Explore the vast range of titles available.

A major objective of the IFCC Task Force on Implementation of HbA1c Standardization is to develop a model to define quality targets for glycated hemoglobin (Hb A1c). Two generic models, biological variation and sigma-metrics, are investigated. We selected variables in the models for Hb A1c and used data of external quality assurance/proficiency testing programs to evaluate the suitability of the models to set and evaluate quality targets within and between laboratories. In the biological variation model, 48% of individual laboratories and none of the 26 instrument groups met the minimum performance criterion. In the sigma-metrics model, with a total allowable error (TAE) set at 5 mmol/mol (0.46% NGSP), 77% of the individual laboratories and 12 of 26 instrument groups met the 2σ criterion. The biological variation and sigma-metrics models were demonstrated to be suitable for setting and evaluating quality targets within and between laboratories. The sigma-metrics model is more flexible, as both the TAE and the risk of failure can be adjusted to the situation-for example, requirements related to diagnosis/monitoring or international authorities. With the aim of reaching (inter)national consensus on advice regarding quality targets for Hb A1c, the Task Force suggests the sigma-metrics model as the model of choice, with default values of 5 mmol/mol (0.46%) for TAE and risk levels of 2σ and 4σ for routine laboratories and laboratories performing clinical trials, respectively. These goals should serve as a starting point for discussion with international stakeholders in the field of diabetes.

Early detection of individuals at elevated risk for type 2 diabetes (T2D) is critical for effective prevention strategies. We developed a novel metabolic marker, the triglyceride-glycated hemoglobin index (TyH-i), which integrates lipid and glycemic parameters to improve T2D risk prediction. This study sought to evaluate the relationship between TyH-i and T2D risk and to examine its predictive performance with the triglyceride-glucose index (TyG-i). A large-scale retrospective cohort study was conducted using data from 15,464 Japanese adults without T2D at baseline. The TyH-i was calculated as Ln[glycated hemoglobin index (%)×triglycerides (mg/dL)/2], and its association with incident T2D was assessed using Cox proportional hazards models and smooth curve fitting and cubic spline functions. The predictive performance of the TyH-i was compared with the TyG-i using receiver operating characteristic curves. Over a median follow-up of 5.39 years, 373 participants developed T2D. After accounting for confounders, the TyH-i was significantly associated with T2D risk (HR: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.22–1.97, P = 0.00031). Additionally, a J-shaped relationship between the TyH-i and incident T2D was identified. A significant positive correlation was identified between TyH-i and T2D only when TyH-i levels were above 4.92 (HR: 1.73, 95%CI: 1.35–2.23, P < 0.0001). Furthermore, TyH-i and TyG-i possess comparable discriminatory ability in predicting incident T2D (AUC: 0.751 vs. 0.750, P = 0.8873). Moreover, TyH-i yielded lower Akaike Information Criterion (AIC) and Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) values than TyG-i (AIC: 3211.60 vs. 3211.91; BIC: 3226.89 vs. 3227.20), indicating a more parsimonious model with better overall model fit. The TyH-i is a novel and effective predictor of T2D risk, exhibiting a non-linear relationship with T2D. Furthermore, TyH-i and TyG-i exhibit comparable discriminatory abilities in predicting incident T2D. These results highlight the potential of TyH-i as a valuable instrument for T2D risk stratification, particularly in individuals with elevated TyH-i levels.

A closed-loop system (also called an artificial pancreas) may improve glycemic outcomes in children with type 1 diabetes. In this 16-week trial, the glucose level was in the target range for a greater percentage of time with a closed-loop system than with a sensor-augmented insulin pump.

