Search

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus continues to increase in many Asian countries, with possible contributing factors, such as younger-onset disease, diabetes development at lower body mass index, higher visceral fat accumulation and poorer β-cell function, among Asian populations. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors have been shown to confer favorable effects in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients, such as improved glycemic control, weight and blood pressure reduction, and importantly, cardiorenal benefits. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors are generally well-tolerated, and have a well-defined safety profile based on evidence from numerous clinical trials and post-marketing pharmacovigilance reporting. To our knowledge, this review is the first to provide a comprehensive coverage of the adverse events of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, as well as their management and counseling aspects for Asian type 2 diabetes mellitus populations., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of Diabetes Investigation published by Asian Association for the Study of Diabetes (AASD) and John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd.)

The Latino population consists of distinct cultural groups, with differences in dietary habits and lifestyle that can affect the risk for type 2 diabetes. The best terminology today is Latino/Hispanic, and it should only be used as ethnicity. Latin-America has different races such as Caucasians, Native Americans, Blacks and Asians, and many mixtures of all. The leading cause of death in Latin-America is Cardiovascular diseases and the most important risk factor is diabetes mellitus (DM). According to the latest estimates from the Global Burden of Disease, the burden of DM was greater than expected in Latin America and the Caribbean region. Extensive data illustrates that lower cardiovascular disease risk in Latino group is a paradox. Instead, it is evident that the cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of mortality in Latinos., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Background: To examine the impact on glycemic control of achieving postprandial glucose (PPG) target with lixisenatide, a once-daily glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist approved in the US, in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on basal insulin, an agent that primarily targets fasting plasma glucose., Methods: A post hoc pooled analysis was conducted using clinical trial data extracted from the intent-to-treat subpopulation of patients with T2D who participated in the 24-week, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-arm parallel-group, multicenter GetGoal-L (NCT00715624), GetGoal-Duo 1 (NCT00975286) and GetGoal-L Asia trials (NCT00866658)., Results: Data from 587 lixisenatide-treated patients and 484 placebo-treated patients were included. Patients on lixisenatide were more likely to achieve a PPG target of < 10 mmol/L (< 180 mg/dL) than placebo-treated patients (P < 0.001), regardless of baseline fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels. More importantly, those who reached the PPG target experienced a significantly greater reduction in mean HbA1c, were more likely to achieve HbA1c target of < 53 mmol/mol (< 7.0%), and experienced weight loss. Those outcomes were achieved with no significant differences in the risk of symptomatic hypoglycemia compared with placebo., Conclusion: Compared with placebo, addition of lixisenatide to basal insulin improved HbA1c and reduced PPG, without increasing hypoglycemia risk. These findings highlight the importance of PPG control in the management of T2D, and provide evidence that adding an agent to basal insulin therapy that also impacts PPG has therapeutic value for patients who are not meeting glycemic targets., Trial Registration: NCT00715624. Registered 15 July 2008, NCT00975286 . Registered 11 September 2009, NCT00866658 . Registered 20 March 2009., Competing Interests: Competing interestsJAD has been a consultant or served on the advisory board for Amgen Inc., Aspire Bariatrics, AstraZeneca, Boston Therapeutics, Eli Lilly & Co., GSK, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk, and Valeritas; has been a speaker for AstraZeneca, Janssen, Merck-Serono, Novo Nordisk, and Takeda; and has received a research grant from AstraZeneca. WS, SP, and RB are employees and stockholders of Sanofi. LAL. has been a consultant for AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly & Co., Janssen, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Servier; has received research support from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly & Co., GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; and has provided continuing medical education on behalf of AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly & Co., Janssen, Merck & Co., Inc., Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Servier., (© The Author(s). 2020.)

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) has created a transculturalized diabetes chronic disease care model that is adapted for patients across a spectrum of ethnicities and cultures. AACE has conducted several transcultural activities on global issues in clinical endocrinology and completed a 3-city series of conferences in December 2017 that focused on diabetes care for ethnic minorities in the U.S. Proceedings from the "Diabetes Care Across America" series of transcultural summits are presented here. Information from community leaders, practicing health care professionals, and other stakeholders in diabetes care is analyzed according to biological and environmental factors. Four specific U.S. ethnicities are detailed: African Americans, Latino/Hispanics, Asian Americans, and Native Americans. A core set of recommendations to culturally adapt diabetes care is presented that emphasizes culturally appropriate terminology, transculturalization of white papers, culturally adapting clinic infrastructure, flexible office hours, behavioral medicine-especially motivational interviewing and building trust-culturally competent nutritional messaging and health literacy, community partnerships for care delivery, technology innovation, clinical trial recruitment and retention of ethnic minorities, and more funding for scientific studies on epigenetic mechanisms of cultural impact on disease expression. It is hoped that through education, research, and clinical practice enhancements, diabetes care can be optimized in terms of precision and clinical outcomes for the individual and U.S. population as a whole.

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a frequent complication of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and is associated with poor clinical outcomes, including an increased risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, as well as adverse economic and social effects. Slowing the development and progression of CKD remains an unmet clinical need in patients with T2DM. Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are widely used for the management of T2DM and have effects beyond glucose lowering that include cardiovascular benefits and potential renoprotective effects. Although the glucose-lowering efficacy of these agents is dependent on renal function, the cardiovascular and renal benefits of SGLT2 inhibition appear to be maintained to estimated glomerular filtration levels as low as 30 mL/min/1.73 m 2 . Clinical evidence has indicated that these agents can reduce the risk of development or worsening of albuminuria, a marker of renal damage, through a range of mechanisms. These include blood pressure lowering, reduction of intraglomerular pressure and hyperfiltration, modification of inflammatory processes, reduction of ischemia-related renal injury, and increases in glucagon levels. The blood pressure-lowering effect of SGLT2 inhibitors is maintained in people with CKD and could further contribute to reduced renal burden, as well as potentially offering synergistic effects with antihypertensive therapies in these patients. Several cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) have included renal endpoints, adding to the growing evidence of the potential renoprotective effects of these agents in patients with T2DM. Several ongoing dedicated renal outcomes trials will provide further guidance on the potential clinical role of SGLT2 inhibitors in slowing the development and progression of renal impairment in individuals with T2DM.

This document represents the official position of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists and the American College of Endocrinology. Where there were no randomized controlled trials or specific U.S. FDA labeling for issues in clinical practice, the participating clinical experts utilized their judgment and experience. Every effort was made to achieve consensus among the committee members. Position statements are meant to provide guidance, but they are not to be considered prescriptive for any individual patient and cannot replace the judgment of a clinician.

