Search

Aim: Experimental hypoglycaemia blunts the counterregulatory hormone and symptom responses to a subsequent episode of hypoglycaemia. In this study, we aimed to assess the associations between antecedent exposure and continuous glucose monitoring (CGM)-recorded hypoglycaemia during a 1-week period and the counterregulatory responses to subsequent experimental hypoglycaemia in people with type 1 diabetes., Materials and Methods: Forty-two people with type 1 diabetes (20 females, mean ± SD glycated haemoglobin 7.8% ± 1.0%, diabetes duration median (interquartile range) 22.0 (10.5-34.9) years, 29 CGM users, and 19 with impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia) wore an open intermittently scanned CGM for 1 week to detect hypoglycaemic exposure before a standardized hyperinsulinaemic-hypoglycaemic [2.8 ± 0.1 mmol/L (50.2 ± 2.3 mg/dl)] glucose clamp. Symptom responses and counterregulatory hormones were measured during the clamp. The study is part of the HypoRESOLVE project., Results: CGM-recorded hypoglycaemia in the week before the clamp was negatively associated with adrenaline response [β -0.09, 95% CI (-0.16, -0.02) nmol/L, p = .014], after adjusting for CGM use, awareness of hypoglycaemia, glycated haemoglobin and total daily insulin dose. This was driven by level 2 hypoglycaemia [<3.0 mmol/L (54 mg/dl)] [β -0.21, 95% CI (-0.41, -0.01) nmol/L, p = .034]. CGM-recorded hypoglycaemia was negatively associated with total, autonomic, and neuroglycopenic symptom responses, but these associations were lost after adjusting for potential confounders., Conclusions: Recent exposure to CGM-detected hypoglycaemia was independently associated with an attenuated adrenaline response to experimental hypoglycaemia in people with type 1 diabetes., (© 2024 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: The sympathetic nervous and hormonal counterregulatory responses to hypoglycaemia differ between people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes and may change along the course of diabetes, but have not been directly compared. We aimed to compare counterregulatory hormone and symptom responses to hypoglycaemia between people with type 1 diabetes, insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and controls without diabetes, using a standardised hyperinsulinaemic-hypoglycaemic clamp., Materials: We included 47 people with type 1 diabetes, 15 with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, and 32 controls without diabetes. Controls were matched according to age and sex to the people with type 1 diabetes or with type 2 diabetes. All participants underwent a hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic-(5.2 ± 0.4 mmol/L)-hypoglycaemic-(2.8 ± 0.13 mmol/L)-clamp., Results: The glucagon response was lower in people with type 1 diabetes (9.4 ± 0.8 pmol/L, 8.0 [7.0-10.0]) compared to type 2 diabetes (23.7 ± 3.7 pmol/L, 18.0 [12.0-28.0], p < 0.001) and controls (30.6 ± 4.7, 25.5 [17.8-35.8] pmol/L, p < 0.001). The adrenaline response was lower in type 1 diabetes (1.7 ± 0.2, 1.6 [1.3-5.2] nmol/L) compared to type 2 diabetes (3.4 ± 0.7, 2.6 [1.3-5.2] nmol/L, p = 0.001) and controls (2.7 ± 0.4, 2.8 [1.4-3.9] nmol/L, p = 0.012). Growth hormone was lower in people with type 2 diabetes than in type 1 diabetes, at baseline (3.4 ± 1.6 vs 7.7 ± 1.3 mU/L, p = 0.042) and during hypoglycaemia (24.7 ± 7.1 vs 62.4 ± 5.8 mU/L, p = 0.001). People with 1 diabetes had lower overall symptom responses than people with type 2 diabetes (45.3 ± 2.7 vs 58.7 ± 6.4, p = 0.018), driven by a lower neuroglycopenic score (27.4 ± 1.8 vs 36.7 ± 4.2, p = 0.012)., Conclusion: Acute counterregulatory hormone and symptom responses to experimental hypoglycaemia are lower in people with type 1 diabetes than in those with long-standing insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and controls., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Aim: To compare nocturnal glucose profiles according to hourly plasma glucose measurements during treatment with insulin degludec and insulin glargine U100 in a cohort of people with type 1 diabetes prone to nocturnal severe hypoglycaemia., Materials and Methods: The HypoDeg trial is a 2-year investigator-initiated, randomized, controlled crossover trial in 149 participants randomized to treatment with insulin degludec and insulin glargine U100 for 12 months each. The 51 participants in this