insulin

More than 30 million people in the US have diabetes, approximately 5% with type 1 and approximately 95% with type 2. About 5 million individuals in the US with type 2 diabetes use insulin and 7 million take sulfonylureas; both of these medications have a greater association with hypoglycemia than metformin, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, or sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. Each month, 70% of people with type 1 diabetes experience some degree of hypoglycemia.1 Level 1 hypoglycemia is defined as blood glucose of 54 to 70 mg/dL; level 2 is less than 54 mg/dL; and severe hypoglycemia (level 3) occurs when low blood glucose levels cause neurologic or physical symptoms that require help from others. Furthermore, recurrent severe hypoglycemia increases risk of future dementia.2 Hypoglycemia occurs more often in people with lower education, lower income, and food insecurity.3 This synopsis focuses on outpatient management of diabetes with high risk of hypoglycemia; the guideline also addresses prevention of hypoglycemia in hospitalized patients.4

Author/s:

Celeste C Thomas, Karishma Chopra, Andrew M Davis

Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Basal Insulin: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Saige Blanchard — Tue, 08 Jun 2021 05:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

June 8, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Journal of the American Medical Association

Publisher:

American Medical Association

Publication Date:

June 8, 2021

Issue:

Volume:

325

Pages:

2262-2272

URL:

Effect of Continuous Glucose Monitoring on Glycemic Control in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Basal Insulin: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2021.7444

Keywords

PMID (1):

34077499

MeSH

glycated hemoglobin a

Use of continuous glucose monitoring devices by people with Type 2 diabetes who are being treated with supplementary basal insulin results in significantly better glycemic control. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Importance: Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to be beneficial for adults with type 2 diabetes using intensive insulin therapy, but its use in type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin without prandial insulin has not been well studied.

Objective: To determine the effectiveness of CGM in adults with type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin without prandial insulin in primary care practices.

Design, setting, and participants: This randomized clinical trial was conducted at 15 centers in the US (enrollment from July 30, 2018, to October 30, 2019; follow-up completed July 7, 2020) and included adults with type 2 diabetes receiving their diabetes care from a primary care clinician and treated with 1 or 2 daily injections of long- or intermediate-acting basal insulin without prandial insulin, with or without noninsulin glucose-lowering medications.

Interventions: Random assignment 2:1 to CGM (n = 116) or traditional blood glucose meter (BGM) monitoring (n = 59).

Main outcomes and measures: The primary outcome was hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) level at 8 months. Key secondary outcomes were CGM-measured time in target glucose range of 70 to 180 mg/dL, time with glucose level at greater than 250 mg/dL, and mean glucose level at 8 months.

Results: Among 175 randomized participants (mean [SD] age, 57 [9] years; 88 women [50%]; 92 racial/ethnic minority individuals [53%]; mean [SD] baseline HbA1c level, 9.1% [0.9%]), 165 (94%) completed the trial. Mean HbA1c level decreased from 9.1% at baseline to 8.0% at 8 months in the CGM group and from 9.0% to 8.4% in the BGM group (adjusted difference, -0.4% [95% CI, -0.8% to -0.1%]; P = .02). In the CGM group, compared with the BGM group, the mean percentage of CGM-measured time in the target glucose range of 70 to 180 mg/dL was 59% vs 43% (adjusted difference, 15% [95% CI, 8% to 23%]; P < .001), the mean percentage of time at greater than 250 mg/dL was 11% vs 27% (adjusted difference, -16% [95% CI, -21% to -11%]; P < .001), and the means of the mean glucose values were 179 mg/dL vs 206 mg/dL (adjusted difference, -26 mg/dL [95% CI, -41 to -12]; P < .001). Severe hypoglycemic events occurred in 1 participant (1%) in the CGM group and in 1 (2%) in the BGM group.

Conclusions and relevance: Among adults with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin without prandial insulin, continuous glucose monitoring, as compared with blood glucose meter monitoring, resulted in significantly lower HbA1c levels at 8 months.

Author/s:

Martens, T., Beck, R. W., Bailey, R., Ruedy, K. J., Calhoun, P., Peters, A. L., Pop-Busui, R., Philis-Tsimikas, A., Bao, S., Umpierrez, G., Davis, G., Kruger, D., Bhargava, A., Young, L., McGill, J. B., Aleppo, G., Nguyen, Q. T., Orozco, I., Biggs, W., Lucas, K. J., Polonsky, W. H., Buse, J. B., Price, D., Bergenstal, R. M.