Objective: to evaluate the efficacy and safety of albiglutide compared with placebo and active comparators from an integrated trial subpopulation of Latino/Hispanic patients whose type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) was inadequately controlled on their current regimen of diet and exercise, with or without oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) and/or insulin., Methods: Latino/Hispanic patient subpopulations (N = 1204) across 7 phase III albiglutide studies (N = 4400) were evaluated post-hoc for efficacy and safety. Comparators were placebo, sulfonylureas, insulin, thiazolidinediones, and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Glycatedhemoglobin (HbA 1c ) change from baseline to the time of the primary endpoint assessment (from 26 to 104 weeks) was evaluated in patients on diet and exercise and/or OADs, with or without insulin. Patients were allowed to continue in the study if hyperglycemic rescue was required, according to a prespecified algorithm and at the discretion of the investigator., Results: At baseline in the Latino/Hispanic subpopulation, the mean HbA 1c was 8.3%, mean age was 53 years, mean body mass index was 32 kg/m 2 , and mean duration of T2DM was 8.0 years. The primary endpoint of mean HbA 1c difference (albiglutide - placebo) was -0.94% for the Latino/Hispanic subpopulation and -0.86% (p < 0.001) for the overall phase III population. Changes in fasting plasma glucose mirrored those of HbA 1c . Weight loss with albiglutide was numerically greater than with OADs and insulin in both populations, but it was smaller than with liraglutide. Within the Latino/Hispanic subpopulation, more injection-site reactions were reported with albiglutide vs all comparators, while gastrointestinal and hypoglycemic adverse events were comparable between the two groups, and the latter was uncommon when used without insulin and/or a sulfonylurea., Conclusions: In the Latino/Hispanic population, albiglutide resulted in effective lowering of glucose and modest weight loss, and it was generally well tolerated.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a class of antidiabetic drug used for the treatment of diabetes. These drugs are thought to lower blood glucose by blocking reabsorption of glucose by SGLT2 in the proximal convoluted tubules of the kidney. To investigate the effect of inhibiting SGLT2 on pancreatic hormones, we treated perfused pancreata from rats with chemically induced diabetes with dapagliflozin and measured the response of glucagon secretion by alpha cells in response to elevated glucose. In these type 1 diabetic rats, glucose stimulated glucagon secretion by alpha cells; this was prevented by dapagliflozin. Two models of type 2 diabetes, severely diabetic Zucker rats and db/db mice fed dapagliflozin, showed significant improvement of blood glucose levels and glucose disposal, with reduced evidence of glucagon signaling in the liver, as exemplified by reduced phosphorylation of hepatic cAMP-responsive element binding protein, reduced expression of phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase 2, increased hepatic glycogen, and reduced hepatic glucose production. Plasma glucagon levels did not change significantly. However, dapagliflozin treatment reduced the expression of the liver glucagon receptor. Dapagliflozin in rodents appears to lower blood glucose levels in part by suppressing hepatic glucagon signaling through down-regulation of the hepatic glucagon receptor., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Dulaglutide is a once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Integrated data from 9 phase II and III trials in people with T2D (N = 6005) were used to evaluate the effects of dulaglutide on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR [Chronic Kidney Disease Epidemiology Collaboration]), urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) and kidney adverse events (AEs). No significant differences in eGFR were observed during treatment for dulaglutide vs placebo, active comparators or insulin glargine (mean ± standard deviation values: dulaglutide vs placebo: 87.8 ± 17.7 vs 88.2 ± 17.9 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , P = .075; dulaglutide vs active comparators: 89.9 ± 16.7 vs 88.8 ± 16.3 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , P = .223; and dulaglutide vs insulin glargine: 85.9 ± 18.2 vs 83.9 ± 18.6 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , P = .423). Lower UACR values were observed for dulaglutide vs placebo, active comparators and insulin glargine (at 26 weeks, median [Q1-Q3] values were: dulaglutide vs placebo: 8.0 [4.4-20.4] vs 8.0 [4.4-23.9] mg/g, P = .023; dulaglutide vs active comparators: 8.0 [4.4-21.2] vs 8.9 [4.4-27.4] mg/g, P = .013; and dulaglutide vs insulin glargine: 8.9 [4.4-29.2] vs 12.4 [5.3-50.5] mg/g, P = .029). AEs reflecting potential acute renal failure were 3.4, 1.7 and 7.0 events/1000 patient-years for dulaglutide, active comparators and placebo, respectively. In conclusion, dulaglutide treatment of clinical trial participants with T2D did not affect eGFR and slightly decreased albuminuria., (© 2016 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Metformin is recommended as a first-line therapy for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, many patients do not achieve glycemic goals with metformin monotherapy and require subsequent combination therapy with other antihyperglycemic agents (AHAs). For newly diagnosed patients with high blood glucose, initial combination therapy may be required to achieve glycemic control. The American Association for Clinical Endocrinologists algorithm for the treatment of T2DM recommends metformin plus a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor as the first oral combination in patients who present with HbA1c ≥7.5%. Canagliflozin, an SGLT2 inhibitor, lowers the renal threshold for glucose and increases urinary glucose excretion leading to a mild osmotic diuresis and a net caloric loss. The effect of canagliflozin is insulin-independent and complementary to other AHAs, including metformin. A fixed-dose combination (FDC) of canagliflozin and metformin is also available with variable dosing, which may be attractive to some patients owing to the potential for reduced pill burden and costs. This article reviews the efficacy and safety of canagliflozin in combination with metformin based on data from the canagliflozin phase 3 clinical program. As initial combination therapy in drug-naïve patients or as dual therapy with metformin or triple therapy in combination with metformin and other AHAs, canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg improved glycemic control and provided reductions in body weight and systolic blood pressure that were sustained for up to 104 weeks. Canagliflozin was generally well tolerated across studies in combination with metformin. An increased incidence of adverse events (AEs) related to the mechanism of SGLT2 inhibition (i.e., genital mycotic infections, urinary tract infections, osmotic diuresis-related AEs) was observed with canagliflozin. Canagliflozin was associated with a low incidence of hypoglycemia when not used in conjunction with AHAs associated with hypoglycemia (i.e., insulin or sulfonylurea). Together, these results support the use of a canagliflozin and metformin FDC as a treatment approach for a broad range of patients with T2DM., Funding: Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC.

Objective: The aim of this post hoc analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide in Hispanic/Latino patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in phase 3 AWARD trials 1 to 6., Methods: Hispanic/Latino data at Week 26 were pooled across studies for each dulaglutide dose to analyze the change from baseline in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), percent to HbA1c goal, and adverse events (AEs). Change from baseline in HbA1c, change from baseline in weight and hypoglycemia were analyzed by Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino subgroups for each study., Results: Of the 3,136 patients randomized to dulaglutide 1.5 or 0.75 mg, 949 were reported as having Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. Baseline characteristics were similar for Hispanic/Latino and overall populations, except there were slightly more Hispanic/Latino females and weight was slightly lower for Hispanic/Latino patients. Hispanic/Latino patients receiving dulaglutide 1.5 mg had a reduction in HbA1c of 1.25% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.35, -1.15); dulaglutide 0.75 mg had a reduction of 1.07% (95% CI: -1.18, -0.96). Reductions in HbA1c and percent to goal HbA1c <7% and ≤6.5% were similar between Hispanic/Latino patients and the overall population. Weight change and hypoglycemia were similar between Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino subgroups for all studies. Treatment-emergent AEs were consistent with the overall population., Conclusion: Dulaglutide improved glycemic control with the potential for weight loss in Hispanic/Latino patients with T2D. Dulaglutide was well tolerated and had a low risk of hypoglycemia when used without insulin secretagogues or insulin. In the Hispanic/Latino population, dulaglutide efficacy and safety was consistent with that of the overall population., Abbreviations: AE = adverse event AWARD = Assessment of Weekly AdministRation of dulaglutide in Diabetes BID = twice daily CARMELA = The Cardiovascular Risk Factor Multiple Evaluation of Latin America CI = confidence interval GLP-1 RA = glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist HbA1c = glycosylated hemoglobin T2D = type 2 diabetes.