predefined substudy stayed at least one night in hospital during each treatment arm for plasma glucose samples to be taken. Endpoints were glucose profiles, including mean plasma glucose, glycaemic variability and risk of hypoglycaemia., Results: There were no differences between treatments regarding mean plasma glucose. We saw a flatter glucose profile during insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine U100 treatment, which had a nadir at 4:00 AM, with a subsequent rise. During treatment with insulin degludec, the participants had lower glycaemic variability, with an estimated treatment difference of -4.3% (95% confidence interval [CI] -8.1 to -0.5; P < 0.05). Participants treated with insulin degludec were less likely to experience nocturnal hypoglycaemia below 3.0 mmol/L (hazard ratio 0.36 [95% CI 0.17-0.73; P < 0.05])., Conclusion: Based on nocturnal plasma glucose measurements, treatment with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine U100 administered in the evening results in lower glycaemic variability and lower risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia without differences in mean plasma glucose., (© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim/hypothesis: The physiological counterregulatory response to hypoglycaemia is reported to be organised hierarchically, with hormone responses usually preceding symptomatic awareness and autonomic responses preceding neuroglycopenic responses. To compare thresholds for activation of these responses more accurately between people with or without type 1 diabetes, we performed a systematic review on stepped hyperinsulinaemic-hypoglycaemic glucose clamps., Methods: A literature search in PubMed and EMBASE was conducted. We included articles published between 1980 and 2018 involving hyperinsulinaemic stepped hypoglycaemic glucose clamps among people with or without type 1 diabetes. Key exclusion criteria were as follows: data were previously published; other patient population; a clamp not the primary intervention; and an inadequate clamp description. Glycaemic thresholds for counterregulatory hormone and/or symptom responses to hypoglycaemia were estimated and compared using generalised logrank test for interval-censored data, where the intervals were either extracted directly or calculated from the data provided by the study. A glycaemic threshold was defined as the glucose level at which the response exceeded the 95% CI of the mean baseline measurement or euglycaemic control clamp. Because of the use of interval-censored data, we described thresholds using median and IQR., Results: A total of 63 articles were included, whereof 37 papers included participants with type 1 diabetes (n=559; 67.4% male sex, aged 32.7±10.2 years, BMI 23.8±1.4 kg/m 2 ) and 51 papers included participants without diabetes (n=733; 72.4% male sex, aged 31.1±9.2 years, BMI 23.6±1.1 kg/m 2 ). Compared with non-diabetic control individuals, in people with type 1 diabetes, the median (IQR) glycaemic thresholds for adrenaline (3.8 [3.2-4.2] vs 3.4 [2.8-3.9 mmol/l]), noradrenaline (3.2 [3.2-3.7] vs 3.0 [2.8-3.1] mmol/l), cortisol (3.5 [3.2-4.2]) vs 2.8 [2.8-3.4] mmol/l) and growth hormone (3.8 [3.3-3.8] vs. 3.2 [3.0-3.3] mmol/l) all occurred at lower glucose levels in people with diabetes than in those without diabetes (all p≤0.01). Similarly, although both autonomic (median [IQR] 3.4 [3.4-3.4] vs 3.0 [2.8-3.4] mmol/l) and neuroglycopenic (median [IQR] 3.4 [2.8-N/A] vs 3.0 [3.0-3.1] mmol/l) symptom responses were elicited at lower glucose levels in people with type 1 diabetes, the thresholds for autonomic and neuroglycopenic symptoms did not differ for each individual subgroup., Conclusions/interpretation: People with type 1 diabetes have glycaemic thresholds for counterregulatory hormone and symptom responses at lower glucose levels than people without diabetes. Autonomic and neuroglycopenic symptoms responses are generated at about similar levels of hypoglycaemia. There was a considerable variation in the methodology of the articles and the high insulin doses in most of the clamps may affect the counterregulatory responses., Funding: This article has received funding from the Innovative Medicines Initiative 2 Joint Undertaking (JU) under grant agreement no. 777460., Registration: This systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019120083)., (© 2022. The Author(s).)

