Search

Background Worldwide, up to 20 % of hospitalised patients have diabetes mellitus. In-hospital dysglycaemia increases patient mortality, morbidity, and length of hospital stay. Improved in-hospital diabetes management strategies are needed. The DIATEC trial investigates the effects of an in-hospital diabetes team and operational insulin titration algorithms based on either continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data or standard point-of-care (POC) glucose testing. Methods This is a two-armed, two-site, prospective randomised open-label blinded endpoint (PROBE) trial. We recruit non-critically ill hospitalised general medical and orthopaedic patients with type 2 diabetes treated with basal, prandial, and correctional insulin (N = 166). In both arms, patients are monitored by POC glucose testing and diabetes management is done by ward nurses guided by in-hospital diabetes teams. In one of the arms, patients are monitored in addition to POC glucose testing by telemetric CGM viewed by the in-hospital diabetes teams only. The in-hospital diabetes teams have operational algorithms to titrate insulin in both arms. Outcomes are in-hospital glycaemic and clinical outcomes. Discussion The DIATEC trial will show the glycaemic and clinical effects of in-hospital CGM handled by in-hospital diabetes teams with access to operational insulin titration algorithms in non-critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes. The DIATEC trial seeks to identify which hospitalised patients will benefit from CGM and in-hospital diabetes teams compared to POC glucose testing. This is essential information to optimise the use of healthcare resources before broadly implementing in-hospital CGM and diabetes teams., Background: Worldwide, up to 20 % of hospitalised patients have diabetes mellitus. In-hospital dysglycaemia increases patient mortality, morbidity, and length of hospital stay. Improved in-hospital diabetes management strategies are needed. The DIATEC trial investigates the effects of an in-hospital diabetes team and operational insulin titration algorithms based on either continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data or standard point-of-care (POC) glucose testing. Methods: This is a two-armed, two-site, prospective randomised open-label blinded endpoint (PROBE) trial. We recruit non-critically ill hospitalised general medical and orthopaedic patients with type 2 diabetes treated with basal, prandial, and correctional insulin (N = 166). In both arms, patients are monitored by POC glucose testing and diabetes management is done by ward nurses guided by in-hospital diabetes teams. In one of the arms, patients are monitored in addition to POC glucose testing by telemetric CGM viewed by the in-hospital diabetes teams only. The in-hospital diabetes teams have operational algorithms to titrate insulin in both arms. Outcomes are in-hospital glycaemic and clinical outcomes. Discussion: The DIATEC trial will show the glycaemic and clinical effects of in-hospital CGM handled by in-hospital diabetes teams with access to operational insulin titration algorithms in non-critically ill patients with type 2 diabetes. The DIATEC trial seeks to identify which hospitalised patients will benefit from CGM and in-hospital diabetes teams compared to POC glucose testing. This is essential information to optimise the use of healthcare resources before broadly implementing in-hospital CGM and diabetes teams. Trial registration: Prospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with identification number NCT05803473 on March 27th 2023.

The diverse range of organizations contributing to the global research ecosystem is believed to enhance the overall quality and resilience of its output. Mid-sized autonomous research institutes, distinct from universities, play a crucial role in this landscape. They often lead the way in new research fields and experimental methods, including those in social and organizational domains, which are vital for driving innovation. The EU-LIFE alliance was established with the goal of fostering excellence by developing and disseminating best practices among European biomedical research institutes. As directors of the 15 EU-LIFE institutes, we have spent a decade comparing and refining our processes. Now, we are eager to share the insights we've gained. To this end, we have crafted this Charter, outlining 10 principles we deem essential for research institutes to flourish and achieve ground-breaking discoveries. These principles, detailed in the Charter, encompass excellence, independence, training, internationality and inclusivity, mission focus, technological advancement, administrative innovation, cooperation, societal impact, and public engagement. Our aim is to inspire the establishment of new institutes that adhere to these principles and to raise awareness about their significance. We are convinced that they should be viewed a crucial component of any national and international innovation strategies.

OBJECTIVES: Preclinically, curcumin has been shown to protect against glucocorticoid-induced insulin resistance. We evaluated the effect of curcumin administered with prednisolone in healthy overweight or obese men.METHODS: In a double-blind, parallel-group trial, 24 overweight/obese non-diabetic men were randomised to one of three intervention groups A) prednisolone placebo+curcumin placebo, B) prednisolone (50 mg/day)+curcumin placebo or C) prednisolone and curcumin (400 mg/day). Curcumin or curcumin placebo treatment started one day prior to 10-day prednisolone or prednisolone placebo treatment. The primary endpoint was change in prednisolone-induced insulin resistance assessed by homeostatic model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA2-IR). Other endpoints included anthropometric measurements, magnetic resonance spectroscopy-assessed hepatic fat content, blood pressure, circulating metabolic markers and continuous glucose monitoring measures.RESULTS: Baseline characteristics (mean ± SD): age 44.2 ± 13.7 years, body mass index 30.1 ± 3.5 kg/m2, glycated haemoglobin A1c 33.3 ± 3.2 mmol/mol, HOMA2-IR 1.10 ± 0.45 and fasting plasma glucose 5.2 ± 0.4 mmol/L. Prednisolone significantly increased HOMA2-IR (estimated treatment difference 0.36 [95% CI 0.16; 0.57]). Co-treatment with curcumin had no effect on HOMA2-IR (estimated treatment difference 0.08 [95% CI -0.13; 0.39]). Prednisolone increased glycated haemoglobin A1c, insulin, C-peptide, glucagon, blood pressure, mean interstitial glucose, time spent in hyperglycaemia and glucose variability, but no protective effect of curcumin on any of these measures was observed.CONCLUSIONS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled parallel-group study involving 24 overweight or obese men randomised to one of three treatment arms, curcumin treatment had no protective effect on prednisolone-induced insulin resistance or other gluco-metabolic perturbations.