Objectives: To evaluate the proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) achieving reductions in both glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight with canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, versus sitagliptin over 52 weeks., Methods: Data were pooled from two, randomized, Phase 3 studies of canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg versus sitagliptin 100 mg as add-on to metformin, and canagliflozin 300 mg versus sitagliptin 100 mg as add-on to metformin plus sulfonylurea (N = 1856). The composite end points of change from baseline in both HbA1c <0% and body weight <0 kg, and attainment of HbA1c <7.0% and body weight reduction ≥5% at Week 52 were evaluated. Safety was assessed based on adverse event reports., Results: Canagliflozin provided reductions in HbA1c and body weight over 52 weeks versus sitagliptin. A greater proportion of patients had both HbA1c and body weight reductions with canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg versus sitagliptin 100 mg (67.7%, 72.6%, and 44.1%, respectively). Among patients with HbA1c and body weight reductions, more patients achieved the composite end point of HbA1c <7.0% and body weight reduction ≥5% with canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg versus sitagliptin 100 mg (18.9%, 18.3%, and 5.7%, respectively). Canagliflozin was generally well tolerated., Conclusions: A greater proportion of patients with T2DM achieved reductions in both HbA1c and body weight, and more patients with HbA1c and body weight reductions achieved HbA1c <7.0% and body weight reduction ≥5% with canagliflozin versus sitagliptin over 52 weeks., Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers are NCT01106677; NCT01137812.

Although insulin monotherapy prevents death from ketoacidosis, it does not prevent either the hyperglycemic surges or the hypoglycemic plunges of glucose levels that plague the majority of patients with type 1 diabetes. However, significant improvements have occurred with the combination of continuous insulin delivery matched by continuous glucose monitoring, but the technology is not available for all patients, requires extensive education, is expensive and moreover, while much better than standard care, it almost never reduces haemoglobin A 1c (HbA 1c ) to below 6%. This may indicate that an improved diabetes therapy involving antagonism of glucagon action will for the first time control glucose levels to normal and eradicate the long-term complications of diabetes. Although one can never predict that results in animals will be reproduced in humans, the available evidence suggests that patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes may expect far superior control of the metabolic abnormalities without the need for significant monitoring of glucose, a very important but expensive part of any insulin regimen., (Copyright © 2016 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objective: To compare two methods of delivering intensified insulin therapy (IIT) in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin ± concomitant antihyperglycemic agents in a real-world clinical setting., Methods: Data for this retrospective study were obtained using electronic medical records from a large multicenter diabetes system. Records were queried to identify patients transitioned to V-Go(®) disposable insulin delivery device (V-Go) or multiple daily injections (MDI) using an insulin pen to add prandial insulin when A1C was >7% on basal insulin therapy. The primary endpoint was the difference in A1C change using follow-up A1C results., Results: A total of 116 patients were evaluated (56 V-Go, 60 MDI). Both groups experienced significant glycemic improvement from similar mean baselines. By 27 weeks, A1C least squares mean change from baseline was -1.98% (-21.6 mmol/mol) with V-Go and -1.34% (-14.6 mmol/mol) with MDI, for a treatment difference of -0.64% (-7.0 mmol/mol; P = .020). Patients using V-Go administered less mean ± SD insulin compared to patients using MDI, 56 ± 17 units/day versus 78 ± 40 units/day (P<.001), respectively. Diabetes-related direct pharmacy costs were lower with V-Go, and the cost inferential from baseline per 1% reduction in A1C was significantly less with V-Go ($118.84 ± $158.55 per patient/month compared to $217.16 ± $251.66 per patient/month with MDI; P = .013)., Conclusion: Progression to IIT resulted in significant glycemic improvement. Insulin delivery with V-Go was associated with a greater reduction in A1C, required less insulin, and proved more cost-effective than administering IIT with MDI., Abbreviations: A1C = glycated hemoglobin ANCOVA = analysis of covariance CI = confidence interval CSII = continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion FPG = fasting plasma glucose IIT = intensified insulin therapy LSM = least squares mean MDI = multiple daily injections T2DM = type 2 diabetes mellitus TDD = total daily dose.

A recent Diabetes Care study found flaws in Medicare's competitive bidding program for diabetes test strips. Two of that study's co-authors discuss the findings and why CMS should suspend the bidding program.

Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitor canagliflozin in patients of different ethnicities., Design Setting and Patients: Post hoc analysis of data pooled from four randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies of adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)., Interventions: Once daily oral canagliflozin 100 mg or 300 mg, or placebo., Main Outcome Measures: Efficacy endpoints included change from baseline in HbA1c, body weight (BW), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and lipids at week 26; safety and tolerability were assessed by adverse event reports., Results: Of the 2,313 patients included in this pooled analysis, 609 self-identified as Hispanic/Latino. Hispanic/Latino patients had a mean age of 54 years, mean duration of T2DM of 7 years, mean HbA1c of 8.1%, mean body mass index of 31.2 kg/m(2), and mean SBP of 126.1 mm Hg. There were more women in the non-Hispanic/Latino cohort (63%) compared with the Hispanic/Latino cohort. Placebo-subtracted changes in HbA1c were -.82% with canagliflozin 100 mg and -.94% with canagliflozin 300 mg in the Hispanic/Latino cohort, which were similar to reductions observed in the non-Hispanic/Latino cohort. Significantly greater dose-related reductions in HbA1c, BW, and SBP were observed with both canagliflozin doses compared with placebo. Canagliflozin was generally well-tolerated. Genital mycotic infections were less frequent in Hispanic/Latino women than in non-Hispanic/Latino women., Conclusions: The SGLT2 inhibitor canagliflozin was generally well-tolerated and was associated with clinically meaningful reductions in HbA1c, BW, and SBP in both Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino patients with T2DM.

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) and American College of Endocrinology (ACE) convened their first Workshop for recommendations to optimize Clinical Practice Algorithm (CPA) development for Latin America (LA) in diabetes (focusing on glycemic control), obesity (focusing on weight loss), thyroid (focusing on thyroid nodule diagnostics), and bone (focusing on postmenopausal osteoporosis) on February 28, 2015, in San Jose, Costa Rica. A standardized methodology is presented incorporating various transculturalization factors: resource availability (including imaging equipment and approved pharmaceuticals), health care professional and patient preferences, lifestyle variables, socio-economic parameters, web-based global accessibility, electronic implementation, and need for validation protocols. A standardized CPA template with node-specific recommendations to assist the local transculturalization process is provided. Participants unanimously agreed on the following five overarching principles for LA: (1) there is only one level of optimal endocrine care, (2) hemoglobin A1C should be utilized at every level of diabetes care, (3) nutrition education and increased pharmaceutical options are necessary to optimize the obesity care model, (4) quality neck ultrasound must be part of an optimal thyroid nodule care model, and (5) more scientific evidence is needed on osteoporosis prevalence and cost to justify intervention by governmental health care authorities. This 2015 AACE/ACE Workshop marks the beginning of a structured activity that assists local experts in creating culturally sensitive, evidence-based, and easy-to-implement tools for optimizing endocrine care on a global scale.

Objective: In 2011, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) launched the Competitive Bidding Program (CBP) in nine markets for diabetes supplies. The intent was to lower costs to consumers. Medicare claims data (2009-2012) were used to confirm the CMS report (2012) that there were no disruptions in acquisition caused by CBP and no changes in health outcomes., Research Design and Methods: The study population consisted of insulin users: 43,939 beneficiaries in the nine test markets (TEST) and 485,688 beneficiaries in the nontest markets (NONTEST). TEST and NONTEST were subdivided: those with full self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) supply acquisition (full SMBG) according to prescription and those with partial/no acquisition (partial/no SMBG). Propensity score-matched analysis was performed to reduce selection bias. Outcomes were impact of partial/no SMBG acquisition on mortality, inpatient admissions, and inpatient costs., Results: Survival was negatively associated with partial/no SMBG acquisition in both cohorts (P < 0.0001). Coterminous with CBP (2010-2011), there was a 23.0% (P < 0.0001) increase in partial/no SMBG acquisition in TEST vs. 1.7% (P = 0.0002) in NONTEST. Propensity score-matched analysis showed beneficiary migration from full to partial/no SMBG acquisition in 2011 (1,163 TEST vs. 605 NONTEST) was associated with more deaths within the TEST cohort (102 vs. 60), with higher inpatient hospital admissions and associated costs., Conclusions: SMBG supply acquisition was disrupted in the TEST population, leading to increased migration to partial/no SMBG acquisition with associated increases in mortality, inpatient admissions, and costs. Based on our findings, more effective monitoring protocols are needed to protect beneficiary safety., (© 2016 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered.)