Objective: Hypoglycemia poses an immediate threat for cognitive function. Due to its association with acute cognitive impairment, the International Hypoglycemia Study Group (IHSG) defines a blood glucose level <3.0 mmol/L as "level 2 hypoglycemia." In the current study we investigated whether having diabetes, type of diabetes, or hypoglycemia awareness moderates this association., Research Design and Methods: Adults with type 1 diabetes with normal (n = 26) or impaired (n = 21) hypoglycemic awareness or with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (n = 15) and age-matched control subjects without diabetes (n = 32) underwent a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic-hypoglycemic glucose clamp (2.80 ± 0.13 mmol/L [50.2 ± 2.3 mg/dL]). At baseline and during hypoglycemia, calculation ability, attention, working memory and cognitive flexibility were measured with the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Test (PASAT) and the Test of Attentional Performance (TAP)., Results: For the whole group, hypoglycemia decreased the mean ± SD proportion of correct answers on the PASAT by 8.4 ± 12.8%, increased reaction time on the TAP Alertness task by 32.1 ± 66.6 ms, and increased the sum of errors and omissions on the TAP Working Memory task by 2.0 ± 5.5 (all P < 0.001). Hypoglycemia-induced cognitive declines were largely irrespective of the presence or type of diabetes, level of symptomatic awareness, diabetes duration, or HbA1c., Conclusions: IHSG level 2 hypoglycemia impairs cognitive function in people with and without diabetes, irrespective of type of diabetes or hypoglycemia awareness status. These findings support the cutoff value of hypoglycemia <3.0 mmol/L (<54 mg/dL) as being clinically relevant for most people with diabetes., (© 2022 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Aims/hypothesis: The hyperinsulinaemic-hypoglycaemic glucose clamp technique has been developed and applied to assess effects of and responses to hypoglycaemia under standardised conditions. However, the degree to which the methodology of clamp studies is standardised is unclear. This systematic review examines how hyperinsulinaemic-hypoglycaemic clamps have been performed and elucidates potential important differences., Methods: A literature search in PubMed and EMBASE was conducted. Articles in English published between 1980 and 2018, involving adults with or without diabetes, were included., Results: A total of 383 articles were included. There was considerable variation in essential methodology of the hypoglycaemic clamp procedures, including the insulin dose used (49-fold difference between the lowest and the highest rate), the number of hypoglycaemic steps (range 1-6), the hypoglycaemic nadirs (range 2.0-4.3 mmol/l) and the duration (ranging from 5 to 660 min). Twenty-seven per cent of the articles reported whole blood glucose levels, most venous levels. In 70.8% of the studies, a dorsal hand vein was used for blood sampling, with some form of hand warming to arterialise venous blood in 78.8% of these. Key information was missing in 61.9% of the articles., Conclusions/interpretation: Although the hyperinsulinaemic-hypoglycaemic clamp procedure is considered the gold standard to study experimental hypoglycaemia, a uniform standard with key elements on how to perform these experiments is lacking. Methodological differences should be considered when comparing results between hypoglycaemic clamp studies., Prospero Registration: This systematic review is registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019120083).

Context: Severe hypoglycemic events are unevenly distributed in people with type 1 diabetes, making a genetic influence probable. Of the common adrenoceptor β-2 receptor gene (ADRB2) polymorphisms, the Arg16 allele is associated with receptor downregulation and reduced agonist-mediated endogenous glucose production., Objective: We tested the hypothesis that the Arg16 variant is associated with severe hypoglycemia., Method: A cohort of 311 patients with type 1 diabetes reported severe hypoglycemic events retrospectively in a validated questionnaire. The patients were characterized by diabetes history, state of hypoglycemia awareness, C-peptide status, HbA1c, and ADRB2 genotype., Results: The ADRB2 Gly16Arg genotype distribution was in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. The rate of severe hypoglycemia differed among all genotypes (P = 0.01). Patients homozygous for the Arg16 genotype (AA; n = 60) had a relative rate (RR) of severe hypoglycemia of 2.2 (95% CI, 1.3 to 3.6) compared with patients homozygous for the Gly16 genotype (GG; n = 116; P = 0.002). Among patients with impaired awareness or unawareness (n = 175), those with the AA genotype (n = 33) had an RR of severe hypoglycemia of 3.2 (95% CI, 1.7 to 6.0) compared with patients with the GG genotype (n = 58; P < 0.000). Genotype was not associated with state of hypoglycemia awareness per se, as assessed by any of three classification methods. The difference was not explained by other risk factors., Conclusion: Genetic polymorphism in ADRB2 is associated with risk of severe hypoglycemia in individuals with type 1 diabetes, especially in those with impaired hypoglycemia awareness.