AbstractObjectiveTo determine the efficacy and safety of low carbohydrate diets (LCDs) and very low carbohydrate diets (VLCDs) for people with type 2 diabetes.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesSearches of CENTRAL, Medline, Embase, CINAHL, CAB, and grey literature sources from inception to 25 August 2020.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials evaluating LCDs (<130 g/day or <26% of a 2000 kcal/day diet) and VLCDs (<10% calories from carbohydrates) for at least 12 weeks in adults with type 2 diabetes were eligible.Data extractionPrimary outcomes were remission of diabetes (HbA1c <6.5% or fasting glucose <7.0 mmol/L, with or without the use of diabetes medication), weight loss, HbA1c, fasting glucose, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes included health related quality of life and biochemical laboratory data. All articles and outcomes were independently screened, extracted, and assessed for risk of bias and GRADE certainty of evidence at six and 12 month follow-up. Risk estimates and 95% confidence intervals were calculated using random effects meta-analysis. Outcomes were assessed according to a priori determined minimal important differences to determine clinical importance, and heterogeneity was investigated on the basis of risk of bias and seven a priori subgroups. Any subgroup effects with a statistically significant test of interaction were subjected to a five point credibility checklist.ResultsSearches identified 14 759 citations yielding 23 trials (1357 participants), and 40.6% of outcomes were judged to be at low risk of bias. At six months, compared with control diets, LCDs achieved higher rates of diabetes remission (defined as HbA1c <6.5%) (76/133 (57%) v 41/131 (31%); risk difference 0.32, 95% confidence interval 0.17 to 0.47; 8 studies, n=264, I2=58%). Conversely, smaller, non-significant effect sizes occurred when a remission definition of HbA1c <6.5% without medication was used. Subgroup assessments determined as meeting credibility criteria indicated that remission with LCDs markedly decreased in studies that included patients using insulin. At 12 months, data on remission were sparse, ranging from a small effect to a trivial increased risk of diabetes. Large clinically important improvements were seen in weight loss, triglycerides, and insulin sensitivity at six months, which diminished at 12 months. On the basis of subgroup assessments deemed credible, VLCDs were less effective than less restrictive LCDs for weight loss at six months. However, this effect was explained by diet adherence. That is, among highly adherent patients on VLCDs, a clinically important reduction in weight was seen compared with studies with less adherent patients on VLCDs. Participants experienced no significant difference in quality of life at six months but did experience clinically important, but not statistically significant, worsening of quality of life and low density lipoprotein cholesterol at 12 months. Otherwise, no significant or clinically important between group differences were found in terms of adverse events or blood lipids at six and 12 months.ConclusionsOn the basis of moderate to low certainty evidence, patients adhering to an LCD for six months may experience remission of diabetes without adverse consequences. Limitations include continued debate around what constitutes remission of diabetes, as well as the efficacy, safety, and dietary satisfaction of longer term LCDs.Systematic review registrationPROSPERO CRD42020161795.

In 2009, we investigated the conformance of 8 hemoglobin A(1c) (Hb A(1c)) point-of-care (POC) instruments. Since then, instruments have improved and new devices are available on the market. In this second study, we evaluated the performance of DCA Vantage, Afinion, InnovaStar, Quo-Lab, Quo-Test, Cobas B101, and B-analyst Hb A(1c) POC instruments. Clinical and Laboratory Standards Institute protocols EP-5 and EP-9 were applied to investigate imprecision, accuracy, and bias. We assessed bias using the mean of 3 certified secondary reference measurement procedures (SRMPs). Assay conformance with the National Glycohemoglobin Standardization Program (NGSP) certification criteria was also evaluated. Interference of common Hb variants was investigated for methods that could work with hemolysed material. The total CVs for all instruments, except for the DCA Vantage at a high Hb A(1c) value, were ≤3.1% in SI units and ≤2.1% in Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) units. Afinion, DCA Vantage, B-analyst, and Cobas B101 instruments passed the NGSP criteria with 2 different reagent lot numbers. Quo-Test, Quo-Lab, and InnovaStar instruments had a negative bias compared to the mean of the 3 SRMPs and failed NGSP criteria. Most of the common Hb variants did not interfere with the investigated instruments, except Hb AE for the Cobas B101. Afinion, DCA Vantage, Cobas B101, and B-analyst instruments met the generally accepted performance criteria for Hb A(1c). Quo-Test, Quo-Lab, and InnovaStar met the criteria for precision but not for bias. Proficiency testing should be mandated for users of Hb A1c POC assays to ensure quality.

Abstract Context Combination therapy with insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) is important for treating type 2 diabetes (T2D). This trial assesses the efficacy and safety of semaglutide, a GLP-1RA, as an add-on to basal insulin. Objective To demonstrate the superiority of semaglutide vs placebo on glycemic control as an add-on to basal insulin in patients with T2D. Design Phase 3a, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 30-week trial. Setting This study included 90 sites in five countries. Patients We studied 397 patients with uncontrolled T2D receiving stable therapy with basal insulin with or without metformin. Interventions Subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 or 1.0 mg once weekly or volume-matched placebo. Main Outcome Measures Primary endpoint was change in glycated Hb (HbA1c) from baseline to week 30. Confirmatory secondary endpoint was change in body weight from baseline to week 30. Results At week 30, mean HbA1c reductions [mean baseline value, 8.4% (67.9 mmol/mol)] with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg were 1.4% (15.8 mmol/mol) and 1.8% (20.2 mmol/mol) vs 0.1% (1.0 mmol/mol) with placebo [estimated treatment difference (ETD) vs placebo, –1.35 (14.8 mmol/mol); 95% CI, –1.61 to –1.10 and ETD, –1.75% (19.2 mmol/mol); 95% CI, –2.01 to –1.50; both P < 0.0001]. Severe or blood glucose–confirmed hypoglycemic episodes were reported in 11 patients (17 events) and 14 patients (25 events) with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg, respectively, vs seven patients (13 events) with placebo (estimated rate ratio vs placebo, 2.08; 95% CI, 0.67 to 6.51 and estimated rate ratio vs placebo, 2.41; 95% CI, 0.84 to 6.96 for 0.5 and 1.0 mg; both P = nonsignificant). Mean body weight decreased with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg vs placebo from baseline to end of treatment: 3.7, 6.4, and 1.4 kg (ETD, –2.31; 95% CI, –3.33 to –1.29 and ETD, –5.06; 95% CI, –6.08 to –4.04 kg; both P < 0.0001). Premature treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was higher for semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg vs placebo (4.5%, 6.1%, and 0.8%), mainly due to gastrointestinal disorders. Conclusions Semaglutide, added to basal insulin, significantly reduced HbA1c and body weight in patients with uncontrolled T2D vs placebo. The randomized, double-blind SUSTAIN 5 trial demonstrated the superiority of once-weekly semaglutide vs placebo in patients with uncontrolled T2D on basal insulin therapy.

