MATERIALS AND METHODS: In silico target prediction was first employed to predict the probability of the polyphenols interacting with key protein targets related to insulin signalling, based on a model trained on known bioactivity data and chemical similarity considerations. Next, CA was investigated in in vivo studies where induced type 2 diabetic rats were treated with CA for 28 days and the expression levels of genes regulating insulin signalling pathway, glucose transporters of hepatic (GLUT2) and muscular (GLUT4) tissue, insulin receptor substrate (IRS), phosphorylated insulin receptor (AKT), gluconeogenesis (G6PC and PCK-1), along with inflammatory mediators genes (NF-κB, IL-6, IFN-γ and TNF-α) and peroxisome proliferators-activated receptor gamma (PPAR-γ) were determined by qPCR.
RESULTS: In silico analysis shows that several of the top 20 enriched targets predicted for the constituents of CA are involved in insulin signalling pathways e.g. PTPN1, PCK-α, AKT2, PI3K-γ. Some of the predictions were supported by scientific literature such as the prediction of PI3K for epigallocatechin gallate. Based on the in silico and in vivo findings, we hypothesized that CA may enhance glucose uptake and glucose transporter expressions via the IRS signalling pathway. This is based on AKT2 and PI3K-γ being listed in the top 20 enriched targets. In vivo analysis shows significant increase in the expression of IRS, AKT, GLUT2 and GLUT4. CA may also affect the PPAR-γ signalling pathway. This is based on the CA-treated groups showing significant activation of PPAR-γ in the liver compared to control. PPAR-γ was predicted by the in silico target prediction with high normalisation rate although it was not in the top 20 most enriched targets. CA may also be involved in the gluconeogenesis and glycogenolysis in the liver based on the downregulation of G6PC and PCK-1 genes seen in CA-treated groups. In addition, CA-treated groups also showed decreased cholesterol, triglyceride, glucose, CRP and Hb1Ac levels, and increased insulin and C-peptide levels. These findings demonstrate the insulin secretagogue and sensitizer effect of CA.
CONCLUSION: Based on both an in silico and in vivo analysis, we propose here that CA mediates glucose/lipid metabolism via the PI3K signalling pathway, and influence AKT thereby causing insulin secretion and insulin sensitivity in peripheral tissues. CA enhances glucose uptake and expression of glucose transporters in particular via the upregulation of GLUT2 and GLUT4. Thus, based on its ability to modulate immunometabolic pathways, CA appears as an attractive long term therapy for T2DM even at relatively low doses.
METHODS: We used data from the KARolinska MAmmography (Karma) project, a Swedish mammography screening cohort. Insulin-treated patients with type 1 (T1D, n = 122) and type 2 (T2D, n = 237) diabetes were identified through linkage with the Prescribed Drug Register and age-matched to 1771 women without diabetes. We assessed associations with treatment duration and insulin glargine use, and we further examined MD differences using non-insulin-treated T2D patients as an active comparator. MD was measured using a fully automated volumetric method, and analyses were adjusted for multiple potential confounders. Associations with the insulin genetic score were assessed in 9437 study participants without diabetes.
RESULTS: Compared with age-matched women without diabetes, insulin-treated T1D patients had greater percent dense (8.7% vs. 11.4%) and absolute dense volumes (59.7 vs. 64.7 cm3), and a smaller absolute nondense volume (615 vs. 491 cm3). Similar associations were observed for insulin-treated T2D, and estimates were not materially different in analyses comparing insulin-treated T2D patients with T2D patients receiving noninsulin glucose-lowering medication. In both T1D and T2D, the magnitude of the association with the absolute dense volume was highest for long-term insulin therapy (≥ 5 years) and the long-acting insulin analog glargine. No consistent evidence of differential associations by insulin treatment duration or type was found for percent dense and absolute nondense volumes. Genetically predicted insulin levels were positively associated with percent dense and absolute dense volumes, but not with the absolute nondense volume (percentage difference [95% CI] per 1-SD increase in insulin genetic score = 0.8 [0.0; 1.6], 0.9 [0.1; 1.8], and 0.1 [- 0.8; 0.9], respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The consistency in direction of association for insulin treatment and the insulin genetic score with the absolute dense volume suggest a causal influence of long-term increased insulin exposure on mammographic dense breast tissue.