Background: Hypoglycemia is an increasingly important endpoint in clinical diabetes trials. The assessment of hypoglycemia should therefore be as complete as possible. Blinded continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) provides an improved opportunity to capture asymptomatic and nocturnal events. Here we report results from the HypoAna trial comparing all-analog-insulin therapy (aspart/detemir) with all-human-insulin therapy (neutral protamine Hagedorn/regular) on non-severe hypoglycemia (symptomatic and asymptomatic hypoglycemia) as assessed by blinded CGM and compared with data obtained by self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in patients with type 1 diabetes and recurrent severe hypoglycemia., Methods: Fifty-three patients completed a substudy of 4 × 3 days of blinded CGM. CGM traces were reviewed for hypoglycemic events lasting 15 min or longer., Results: At the threshold ≤3.9 mmol/L, the per-protocol analysis demonstrated a 40% rate reduction (95% confidence interval [CI] 20%-60%; P = 0.002) in nocturnal non-severe hypoglycemia during analog treatment, mainly due to a 40% rate reduction (95% CI 0%-70%; P = 0.03) of nocturnal asymptomatic hypoglycemia. Similar nonsignificant trends were seen at the glucose threshold ≤3.0 mmol/L. Overall CGM-detected that nocturnal asymptomatic hypoglycemia ≤3.9 mmol/L was ∼17 times more frequent than SMBG-detected episodes (52 vs. 3 events/patient-year). This translates into a time needed to treat one patient with insulin analogs to prevent one episode that is 34 times shorter using CGM data than SMBG data (1.4 vs. 47 weeks)., Conclusions: Capturing hypoglycemic events by the conventional method of SMBG in patients with impaired awareness reveals only a limited number of events. Blinded CGM can provide more complete data, particularly in terms of asymptomatic and nocturnal events.

Glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) is glucagonotropic, and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is glucagonostatic. We studied the effects of GIP and GLP-1 on glucagon responses to insulin-induced hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Ten male subjects with T1DM (C-peptide negative, age [mean ± SEM] 26 ± 1 years, BMI 24 ± 0.5 kg/m(2), HbA1c 7.3 ± 0.2%) were studied in a randomized, double-blinded, crossover study, with 2-h intravenous administration of saline, GIP, or GLP-1. The first hour, plasma glucose was lowered by insulin infusion, and the second hour constituted a "recovery phase." During the recovery phase, GIP infusions elicited larger glucagon responses (164 ± 50 [GIP] vs. 23 ± 25 [GLP-1] vs. 17 ± 46 [saline] min ⋅ pmol/L, P < 0.03) and endogenous glucose production was higher with GIP and lower with GLP-1 compared with saline (P < 0.02). On the GIP days, significantly less exogenous glucose was needed to keep plasma glucose above 2 mmol/L (155 ± 36 [GIP] vs. 232 ± 40 [GLP-1] vs. 212 ± 56 [saline] mg ⋅ kg(-1), P < 0.05). Levels of insulin, cortisol, growth hormone, and noradrenaline, as well as hypoglycemic symptoms and cognitive function, were similar on all days. Our results suggest that during hypoglycemia in patients with T1DM, exogenous GIP increases glucagon responses during the recovery phase after hypoglycemia and reduces the need for glucose administration., (© 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.)

