METHODS: Participants were consented to answer a physician-administered questionnaire following Ramadan 2020. Impact of COVID-19 on the decision of fasting, intentions to fast and duration of Ramadan and Shawal fasting, hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia events were assessed. Specific analysis comparing age categories of <65 years and ≥65 years were performed.
RESULTS: Among the 5865 participants, 22.5% were ≥65 years old. Concern for COVID-19 affected fasting decision for 7.6% (≥65 years) vs 5.4% (<65 years). More participants ≥65 years old did not fast (28.8% vs 12.7%, <65 years). Of the 83.6%, participants fulfilling Ramadan-fasting, 94.8% fasted ≥15 days and 12.6% had to break fast due to diabetes-related illness. The average number of days fasting within and post-Ramadan were 27 and 6 days respectively, regardless of age. Hypoglycaemia and hyperglycaemia occurred in 15.7% and 16.3% of participants respectively, with 6.5% and 7.4% requiring hospital care respectively. SMBG was performed in 73.8% of participants and 43.5% received Ramadan-focused education.
CONCLUSION: During the COVID-19 pandemic, universally high rates of Ramadan-fasting were observed regardless of fasting risk level. Glycemic complications occurred frequently with older adults requiring higher rates of acute hospital care. Risk stratification is essential followed by pre-Ramadan interventions, Ramadan-focused diabetes education and self-monitoring to reduce and prevent complications, with particular emphasis in older adults.
METHODS: The e-intervention group (n = 62) received a 6-month web-delivered intensive dietary intervention while the control group (n = 66) continued with their standard hospital care. Outcomes (DKAB and DSOC scores, FBG and HbA1c) were compared at baseline, post-intervention and follow-up.
RESULTS: While both study groups showed improvement in total DKAB score, the margin of improvement in mean DKAB score in e-intervention group was larger than the control group at post-intervention (11.1 ± 0.9 vs. 6.5 ± 9.4,p
METHODS: MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were searched from inception to 13 July 2021 for randomised controlled trials comparing second-line glucose lowering therapies with placebo, standard care or one another. Primary outcomes included cardiovascular and renal outcomes. Secondary outcomes were non-cardiovascular adverse events. Risk ratios (RRs) and corresponding confidence intervals (CI) or credible intervals (CrI) were reported within pairwise and network meta-analysis. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. Number needed to treat (NNT) and number needed (NNH) to harm were calculated at 5 years using incidence rates and RRs. PROSPERO (CRD42020168322).
RESULTS: We included 38 trials from seven classes of glucose-lowering therapies. Both sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) showed moderate to high certainty in reducing risk of 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events, 3P-MACE (network estimates: SGLT2i [RR 0.90; 95% CrI 0.84-0.96; NNT, 59], GLP1RA [RR 0.88; 95% CrI 0.83-0.93; NNT, 50]), cardiovascular death, all-cause mortality, renal composite outcome and macroalbuminuria. SGLT2i also showed high certainty in reducing risk of hospitalization for heart failure (hHF), ESRD, acute kidney injury, doubling in serum creatinine and decline in eGFR. GLP1RA were associated with lower risk of stroke (high certainty) while glitazone use was associated with an increased risk of hHF (very low certainty). The risk of developing ESRD was lower with the use of sulphonylureas (low certainty). For adverse events, sulphonylureas and insulin were associated with increased hypoglycaemic events (very low to low certainty), while GLP1RA increased the risk of gastrointestinal side effects leading to treatment discontinuation (low certainty). DPP-4i increased risk of acute pancreatitis (low certainty). SGLT2i were associated with increased risk of genital infection, volume depletion (high certainty), amputation and ketoacidosis (moderate certainty). Risk of fracture was increased with the use of glitazones (moderate certainty).
CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2i and GLP1RA were associated with lower risk for different cardiorenal end points, when used as an adjunct to metformin in people with type 2 diabetes. Additionally, SGLT2i demonstrated benefits in reducing risk for surrogate end points in kidney disease progression. Safety outcomes differ among the available pharmacotherapies.
METHODS: We reviewed a cohort of people with T2D seeking care from two tertiary hospitals in the metropolitan cities of the state of Selangor and Negeri Sembilan from January 2012 to May 2021. To identify the 3-year predictor of developing CKD (primary outcome) and CKD progression (secondary outcome), the dataset was randomly split into a training and test set. A Cox proportional hazards (CoxPH) model was developed to identify predictors of developing CKD. The resultant CoxPH model was compared with other machine learning models on their performance using C-statistic.
RESULTS: The cohorts included 1992 participants, of which 295 had developed CKD and 442 reported worsening of kidney function. Equation for the 3-year risk of developing CKD included gender, haemoglobin A1c, triglyceride and serum creatinine levels, estimated glomerular filtration rate, history of cardiovascular disease and diabetes duration. For risk of CKD progression, the model included systolic blood pressure, retinopathy and proteinuria. The CoxPH model was better at prediction compared with other machine learning models examined for incident CKD (C-statistic: training 0.826; test 0.874) and CKD progression (C-statistic: training 0.611; test 0.655). The risk calculator can be found at https://rs59.shinyapps.io/071221/.
CONCLUSIONS: The Cox regression model was the best performing model to predict people with T2D who will develop a 3-year risk of incident CKD and CKD progression in a Malaysian cohort.
METHODS: A state-transition microsimulation model was developed to compare the clinical and economic outcomes of 4 treatments: standard care, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is), and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. Cost-effectiveness was assessed from a healthcare provider's perspective over a lifetime horizon with 3% discount rate in a hypothetical cohort of people with T2D. Data input were informed from literature and local data when available. Outcome measures include costs, quality-adjusted life-years, incremental cost-effectiveness ratios, and net monetary benefits. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess uncertainties.
RESULTS: Over a lifetime horizon, the costs to treat a person with T2D ranged from RM 12 494 to RM 41 250, whereas the QALYs gains ranged from 6.155 to 6.731, depending on the treatment. Based upon a willingness-to-pay threshold of RM 29 080 per QALY, we identified SGLT2i as the most cost-effective glucose-lowering treatment, as add-on to standard care over patient's lifetime, with the net monetary benefit of RM 176 173 and incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of RM 12 279 per QALY gained. The intervention also added 0.577 QALYs and 0.809 LYs compared with standard care. Cost-effectiveness acceptability curve showed that SGLT2i had the highest probability of being cost-effective in Malaysia across varying willingness-to-pay threshold. The results were robust to various sensitivity analyses.
CONCLUSIONS: SGLT2i was found to be the most cost-effective intervention to mitigate diabetes-related complications.