0
selected
-
1.
Dietary Glycemic Index and Load and the Risk of Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Updated Meta-Analyses of Prospective Cohort Studies.
Livesey, G, Taylor, R, Livesey, HF, Buyken, AE, Jenkins, DJA, Augustin, LSA, Sievenpiper, JL, Barclay, AW, Liu, S, Wolever, TMS, et al
Nutrients. 2019;(6)
Abstract
Published meta-analyses indicate significant but inconsistent incident type-2 diabetes(T2D)-dietary glycemic index (GI) and glycemic load (GL) risk ratios or risk relations (RR). It is nowover a decade ago that a published meta-analysis used a predefined standard to identify validstudies. Considering valid studies only, and using random effects dose-response meta-analysis(DRM) while withdrawing spurious results (p < 0.05), we ascertained whether these relationswould support nutrition guidance, specifically for an RR > 1.20 with a lower 95% confidence limit>1.10 across typical intakes (approximately 10th to 90th percentiles of population intakes). Thecombined T2D-GI RR was 1.27 (1.15-1.40) (p < 0.001, n = 10 studies) per 10 units GI, while that forthe T2D-GL RR was 1.26 (1.15-1.37) (p < 0.001, n = 15) per 80 g/d GL in a 2000 kcal (8400 kJ) diet.The corresponding global DRM using restricted cubic splines were 1.87 (1.56-2.25) (p < 0.001, n =10) and 1.89 (1.66-2.16) (p < 0.001, n = 15) from 47.6 to 76.1 units GI and 73 to 257 g/d GL in a 2000kcal diet, respectively. In conclusion, among adults initially in good health, diets higher in GI or GLwere robustly associated with incident T2D. Together with mechanistic and other data, thissupports that consideration should be given to these dietary risk factors in nutrition advice.Concerning the public health relevance at the global level, our evidence indicates that GI and GLare substantial food markers predicting the development of T2D worldwide, for persons ofEuropean ancestry and of East Asian ancestry.
-
2.
Prospective, randomized trial on intensive SMBG management added value in non-insulin-treated T2DM patients (PRISMA): a study to determine the effect of a structured SMBG intervention.
Scavini, M, Bosi, E, Ceriello, A, Giorgino, F, Porta, M, Tiengo, A, Vespasiani, G, Bottalico, D, Marino, R, Parkin, C, et al
Acta diabetologica. 2013;(5):663-72
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is a core component of diabetes management. However, the International Diabetes Federation recommends that SMBG be performed in a structured manner and that the data are accurately interpreted and used to take appropriate therapeutic actions. We designed a study to evaluate the impact of structured SMBG on glycemic control in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients. The Prospective, Randomized Trial on Intensive SMBG Management Added Value in Non-insulin-Treated T2DM Patients (PRISMA) is a 12-month, prospective, multicenter, open, parallel group, randomized, and controlled trial to evaluate the added value of an intensive, structured SMBG regimen in T2DM patients treated with oral agents and/or diet. One thousand patients (500 per arm) will be enrolled at 39 clinical sites in Italy. Eligible patients will be randomized to the intensive structured monitoring (ISM) group or the active control (AC) group, with a glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) target of <7.0%. Intervention will comprise (1) structured SMBG (4-point daily glucose profiles on 3 days per week [ISM]; discretionary, unstructured SMBG [AC]); (2) comprehensive patient education (both groups); and (3) clinician's adjustment of diabetes medications using an algorithm targeting SMBG levels, HbA1c and hypoglycemia (ISM) or HbA1c and hypoglycemia (AC). The intervention and trial design build upon previous research by emphasizing appropriate and collaborative use of SMBG by both patients and physicians. Utilization of per protocol and intent-to-treat analyses facilitates assessment of the intervention. Inclusion of multiple dependent variables allows us to assess the broader impact of the intervention, including changes in patient and physician attitudes and behaviors.
-
3.
Post hoc subgroup analysis of the HEART2D trial demonstrates lower cardiovascular risk in older patients targeting postprandial versus fasting/premeal glycemia.