Background: Insulin analogues have been developed to reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia in patients with diabetes who require insulin-based treatment, but their effect on this endpoint in patients with type 1 diabetes complicated by recurrent severe hypoglycaemia is unknown. We compared the occurrence of severe hypoglycaemic episodes in such patients during treatment with insulin analogues or human insulin., Methods: In this investigator-initiated, prospective, randomised, open-label, blinded-endpoint crossover trial at seven medical centres in Denmark, we recruited patients (aged ≥18 years) with type 1 diabetes (diagnosed for >5 years) who had reported two or more episodes of severe hypoglycaemia in the preceding year. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using computer-generated site-specific randomisation lists in blocks of four to treatment with basal-bolus therapy with either analogue insulin (detemir and aspart) or human insulin (human neutral protamine Hagedorn and human regular) in a balanced crossover design. A 1-year plus 1-year treatment period was specified, consisting of two 3-month run-in periods, each followed by a 9-month maintenance period. The primary endpoint was the number of validated episodes of severe hypoglycaemia (defined by need for treatment assistance from others) reported during the maintenance periods, analysed by intention to treat. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00346996., Findings: Between May 9, 2007, and Oct 30, 2009, 159 patients were randomly assigned. 18 patients discontinued during the first run-in period, leaving 141 patients in the intention-to-treat population. 136 severe hypoglycaemic episodes were reported during treatment with human insulin and 105 episodes were reported during treatment with insulin analogues, resulting in an absolute rate reduction of 0.51 episodes (95% CI 0.19-0.84) per patient-year with insulin analogues. This result corresponds to a relative rate reduction of 29% (95% CI 11-48; p=0.010)., Interpretation: Treatment with insulin detemir and aspart in patients with type 1 diabetes and recurrent severe hypoglycaemia resulted in a clinically significant reduced rate of severe hypoglycaemia compared with human insulin. Patients with the greatest chance of benefitting from improved insulin therapy should be offered treatment with insulin analogues and be included in future trials of new insulins., Funding: Novo Nordisk A/S., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: A reliable method to detect biochemical nocturnal hypoglycemia is highly needed, especially in patients with recurrent severe hypoglycemia. We evaluated reliability of nocturnal continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in patients with type 1 diabetes at high risk of severe hypoglycemia., Patients and Methods: Seventy-two type 1 diabetes patients with recurrent severe hypoglycemia (two or more events within the last year) participated for 4 nights in blinded CGM recordings (Guardian(®) REAL-Time CGMS and Sof-Sensor(®); Medtronic MiniMed, Northridge, CA). Blood was drawn hourly from 23:00 to 07:00 h for plasma glucose (PG) measurements (gold standard)., Results: Valid data were obtained in 217 nights. The sensitivity of CGM was 65% (95% confidence interval, 53-77%) below 4 mmol/L, 40% (24-56%) below 3 mmol/L, and 17% (0-47%) below 2.2 mmol/L. PG and CGM readings correlated in the total measurement range (Spearman's ρ=0.82; P<0.001). In the normo- and hyperglycemic ranges CGM underestimated PG by 1.1 mmol/L (0.9-1.2 mmol/L) (P<0.001); in contrast, in the hypoglycemic range (PG<4 mmol/L) CGM overestimated PG levels by 1.0 mmol/L (P<0.001). The mean absolute relative differences in the hypo- (≤3.9 mmol/L), normo- (4-9.9 mmol/L), and hyperglycemic (≥10 mmol/L) ranges were 45% (37-53%), 23% (22-25%), and 20% (19-21%), respectively. Continuous glucose error grid analysis indicated a clinical accuracy of 56%, 99%, and 93% in the hypo-, normo-, and hyperglycemic ranges, respectively., Conclusions: The accuracy in the hypoglycemic range of nocturnal CGM data using Sof-Sensor is suboptimal in type 1 diabetes patients at high risk of severe hypoglycemia. To ensure clinical useful sensitivity in detection of nocturnal hypoglycemic episodes, an alarm threshold should not be lower than 4 mmol/L.

Introduction: High basal renin-angiotensin system (RAS) activity is associated with increased risk of severe hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes. We tested whether this might be explained by more pronounced cognitive dysfunction during hypoglycaemia in patients with high RAS activity than in patients with low RAS activity., Materials and Methods: Nine patients with type 1 diabetes and high and nine with low RAS activity were subjected to hypoglycaemia and euglycaemia in a cross-over study using an intravenous insulin infusion protocol. Cognitive function, electroencephalography, auditory evoked potentials and hypoglycaemic symptoms were recorded., Results: At a hypoglycaemic nadir of 2.2 (SD 0.3) mmol/L the high RAS group displayed significant deterioration in cognitive performance during hypoglycaemia in the three most complex reaction time tasks. In the low RAS group, hypoglycaemia led to cognitive dysfunction in only one reaction time task. The high RAS group reported lower symptom scores during hypoglycaemia than the low RAS group, suggesting poorer hypoglycaemia awareness., Conclusion: High RAS activity is associated with increased cognitive dysfunction and blunted symptoms during mild hypoglycaemia compared to low RAS activity. This may explain why high RAS activity is a risk factor for severe hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes.

