0
selected
-
1.
Clinical impact of an integrated e-health system for diabetes self-management support and shared decision making (POWER2DM): a randomised controlled trial.
Ruissen, MM, Torres-Peña, JD, Uitbeijerse, BS, Arenas de Larriva, AP, Huisman, SD, Namli, T, Salzsieder, E, Vogt, L, Ploessnig, M, van der Putte, B, et al
Diabetologia. 2023;(12):2213-2225
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIMS/HYPOTHESIS There is a lack of e-health systems that integrate the complex variety of aspects relevant for diabetes self-management. We developed and field-tested an e-health system (POWER2DM) that integrates medical, psychological and behavioural aspects and connected wearables to support patients and healthcare professionals in shared decision making and diabetes self-management. METHODS Participants with type 1 or type 2 diabetes (aged >18 years) from hospital outpatient diabetes clinics in the Netherlands and Spain were randomised using randomisation software to POWER2DM or usual care for 37 weeks. This RCT assessed the change in HbA1c between the POWER2DM and usual care groups at the end of the study (37 weeks) as a primary outcome measure. Participants and clinicians were not blinded to the intervention. Changes in quality of life (QoL) (WHO-5 Well-Being Index [WHO-5]), diabetes self-management (Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire - Revised [DSMQ-R]), glycaemic profiles from continuous glucose monitoring devices, awareness of hypoglycaemia (Clarke hypoglycaemia unawareness instrument), incidence of hypoglycaemic episodes and technology acceptance were secondary outcome measures. Additionally, sub-analyses were performed for participants with type 1 and type 2 diabetes separately. RESULTS A total of 226 participants participated in the trial (108 with type 1 diabetes; 118 with type 2 diabetes). In the POWER2DM group (n=111), HbA1c decreased from 60.6±14.7 mmol/mol (7.7±1.3%) to 56.7±12.1 mmol/mol (7.3±1.1%) (means ± SD, p<0.001), compared with no change in the usual care group (n=115) (baseline: 61.7±13.7 mmol/mol, 7.8±1.3%; end of study: 61.0±12.4 mmol/mol, 7.7±1.1%; p=0.19) (between-group difference 0.24%, p=0.008). In the sub-analyses in the POWER2DM group, HbA1c in participants with type 2 diabetes decreased from 62.3±17.3 mmol/mol (7.9±1.6%) to 54.3±11.1 mmol/mol (7.1±1.0%) (p<0.001) compared with no change in HbA1c in participants with type 1 diabetes (baseline: 58.8±11.2 mmol/mol [7.5±1.0%]; end of study: 59.2±12.7 mmol/mol [7.6±1.2%]; p=0.84). There was an increase in the time during which interstitial glucose levels were between 3.0 and 3.9 mmol/l in the POWER2DM group, but no increase in clinically relevant hypoglycaemia (interstitial glucose level below 3.0 mmol/l). QoL improved in participants with type 1 diabetes in the POWER2DM group compared with the usual care group (baseline: 15.7±3.8; end of study: 16.3±3.5; p=0.047 for between-group difference). Diabetes self-management improved in both participants with type 1 diabetes (from 7.3±1.2 to 7.7±1.2; p=0.002) and those with type 2 diabetes (from 6.5±1.3 to 6.7±1.3; p=0.003) within the POWER2DM group. The POWER2DM integrated e-health support was well accepted in daily life and no important adverse (or unexpected) effects or side effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION POWER2DM improves HbA1c levels compared with usual care in those with type 2 diabetes, improves QoL in those with type 1 diabetes, improves diabetes self-management in those with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and is well accepted in daily life. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03588104. FUNDING This study was funded by the European Union's Horizon 2020 Research and Innovation Programme (grant agreement number 689444).
-
2.