Purpose: The pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes mellitus is complex and involves multiple organs and hormones, suggesting that successful treatment may require therapies that target multiple mechanisms. Exenatide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, has a multifaceted mechanism of action involving pancreatic α and β cells, hepatic glucose production, gastric motility, and satiety. Exenatide once weekly (a twice-daily formulation is also available) utilizes continuous release from biodegradable microspheres. This review discusses relevant efficacy and tolerability outcomes with exenatide once weekly in the context of its pharmacology., Methods: The medical literature was searched to identify relevant data on the pharmacology and clinical effects of exenatide once weekly., Findings: Exenatide once weekly, like the twice-daily formulation, has been shown to improve glycemic parameters, promote weight loss, result in beneficial changes in cardiovascular risk factors, and is well-tolerated., Implications: The characteristics of exenatide once weekly make it a treatment option for patients with type 2 diabetes., (Copyright © 2016. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Purpose: To describe the cultural and linguistic adaptation and Spanish translation of an English-language patient decision aid (PDA) for use in supporting shared decision-making in Hispanics/Latinos with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), a group at a high risk for complications., Patients and Methods: A steering committee of endocrinologists, a primary care physician, a certified diabetes educator, and a dietician, each with extensive experience in providing care to Hispanics/Latinos was convened to assess a PDA developed for English-speaking patients with T2DM. English content was reviewed for cultural sensitivity and appropriateness for a Hispanic/Latino population. A consensus-building process and iterative version edits incorporated clinician perspectives. The content was adapted to be consistent with traditional Hispanic/Latino cultural communication precepts (eg, avoidance of hostile confrontation; value for warm interaction; respect for authority; value of family support for decisions). The PDA was translated by native-speaking individuals with diabetes expertise., Results: The PDA underwent testing during cognitive interviews with ten Spanish-speaking Hispanics/Latinos with T2DM to ensure that the content is reflective of the experience, understanding, and language Hispanic/Latino patients use to describe diabetes and treatment. Content edits were made to assure a literacy level appropriate to the audience, and the PDA was produced for online video dissemination., Conclusion: High-quality, well-developed tools to facilitate shared decision-making in populations with limited access to culturally sensitive information can narrow gaps and align care with individual patient preferences. A newly developed PDA is available for shared decision-making that provides culturally appropriate treatment information for inadequately controlled Hispanics/Latinos with T2DM. The impact on the overall health of patients and care management of T2DM requires further study.

Objective: The glycemic management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and renal impairment is challenging, with few treatment options. We investigated the effect of saxagliptin in the Saxagliptin Assessment of Vascular Outcomes Recorded in Patients with Diabetes Mellitus (SAVOR)-Thrombolysis in Myocardial Infarction (TIMI) 53 trial according to baseline renal function., Research Design and Methods: Patients with T2DM at risk for cardiovascular events were stratified as having normal or mildly impaired renal function (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] >50 mL/min/1.73 m(2); n = 13,916), moderate renal impairment (eGFR 30-50 mL/min/1.73 m(2); n = 2,240), or severe renal impairment (eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m(2); n = 336) and randomized to receive saxagliptin or placebo. The primary end point was cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or ischemic stroke., Results: After a median duration of 2 years, saxagliptin neither increased nor decreased the risk of the primary and secondary composite end points compared with placebo, irrespective of renal function (all P for interactions ≥ 0.19). Overall, the risk of hospitalization for heart failure among the three eGFR groups of patients was 2.2% (referent), 7.4% (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 2.38 [95% CI 1.95-2.91], P < 0.001), and 13.0% (adjusted HR 4.59 [95% CI 3.28-6.28], P < 0.001), respectively. The relative risk of hospitalization for heart failure with saxagliptin was similar (P for interaction = 0.43) in patients with eGFR >50 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (HR 1.23 [95% CI 0.99-1.55]), eGFR 30-50 mL/min/1.73 m(2) (HR 1.46 [95% CI 1.07-2.00]), and in patients with eGFR <30 (HR 0.94 [95% CI 0.52-1.71]). Patients with renal impairment achieved reductions in microalbuminuria with saxagliptin (P = 0.041) that were similar to those of the overall trial population., Conclusions: Saxagliptin did not affect the risk of ischemic cardiovascular events, increased the risk of heart failure hospitalization, and reduced progressive albuminuria, irrespective of baseline renal function., (© 2015 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered.)

In type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), decreased pancreatic beta-cell function and increased insulin resistance contribute to a steady decline in glucose homeostasis. Maintaining levels of glycated hemoglobin ≤7.0% is thought to reduce the microvascular and possibly macrovascular complications that result if T2DM is not properly managed. Recent guidelines have recognized the importance of postprandial glucose (PPG) control in reducing cardiovascular risks, and have recommended a more patient-centered approach. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) mimic the action of the endogenous gastrointestinal hormone GLP-1 to activate the insulin response in pancreatic beta cells in a glucose-dependent manner. Prandial GLP-1 RAs have a short plasma half-life and are particularly effective at targeting PPG elevations, whereas long-acting non-prandial GLP-1 RAs are more effective at reducing fasting plasma glucose. These differences highlight the potential for treatment with these agents to be tailored to the need of individual patients and their glycemic imbalance. All GLP-1 RAs are being evaluated in long-term cardiovascular outcome trials. To date, the only cardiovascular trial that has been completed is the ELIXA trial for lixisenatide, which was found to meet the pre-specified criterion of non-inferiority versus placebo in terms of cardiovascular outcomes.

Most antihyperglycemic agents available for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have insulin-dependent mechanisms of action; that is, they either stimulate insulin production (sulfonylureas, glinides, incretin mimetics, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors), improve insulin sensitivity (thiazolidinediones, biguanides), or directly augment endogenous insulin (basal and prandial insulins). As β-cell function deteriorates, combination therapy is usually needed to effectively control glycemia. Moreover, some antihyperglycemic agents are associated with adverse effects, such as weight gain and hypoglycemia. A novel approach for treating T2DM is to inhibit renal glucose reabsorption through inhibition of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2), which is responsible for the majority of glucose reabsorption in the renal proximal tubule. By reducing the renal capacity to reabsorb filtered glucose, SGLT2 inhibitors increase excretion of excess glucose in urine, thereby decreasing plasma glucose concentration. Thus, although glucosuria is often viewed as an indicator of systemic hyperglycemia, this perception needs to be modified in patients treated with SGLT2 inhibitors where glucosuria is an indicator of the desired treatment effect. Currently, 2 SGLT2 inhibitors, canagliflozin and dapagliflozin, are approved in the United States for the treatment of patients with T2DM; other SGLT2 inhibitors are in various stages of clinical development. Clinical studies in patients with T2DM on a variety of background diabetes treatments have demonstrated the efficacy of canagliflozin and dapagliflozin in improving glycemic control and reducing body weight and blood pressure. Canagliflozin and dapagliflozin are generally well tolerated, with a low risk of hypoglycemia when not used in combination with insulin and/or sulfonylurea. Higher incidences of genital mycotic infections and adverse events related to osmotic diuresis and volume depletion were observed with both agents; they were generally mild or moderate and infrequently led to study discontinuation. Based on current evidence, SGLT2 inhibitors provide an important new treatment option for patients with T2DM.

