Search

Objective: The study explores whether type 2 diabetes (T2D) diagnosis affects food consumption patterns in line with the dietary recommendations provided to individuals in relation to a diagnosis. Design: Based on detailed food purchase data, we explore which dietary changes are most common following a T2D diagnosis. Changes are investigated for several energy-adjusted nutrients and food groups and overall adherence to dietary guidelines. Setting: We use data on diagnosis of T2D and hospitalisation in relation to T2D for a sample of adult Danes registered in the official patient register. This is combined with detailed scanner data on food purchases, which are used as a proxy for dietary intake. Participants: We included 274 individuals in Denmark who are diagnosed during their participation in a consumer panel where they report their food purchases and 16 395 individuals who are not diagnosed. Results: Results suggest some changes in dietary composition following diagnosis, as measured by a Healthy Eating Index and for specific food groups and nutrients, although the long-term effects are limited. Socio-economic characteristics are poor predictors of dietary changes following diagnosis. Change in diet following diagnosis vary with the pre-diagnosis consumption patterns, where individuals with relatively unhealthy overall diets prior to diagnosis improve overall healthiness more compared to individuals with relatively healthy diets prior to diagnosis. Conclusions: Adherence to dietary advice is low, on average, but there is large variation in behavioural change between the diagnosed individuals. Our results stress the difficulty for diagnosed individuals to shift dietary habits, particularly in the long term. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Sulfonylureas are first-line treatment of hepatocyte nuclear factor 1-α (HNF1A) diabetes (maturity-onset diabetes of the young type 3), but many patients do not achieve optimal glycemic control without episodes of hypoglycemia. We investigated the combination of the sulfonylurea glimepiride and the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor linagliptin versus glimepiride monotherapy with respect to glycemic variability, glycemic control, and risk of hypoglycemia.Research Design and Methods: In a randomized, double-blinded, crossover trial, patients with HNF1A diabetes (n = 19; mean ± SD age 43 ± 14 years, BMI 24.8 ± 2.8 kg/m2, and glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.4 ± 0.2% [57.1 ± 7.3 mmol/mol]) were randomly assigned to treatment with glimepiride + linagliptin 5 mg (16 weeks), washout (4 weeks), and glimepiride + placebo (16 weeks) (or vice versa). Glimepiride was titrated targeting a fasting plasma glucose of 4.5-6.0 mmol/L without hypoglycemia. Treatments were evaluated by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), HbA1c, and meal test.Results: Compared with glimepiride + placebo, glimepiride + linagliptin did not significantly improve the primary end point, mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE) (mean difference -0.7 mmol/L, P = 0.1540), but displayed significant reductions in coefficient of variation on CGM (-3.6%, P = 0.0401), HbA1c (-0.5%, P = 0.0048), and glimepiride dose (-0.7 mg/day, P = 0.0099). β-cell glucose sensitivity (assessed as C-peptide-to-glucose ratio) during meal test improved with glimepiride + linagliptin. Incidences of hypoglycemia were similar with both treatments.Conclusions: Linagliptin as add-on treatment to glimepiride improved glycemic variability and control without increasing risk of hypoglycemia in patients with HNF1A diabetes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Hepatocyte nuclear factor 1α (HNF1A)-diabetes is the most common monogenetic subtype of diabetes. Strict glycaemic control is crucial for a good prognosis for patients with HNF1A-diabetes. Sulfonylurea (SU) is used as a first-line therapy in HNF1A-diabetes. However, SU therapy may be problematic as it confers a high risk of hypoglycaemia. We hypothesise that low dose of SU in combination with a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor provides a safer and more efficacious treatment in patients with HNF1A-diabetes compared with SU as monotherapy., Methods and Analysis: In a randomised, double-blinded, crossover study, patients with HNF1A-diabetes will randomly be assigned to 16 weeks of treatment with glimepiride+linagliptin, 4 weeks of washout and 16 weeks of treatment with glimepiride+placebo (or vice versa). Treatment will be evaluated with continuous glucose monitoring and combined meal and bicycle tests conducted at baseline and at the end of each of the two treatment periods. The primary end point is the absolute difference in the mean amplitude of glycaemic excursions between the two treatments (glimepiride+linagliptin vs glimepiride+placebo) at the end of each treatment period., Ethics and Dissemination: The study protocol is approved by the Danish Medicines Agency, The Scientific-Ethical Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark (H-17014518) and the Danish Data Protection Agency. The trial will be carried out and monitored in compliance with Good Clinical Practice guidelines and in accordance with the latest version of the Declaration of Helsinki. Positive, negative and inconclusive results will be published at scientific conferences and as one or more scientific manuscripts in peer-reviewed journals with authorship in accordance with the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors' recommendations., Trial Registration Number: 2017-000204-15., Competing Interests: Competing interests: ASC, SH, TH and TV have nothing to disclose in relation to the present paper. HS reports personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, personal fees from Bristol-Myers Sqiubb, outside the submitted work. FKK reports personal fees from Amgen, grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, personal fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, personal fees and non-financial support from Eli Lilly, personal fees and non-financial support from MSD/Merck, personal fees and non-financial support from Novo Nordisk, grants, personal fees and non-financial support from Sanofi, grants and personal fees from Zealand Pharma, other from Antag Therapeutics, outside the submitted work., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2018. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Several studies have linked low birth weight (LBW) and type 2 diabetes. We investigated hepatic and peripheral insulin action including intracellular glucose metabolism in 40 19-year-old men (20 LBW, 20 matched control subjects), using the hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp technique at two physiological insulin levels (10 and 40 mU/m(2) per min), indirect calorimetry, and [3-(3)H]glucose. Insulin secretion was examined during an oral and intravenous glucose tolerance test. Fasting p-glucose was higher in the LBW group (5.6 +/- 0.1 vs. 5.4 +/- 0.1; P < 0.05). Basal plasma glycerol concentrations were significantly lower in the LBW group. Insulin-stimulated glycolytic flux was significantly reduced, and suppression of endogenous glucose production was enhanced in the LBW group. Nevertheless, basal and insulin-stimulated rates of whole-body peripheral glucose disposal, glucose oxidation, lipid oxidation, exogenous glucose storage, and nonoxidative glucose metabolism were similar in the two groups. Insulin secretion was reduced by 30% in the LBW group, when expressed relative to insulin sensitivity (disposition index = insulin secretion x insulin action). We propose that reduced insulin-stimulated glycolysis precedes overt insulin resistance in LBW men. A lower insulin secretion may contribute to impaired glucose tolerance and ultimately lead to diabetes.