INTRODUCTION. Insulin is the preferred treatment for hyperglycaemia in hospitalised patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, which insulin regimen to prefer is debated. We described Danish regional guidelines on the management of non-critically ill hospitalised patients with T2DM and compared them with international guidelines. METHODS. The Danish regional guidelines have been obtained via Danish regional web portals and by request to the regions. The guidelines were reviewed independently by the authors of this article to ensure uniformity in the interpretation of their contents. RESULTS. The recommended treatment of in-hospital hyperglycaemia is sliding scale insulin (SSI) in all five Danish regions. Insulin dosing by SSI is adjusted to bodyweight in two of the five regions. The recommended number of daily glucose point-of- care tests ranges from 4-8 to reach glucose levels of 5-10 mmol/l (90-180 mg/dl). In all regions, continuation of out-hospital insulin and non-insulin antidiabetic drugs is recommended; however, the latter is paused on wide indications. CONCLUSIONS. In-hospital hyperglycaemia for non-critically ill hospitalised patients with T2DM is treated by SSI, based on short-acting insulin, in all five Danish regions. International guidelines recommend a basal-bolus or basal-plus regimen based on both short- and long-acting insulin for most hospitalised non-critically ill patients with diabetes and discourage SSI. Danish regions should consider replacing SSI with a basal-bolus or basal-plus regimen. FUNDING. none. TRIAL REGISTRATION. not relevant., INTRODUCTION. Insulin is the preferred treatment for hyperglycaemia in hospitalised patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). However, which insulin regimen to prefer is debated. We described Danish regional guidelines on the management of non-critically ill hospitalised patients with T2DM and compared them with international guidelines. METHODS. The Danish regional guidelines have been obtained via Danish regional web portals and by request to the regions. The guidelines were reviewed independently by the authors of this article to ensure uniformity in the interpretation of their contents. RESULTS. The recommended treatment of in-hospital hyperglycaemia is sliding scale insulin (SSI) in all five Danish regions. Insulin dosing by SSI is adjusted to bodyweight in two of the five regions. The recommended number of daily glucose point-of-care tests ranges from 4-8 to reach glucose levels of 5-10 mmol/l (90-180 mg/dl). In all regions, continuation of out-hospital insulin and non-insulin antidiabetic drugs is recommended; however, the latter is paused on wide indications. CONCLUSIONS. In-hospital hyperglycaemia for non-critically ill hospitalised patients with T2DM is treated by SSI, based on short-acting insulin, in all five Danish regions. International guidelines recommend a basal-bolus or basal-plus regimen based on both short-and long-acting insulin for most hospitalised non-critically ill patients with diabetes and discourage SSI. Danish regions should consider replacing SSI with a basal-bolus or basal-plus regimen.

Aims The aim of our meta-analyses was to compare the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on mortality, cardiovascular and renal endpoints for a range of type 2 diabetes (T2D) subgroups defined by their specific cardiovascular risk profile. Methods Meta-analyses comparing drugs within the classes of GLP-1RAs and SGLT-2 inhibitors were performed and compared to sulphonylureas and DPP-4 inhibitors with available cardiovascular outcome trials. The comparison between the different classes of glucose-lowering drugs included analyses of T2D populations with low risk and high risk for cardiovascular disease including populations with established cardiovascular disease and/or kidney disease. Outcomes included mortality, major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE), hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF) and a composite renal endpoint as applied in the underlying clinical trials. Results SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1RAs showed beneficial effects on mortality and MACE compared to the classes of DPP-4 inhibitors and sulphonylureas. SGLT-2 inhibitors were shown to be the most effective treatment in terms of HHF and kidney disease. Metformin was used as background therapy for the vast majority of participants in all included studies. Overall, the absolute effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1RAs on these important outcomes were evident for patients with established or at high risk for cardiovascular disease but limited for the low-risk subgroup. Conclusions The findings from our analyses substantiate the relevance of treatment with SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1RAs as an add-on to metformin in patients with T2D and a high risk for cardiovascular disease, and furthermore, support the recommendation for SGLT-2 inhibitor treatment in patients with T2D and heart failure or established kidney disease., Aims: The aim of our meta-analyses was to compare the effects of glucose-lowering drugs on mortality, cardiovascular and renal endpoints for a range of type 2 diabetes (T2D) subgroups defined by their specific cardiovascular risk profile. Methods: Meta-analyses comparing drugs within the classes of GLP-1RAs and SGLT-2 inhibitors were performed and compared to sulphonylureas and DPP-4 inhibitors with available cardiovascular outcome trials. The comparison between the different classes of glucose-lowering drugs included analyses of T2D populations with low risk and high risk for cardiovascular disease including populations with established cardiovascular disease and/or kidney disease. Outcomes included mortality, major cardiovascular adverse events (MACE), hospitalisation for heart failure (HHF) and a composite renal endpoint as applied in the underlying clinical trials. Results: SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1RAs showed beneficial effects on mortality and MACE compared to the classes of DPP-4 inhibitors and sulphonylureas. SGLT-2 inhibitors were shown to be the most effective treatment in terms of HHF and kidney disease. Metformin was used as background therapy for the vast majority of participants in all included studies. Overall, the absolute effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1RAs on these important outcomes were evident for patients with established or at high risk for cardiovascular disease but limited for the low-risk subgroup. Conclusions: The findings from our analyses substantiate the relevance of treatment with SGLT-2 inhibitors or GLP-1RAs as an add-on to metformin in patients with T2D and a high risk for cardiovascular disease, and furthermore, support the recommendation for SGLT-2 inhibitor treatment in patients with T2D and heart failure or established kidney disease.