Objective: The number of individuals diagnosed with type 2 diabetes mellitus is expected to rise disproportionately in Hispanic/Latino populations. We therefore aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor linagliptin specifically in Hispanic/Latino patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus., Research Design and Methods: Data from 745 patients who self-identified their ethnicity as Hispanic or Latino were pooled from six randomized, placebo-controlled phase 3 trials. Participants received linagliptin (5 mg/day) or placebo as monotherapy, or in combination with other oral antidiabetes drugs for 18 or 24 weeks., Results: The placebo-adjusted mean change (95% CI) in glycated hemoglobin from baseline (mean 8.2%) was -0.63% (-0.77 to -0.48; p<0.0001) at week 18, and -0.58% (-0.74 to -0.42; p<0.0001) at week 24. The placebo-adjusted mean change (95% CI) in fasting plasma glucose from baseline was -11.7 mg/dL (-19.3 to -4.0; p=0.0028) at week 18 and -14.1 mg/dL (-22.0 to -6.3; p=0.0004) at week 24. Hypoglycemia incidence was 17.4% with linagliptin and 21% with placebo. In patients not receiving concomitant sulfonylurea, the hypoglycemia incidence was 10.1% with linagliptin and 19.4% with placebo. The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs), drug-related AEs, and serious AEs with linagliptin was similar to placebo (AEs 67.6% vs 68.9%; drug-related AEs 15.1% vs 18.7%; serious AEs 3.6% vs 3.0%). The mean body weight remained unchanged in both groups., Conclusions: In Hispanic/Latino patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus, linagliptin provided clinically meaningful improvements in glycemic control without weight gain or increased risk of hypoglycemia.

Cardiovascular disease is a serious complication of diabetes mellitus. In the last 2 decades, great strides have been made in reducing microvascular complications in patients with diabetes through improving glycemic control. Decreasing rates of cardiovascular events have proved to be more difficult than simply intensifying the management of hyperglycemia. A tremendous effort has been made to deepen understanding of cardiovascular disease in diabetes and to formulate the best treatment approach. This review summarizes the current state of knowledge and discusses areas of uncertainty in the care of patients with diabetes who are at risk for cardiovascular disease., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Oral antihyperglycemic drugs used to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) vary in safety and tolerability. Treatment-related hypoglycemia and weight gain can exacerbate underlying disease. , Objective: To evaluate the tolerability of saxagliptin using data from phase III clinical trials. , Methods: Six 24-week randomized studies in 4,214 patients with T2DM were assessed. Saxagliptin 2.5 mg or 5 mg was compared with placebo in 2 trials of monotherapy in treatment-naïve patients and in 3 trials of add-on therapy to metformin, glyburide, or a thiazolidinedione; initial combination therapy with saxagliptin 5 mg plus metformin was compared with metformin monotherapy in treatment-naïve patients. Data from the monotherapy and add-on studies were pooled; data from the initial combination study were analyzed separately. No statistical analyses of between-group comparisons across studies were conducted for these safety analyses because of multiplicity of end points and relative lack of statistical power and because small differences not reaching statistical significance have the potential to be clinically relevant.  , Results: In the pooled analysis, incidence rates for adverse events (AEs) with saxagliptin 2.5 mg, 5 mg, and placebo were 72.0% (635/882), 72.2% (637/882), and 70.6% (564/799), respectively; rates for serious AEs (SAEs) were 3.5% (31/882), 3.4% (30/882), and 3.4% (27/799); rates of discontinuation due to AEs were 2.2% (19/882), 3.3% (29/882), and 1.8% (14/799). AEs reported in ≥ 2% of patients receiving saxagliptin and occurring ≥ 1% more frequently with saxagliptin than with placebo were sinusitis, gastroenteritis, abdominal pain, and vomiting. In the initial combination study, AE incidence rates with saxagliptin 5 mg plus metformin and metformin monotherapy were 55.3% (177/320) and 58.5% (192/328), respectively; incidence rates for SAEs were 2.5% (8/320) and 2.4% (8/328); and rates of discontinuation due to AEs were 2.5% (8/320) and 3.4% (11/328). , Conclusion: Saxagliptin 2.5 mg or 5 mg was generally well tolerated as monotherapy, add-on combination therapy with other oral antihyperglycemic drugs, and initial combination with metformin.

Type 2 diabetes is associated with a high prevalence of comorbidities resulting from hypertension, dyslipidemia, and hyperglycemia. Inadequate management of these risk factors will eventually result in detrimental health consequences. Thus, the effect of a drug on factors such as weight, cardiovascular (CV) risk factors, and adherence is important to consider. A review was undertaken of the recent medical literature describing the extraglycemic characteristics of the two classes of incretin-based therapies-glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors. PubMed searches were performed to identify published data on incretin therapies that describe their effects on CV risk factors, CV events, and factors related to medication adherence. The maintenance or loss of weight associated with the use of GLP-1RAs and DPP-4 inhibitors is well described in the medical literature. These agents also appear to be associated with a modest decrease in blood pressure and a reduced risk of CV events. In addition, several characteristics of incretin therapies may improve rates of medication adherence, such as generally favorable tolerability profiles (particularly with DPP-4 inhibitors), the availability of formulations that simplify treatment regimens, and a low risk for hypoglycemia. The literature on incretin therapies describes a number of clinical characteristics that are relevant to the management of extraglycemic risk factors. As part of a holistic treatment strategy, these properties constitute important considerations for tailoring therapy to individual patients with type 2 diabetes.

Objective: To review the most recent clinical data on the safety and efficacy of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and to evaluate their position in current treatment guidelines and algorithms., Methods: PubMed searches were performed to identify published data regarding both the safety and efficacy of DPP-4 inhibitors approved for use in the United States and clinical guidelines describing recommendations for their use., Results: In the past 2 years, more than 100 publications have added clinical trial data on DPP-4 inhibitors to the medical literature. Since becoming available in 2006, these agents have demonstrated an excellent safety/tolerability profile, and as add-on to metformin, DPP-4 inhibitors may have comparable glycemic efficacy as other oral agents. As a result, DPP-4 inhibitors have assumed roles in clinical practice guidelines and treatment algorithms that are comparable to the sulfonylurea class. Advantages of DPP-4 inhibitors include an oral route of administration, a mechanism of action based on glucose-stimulated insulin secretion, and a low risk of hypoglycemia. The main disadvantage associated with this class is a relatively high cost. There is also less clinical experience with DPP-4 agents than classes of agents that have been in use for decades; however, long-term data on the safety and efficacy of DPP-4 agents will be available in the near future to refine their place in therapy. From 2 large clinical trials recently reported, EXAMINE and SAVOR, this class of agents does not increase overall adverse cardiovascular outcomes nor the risk of pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer., Conclusion: Based on comparisons of nonglycemic effects such as risk of hypoglycemia, weight gain, and durability, DPP-4 inhibitors may be considered as an alternative to sulfonylureas. However, direct cost may be a determining factor in the choice of therapy.