Increased stress, weight gain and less exercise in relation to glycemic control in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Ruissen, MM, Regeer, H, Landstra, CP, Schroijen, M, Jazet, I, Nijhoff, MF, Pijl, H, Ballieux, BEPB, Dekkers, O, Huisman, SD, et al
BMJ open diabetes research & care. 2021;(1)
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Lockdown measures have a profound effect on many aspects of daily life relevant for diabetes self-management. We assessed whether lockdown measures, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, differentially affect perceived stress, body weight, exercise and related this to glycemic control in people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We performed a short-term observational cohort study at the Leiden University Medical Center. People with type 1 and type 2 diabetes ≥18 years were eligible to participate. Participants filled out online questionnaires, sent in blood for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) analysis and shared data of their flash or continuous glucose sensors. HbA1c during the lockdown was compared with the last known HbA1c before the lockdown. RESULTS In total, 435 people were included (type 1 diabetes n=280, type 2 diabetes n=155). An increase in perceived stress and anxiety, weight gain and less exercise was observed in both groups. There was improvement in glycemic control in the group with the highest HbA1c tertile (type 1 diabetes: -0.39% (-4.3 mmol/mol) (p<0.0001 and type 2 diabetes: -0.62% (-6.8 mmol/mol) (p=0.0036). Perceived stress was associated with difficulty with glycemic control (p<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS An increase in perceived stress and anxiety, weight gain and less exercise but no deterioration of glycemic control occurs in both people with relatively well-controlled type 1 and type 2 diabetes during short-term lockdown measures. As perceived stress showed to be associated with glycemic control, this provides opportunities for healthcare professionals to put more emphasis on psychological aspects during diabetes care consultations.
-
3.
Genome-Wide Association Study on the Early-Phase Insulin Response to a Liquid Mixed Meal: Results From the NEO Study.
Li-Gao, R, Carlotti, F, de Mutsert, R, van Hylckama Vlieg, A, de Koning, EJP, Jukema, JW, Rosendaal, FR, Willems van Dijk, K, Mook-Kanamori, DO
Diabetes. 2019;(12):2327-2336
Abstract
Early-phase insulin secretion is a determinant of postprandial glucose homeostasis. In this study, we aimed to identify novel genetic variants associated with the early-phase insulin response to a liquid mixed meal by a genome-wide association study using a discovery and replication design embedded in the Netherlands Epidemiology of Obesity (NEO) study. The early-phase insulin response was defined as the difference between the natural logarithm-transformed insulin concentrations of the postprandial state at 30 min after a meal challenge and the fasting state (Δinsulin). After Bonferroni correction, rs505922 (β: -6.5% [minor allele frequency (MAF) 0.32, P = 3.3 × 10-8]) located in the ABO gene reached genome-wide significant level (P < 5 × 10-8) and was also replicated successfully (β: -7.8% [MAF 0.32, P = 7.2 × 10-5]). The function of the ABO gene was assessed using in vitro shRNA-mediated knockdown of gene expression in the murine pancreatic β-cell line MIN6. Knocking down the ABO gene led to decreased insulin secretion in the murine pancreatic β-cell line. These data indicate that the previously identified elevated risk of type 2 diabetes for carriers of the ABO rs505922:C allele may be caused by decreased early-phase insulin secretion.
-
4.
SUGAR-DIP trial: oral medication strategy versus insulin for diabetes in pregnancy, study protocol for a multicentre, open-label, non-inferiority, randomised controlled trial.
de Wit, L, Rademaker, D, Voormolen, DN, Akerboom, BMC, Kiewiet-Kemper, RM, Soeters, MR, Verwij-Didden, MAL, Assouiki, F, Schippers, DH, Vermeulen, MAR, et al
BMJ open. 2019;(8):e029808
Abstract
INTRODUCTION In women with gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) requiring pharmacotherapy, insulin was the established first-line treatment. More recently, oral glucose lowering drugs (OGLDs) have gained popularity as a patient-friendly, less expensive and safe alternative. Monotherapy with metformin or glibenclamide (glyburide) is incorporated in several international guidelines. In women who do not reach sufficient glucose control with OGLD monotherapy, usually insulin is added, either with or without continuation of OGLDs. No reliable data from clinical trials, however, are available on the effectiveness of a treatment strategy using all three agents, metformin, glibenclamide and insulin, in a stepwise approach, compared with insulin-only therapy for improving pregnancy outcomes. In this trial, we aim to assess the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and patient experience of a stepwise combined OGLD treatment protocol, compared with conventional insulin-based therapy for GDM. METHODS The SUGAR-DIP trial is an open-label, multicentre randomised controlled non-inferiority trial. Participants are women with GDM who do not reach target glycaemic control with modification of diet, between 16 and 34 weeks of gestation. Participants will be randomised to either treatment with OGLDs, starting with metformin and supplemented as needed with glibenclamide, or randomised to treatment with insulin. In women who do not reach target glycaemic control with combined metformin and glibenclamide, glibenclamide will be substituted with insulin, while continuing metformin. The primary outcome will be the incidence of large-for-gestational-age infants (birth weight >90th percentile). Secondary outcome measures are maternal diabetes-related endpoints, obstetric complications, neonatal complications and cost-effectiveness analysis. Outcomes will be analysed according to the intention-to-treat principle. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION The study protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of the Utrecht University Medical Centre. Approval by the boards of management for all participating hospitals will be obtained. Trial results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NTR6134; Pre-results.
