METHODS: A comprehensive systematic search was performed in Web of Science, PubMed/MEDLINE, Cochrane, SCOPUS and Embase from inception until June 2019. All clinical trials investigating the effects of fasting and energy-restricted diets on leptin and adiponectin in adults were included.
RESULTS: Twelve studies containing 17 arms and a total of 495 individuals (intervention = 249, control = 246) reported changes in serum leptin concentrations, and 10 studies containing 12 arms with a total of 438 individuals (intervention = 222, control = 216) reported changes in serum adiponectin concentrations. The combined effect sizes suggested a significant effect of fasting and energy-restricted diets on leptin concentrations (WMD: -3.690 ng/ml, 95% CI: -5.190, -2.190, p ≤ 0.001; I2 = 84.9%). However, no significant effect of fasting and energy-restricted diets on adiponectin concentrations was found (WMD: -159.520 ng/ml, 95% CI: -689.491, 370.451, p = 0.555; I2 = 74.2%). Stratified analyses showed that energy-restricted regimens significantly increased adiponectin (WMD: 554.129 ng/ml, 95% CI: 150.295, 957.964; I2 = 0.0%). In addition, subsequent subgroup analyses revealed that energy restriction, to ≤50% normal required daily energy intake, resulted in significantly reduced concentrations of leptin (WMD: -4.199 ng/ml, 95% CI: -7.279, -1.118; I2 = 83.9%) and significantly increased concentrations of adiponectin (WMD: 524.04 ng/ml, 95% CI: 115.618, 932.469: I2 = 0.0%).
CONCLUSION: Fasting and energy-restricted diets elicit significant reductions in serum leptin concentrations. Increases in adiponectin may also be observed when energy intake is ≤50% of normal requirements, although limited data preclude definitive conclusions on this point.
METHODS: DIA-RAMADAN (NCT04132934) was a prospective, international, observational study conducted in nine countries. Patients >18 years of age with T2DM (N = 1244) were examined at an inclusion visit (V0) occurring 6-8 weeks before the start of Ramadan. Patients received a diary to report treatment changes, hypoglycaemic events (HEs), and other adverse events. Gliclazide MR was taken once daily for 14-18 weeks. A second visit (V1) was conducted 4-6 weeks after the end of Ramadan. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reporting ≥1 symptomatic HE. Changes in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and body weight were secondary endpoints.
RESULTS: The proportion of patients reporting ≥1 symptomatic HE during Ramadan was low (2.2%) with no reported severe HEs. There was a significant reduction in HbA1c (-0.3%), FPG (-9.7 mg/dL), body weight (-0.5 kg) and body mass index (-0.2 kg/m2) between V0 and V1 (p
METHODS: Data of 328 eligible housewives who participated in the MyBFF@Home study was used. Intervention group of 169 subjects were provided with an intervention package which includes physical activity (brisk walking, dumbbell exercise, physical activity diary, group exercise) and 159 subjects in control group received various health seminars. Physical activity level was assessed using short-International Physical Activity Questionnaire. The physical activity level was then re-categorized into 4 categories (active intervention, inactive intervention, active control and inactive control). Physical activity, blood glucose and lipid profile were measured at baseline, 3rd month and 6th month of the study. General Linear Model was used to determine the effect of physical activity on glucose and lipid profile.
RESULTS: At the 6th month, there were 99 subjects in the intervention and 79 control group who had complete data for physical activity. There was no difference on the effect of physical activity on the glucose level and lipid profile except for the Triglycerides level. Both intervention and control groups showed reduction of physical activity level over time.
CONCLUSION: The effect of physical activity on blood glucose and lipid profile could not be demonstrated possibly due to physical activity in both intervention and control groups showed decreasing trend over time.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 100 adults with type 2 diabetes were assessed with 6-day continuous glucose monitoring and HbA1c . Area under the curve (AUC) ≥5.6 mmol/L was defined as AUCTOTAL . AUC equal to or greater than each preprandial glucose for 4-h duration was defined as AUCPPH . The total PPH (AUCTPPH ) was the sum of the various AUCPPH. The postprandial contribution to overall hyperglycemia was calculated as (AUCTPPH / AUCTOTAL ) × 100%.
RESULTS: The present study comprised of Malay, Indian, and Chinese type 2 diabetes patients at 34, 34 and 28% respectively. Overall, the mean PPH significantly decreased as HbA1c advanced (mixed model repeated measures adjusted, beta-estimate = -3.0, P = 0.009). Age (P = 0.010) and hypoglycemia (P = 0.006) predicted the contribution difference. In oral antidiabetic drug-treated patients (n = 58), FH contribution increased from 54% (HbA1c 6-6.9%) to 67% (HbA1c ≥10%). FH predominance was significant in poorly-controlled groups (P = 0.028 at HbA1c 9-9.9%; P = 0.015 at HbA1c ≥10%). Among insulin users (n = 42), FH predominated when HbA1c was ≥10% before adjustment for hypoglycemia (P = 0.047), whereas PPH was numerically greater when HbA1c was <8%.
CONCLUSIONS: FH and PPH contributions were equal in well-controlled Malaysian type 2 diabetes patients in real-world practice. FH predominated when HbA1c was ≥9 and ≥10% in oral antidiabetic drug- and insulin-treated patients, respectively. A unique observation was the greater PPH contribution when HbA1c was <8% despite the use of basal and mealtime insulin in this multi-ethnic cohort, which required further validation.
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.