Objective: To explore the impact of race/ethnicity on efficacy and safety of twice-daily insulin lispro mix 75/25 (LM75/25; 75% lispro protamine suspension, 25% insulin lispro) and once daily insulin glargine (GL)., Design, Setting, Patients: More than 2,000 Patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled in the 24-week initiation phase of the DURABLE Trial., Main Outcome Measures: Efficacy and safety variables at endpoint, including hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG), and hypoglycemia, in each racial/ethnic group were compared to Caucasians within treatment groups., Results: Asian patients had less (LM75/25: -1.46%, P < .01; GL: -1.25%, P < .01) and Hispanic patients had greater (LM75/25: -2.17%) HbA1c reduction from baseline vs Caucasian patients (LM75/25: -1.84%; GL: -1.78%). Fewer Asian (LM75/25: 20%, P < .001; GL: 22%, P < .001) and Hispanic patients (LM75/25: 40%, P < .01) reached HbA1c target (< 7%) vs Caucasian patients (LM75/25: 53%; GL: 44%). Fasting plasma glucose was similar among groups, postprandial glucose (PPG) with GL was lower for African patients post-breakfast and post-dinner and higher for Asian patients post-lunch. Only PPG with LM75/25 was lower for Hispanic patients post-breakfast. Weight gain was lower in Asian patients (LM75/ 25). Insulin dose was higher for Asian (LM75/25 and GL) and lower for African patients (GL). Hypoglycemia rate was lower for Asian (LM75/25 and GL) and Hispanic patients (LM75/25)., Conclusions: There were significant efficacy and safety differences among racial/ethnic groups in the DURABLE trial. These differences may be important in designing insulin based treatment plans.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a pandemic, with millions of new diagnoses made each year. In the United States, > 90% of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus are cared for by primary care physicians who bear the primary responsibility of diagnosing and treating this disease. Building an optimal treatment regimen for a patient from the many choices available depends on many factors, including the ability of a given therapy to safely and effectively lower blood glucose levels, and potential benefits on body weight, cardiovascular risk factors, and hypoglycemia risk. With these considerations at the forefront, this article provides an overview of exenatide once weekly (EQW), a recently available antidiabetes therapy in the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist class designed to provide continuous glycemic control with once-weekly dosing. We discuss the clinical trials that have demonstrated the ability of EQW to effectively lower blood glucose levels and body weight with a minimal risk of hypoglycemia. In addition, we examine other issues likely to be relevant in a primary care setting, including safety and tolerability profiles, pharmacology and dosing, ease of use, recommended place in treatment, and patient perceptions of EQW.

Diabetic nephropathy is the leading cause of stage 5 chronic kidney disease (CKD) and occurs in 1 in 9 persons with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes. Screening should begin at the time of type 2 diabetes diagnosis to detect the presence of a decreased estimated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and/or an elevated albumin excretion rate. The estimated GFR can be used to stage CKD, assess cardiovascular risk, and develop treatment strategies. A multifaceted treatment plan delivered using a collaborative care approach that fosters person self-management is important. Glucose-lowering agents should be selected based on renal function and titrated to achieve an A1c less than 7.0%. Lipid-lowering therapy with a statin should be utilized to achieve a low-density lipoprotein cholesterol less than 100 mg/dL, possibly less than 70 mg/dL. An angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, angiotensin receptor blocker, or direct renin inhibitor, typically in combination with other antihypertensive therapies, is recommended for persons with hypertension, microalbuminuria/macroalbuminuria, and type 2 diabetes, as this approach has been shown to be renoprotective. Angiotensin-converting inhibitors have an additional benefit of improving cardiovascular outcomes in CKD.

Objective: To determine the effect of mild renal impairment (RI) on the efficacy and safety of liraglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus., Methods: In this meta-analysis, we examined the 6 LEAD (Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes) studies. Data from patients with type 2 diabetes who had normal renal function, mild RI, or moderate or severe RI were pooled for analysis. Renal function was measured by creatinine clearance as determined by the Cockcroft-Gault equation: normal renal function = creatinine clearance >89 mL/min; mild RI = 60 mL/min ≤ creatinine clearance ≤ 89 mL/min; and moderate or severe RI = creatinine clearance <60 mL/min. The meta-analysis included patients administered once-daily liraglutide (1.2 or 1.8 mg) or placebo as either monotherapy or in combination with oral antidiabetic drugs for 26 weeks. In addition, a pooled analysis of all phase 2 and 3 liraglutide trials was done to examine rates of altered renal function., Results: Mild RI did not affect the estimated treatment differences in hemoglobin A1c. Patients with normal renal function demonstrated decreases in body weight and systolic blood pressure with either dosage of liraglutide, whereas patients in either RI group also demonstrated a decrease in body weight and systolic blood pressure, but these differences were not significant compared with differences observed in the placebo group. Liraglutide treatment vs placebo was safe and well tolerated in patients with mild RI, as there were no significant differences in rates of renal injury, minor hypoglycemia, or nausea. A trend towards increased nausea was observed in patients with moderate or severe RI receiving liraglutide, although the number of patients in this treatment group was too low to determine significance., Conclusion: Mild RI, as determined by the Cockcroft-Gault equation, had no effect on the efficacy and safety of liraglutide in this meta-analysis.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) is a prevalent disorder that affects children, adolescents, and adults worldwide. In addition to risks of microvascular disease, patients with type 2 DM often have multiple risk factors of macrovascular disease; for example, approximately 90% of patients with type 2 DM are overweight/obese. Type 2 DM is a complex disease that involves a variety of pathophysiologic abnormalities, including insulin resistance, increased hepatic glucose production, and abnormalities in the secretion of hormones, such as insulin, glucagon, amylin, and incretins. Incretins are gut-derived peptides with a variety of glucoregulatory functions. Incretin dysfunction can be treated with glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (eg, exenatide and liraglutide) or inhibitors of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) (eg, sitagliptin and saxagliptin), the enzyme that degrades GLP-1. The GLP-1 receptor agonists and DPP-4 inhibitors both elevate GLP-1 activity and substantially improve glycemic control. The GLP-1 receptor agonists are more effective in lowering blood glucose and result in substantial weight loss, whereas therapy with DPP-4 inhibitors lowers blood glucose levels to a lesser degree, and they are weight neutral. Treatment with GLP-1 receptor agonists has demonstrated durable glycemic control and improvement in multiple cardiovascular disease risk factors. In addition, unlike insulin or sulfonylureas, treatment with a GLP-1 receptor agonist or a DPP-4 inhibitor has not been associated with substantial hypoglycemia. These factors should be considered when selecting monotherapy or elements of combination therapy for patients with type 2 DM who are overweight/obese, for patients who have experienced hypoglycemia with other agents, and when achieving glycemic targets is difficult.

Objective: To explore the impact of race/ethnicity on the efficacy and safety of commonly used insulin regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus., Methods: In this post hoc analysis, pooled data from 11 multinational clinical trials involving 1455 patients with type 2 diabetes were used to compare specific insulin treatments in Latino/Hispanic, Asian, African-descent, and Caucasian patients. Insulin treatments included once daily insulin glargine or neutral protamine Hagedorn (BASAL), insulin lispro mix 75/25 twice daily (LMBID), or insulin lispro mix 50/50 three times daily (LMTID)., Results: Race/ethnicity was associated with significant outcome differences for each of the insulin regimens. BASAL therapy was associated with greater improvement in several measures of glycemic control among Latino/Hispanic patients compared with Caucasian patients (lower end point hemoglobin A1c, greater reduction in hemoglobin A1c from baseline, and a larger proportion of patients achieving hemoglobin A1c level <7%). In contrast, LMBID therapy was associated with higher end point hemoglobin A1c and a smaller decrease in hemoglobin A1c from baseline in Latino/Hispanic and Asian patients than in Caucasian patients. Furthermore, fewer Asian patients attained a hemoglobin A1c level <7% than did Caucasians patients. For LMTID therapy, hemoglobin A1c outcomes were comparable across patient groups. Fasting blood glucose and glycemic excursions varied among racial/ethnic groups for the 3 insulin regimens. Weight change was comparable among racial/ethnic groups in each insulin regimen. During treatment with LMTID, Asian patients experienced higher incidence and rate of severe hypoglycemia than Caucasian patients., Conclusions: Latino/Hispanic, Asian, and African-descent patients with type 2 diabetes show different metabolic responses to insulin therapy, dependent in part on insulin type and regimen intensity.

