METHODS: A sample of 3895 individuals without known diabetes underwent detailed interview and health examination, including anthropometric and biochemical evaluation, between 2004 and 2007. Pearson's correlation, analysis of variance and multiple linear regression analyses were used to examine the influence of ethnicity on HbA(1c) .
RESULTS: As fasting plasma glucose increased, HbA(1c) increased more in Malays and Indians compared with Chinese after adjustment for age, gender, waist circumference, serum cholesterol, serum triglyceride and homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (P-interaction < 0.001). This translates to an HbA(1c) difference of 1.1 mmol/mol (0.1%, Indians vs. Chinese), and 0.9 mmol/mol (0.08%, Malays vs. Chinese) at fasting plasma glucose 5.6 mmol/l (the American Diabetes Association criterion for impaired fasting glycaemia); and 2.1 mmol/mol (0.19%, Indians vs. Chinese) and 2.6 mmol/mol (0.24%, Malays vs. Chinese) at fasting plasma glucose 7.0 mmol/l, the diagnostic criterion for diabetes mellitus.
CONCLUSIONS: Using HbA(1c) in place of fasting plasma glucose will reclassify different proportions of the population in different ethnic groups. This may have implications in interpretation of HbA(1c) results across ethnic groups and the use of HbA(1c) for diagnosing diabetes mellitus.
RESULTS: In this study, we isolated gut K and L-cells to compare the potential of both cell types to produce insulin when exposed to similar conditions. The isolated pure K and L-cells were transfected with recombinant plasmids encoding insulin and with specific promoters for K or L-cells. Insulin expression was studied in response to glucose or meat hydrolysate. We found that glucose and meat hydrolysate efficiently induced insulin secretion from K and L-cells. However, the effects of meat hydrolysate on insulin secretion were more potent in both cells compared with glucose. Results of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays showed that L-cells secreted more insulin compared with K-cells regardless of the stimulator, although this difference was not statistically significant.
CONCLUSION: The responses of K and L-cells to stimulation with glucose or meat hydrolysate were generally comparable. Therefore, both K and L-cells show similar potential to be used as surrogate cells for insulin gene expression in vitro. The potential use of these cells for diabetic gene therapy warrants further investigation.
OBJECTIVE: This study sought to identify demographic, clinical, and genetic factors that may contribute to increased insulin resistance or worsening of glycaemic control in patients with T2DM.
SETTING: This prospective cohort study included 156 patients with T2DM and severe or acute hyperglycaemia who were treated with insulin at any medical ward of the National University of Malaysia Medical Centre.
METHOD: Insulin resistance was determined using the homeostatic model assessment-insulin resistance index. Glycaemic control during the episode of hyperglycaemia was assessed as the degree to which the patient achieved the target glucose levels. The polymerase chain reaction-restriction fragment length polymorphism method was used to identify polymorphisms in insulin receptor substrate (IRS) genes.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Identification of possible predictors (demographic, clinical, or genetic) for insulin resistance and glycaemic control during severe/acute hyperglycaemia.
RESULTS: A polymorphism in IRS1, r.2963 G>A (p.Gly972Arg), was a significant predictor of both insulin resistance [odds ratios (OR) 4.48; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.2-16.7; P = 0.03) and worsening of glycaemic control (OR 6.04; 95 % CI 0.6-64.6; P = 0.02). The use of loop diuretics (P < 0.05) and antibiotics (P < 0.05) may indirectly predict worsening of insulin resistance or glycaemic control in patients with severe/acute hyperglycaemia.
CONCLUSION: Clinical and genetic factors contribute to worsening of insulin resistance and glycaemic control during severe/acute hyperglycaemia in patients with T2DM. Early identification of factors that may influence insulin resistance and glycaemic control may help to achieve optimal glycaemic control during severe/acute hyperglycaemia.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of colesevelam for type 2 diabetes mellitus.
SEARCH METHODS: Several electronic databases were searched, among these The Cochrane Library (Issue 1, 2012), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, OpenGrey and Proquest Dissertations and Theses database (all up to January 2012), combined with handsearches. No language restriction was used.
SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared colesevelam with or without other oral hypoglycaemic agents with a placebo or a control intervention with or without oral hypoglycaemic agents.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected the trials and extracted the data. We evaluated risk of bias of trials using the parameters of randomisation, allocation concealment, blinding, completeness of outcome data, selective reporting and other potential sources of bias.
MAIN RESULTS: Six RCTs ranging from 8 to 26 weeks investigating 1450 participants met the inclusion criteria. Overall, the risk of bias of these trials was unclear or high. All RCTs compared the effects of colesevelam with or without other antidiabetic drug treatments with placebo only (one study) or combined with antidiabetic drug treatments. Colesevelam with add-on antidiabetic agents demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in fasting blood glucose with a mean difference (MD) of -15 mg/dL (95% confidence interval (CI) -22 to - 8), P < 0.0001; 1075 participants, 4 trials, no trial with low risk of bias in all domains. There was also a reduction in glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in favour of colesevelam (MD -0.5% (95% CI -0.6 to -0.4), P < 0.00001; 1315 participants, 5 trials, no trial with low risk of bias in all domains. However, the single trial comparing colesevelam to placebo only (33 participants) did not reveal a statistically significant difference between the two arms - in fact, in both arms HbA1c increased. Colesevelam with add-on antidiabetic agents demonstrated a statistical significant reduction in low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol with a MD of -13 mg/dL (95% CI -17 to - 9), P < 0.00001; 886 participants, 4 trials, no trial with low risk of bias in all domains. Non-severe hypoglycaemic episodes were infrequently observed. No other serious adverse effects were reported. There was no documentation of complications of the disease, morbidity, mortality, health-related quality of life and costs.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Colesevelam added on to antidiabetic agents showed significant effects on glycaemic control. However, there is a limited number of studies with the different colesevelam/antidiabetic agent combinations. More information on the benefit-risk ratio of colesevelam treatment is necessary to assess the long-term effects, particularly in the management of cardiovascular risks as well as the reduction in micro- and macrovascular complications of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Furthermore, long-term data on health-related quality of life and all-cause mortality also need to be investigated.