Recommendations: Regular self-monitoring of glucose (using accurate fingerstick blood glucose [BG] measurements, with or without continuous glucose monitoring [CGM] or intermittently scanned CGM [isCGM]), is essential for diabetes management for all children and adolescents with diabetes (A). ○ Each child should have access to technology and materials for self-monitoring of glucose measurements to test enough to optimize diabetes care (B). ○ Diabetes center personnel should advocate to nations, states, and health care funders to ensure that children and adolescents with diabetes have adequate glucose monitoring supplies (E). ○ When fingerstick BGs are used, testing may need to be performed 6 to 10 times per day to optimize intensive control. For children, adolescents, and young adults aged ≤25 years we recommend individualized targets, aiming for the lowest achievable HbA1c without undue exposure to severe hypoglycemia balanced with quality of life and burden of care (E). For children, adolescents, and young adults ≤25 years who have access to comprehensive care a target of HbA1c of <53 mmol/mol (7.0%) is recommended (E). ○ A higher HbA1c goal (in most cases <58 mmol/mol [7.5%]) is appropriate in the following contexts: inability to articulate symptoms of hypoglycemia, hypoglycemia unawareness/history of severe hypoglycemia, lack of access to analog insulins, advanced insulin delivery technology, ability to regularly check BG, and CGM (E), and individuals who are “high glycators,” in whom an at-target HbA1c would reflect a significantly lower mean glucose than 8.6 mmoL/L (155 mg/dL) (E). ○ A lower goal (6.5%) or 47.5 mmol/mol may be appropriate if achievable without excessive hypoglycemia, impairment of quality of life, and undue burden of care (E). ○ A lower goal may be appropriate during the honeymoon phase of type 1 diabetes (E). ○ For patients who have elevated HbA1c, a step-wise approach to improve glycemic control is advised including individualized attention to: dose adjustments (E), personal factors limiting achievement of the target (E), assessment of the psychological effect of goal setting on the individual (E), and incorporation of available technology to improve glucose monitoring and insulin delivery modalities (E). Importantly, recent data suggest that lowering HbA1c targets is associated with a decreased mean HbA1c on a population and individual level without an increased frequency of severe hypoglycemia, even in children who achieve HbA1c levels <53 mmol/mol (7.0%).

Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is used to diagnose type 2 diabetes (T2D) and assess glycemic control in patients with diabetes. Previous genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified 18 HbA1c-associated genetic variants. These variants proved to be classifiable by their likely biological action as erythrocytic (also associated with erythrocyte traits) or glycemic (associated with other glucose-related traits). In this study, we tested the hypotheses that, in a very large scale GWAS, we would identify more genetic variants associated with HbA1c and that HbA1c variants implicated in erythrocytic biology would affect the diagnostic accuracy of HbA1c. We therefore expanded the number of HbA1c-associated loci and tested the effect of genetic risk-scores comprised of erythrocytic or glycemic variants on incident diabetes prediction and on prevalent diabetes screening performance. Throughout this multiancestry study, we kept a focus on interancestry differences in HbA1c genetics performance that might influence race-ancestry differences in health outcomes. Using genome-wide association meta-analyses in up to 159,940 individuals from 82 cohorts of European, African, East Asian, and South Asian ancestry, we identified 60 common genetic variants associated with HbA1c. We classified variants as implicated in glycemic, erythrocytic, or unclassified biology and tested whether additive genetic scores of erythrocytic variants (GS-E) or glycemic variants (GS-G) were associated with higher T2D incidence in multiethnic longitudinal cohorts (N = 33,241). Nineteen glycemic and 22 erythrocytic variants were associated with HbA1c at genome-wide significance. GS-G was associated with higher T2D risk (incidence OR = 1.05, 95% CI 1.04-1.06, per HbA1c-raising allele, p = 3 × 10-29); whereas GS-E was not (OR = 1.00, 95% CI 0.99-1.01, p = 0.60). In Europeans and Asians, erythrocytic variants in aggregate had only modest effects on the diagnostic accuracy of HbA1c. Yet, in African Americans, the X-linked G6PD G202A variant (T-allele frequency 11%) was associated with an absolute decrease in HbA1c of 0.81%-units (95% CI 0.66-0.96) per allele in hemizygous men, and 0.68%-units (95% CI 0.38-0.97) in homozygous women. The G6PD variant may cause approximately 2% (N = 0.65 million, 95% CI 0.55-0.74) of African American adults with T2D to remain undiagnosed when screened with HbA1c. Limitations include the smaller sample sizes for non-European ancestries and the inability to classify approximately one-third of the variants. Further studies in large multiethnic cohorts with HbA1c, glycemic, and erythrocytic traits are required to better determine the biological action of the unclassified variants. As G6PD deficiency can be clinically silent until illness strikes, we recommend investigation of the possible benefits of screening for the G6PD genotype along with using HbA1c to diagnose T2D in populations of African ancestry or groups where G6PD deficiency is common. Screening with direct glucose measurements, or genetically-informed HbA1c diagnostic thresholds in people with G6PD deficiency, may be required to avoid missed or delayed diagnoses.

Abstract Context Questions remain about bariatric surgery for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treatment. Objective Compare the remission of T2DM following surgical or nonsurgical treatments. Design, setting, and participants Randomized controlled trial at the University of Pittsburgh, in the United States. Five-year follow-up from February 2015 until June 2016. Interventions 61 participants with obesity and T2DM who were initially randomized to either bariatric surgical treatments (Roux-en-Y gastric bypass [RYGB] or laparoscopic adjustable gastric banding [LAGB]) or an intensive lifestyle weight loss intervention (LWLI) program for 1 year. Lower level lifestyle weight loss interventions (LLLIs) were then delivered for 4 years. Main Outcomes and Measures Diabetes remission assessed at 5 years. Results The mean age of the patients was 47 ± 6.6 years, 82% were women, and 21% African American. Mean hemoglobin A1c level 7.8% ± 1.9%, body mass index (BMI) 35.7 ± 3.1 kg/m2, and 26 participants (43%) had BMI < 35 kg/m2. Partial or complete T2DM remission was achieved by 30% (n = 6) of RYGB, 19% (n = 4) of LAGB, and no LWLI participants (P = .0208). At 5 years those in the RYGB group had the largest percentage of individuals (56%) not requiring any medications for T2DM compared with those in the LAGB (45%) and LWLI (0%) groups (P = .0065). Mean reductions in percent body weight at 5 years was the greatest after RYGB 25.2% ± 2.1%, followed by LAGB 12.7% ± 2.0% and lifestyle treatment 5.1% ± 2.5% (all pairwise P < .01). Conclusions Surgical treatments are more effective than lifestyle intervention alone for T2DM treatment.

Improving glucose sensitivity remains an unmet medical need in treating type 2 diabetes (T2D). Dorzagliatin is a dual-acting, orally bioavailable glucokinase activator that enhances glucokinase activity in a glucose-dependent manner, improves glucose-stimulated insulin secretion and demonstrates effects on glycemic control in patients with T2D. We report the findings of a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dorzagliatin in patients with T2D. Eligible drug-naïve patients with T2D ( n  = 463) were randomly assigned to the dorzagliatin or placebo group at a ratio of 2:1 for 24 weeks of double-blind treatment, followed by 28 weeks of open-label treatment with dorzagliatin for all patients. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change in glycated hemoglobin from baseline to week 24. Safety was assessed throughout the trial. At week 24, the least-squares mean change in glycated hemoglobin from baseline (95% confidence interval) was −1.07% (−1.19%, −0.95%) in the dorzagliatin group and −0.50% (−0.68%, −0.32%) in the placebo group (estimated treatment difference, −0.57%; 95% confidence interval: −0.79%, −0.36%; P  < 0.001). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the two groups. There were no severe hypoglycemia events or drug-related serious adverse events in the dorzagliatin group. In summary, dorzagliatin improved glycemic control in drug-naïve patients with T2D and showed a good tolerability and safety profile. The SEED study is a phase 3 clinical trial demonstrating a beneficial effect on glycemic control of dorzagliatin, a glucokinase activator, in drug-naive patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes.