood glucose levels and delay the need for insulin.

Effect of clinical inertia and trial participation in younger and older adults with diabetes having comorbidities and progressive complications.

AIM: Clinical inertia is a multifactorial phenomenon, with contributing factors from people with diabetes and their healthcare team. It is widely cited that clinical inertia is minimised by participation in clinical trials. We assessed whether trial participation per se improves metabolic parameters in people with diabetes, or a specific focus on glycaemia is required. METHODS: We compared improvement in glycaemic control in a pooled set of people assigned to the "placebo" arm from 25 glycaemia-focused trials with a pooled group of people with diabetes allocated to sham or non-pharmacological intervention for the treatment of diabetic retinal disease. Mean change in HbA1c (ANCOVA) was evaluated. RESULTS: The overall placebo effect in studies focused on glucose control (N = 3081) was comparable between strata groups with and without complications. Adjusted least square mean change in HbA1c at 24 weeks was between -0.23% (-2.50 mmol/mol) and -0.32% (-3.50 mmol/mol). In studies focused on retinal disease (N = 288), the change from baseline in HbA1c was +0.10% (1.10 mmol/mol) and fasting plasma glucose was +0.50 mmol/L showing no improvement in metabolic parameters at 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical trial participation alone does not seem to improve metabolic parameters in people living with diabetes. The benefits observed in glycaemia-focused studies were independent of age and comorbidities.

Individualised treatment targets for elderly patients with type 2 diabetes using vildagliptin add-on or lone therapy (INTERVAL): a 24 week, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Guidelines suggest setting individualised targets for glycaemic control in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes, despite no evidence. We aimed to assess the feasibility of setting and achieving individualised targets over 24 weeks along with conventional HbA1c reduction using vildagliptin versus placebo. METHODS: In this multinational, double-blind, 24 week study, we enrolled drug-naive or inadequately controlled (glycosylated haemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] ≥7·0% to ≤10·0%) patients with type 2 diabetes aged 70 years or older from 45 outpatient centres in Europe. Investigators set individualised treatment targets on the basis of age, baseline HbA1c, comorbidities, and frailty status before a validated automated system randomly assigned patients (1:1) to vildagliptin (50 mg once or twice daily as per label) or placebo. Coprimary efficacy endpoints were proportion of patients reaching their investigator-defined HbA1c target and HbA1c reduction from baseline to study end. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01257451, and European Union Drug Regulating Authorities Clinical Trials database, number 2010-022658-18. FINDINGS: Between Dec 22, 2010, and March 14, 2012, we randomly assigned 139 patients each to the vildagliptin and placebo groups. 37 (27%) of 137 patients in the placebo group achieved their individualised targets by education and interactions with the study team alone and 72 (52·6%) of 137 patients achieved their target in the vildagliptin group (adjusted odds ratio 3·16, 96·2% CI 1·81-5·52; p<0·0001). This finding was accompanied by a clinically relevant 0·9% reduction in HbA1c from a baseline of 7·9% with vildagliptin and a between-group difference of -0·6% (98·8% CI -0·81 to -0·33; p<0·0001). The overall safety and tolerability was similar in the vildagliptin and placebo groups, with low incidence of hypoglycaemia and no emergence of new safety signals. INTERPRETATION: This study is the first to introduce and show the feasibility of using individualised HbA1c targets as an endpoint in any type 2 diabetes population. Individualised glycaemic target levels are achievable with vildagliptin without any tolerability issues in the elderly type 2 diabetes population. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma AG.