In healthy adults, levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) increase in response to mild hypoglycemia. VEGF is implicated in glucose transport over the blood-brain barrier, and the increase during hypoglycemia has been positively correlated with preservation of cognitive function during hypoglycemia. High activity in the renin-angiotensin system (RAS) is associated with an increased risk of severe hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. Renin-angiotensin system possibly exerts its mechanism in hypoglycemia via VEGF. We studied the impact of mild hypoglycemia on plasma VEGF in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and high or low RAS activity and analyzed associations between VEGF levels and cognitive function during hypoglycemia. Eighteen patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus-9 with high and 9 with low RAS activity-underwent a single-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study with either mild hypoglycemia or stable glycemia. Cognitive function was assessed by the California Cognitive Assessment Package and the Alzheimer Quick Test. Nadir plasma glucose was 2.2 (0.3) mmol/L. During the control study, plasma VEGF did not change. During hypoglycemia, plasma VEGF increased from 39 to 58 pg/L in the high-RAS group (P = .004) and from 76 to 109 pg/L in the low-RAS group (P = .01), with no difference between RAS groups (P = .9). A weak association between reduced preservation of cognitive function during hypoglycemia and low VEGF response was observed. Plasma VEGF levels increase during mild, short-term hypoglycemia in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. The VEGF response is not dependent on RAS activity and only weakly associated with preservation of cognitive function during hypoglycemia. Thus, the previously described association between low RAS activity and better cognitive performance during hypoglycemia does not seem to be mediated by VEGF.

Aims: Preservation of cognitive function during hypoglycaemic episodes is crucial for patients with insulin-treated diabetes to avoid severe hypoglycaemic events. Erythropoietin has neuroprotective potential. However, the role of erythropoietin during hypoglycaemia is unclear. The aim of the study was to explore plasma erythropoietin response to hypoglycaemia and the relationship to basal renin-angiotensin system (RAS) activity and cognitive function., Methods: We performed a single-blinded, controlled, cross-over study with induced hypoglycaemia or maintained glycaemic level. Nine patients with type 1 diabetes with high and nine with low activity in RAS were studied. Hypoglycaemia was induced using a standardized insulin-infusion., Results: Overall, erythropoietin concentrations increased during hypoglycaemia. In the high RAS group erythropoietin rose 29% (p=0.032) whereas no significant response was observed in the low RAS group (7% increment; p=0.43). Independently, both hypoglycaemia and high RAS activity were associated with higher levels of erythropoietin (p=0.02 and 0.04, respectively). Low plasma erythropoietin at baseline was associated with poorer cognitive performance during hypoglycaemia., Conclusions: Hypoglycaemia triggers a rise in plasma erythropoietin in patients with type 1 diabetes. The response is influenced by basal RAS activity. Erythropoietin may carry a neuroprotective potential during hypoglycaemia.

Aims: In hospitals, 15%–20% of patients have diabetes. Therefore, all healthcare professionals (HCPs) must have a basic knowledge of in‐hospital diabetes management. This survey assessed the knowledge of diabetes among HCPs in Denmark. Methods: A 27‐item questionnaire was developed and reviewed independently before the survey was distributed. The questionnaire contained seven baseline questions on the HCPs' current workplace, educational level, usual shift routines and years of experience, 18 multiple‐choice questions and 2 cases. Results: A total of 252 completed questionnaires were returned by 133 (52.8%) physicians, 101 (40.1%) nurses and 18 (7.1%) healthcare assistants. HCPs answered 50% of the questions correctly. Having experience from endocrinological departments increased the correct response score (0%‐100%) by 6.2% points (95% CI 0.3‐12.1) (p = 0.039) and 3.1% points (95% CI 1.5–4.7) for every increase in confidence level on a scale from 1 to 10 (p < 0.001). HCPs scored 8 out of 10 on a confidence level scale on average. In a fictive case, 50% of HCPs administered the correct bolus insulin dose. Hyperglycaemia (>10.0 mmol/L) and hypoglycaemia (<3.9 mmol/L) were correctly identified by around 40% of HCPs. Hypoglycaemia was rated more important than hyperglycaemia by most HCPs. Conclusion: Significant gaps in identifying hypo‐ and hyperglycaemia and correct administration of bolus insulin have been identified, which could be targeted in future education for HCPs. HCPs answered 50% of questions related to in‐hospital diabetes management correctly. Experience from endocrinological departments and self‐rated confidence levels are associated with HCPs' in‐hospital diabetes competencies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article analyzes exercise patterns among individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using the Hedia Diabetes Assistant app. Topics discussed include the comparison of physical activity (PA) between users who utilized the app's PA module and those who did not, glucose management during exercise, and the implications of exercise patterns on insulin dosing strategies.