Aims: To compare total costs and risk of hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiated on NPH insulin versus glargine in a real-world setting., Methods: This study used claims data (10/2001 to 06/2005) from a privately insured U.S. population of adult T2D patients who were initiated on NPH or glargine following a 6-month insulin-free period. A sample of 1698 glargine-treated and 400 NPH-treated patients met the inclusion criteria. Total and diabetes-related costs (inflation-adjusted to 2006) were calculated for 6-month pre- and post-index periods and compared between 400 patient pairs matched by a propensity score method., Results: In the post-index 6-month period, glargine patients incurred higher diabetes-related drug costs than NPH patients ($785 versus $632, p<0.0001) but there were no significant differences in diabetes-related medical or total costs, or all other total cost categories. Compared to the pre-index period, glargine patient costs declined by $2420 (p=0.058) whereas NPH patient costs declined by $4200 (p=0.046), with no statistically significant group differences (p=0.469). Among patients with hypoglycemia-related claims (0.75% in both groups), mean hypoglycemia-related costs were $85 and $202 for NPH and glargine patients, respectively (p=0.564)., Conclusion: Initiation of either NPH or glargine was associated with major cost reductions and infrequent hypoglycemia-related claims., (Copyright 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is intrinsically connected to overweight and obesity. It is a complex metabolic disorder that predisposes patients to, and is associated with, cardiovascular disease. In addition to the triumvirate of core defects associated with T2DM (involvement of the pancreatic beta cell, the muscle, and the liver), other mechanisms including hyperglucagonemia, accelerated gastric emptying, and incretin deficiency/resistance are also involved. This has led to the development of incretinbased therapies, such as glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors. These newer therapies have beneficial effects on glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels, weight, and pancreatic beta-cell function.

This report presents an algorithm to assist primary care physicians, endocrinologists, and others in the management of adult, nonpregnant patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. In order to minimize the risk of diabetes-related complications, the goal of therapy is to achieve a hemoglobin A1c (A1C) of 6.5% or less, with recognition of the need for individualization to minimize the risks of hypoglycemia. We provide therapeutic pathways stratified on the basis of current levels of A1C, whether the patient is receiving treatment or is drug naïve. We consider monotherapy, dual therapy, and triple therapy, including 8 major classes of medications (biguanides, dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors, incretin mimetics, thiazolidinediones, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, sulfonylureas, meglitinides, and bile acid sequestrants) and insulin therapy (basal, premixed, and multiple daily injections), with or without orally administered medications. We prioritize choices of medications according to safety, risk of hypoglycemia, efficacy, simplicity, anticipated degree of patient adherence, and cost of medications. We recommend only combinations of medications approved by the US Food and Drug Administration that provide complementary mechanisms of action. It is essential to monitor therapy with A1C and self-monitoring of blood glucose and to adjust or advance therapy frequently (every 2 to 3 months) if the appropriate goal for each patient has not been achieved. We provide a flow-chart and table summarizing the major considerations. This algorithm represents a consensus of 14 highly experienced clinicians, clinical researchers, practitioners, and academicians and is based on the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology Diabetes Guidelines and the recent medical literature.

Background: Insulin is recommended as a second-line treatment after diet and metformin fail to reach and/or maintain glycemic targets considered to minimize the risk for long-term diabetic complications. Hypoglycemia and the fear of developing hypoglyce-mia, however, remain substantial barriers to the initiation and optimal use of insulin., Objective: The aim of this study was to compare biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) with biphasic human insulin 30 (BHI 30) with respect to glycemic control and the risk for hypoglycemia using a meta-analysis of clinical trials comparing these insulins in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM)., Methods: We included all published and unpublished, randomized, controlled trials in adult patients with T2DM (treatment duration > or = 12 weeks) for which individual patient data were available. All clinical databases and local trial registries of Novo Nordisk A/S (Soeborg, Denmark) were searched to identify clinical trials comparing the 2 products. The predefined primary end point of the study was the overall rate of nocturnal hypoglyce-mia (major, minor, and symptoms-only hypoglycemia occurring from 12:00-6:00 AM). Hypoglycemia was analyzed using a negative binomial distribution model, accounting for exposure time. Glycemic end points were analyzed at 12 to 16 weeks of treatment using ANCOVA, adjusting for baseline. Secondary safety end points were the rates of major hypoglycemia (hypoglycemia requiring third-party assistance), minor hypoglycemia (symptoms confirmed by plasma glucose [PG] <3.1 mmol/L), daytime hypoglycemia (major, minor, and symptoms-only hypoglycemia occurring from 6:01 AM-11:59 PM), overall hypoglycemia (the sum of all major, minor, and symptoms-only episodes), and change in weight from baseline to 12 to 16 weeks of treatment. Secondary efficacy end points were changes in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)), fasting PG (FPG), postprandial PG increment (averaged over breakfast, lunch, and dinner), and insulin dose., Results: Nine randomized, parallel or crossover trials were included (N = 1674; male sex, 57%; mean [SD] age, 61.0 [10.6] years; body mass index, 26.7 [4.6] kg/m(2); HbA(1c), 8.1% [1.4%]; duration of diabetes, 10.9 [7.9] years). Rates of overall hypoglycemia were not significantly different (rate ratio [RR] = 1.08; 95% CI, 0.94-1.24; P = NS) between treatments. BIAsp 30 had a 50% lower rate of nocturnal hypoglycemia than BHI 30 (RR = 0.50; 95% CI, 0.38-0.67; P < 0.01), whereas the rate of daytime hypoglycemia was 24% lower for BHI 30 (RR = 1.24; 95% CI, 1.08-1.43; P < 0.01). The likelihood of major hypo-glycemia was significantly lower with BIAsp 30 compared with BHI 30 (odds ratio = 0.45; 95% CI, 0.22-0.93; P < 0.05). BIAsp 30 was associated with reduced PPG increment (averaged over breakfast, lunch and dinner) compared with BHI 30 (treatment difference, -0.31; 95% CI, -0.49 to -0.07; P < 0.01). There was a significantly larger reduction in FPG associated with BHI 30 (treatment difference, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.31-0.95; P < 0.01). However, no significant treatment difference was found for HbA(1c) (treatment difference, 0.04; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.10; P = NS)., Conclusion: This meta-analysis found BIAsp 30 to be associated with a significantly lower rate of nocturnal and major hypoglycemia, but a significantly increased risk for daytime hypoglycemia, compared with BHI 30 at a similar level of HbA(1c) in patients with T2DM.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is an important adjunct to hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) testing. This action can distinguish between fasting, preprandial, and postprandial hyperglycemia; detect glycemic excursions; identify and monitor resolution of hypoglycemia; and provide immediate feedback to patients about the effect of food choices, activity, and medication on glycemic control. Pattern analysis is a systematic approach to identifying glycemic patterns within SMBG data and then taking appropriate action based upon those results. The use of pattern analysis involves: (1) establishing pre- and postprandial glucose targets; (2) obtaining data on glucose levels, carbohydrate intake, medication administration (type, dosages, timing), activity levels and physical/emotional stress; (3) analyzing data to identify patterns of glycemic excursions, assessing any influential factors, and implementing appropriate action(s); and (4) performing ongoing SMBG to assess the impact of any therapeutic changes made. Computer-based and paper-based data collection and management tools can be developed to perform pattern analysis for identifying patterns in SMBG data. This approach to interpreting SMBG data facilitates rational therapeutic adjustments in response to this information. Pattern analysis of SMBG data can be of equal or greater value than measurement of HbA1c levels., (2009 Diabetes Technology Society.)