METHODS: A cross-sectional observational study was designed. Forty normotensive (median age 47 +/- 6 yrs.) and twenty untreated hypertensive Malay men (median age 50 +/- 7 yrs.) without clinical evidence of cardiovascular complications were selected. Pulse wave velocity measured using the automated Complior machine was used as an index of arterial stiffness. Other measurements obtained were blood pressure, body mass index, fasting insulin, cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, triglycerides, glucose and creatinine level.
RESULTS: The blood pressure and pulse wave velocity (PWV) were significantly higher in the hypertensives compared to the normotensives (blood pressure 169/100 mm Hg +/- 14/7 vs. 120/80 mm Hg +/- 10/4, p < 0.001; PWV 11.69 m/s +/- 1.12 vs. 8.83 m/s +/- 1.35, p < 0.001). Other variables such as body mass index, fasting insulin, cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol, triglycerides and haematocrit were comparable among the two groups. Within each group, there was a significant positive correlation between pulse wave velocity and systolic blood pressure (r = 0.76, p < 0.001 in normotensives; r = 0.73, p < 0.001 in hypertensives) and mean arterial pressure (r = 0.74, p < 0.001 in normotensives; r = 0.73, p < 0.001 in hypertensives). No correlation was noted between pulse wave velocity and diastolic blood pressure, age, body mass index, fasting insulin level, cholesterol, HDL-cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol or triglyceride levels.
CONCLUSION: Arterial stiffness as determined by PWV is increased in newly diagnosed untreated hypertensive subjects even before clinically evident cardiovascular disease. However, arterial stiffness is not correlated with the fasting insulin level in normotensives and newly diagnosed hypertensives.
METHODS: We assessed sCD26/DPP-IV levels, active GLP-1 levels, body mass index (BMI), glucose, insulin, A1c, glucose homeostasis indices, and lipid profiles in 549 Malaysian subjects (including 257 T2DM patients with MetS, 57 T2DM patients without MetS, 71 non-diabetics with MetS, and 164 control subjects without diabetes or metabolic syndrome).
RESULTS: Fasting serum levels of sCD26/DPP-IV were significantly higher in T2DM patients with and without MetS than in normal subjects. Likewise, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were significantly higher in patients with T2DM and MetS than in non-diabetic patients with MetS. However, active GLP-1 levels were significantly lower in T2DM patients both with and without MetS than in normal subjects. In T2DM subjects, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were associated with significantly higher A1c levels, but were significantly lower in patients using monotherapy with metformin. In addition, no significant differences in sCD26/DPP-IV levels were found between diabetic subjects with and without MetS. Furthermore, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were negatively correlated with active GLP-1 levels in T2DM patients both with and without MetS. In normal subjects, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were associated with increased BMI, cholesterol, and LDL-cholesterol (LDL-c) levels.
CONCLUSION: Serum sCD26/DPP-IV levels increased in T2DM subjects with and without MetS. Active GLP-1 levels decreased in T2DM patients both with and without MetS. In addition, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were associated with Alc levels and negatively correlated with active GLP-1 levels. Moreover, metformin monotherapy was associated with reduced sCD26/DPP-IV levels. In normal subjects, sCD26/DPP-IV levels were associated with increased BMI, cholesterol, and LDL-c.
METHODS: A total of 20 healthy volunteers were challenged with 3 test meals, similar in fat content (~31% en) but varying in saturated SFA content and polyunsaturated/saturated fatty acid ratios (P/S). The 3 meals were lauric + myristic acid-rich (LM), P/S 0.19; palmitic acid-rich (POL), P/S 0.31; and stearic acid-rich (STE), P/S 0.22. Blood was sampled at fasted baseline and 2, 4, 5, 6, and 8 hours. Plasma lipids (triacylglycerol [TAG]) and lipoproteins (TC, LDL-C, high density lipoprotein-cholesterol [HDL-C]) were evaluated.
RESULTS: Varying SFA in the test meal significantly impacted postprandial TAG response (p < 0.05). Plasma TAG peaked at 5 hours for STE, 4 hours for POL, and 2 hours for LM test meals. Area-under-the-curve (AUC) for plasma TAG was increased significantly after STE treatment (STE > LM by 32.2%, p = 0.003; STE > POL by 27.9%, p = 0.023) but was not significantly different between POL and LM (POL > LM by 6.0%, p > 0.05). At 2 hours, plasma HDL-C increased significantly after the LM and POL test meals compared with STE (p < 0.05). In comparison to the STE test meal, HDL-C AUC was elevated 14.0% (p = 0.005) and 7.6% (p = 0.023) by the LM and POL test meals, respectively. The TC response was also increased significantly by LM compared with both POL and STE test meals (p < 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Chain length of saturates clearly mediated postmeal plasma TAG and HDL-C changes.
METHODS: All English-language medical literature published from inception till October 2014 which met the inclusion criteria were reviewed and analyzed.
RESULTS: A total of nine papers were included, reviewed and analyzed. The total sample size was 4276 patients. All studies used either of the two DPP4 inhibitors - Vildagliptin or Sitagliptin, vs sulphonylurea or meglitinides. Patients receiving DPP4 inhibitors were less likely to develop symptomatic hypoglycemia (risk ratio 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.70), confirmed hypoglycemia (risk ratio 0.36; 95% CI, 0.21-0.64) and severe hypoglycemia (risk ratio 0.22; 95% CI, 0.10-0.53) compared with patients on sulphonylureas. There was no statistically significant difference in HbA1C changes comparing Vildagliptin and sulphonylurea.
CONCLUSION: DPP4 inhibitor is a safer alternative to sulphonylurea in Muslim patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who fast during the month of Ramadan as it is associated with lower risk of symptomatic, confirmed and severe hypoglycemia, with efficacy comparable to sulphonylurea.