Type 1 diabetes is characterized by insulin deficiency, and treatment is to supply insulin mimicking the physiological endogenous insulin secretion. Since its discovery, insulin therapy has evolved, and since the 1990s, an increasing number of insulin analogs with various pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles have become available. Despite the improvement of insulin therapy, hypoglycemia remains the main side effect and is a daily concern for many people with diabetes and their families. A proportion of people with type 1 diabetes are at increased risk of hypoglycemia and experience recurring episodes. When designing insulin trials, this group of people is most often excluded in order to reduce the risk of adverse study outcomes, even though it may be the group that may benefit the most from treatment with new insulins. The results of the phase III trials, therefore, underestimate the clinical impact and pharmacoeconomic effect of the implementation of new insulins in the broader type 1 diabetes population. This paper reviews the four insulin trials that include people at increased risk of hypoglycemia. In general, the studies confirm the results from phase III trials in terms of similar reduction and maintenance of HbA1c, as well as relative rate reductions of hypoglycemia. However, the absolute treatment differences in the reduction of hypoglycemia are even greater in the trials, including people at high risk of hypoglycemia. This emphasizes the importance of including people at high risk of hypoglycemia to assess the full clinical and pharmacoeconomic benefit of new insulins. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The evidence for optimal insulin treatment in type 1 diabetes is mainly based on randomised controlled trials applying a parallel-group design. Such trials yield robust general results but crucial individual treatment effects cannot be extracted. We aimed to assess the potential for further improvement of outcomes by personalized insulin therapy by analyzing data from a cross-over trial at individual level.Methods: Post hoc analysis of data from a two-year multicentre, prospective, randomised, open, blinded endpoint (PROBE) trial (the HypoAna trial). In a cross-over design 114 patients with type 1 diabetes and recurrent severe hypoglycemia were treated with basal-bolus therapy based on analog (detemir/aspart) or human (NPH/regular) insulin aiming at maintenance of baseline HbA1c levels. For each patient a superior outcome was defined as fewer events of severe hypoglycemia defined by need for third party treatment assistance or a more than 0.4% (4.4mmol/mol) lower HbA1c.Results: Only one quarter had comparable outcome of the two treatments in terms of rate of severe hypoglycemia or HbA1c. Twice as many patients had superior outcome of analog-based as compared to human insulin-based insulin treatment. The rate of severe hypoglycemia with the superior treatment was lower compared to the rates obtained with analog insulin and with human insulin (0.67, 1.09, and 1.57 episode per patient-year, respectively (p<0.0001)).Conclusions: Personalized insulin treatment of type 1 diabetes based on single-patient evidence may improve outcomes significantly compared to a general treatment approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Based on the data of the HypoAna trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00346996), a short-term cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted comparing an all insulin analogue regimen with an all human insulin regimen in people with type 1 diabetes who are prone to recurrent severe hypoglycemia.Methods: Clinical data from the HypoAna trial and Danish cost data related to the treatment of severe hypoglycemia were used to populate a 1-year cost-effectiveness analysis. Hypoglycemia quality-of-life data were based on previously published utility values, used to calculate the quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) gained. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test the robustness of the analysis. The main outcome measure was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER).Results: The insulin analogue regimen was associated with greater total costs compared with the human insulin regimen (20,418 DKK [1972 GBP] vs. 18,558 DKK [1793 GBP], respectively), primarily driven by the difference in insulin costs. Total costs for corrective actions for hypoglycemic events, however, were lower in the insulin analogue group (927 DKK [89 GBP]) compared with the human insulin group (1311 DKK [127 GBP]), primarily due to a lower event rate. QALYs were higher with insulin analogues vs. human insulin (difference 0.0672). The resulting ICER was 27,685 DKK (2674 GBP) per QALY gained, which is well below the generally accepted cost-effectiveness threshold.Conclusions: The analysis shows that treating people with type 1 diabetes who are prone to recurrent severe hypoglycemia with an insulin analogue regimen is cost-effective compared with a human insulin regimen. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]