Search

Introduction: Diabetes is widely reported to be more common in people living with HIV (PLWH). Much of the data supporting this originated during the earlier HIV era. The perceived increased risk of type 2 diabetes is reflected in HIV clinical guidelines that recommend screening for diabetes in PLWH on anti‐retroviral therapy (ART). However, international HIV clinical guidelines do not agree on the best marker of glycaemia to screen for diabetes. This stems from studies that suggest HbA1c underestimates glycaemia in PLWH. Methods: Within this review we summarise the literature surrounding the association of HIV and type 2 diabetes and how this has changed over time. We also present the evidence on HbA1c discrepancy in PLWH. Conclusion: We suggest there is no basis to any international guidelines to restrict HbA1c based on HIV serostatus. We recommend, using the current evidence, that PLWH should be screened annually for diabetes in keeping with country specific guidance. Finally, we suggest future work to elucidate phenotype and natural history of type 2 diabetes in PLWH across all populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: HbA1c is reported to underestimate glycaemia in people living with HIV (PLHIV). There is not an internationally agreed screening method for diabetes. The primary aim was to identify which tests are performed to diagnose and monitor diabetes in PLHIV. Secondary aims were to identify whether prevalence or incidence of diabetes differs according to marker of glycaemia and how figures compare in PLHIV compared to people without. Methods: Electronic databases were searched for studies investigating diabetes in PLHIV, not pregnant, aged ≥18 years. Narrative analysis and descriptive statistics were used to describe which markers of glycaemia, and their frequency, were employed in the diagnosis and monitoring of diabetes in PLHIV. Diagnostic studies provided prevalence or incidence of diabetes. Results: In all, 45 of 1028 studies were included. Oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT), fasting glucose (FG), HbA1c and Fructosamine were used to investigate diabetes. In total, 27 studies described diagnosing diabetes, 14 using OGTT, 12 FG and 7 HbA1c. All 18 studies monitoring diabetes used HbA1c. Prevalence ranged from 1.3% to 26% and incidence 2.9% to 12.8%. Studies using glucose and HbA1c reported HbA1c to diagnose fewer people with diabetes, monitoring studies found HbA1c to underestimate glycaemia levels. Controlled studies demonstrate diabetes was more common in PLHIV. Conclusion: OGTT was used most frequently to diagnose diabetes, and HbA1c to monitor known diabetes. Prevalence and incidence varied depending on marker of glycaemia used. Studies reported a discrepancy in accuracy of HbA1c in PLHIV, to address this, well‐designed, prospective studies, providing individual‐level data on HbA1c levels and an additional marker of glycaemia in PLHIV are needed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background 11 patients were referred to our Molecular Genetics Department at the Royal Devon and Exeter Hospital between 2000-2012 with a physician's diagnosis of remitting diabetes. Our aim was to identify patients with remitting diabetes whose clinical presentation is not explained by any known aetiology of diabetes. Methods We obtained longitudinal clinical data on all 11 patients from the hospital records. All patients were aged between 0.5 and 35 years at diagnosis. We applied clinical criteria derived from the literature to establish 1) definite diabetes, 2) diabetes initially severe-requiring treatment with insulin, 3) remission of diabetes, and 4) exclusion of known causes of remitting diabetes. Results 10 out of 11 patients had an alternative explanation for their remission or a clear diagnosis was not identified. We identified a single patient with idiopathic remitting diabetes using these criteria. The patient was a white Caucasian female diagnosed aged 15 with symptoms of diabetes, laboratory glucose of 21.2 mmol/L and HbA1c 134 mmol/mol. Her BMI was 23.6 kg/m2. She was treated with basal bolus insulin but discontinued two years after diagnosis due to hypoglycaemia. 13 years post diagnosis, she had a normal oral glucose tolerance test during pregnancy (fasting glucose 4.5 mmol/L, 2 hr glucose 4.8 mmol/L) and an HbA1c of 30 mmol/mol. This patient does not appear to have Type 1 or Type 2 diabetes, and furthermore does not fit into current classifications of diabetes. Conclusions Idiopathic remitting diabetes is rare but does exist. Strict clinical criteria are important to ensure patients have a robust clinical diagnosis. Identification of more patients with idiopathic remitting diabetes will enable further study of the clinical course of this syndrome. Applying these strict criteria will allow the identification of patients with remitting diabetes to assess its aetiology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "The Diagnosis of Neonatal Diabetes in a Mother at 25 Years of Age," by D. Khurana and colleagues in the 2012 issue.