The relationship between exacerbated diabetic peripheral neuropathy and metformin treatment in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Devin Evans — Wed, 03 Mar 2021 06:00:00 +0000

Date Added:

March 3, 2021

Journal/Publication:

Scientific Reports

Publication Date:

January 21, 2021

Issue:

Volume:

URL:

The relationship between exacerbated diabetic peripheral neuropathy and metformin treatment in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type:

Clinical Research Results

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1038/s41598-021-81631-8

Keywords

PMID (1):

33479439

MeSH

Metformin

diabetic neuropathies

This study suggests that prolonged treatment with metformin is associated with reduced Vitamin B12 levels and an increased incidence of distal peripheral neuropathy. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

Metformin-treated diabetics (MTD) showed a decrease in cobalamin, a rise in homocysteine, and methylmalonic acid, leading to accentuated diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). This study aimed to determine whether or not metformin is a risk factor for DPN. We compared MTD to non-metformin-treated diabetics (NMTD) clinically using the Toronto Clinical Scoring System (TCSS), laboratory (methylmalonic acid, cobalamin, and homocysteine), and electrophysiological studies. Median homocysteine and methylmalonic acid levels in MTD vs. NMTD were 15.3 vs. 9.6 µmol/l; P < 0.001 and 0.25 vs. 0.13 µmol/l; P = 0.02, respectively with high statistical significance in MTD. There was a significantly lower plasma level of cobalamin in MTD than NMTD. Spearman's correlation showed a significant negative correlation between cobalamin and increased dose of metformin and a significant positive correlation between TCSS and increased dose of metformin. Logistic regression analysis showed that MTD had significantly longer metformin use duration, higher metformin dose > 2 g, higher TCSS, lower plasma cobalamin, and significant higher homocysteine. Diabetics treated with metformin for prolonged duration and higher doses were associated with lower cobalamin and more severe DPN.

Author/s:

Hashem, Manal Mohammed, Esmael, Ahmed, Nassar, Abdelfattah Kasem, El-Sherif, Mohammed

Using Insulin to Treat Poorly Controlled Type 2 Diabetes in 2020

John Bayhi — Tue, 26 May 2020 20:43:16 +0000

Date Added:

May 26, 2020

Journal/Publication:

JAMA

Publisher:

American Medical Association

Publication Date:

May 22, 2020

Volume:

Online ahead of print

URL:

Using Insulin to Treat Poorly Controlled Type 2 Diabetes in 2020

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

DOI (1):

10.1001/jama.2020.1303

Keywords

PMID (1):

32442246

MeSH

Sodium-Glucose Transporter 2 Inhibitors

hypoglycemic agents

insulin

glycated hemoglobin a

dipeptidyl-peptidase IV inhibitors

Metformin

diabetes mellitus, type 2

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor

Thiazolidinediones

A potentially useful decision algorithm for management of patients with Type 2 diabetes, which includes early consideration of use of basal insulin in patients with A1c > 9%. James W. Mold, MD, MPH

Free full text

View

No abstract available

Author/s:

Hirsch, IB, Gaudiani, LM

Choosing Wisely - 5 Things Physicians & Patients Should Question

Jeffrey Wilson — Tue, 22 Jan 2019 21:04:50 +0000

Date Added:

January 22, 2019

Publisher:

Society of General Internal Medicine

Publication Date:

April 1, 2016

URL:

Five Things Physicians and Patients Should Question

Type:

Meta-analyses, Reviews, and Guidelines

Format:

Article

Keywords

diabetes

home blood glucose monitoring

insulin

MeSH

blood glucose

insulin

diabetes mellitus, type 1

diabetes mellitus, type 2

Most patients with type 2 diabetes do not benefit from home blood glucose monitoring.

Free full text

Don’t recommend daily home finger glucose testing in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus not using insulin.

Self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) is an integral part of patient self-management in maintaining safe and target-driven glucose control in type 1 diabetes mellitus. However, daily finger glucose testing has no benefit in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are not on insulin or medications associated with hypoglycemia, and small, but significant, patient harms are associated with daily glucose testing. SMBG should be reserved for patients during the titration of their medication doses or during periods of changes in patients’ diet and exercise routines.

Author/s:

Subramanian, Usha, Burger, Alfred, Bailey, Jim, Gleason, Nathaniel, Pahwa, Amit