Objective: To report a case of hyperandrogenism attributable to the presence of an adrenal adenoma secreting dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEA-S) and an ovarian Sertoli-Leydig cell tumor secreting testosterone in a postmenopausal woman., Methods: The laboratory, radiologic, and pathologic findings in our case are described. In addition, the pertinent literature is reviewed., Results: A 56-year-old woman presented with a history of gradual increase in facial and body hair, scalp hair loss, male pattern baldness, and deepening of her voice, beginning a few years after spontaneous menopause at age 49 years. She had hypertension, obesity, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Laboratory tests showed elevated levels of total testosterone (348 ng/dL) and DHEA-S (2,058 microg/dL), and a left adrenal tumor (3 by 4 cm) was detected on abdominal computed tomographic scan. Laparoscopic left adrenalectomy was performed, and the pathologic diagnosis was adrenal adenoma. The DHEA-S returned to normal levels, but the serum testosterone concentration remained elevated. Transvaginal ultrasonography disclosed an ovarian tumor. Bilateral oophorectomy was performed, and an ovarian Sertoli-Leydig cell tumor was diagnosed. The hormonal and clinical picture normalized after this surgical intervention., Conclusion: After extensive review of the literature, we believe that this is the first reported case of a coincidental DHEA-S-secreting adrenal adenoma and a testosterone- secreting ovarian Leydig cell tumor causing signs of virilization.

The prevalence of diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance is predicted to dramatically increase over the next two decades. Clinical therapies for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have traditionally included lifestyle modification, oral anti-diabetic agents, and ultimately insulin initiation. In this report, we review the clinical trial results of two innovative T2DM treatment therapies that are based on the glucoregulatory effects of incretin hormones. Incretin mimetics are peptide drugs that mimic several of the actions of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and have been shown to lower glycated hemoglobin (A1C) levels in patients with T2DM. Additionally, incretin mimetics lower postprandial and fasting glucose, suppress elevated glucagon release, and are associated with progressive weight reduction. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors increase endogenous GLP-1 levels by inhibiting the enzymatic degradation of GLP-1. Clinical studies in patients with T2DM have shown that DPP-4 inhibitors reduce elevated A1C, lower postprandial and fasting glucose, suppress glucagon release, and are weight neutral. Collectively, these new drugs, given in combination with other antidiabetic agents, such as metformin, sulfonylureas, and/or thiazolidinediones, can help restore glucose homeostasis in poorly controlled patients with T2DM.

Background: Type 2 diabetes mellitus is twice as prevalent in African Americans and Hispanic Americans as in non-Hispanic whites. However, the effectiveness and safety profile of rosiglitazone maleate used as combination therapy with sulfonylureas in the management of diabetes and its effect on cardiovascular disease (CVD) biomarkers/parameters have not been studied in these populations., Objective: The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy and tolerability of the addition of rosiglitazone to a regimen of glyburide once daily in African American and Hispanic American patients with type 2 diabetes previously inadequately controlled with sulfonylurea monotherapy., Methods: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study was conducted at 38 centers in the United States. Eligible patients were aged < or =21 years, had type 2 diabetes, a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) level > or =140 mg/dL, and a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) value > or =7.5%, and had been treated with sulfonylurea monotherapy for at least 2 months before screening. Patients were assigned to receive treatment with glyburide 10 or 20 mg/d plus rosiglitazone 8 mg (GLY+RSG) or placebo (GLY+PBO) PO (tablets) QD for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy end point was the change from baseline in HbA(1c) after 24 weeks of treatment. Secondary end points included change in FPG; proportion of patients achieving HbA(1c) targets (<7.0% and <6.5%); and changes in biomarkers for CVD risk, including C-reactive protein (CRP), plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI)-I activity, fibrinogen, tissue plasminogen activator (tPA) antigen, von Willebrand factor (vWF), soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule (sVCAM), lipoprotein-associated phospholipase A 2 activity, and urinary albumin/creatinine ratio (UACR). Tolerability was assessed using physical examination, including vital-sign measurement, clinical laboratory tests, and adverse event (AE) reports collected at each study visit., Results: A total of 245 patients (101 African American and 144 Hispanic American) were enrolled. Demographic characteristics were comparable between the GLY+RSG and GLY+PBO groups: mean (SD) age (52 [11.9] vs 53 [10.4] years), HbA(1c) (9.2% [1.3%] vs 9.4% [1.4%]), sex (men/women, 45.3%/54.7% vs 48.3%/51.7%), race (African American/Hispanic American, 43.6%/56.4% vs 37.9%/62.1%), and mean (SD) weight (86.3 [18.8] vs 88.3 [19.4] kg). In the overall study population, treatment with GLY+RSG was associated with a significantly greater mean (95% CI) reduction from baseline in HbA(1c) compared with GLY+PBO (between-group Delta, -1.4% [-1.7% to -1.1%]; P < 0.001). When assessed by ethnicity, HbA(1c) values were significantly reduced with GLY+RSG compared with GLY+PBO in African American patients (between-group Delta, -1.4%) and in Hispanic American patients (between-group Delta, -1.5%) (both, P < 0.001), as were FPG levels (between-group Deltas, -3.1 mmol/L [57 mg/dL] and -3.8 mmol/L [-69 mg/dL], respectively; both, P < 0.001). With GLY+RSG, 9151 (17.6%) African American patients and 17/66 (25.8%) Hispanic American patients achieved HbA(1c) <7%, compared with 2/44 (4.5%) and 1/72 (1.4%) patients, respectively, who achieved this goal with GLY+PBO. Homeostasis model assessment estimates of insulin sensitivity and beta-cell function were significantly improved with GLY+RSG compared with GIX+PBO (between-group Deltas, 29.3% and 78.4%, respectively; both, P < 0.001). With regard to CVD biomarkers, there were potentially deleterious changes compared with baseline in the GLY+PBO group for CRP (+29.4%; P = 0.042), PAI-1 activity (+27.0%; P = 0.006), fibrinogen (+15.7%; P = 0.007), and sVCAM (+7.0%; P = 0.035), whereas there were no significant increases in these factors in the GLY+RSG group. In the GLY+RSG group, there were significant improvements in tPA (-17.8%; P < 0.001), vWF (-11.3%; P = 0.019), and UACR (-17.2%; P = 0.028) over 24 weeks' treatment, whereas there were no significant changes in any of these factors in the GLY+PBO group. As a result, significant treatment effects were observed for CRP (-29.2%; P = 0.019), tPA (-18.4%; P < 0.001), vWF (-12.9%; P < 0.015), and UACR (-26.7%; P = 0.006) with GLY+RSG compared with GLY+PBO. The most frequently reported AEs with GLY+RSG were edema and weight increase (both 121121 [9.9%] patients) and with GLY+PBO were upper respiratory tract infection (18/124 [14.5%] patients). AEs were reported in 83/121 (68.6%) patients in the GLY+RSG group, of which 6/121 (5.0%) were assessed as severe, compared with 70/124 ( 56.5 % ) patients who received GLY+PBO, of which 31124 (2.4%) were assessed as severe., Conclusion: Add-on rosiglitazone administered for 24 weeks was effective and well tolerated in these African American and Hispanic American patients with type 2 diabetes previously inadequately controlled on sulfonylurea monotherapy.