METHODS: This open-label, parallel-group, 26-week, multicentre, treat-to-target trial, randomly allocated participants (1:1) to two titration arms. The Simple algorithm titrated IDegAsp twice weekly based on a single pre-breakfast self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) measurement. The Stepwise algorithm titrated IDegAsp once weekly based on the lowest of three consecutive pre-breakfast SMPG measurements. In both groups, IDegAsp once daily was titrated to pre-breakfast plasma glucose values of 4.0-5.0 mmol/l. Primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c (%) after 26 weeks.
RESULTS: Change in HbA1c at Week 26 was IDegAspSimple -14.6 mmol/mol (-1.3%) (to 52.4 mmol/mol; 6.9%) and IDegAspStepwise -11.9 mmol/mol (-1.1%) (to 54.7 mmol/mol; 7.2%). The estimated between-group treatment difference was -1.97 mmol/mol [95% confidence interval (CI) -4.1, 0.2] (-0.2%, 95% CI -0.4, 0.02), confirming the non-inferiority of IDegAspSimple to IDegAspStepwise (non-inferiority limit of ≤ 0.4%). Mean reduction in fasting plasma glucose and 8-point SMPG profiles were similar between groups. Rates of confirmed hypoglycaemia were lower for IDegAspStepwise [2.1 per patient years of exposure (PYE)] vs. IDegAspSimple (3.3 PYE) (estimated rate ratio IDegAspSimple /IDegAspStepwise 1.8; 95% CI 1.1, 2.9). Nocturnal hypoglycaemia rates were similar between groups. No severe hypoglycaemic events were reported.
CONCLUSIONS: In participants with insulin-naïve Type 2 diabetes mellitus, the IDegAspSimple titration algorithm improved HbA1c levels as effectively as a Stepwise titration algorithm. Hypoglycaemia rates were lower in the Stepwise arm.
Methodology: This sub-analysis included Filipino patients with T1DM or T2DM, aged 18 years and older, treated with insulin for more than 12 months, who completed the two-part self-assessment questionnaires (SAQ1 and SAQ2) and patient diaries that recorded hypoglycemia during retrospective (6 months/4 weeks before baseline) and prospective period (4 weeks after baseline) (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT02306681).
Results: A total of 671 patients were enrolled and completed the SAQ1 (62 patients with T1DM and 609 patients with T2DM). Almost all patients (100% in T1DM and 99.3% in T2DM) experienced at least 1 hypoglycemic event prospectively. The incidence of any hypoglycemia was also high in the prospective period compared to retrospective period (72.6 [95% CI: 64.8, 80.9] events PPY and 43.6 [95% CI: 37.8, 49.9] events PPY; p=0.001, respectively) in T1DM patients.
Conclusion: Among insulin-treated patients, higher rates of hypoglycemia were reported prospectively than retrospectively. This indicates that the patients in real-life setting often under-report hypoglycemia. Patient education can help in accurate reporting and appropriate management of hypoglycemia and diabetes.
Methodology: We conducted a cross-sectional study using 6-days CGMS to detect the prevalence of hypoglycaemia in 31 insulin-treated pregnant women with diabetes who achieved HbA1c <6.0%. Patients were required to log-keep their self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) readings and hypoglycaemia events.
Results: Eight women experienced confirmed hypoglycaemia with additional seven experienced relative hypoglycaemia, giving rise to prevalence rate of 45.2% (one had both confirmed and relative hypoglycaemia). Nine relative hypoglycaemia and 17 confirmed hypoglycaemic events were recorded. Sixteen (94%) out of 17 confirmed hypoglycaemia events recorded by CGMS were asymptomatic and were missed despite performing regular SMBG. Nocturnal hypoglycaemia events were recorded in seven women. Univariable analysis did not identify any association between conventional risk factors and hypoglycaemia events in our cohort.
Conclusion: Insulin-treated pregnant women with diabetes who achieved HbA1c <6.0% were associated with high prevalence of hypoglycaemia. Asymptomatic hypoglycaemia is common in our cohort and frequently missed despite regular SMBG. Present study did not identify any association between conventional risk factors and hypoglycaemia events in our cohort.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: We pooled data from 17 observational studies involving 1,699 patients treated with either CSII or non-CSII (including premixed and MDI) regimen. The study outcomes were the frequencies of hypoglycemia, hyperglycemia and/or ketosis. Given the lack of patient-level data, separate analyses for premixed and MDI regimen were not carried out.
RESULTS: The CSII-treated group (n = 203) was older (22.9 ± 6.9 vs 17.8 ± 4.0 years), and had longer diabetes duration (116.7 ± 66.5 vs 74.8 ± 59.2 months) and lower glycated hemoglobin (7.8 ± 1.1% vs 9.1 ± 2.0%) at baseline than the non-CSII-treated group (n = 1,496). The non-CSII-treated group had less non-severe hypoglycemia than the CSII-treated group (22%, 95% CI 13-34 vs 35%, 95% CI 17-55). Of the non-CSII-treated group, 7.1% (95% CI 5.8-8.5) developed severe hypoglycemia, but none from the CSII-treated group did. The non-CSII-treated group was more likely to develop hyperglycemia (12%, 95% CI 3-25 vs 8.8%, 95% CI 0-31) and ketosis (2.5%, 95% CI 1.0-4.6 vs 1.6%, 95% CI 0.1-4.7), and discontinue fasting (55%, 95% CI 34-76 vs 31%, 95% CI 9-60) than the CSII-treated group.
CONCLUSIONS: The CSII regimen had lower rates of severe hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia/ketosis, but a higher rate of non-severe hyperglycemia than premixed/MDI regimens. These suggest that appropriate patient selection with regular, supervised fine-tuning of the basal insulin rate with intensive glucose monitoring might mitigate the residual hypoglycemia risk during Ramadan.
RESULTS: There were 55.7% females, median age was 58.2 years and median duration of diabetes was 13 years. The majority (79.4%) of patients had poor diabetes control (HbA1c ≥ 7.0%) and 39.6% of patients had low medication adherence. Patients with good glycaemic control had a higher Timeline Acute/Chronic and Emotional Representations score, hence they held the correct belief that diabetes is chronic and experienced negative emotions. Highly adherent patients had a higher Illness Coherence (χ2 = 21.385, p
Methodology: A 12-week prospective, non-controlled, interventional study in suboptimal-controlled T2DM patients with DFU was conducted. Antidiabetic medications were adjusted with the aim of at least 1% in relation to patient's individualised HbA1c target. The wound area was determined by using specific wound tracing. The daily wound area healing rate in cm2 per day was calculated as the difference between wound area at first visit and the subsequent visit divided by the number of days between the two visits.
Results: 19 patients were included in the study. There was a significant HbA1c reduction from 10.33 %+1.83% to 6.89%+1.4% (p<0.001) with no severe hypoglycaemia. The median daily wound area healing rate was 0.234 (0.025,0.453) cm2/day. There was a strong positive correlation between these two variables (r=0.752, p=0.01). After dividing the patients into four quartiles based on final HbA1c and comparing the first quartile vs fourth quartile, there was a significant difference in daily wound area healing rates (0.597 vs 0.044 cm2/day, p=0.012).
Conclusion: There was a positive correlation between HbA1c reduction and wound healing rate in patients with DFU. Although this is an association study, the study postulated the benefits of achieving lower HbA1c on wound healing rate in DFU which require evidence from future randomised controlled studies.