METHODS: A validated IMS CORE Diabetes Model was used to estimate the long-term costs and outcomes. The efficacy parameters were identified and synthesized using a systematic review and meta-analysis. Baseline characteristics and cost parameters were obtained from published studies and hospital databases in Thailand. Costs were expressed in 2014 US Dollars. Outcomes were presented as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to estimate parameter uncertainty.
RESULTS: From a societal perspective, treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors yielded more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (0.024) at a higher cost (>66,000 Thai baht (THB) or >1,829.27 USD) per person than SFU, resulting in the ICER of >2.7 million THB/QALY (>74,833.70 USD/QALY). The cost-effectiveness results were mainly driven by differences in HbA1c reduction, hypoglycemic events, and drug acquisition cost of DPP-4 inhibitors. At the ceiling ratio of 160,000 THB/QALY (4,434.59 USD/QALY), the probability that DPP-4 inhibitors are cost-effective compared to SFU was less than 10%.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to SFU, DPP-4 inhibitor monotherapy is not a cost-effective treatment for people with T2DM and CKD in Thailand.
OBJECTIVE: Our objective was to systematically review the published cost-effectiveness studies of insulin analogues for the treatment of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).
METHODS: We searched major databases and health technology assessment agency reports for economic evaluation studies published up until 30 September 2015. Two reviewers performed data extraction and assessed the quality of the data using the CHEERS (Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards) guidelines.
RESULTS: Seven of the included studies assessed short-acting insulin analogues, 12 assessed biphasic insulin analogues, 30 assessed long-acting insulin analogues and one assessed a combination of short- and long-acting insulin analogues. Only 17 studies involved patients with T1DM, all were modelling studies and 12 were conducted in Canada. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) for short-acting insulin analogues ranged from dominant to $US435,913 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained, the ICERs for biphasic insulin analogues ranged from dominant to $US57,636 per QALY gained and the ICERs for long-acting insulin analogues ranged from dominant to $US599,863 per QALY gained. A total of 15 studies met all the CHEERS guidelines reporting quality criteria. Only 26 % of the studies assessed heterogeneity in their analyses.
CONCLUSION: Current evidence indicates that insulin analogues are cost effective for T1DM; however, evidence for their use in T2DM is not convincing. Additional evidence regarding compliance and efficacy is required to support the broader use of long-acting and biphasic insulin analogues in T2DM. The value of insulin analogues depends strongly on reductions in hypoglycaemia event rates and its efficacy in lowering glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c).
METHODS: Long-term costs and outcomes were projected using a validated IMS CORE Diabetes Model, version 8.5. Cohort characteristics, baseline risk factors, and costs of diabetes complications were derived from Thai data sources. Relative risk was derived from a systematic review and meta-analysis study. Costs and outcomes were discounted at 3% per annum. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was presented in 2015 US Dollars (USD). A series of one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.
RESULTS: IDet yielded slightly greater quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (8.921 vs 8.908), but incurred higher costs than IGlar (90,417.63 USD vs 66,674.03 USD), resulting in an ICER of ∼1.7 million USD per QALY. The findings were very sensitive to the cost of IDet. With a 34% reduction in the IDet cost, treatment with IDet would become cost-effective according to the Thai threshold of 4,434.59 USD per QALY.
CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with IDet in patients with T2DM who had uncontrolled blood glucose with oral anti-diabetic agents was not a cost-effective strategy compared with IGlar treatment in the Thai context. These findings could be generalized to other countries with a similar socioeconomics level and healthcare systems.
METHODS: In this investigator-initiated, single-arm, open-label, pilot study, nine biopsy-proven NASH patients with T2DM were given empagliflozin 25 mg daily for 24 weeks. Liver biopsy was repeated at the end of treatment. The histological outcomes were compared with the placebo group of a previous 48-week clinical trial.