-
5.
Defining Outcomes for β-cell Replacement Therapy in the Treatment of Diabetes: A Consensus Report on the Igls Criteria From the IPITA/EPITA Opinion Leaders Workshop.
Rickels, MR, Stock, PG, de Koning, EJP, Piemonti, L, Pratschke, J, Alejandro, R, Bellin, MD, Berney, T, Choudhary, P, Johnson, PR, et al
Transplantation. 2018;(9):1479-1486
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
β-cell replacement therapy, available currently as pancreas or islet transplantation, has developed without a clear definition of graft functional and clinical outcomes. The International Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association and European Pancreas and Islet Transplantation Association held a workshop to develop consensus for an International Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association and European Pancreas and Islet Transplant Association Statement on the definition of function and failure of current and future forms of β-cell replacement therapy. There was consensus that β-cell replacement therapy could be considered as a treatment for β-cell failure, regardless of etiology and without requiring undetectable C-peptide, accompanied by glycemic instability with either problematic hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia. Glycemic control should be assessed at a minimum by glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and the occurrence of severe hypoglycemia. Optimal β-cell graft function is defined by near-normal glycemic control (HbA1c ≤6.5% [48 mmol/mol]) without severe hypoglycemia or requirement for insulin or other antihyperglycemic therapy, and with an increase over pretransplant measurement of C-peptide. Good β-cell graft function requires HbA1c less than 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) without severe hypoglycemia and with a significant (>50%) reduction in insulin requirements and restoration of clinically significant C-peptide production. Marginal β-cell graft function is defined by failure to achieve HbA1c less than 7.0% (53 mmol/mol), the occurrence of any severe hypoglycemia, or less than 50% reduction in insulin requirements when there is restoration of clinically significant C-peptide production documented by improvement in hypoglycemia awareness/severity, or glycemic variability/lability. A failed β-cell graft is defined by the absence of any evidence for clinically significant C-peptide production. Optimal and good function are considered successful clinical outcomes.
-
6.
Defining outcomes for β-cell replacement therapy in the treatment of diabetes: a consensus report on the Igls criteria from the IPITA/EPITA opinion leaders workshop.
Rickels, MR, Stock, PG, de Koning, EJP, Piemonti, L, Pratschke, J, Alejandro, R, Bellin, MD, Berney, T, Choudhary, P, Johnson, PR, et al
Transplant international : official journal of the European Society for Organ Transplantation. 2018;(4):343-352
Abstract
β-cell replacement therapy, available currently as pancreas or islet transplantation, has developed without a clear definition of graft functional and clinical outcomes. The International Pancreas & Islet Transplant Association (IPITA) and European Pancreas & Islet Transplantation Association (EPITA) held a workshop to develop consensus for an IPITA/EPITA Statement on the definition of function and failure of current and future forms of β-cell replacement therapy. There was consensus that β-cell replacement therapy could be considered as a treatment for β-cell failure, regardless of etiology and without requiring undetectable C-peptide, accompanied by glycemic instability with either problematic hypoglycemia or hyperglycemia. Glycemic control should be assessed at a minimum by glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c ) and the occurrence of severe hypoglycemia. Optimal β-cell graft function is defined by near-normal glycemic control [HbA1c ≤ 6.5% (48 mmol/mol)] without severe hypoglycemia or requirement for insulin or other antihyperglycemic therapy, and with an increase over pretransplant measurement of C-peptide. Good β-cell graft function requires HbA1c < 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) without severe hypoglycemia and with a significant (>50%) reduction in insulin requirements and restoration of clinically significant C-peptide production. Marginal β-cell graft function is defined by failure to achieve HbA1c < 7.0% (53 mmol/mol), the occurrence of any severe hypoglycemia, or less than 50% reduction in insulin requirements when there is restoration of clinically significant C-peptide production documented by improvement in hypoglycemia awareness/severity, or glycemic variability/lability. A failed β-cell graft is defined by the absence of any evidence for clinically significant C-peptide production. Optimal and good functional outcomes are considered successful clinical outcomes.