Digital Twin-Enabled Personalized Nutrition Improves Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Fatty Liver Disease in Type 2 Diabetes: Results of a 1-Year Randomized Controlled Study.

OBJECTIVE: Postprandial hyperglycemia drives insulin resistance and inflammation, leading to metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD). Prediction of postprandial glycemic responses by digital twin (DT) technology can fashion a personalized nutrition, activity, and sleep to treat type 2 diabetes (T2D) and MAFLD. This study examines the effects of DT-enabled personalized nutrition, activity, and sleep on glycemic status, surrogate markers of MAFLD, and magnetic resonance imaging-derived proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) in patients with T2D. METHODS: In an open-label randomized trial (2:1), 319 people with T2D were eligible to intervention (DT) or standard care (SC). DT patients followed personalized meal plans with foods suggested by artificial intelligence with least predicted postprandial glycemic response. The primary end point was to compare change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and medicine reduction between the DT and SC groups. Key secondary end points included remission to compare liver function test scores and visceral adiposity using MRI. RESULTS: HbA1C was significantly better for DT than for SC (-2.9 [1.8] vs -0.3 [1.2]; P < .001) at 1 year with 72.7% remission of T2D. In patients with abnormal baseline values, significant improvements were seen in DT vs SC patients from baseline to 1 year in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease liver fat score (mean [SD]; -2.5 [2.0] vs -0.1 [1.5]; P < .001) and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score (-1.20 [0.9] vs -0.1 [1.0]; P < .001), respectively. Improvements are seen with DT compared with SC in other liver fat, fibrosis score, and %liver fat by MRI-PDFF. CONCLUSION: At 1 year, DT-enabled personalized treatment significantly improved hyperglycemia and surrogate markers of MAFLD and MRI-PDFF.

Clinical relevance of double-arm blood pressure measurement and prevalence of clinically important inter-arm blood pressure differences in Indian primary care.

Hypertension guidelines recommend measuring blood pressure (BP) in both arms at least once. However, this is seldom done due to uncertainties regarding measurement procedure and the implications of finding a clinically important inter-arm BP difference (IAD). This study aimed to provide insight into the prevalence of clinically important IADs in a large Indian primary care cohort. A number of 134 678 (37% female) unselected Indian primary care participants, mean age 45.2 (SD 11.9) years, had BP measured in both arms using a standardized, triplicate, automated simultaneous measurement method (Microlife WatchBP Office Afib). On average, there were clinically minor differences in right and left arm BP values: systolic BP 134.4 vs 134.2 mmHg (p < .01) and diastolic BP 82.7 vs 82.6 mmHg (p < .01), respectively. Prevalence of significant mean systolic IAD between 10 and 15 mmHg was 7,813 (5.8%). Systolic IAD ≥ 15 mmHg 2,980 (2.2%) and diastolic IAD ≥ 10 mmHg 7,151 (5.3%). In total, there were 7,595 (5.6%) and 8,548 (6.3%) participants with BP above the 140/90 mmHg threshold in only the left or right arm, respectively. Prevalence of participants with elevated BP on one arm only was highest in patients with a systolic IAD ≥ 15 mmHg; 19.1% and 13.7%, for left and right arm, respectively. This study shows that a substantial prevalence of IAD exists in Indian primary care patients. BP is above the diagnostic threshold for hypertension in one arm only for 6% of participants. These findings emphasize the importance of undertaking bilateral BP measurement in routine clinical practice.

Clinical relevance of double-arm blood pressure measurement and prevalence of clinically important inter-arm blood pressure differences in Indian Primary Care.

Hypertension guidelines recommend measuring blood pressure (BP) in both arms at least once. However, this is seldom done due to uncertainties regarding measurement procedure and the implications of finding a clinically important inter-arm BP difference (IAD). This study aimed to provide insight into the prevalence of clinically important IADs in a large Indian primary care cohort. A number of 134678 (37% female) unselected Indian primary care participants, mean age 45.2 (SD 11.9) years, had BP measured in both arms using a standardized, triplicate, automated simultaneous measurement method (Microlife WatchBP Office Afib). On average, there were clinically minor differences in right and left arm BP values: systolic BP 134.4 vs. 134.2 mmHg (p<0.01) and diastolic BP 82.7 vs. 82.6 mmHg (p<0.01), respectively. Prevalence of significant mean systolic IAD between 10 and 15 mmHg was 7813 (5.8%). Systolic IAD ≥ 15 mmHg 2980 (2.2%) and diastolic IAD ≥ 10 mmHg 7151 (5.3%). In total, there were 7595 (5.6%) and 8548 (6.3%) participants with BP above the 140/90 mmHg threshold in only the left or right arm, respectively. Prevalence of participants with elevated BP on one arm only was highest in patients with a systolic IAD ≥ 15 mmHg; 19.1% and 13.7%, for left and right arm, respectively. This study shows that a substantial prevalence of IAD exist in Indian primary care patients. BP is above the diagnostic threshold for hypertension in one arm only for 6% of participants. These findings emphasise the importance of undertaking bilateral BP measurement in routine clinical practice. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.