RESULTS: There was a significant reduction in body mass index (median change, Δ = -0.7 kg per m2, p = 0.011), waist circumference (Δ = -3 cm, p = 0.033), systolic blood pressure (Δ = -9 mmHg, p = 0.024), diastolic blood pressure (Δ = -6 mmHg, p = 0.033), fasting blood glucose (Δ = -1.7 mmol/L, p = 0.008), total cholesterol (Δ = -0.5 mmol/L, p = 0.011), gamma glutamyl transpeptidase (Δ = -19 U/L, p = 0.013), volumetric liver fat fraction (Δ = -7.8%, p = 0.017), steatosis (Δ = -1, p = 0.014), ballooning (Δ = -1, p = 0.034), and fibrosis (Δ = 0, p = 0.046). All histological components either remained unchanged or improved, except in one patient who had worsening ballooning. Empagliflozin resulted in significantly greater improvements in steatosis (67% vs. 26%, p = 0.025), ballooning (78% vs. 34%, p = 0.024), and fibrosis (44% vs. 6%, p = 0.008) compared with historical placebo.
CONCLUSION: This pilot study provides primary histological evidence that empagliflozin may be useful for the treatment of NASH. This preliminary finding should prompt larger clinical trials to assess the effectiveness of empagliflozin and other SGLT2 inhibitors for the treatment of NASH in T2DM patients. Trial registry number ClincialTrials.gov number, NCT02964715.
METHODS: Two reviewers searched MEDLINE for studies of ≥12 weeks duration in adults with type 2 diabetes. The key search word was "gliclazide", filtered with "randomized controlled trial", "human" and "19+ years". Differences were explored in mean change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) from baseline (primary outcome) and risk of hypoglycemia (secondary outcome) between gliclazide and other oral insulinotropic agents; and other sulfonylureas.
RESULTS: Nine out of 181 references reported primary outcomes, of which 7 reported secondary outcomes. Gliclazide lowered HbA1c more than other oral insulinotropic agents, with a weighted mean difference of -0.11% (95%, CI -0.19 to -0.03%, P=0.008, I(2)=60%), though not more than other sulfonylureas (-0.12%; 95%, CI -0.25 to 0.01%, P=0.07, I(2)=77%). Risk of hypoglycemia with gliclazide was not different to other insulinotropic agents (RR 0.85; 95%, CI 0.66 to 1.09, P=0.20, I(2)=61%) but significantly lower than other sulfonylureas (RR 0.47; 95%, CI 0.27 to 0.79, P=0.004, I(2)=0%).
CONCLUSION: Compared with other oral insulinotropic agents, gliclazide significantly reduced HbA1c with no difference regarding hypoglycemia risk. Compared with other sulfonylureas, HbA1c reduction with gliclazide was not significantly different, but hypoglycemia risk was significantly lower.
METHODS: Data on demography, diabetes status, management and complications were collected via medical records, interview and laboratory assessments. HbA(1c) was analysed by a central laboratory prospectively.
RESULTS: Patient profile was similar in the 1998 (N = 21,838) and 2003 cohorts (N = 15,549): 95% were diagnosed as type 2 diabetes mellitus and were obese (BMI approximately 25 kg/m(2)). Glycaemic control was unsatisfactory in many patients (mean HbA(1c) approximately 8%; fasting glucose approximately 9 mmol/L). Lipids were well-controlled but hypertension was not. The incidence of neuropathy ( approximately 33%) and cataract ( approximately 27%) were high. The majority ( approximately 71%) of patients in both cohorts were treated with oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) monotherapy; approximately 24% were on insulin therapy. Approximately half of the 2003 cohort reported a healthy state of well-being. Quality of life did not appear to have suffered as a result of having diabetes. However, many patients were worried about hypoglycaemic risk (53.9%) or worsening of diabetes (45.8%) and insulin initiation (64.5%).
CONCLUSIONS: Although both cohorts were separate cross-sectional studies of diabetes management status in Asia, the results showed that the demography profile, glycaemic control and cardiovascular risk factors were remarkably similar in both cohorts 5 years after the first survey. More concerted efforts are needed to increase diabetes awareness and education.