Raz, I, Ceriello, A, Wilson, PW, Battioui, C, Su, EW, Kerr, L, Jones, CA, Milicevic, Z, Jacober, SJ
Diabetes care. 2011;(7):1511-3
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
OBJECTIVE To identify the Hyperglycemia and Its Effect After Acute Myocardial Infarction on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (HEART2D) trial subgroups with treatment difference. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In 1,115 type 2 diabetic patients who had suffered from an acute myocardial infarction (AMI), the HEART2D trial compared two insulin strategies targeting postprandial or fasting/premeal glycemia on time until first cardiovascular event (cardiovascular death, nonfatal MI, nonfatal stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for acute coronary syndrome). The HEART2D trial ended prematurely for futility. We used the classification and regression tree (CART) to identify baseline subgroups with potential treatment differences. RESULTS CART estimated the age of >65.7 years to best predict the difference in time to first event. In the subgroup aged>65.7 years (prandial, n=189; basal, n=210), prandial patients had a significantly longer time to first event and a lower proportion experienced a first event (n=56 [29.6%] vs. n=85 [40.5%]; hazard ratio 0.69 [95% CI 0.49-0.96]; P=0.029), despite similar A1C levels. CONCLUSIONS Older type 2 diabetic AMI survivors may have a lower risk for a subsequent cardiovascular event with insulin targeting postprandial versus fasting/premeal glycemia.
-
4.
The glucose triad and its role in comprehensive glycaemic control: current status, future management.
Ceriello, A
International journal of clinical practice. 2010;(12):1705-11
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
The prevalence of type 2 diabetes across the world has been described as a global pandemic. Despite significant efforts to limit both the increase in the number of cases and the long-term impact on morbidity and mortality, the total number of people with diabetes is projected to continue to rise and most patients still fail to achieve adequate glycaemic control. Optimal management of type 2 diabetes requires an understanding of the relationships between glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)), fasting plasma glucose and postprandial glucose (the glucose triad), and how these change during development and progression of the disease. Early and sustained control of glycaemia remains important in the management of type 2 diabetes. The contribution of postprandial glucose levels to overall glycaemic control and the role of postprandial glucose targets in disease management are currently debated. However, many patients do not reach HbA(1C) targets set according to published guidelines. As recent data suggest, if driving HbA(1C) down to lower target levels is not the answer, what other factors involved in glucose homeostasis can or should be targeted? Has the time come to change the treatment paradigm to include awareness of the components of the glucose triad, the existence of glucose variability and their potential influence on the choice of pharmacological treatment? It is becomingly increasingly clear that physicians are likely to have to consider plasma glucose levels both after the overnight fast and after meals as well as the variability of glucose levels, in order to achieve optimal glycaemic control for each patient. When antidiabetic therapy is initiated, physicians may need to consider selection of agents that target both fasting and postprandial hyperglycaemia.
-
5.
Lowering glucose to prevent adverse cardiovascular outcomes in a critical care setting.
Ceriello, A, Zarich, SW, Testa, R
Journal of the American College of Cardiology. 2009;(5 Suppl):S9-13
Abstract
High admission blood glucose levels after acute myocardial infarction are common and associated with an increased risk of death in patients with or without diabetes. Hyperglycemia is associated with altered myocardial blood flow and energetics and can lead to a pro-oxidative/proinflammatory state. The use of intensive insulin treatment has shown superior benefits in the treatment of hyperglycemia versus glucose-insulin-potassium infusion, particularly in critical care settings.
-
6.
Glucose metabolism and hyperglycemia.
Giugliano, D, Ceriello, A, Esposito, K
The American journal of clinical nutrition. 2008;(1):217S-222S
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
Islet dysfunction and peripheral insulin resistance are both present in type 2 diabetes and are both necessary for the development of hyperglycemia. In both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, large, prospective clinical studies have shown a strong relation between time-averaged mean values of glycemia, measured as glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and vascular diabetic complications. These studies are the basis for the American Diabetes Association's current recommended treatment goal that HbA1c should be <7%. The measurement of the HbA1c concentration is considered the gold standard for assessing long-term glycemia; however, it does not reveal any information on the extent or frequency of blood glucose excursions, but provides an overall mean value only. Postprandial hyperglycemia occurs frequently in patients with diabetes receiving active treatment and can occur even when metabolic control is apparently good. Interventional studies indicate that reducing postmeal glucose excursions is as important as controlling fasting plasma glucose in persons with diabetes and impaired glucose tolerance. Evidence exists for a causal relation between postmeal glucose increases and microvascular and macrovascular outcomes; therefore, it is not surprising that treatment with different compounds that have specific effects on postprandial glucose regulation is accompanied by a significant improvement of many pathways supposed to be involved in diabetic complications, including oxidative stress, endothelial dysfunction, inflammation, and nuclear factor-kappaB activation. The goal of therapy should be to achieve glycemic status as near to normal as safely possible in all 3 components of glycemic control: HbA1c, fasting glucose, and postmeal glucose peak.