Search

Sarcopenia is linked with an increased risk of falls, osteoporosis and mortality and is an increasing problem for healthcare systems. No satisfying biomarkers for sarcopenia diagnosis exist, connecting bone, fat and muscle. Matrix-GLA-protein (MGP) is an adipokine that regulates bone metabolism and is associated with decreased muscle strength. Associations of dp-ucMGP were analyzed in the BioPersMed cohort (58 ± 9 years), including 1022 asymptomatic subjects at moderate cardiovascular risk. Serum measurements of dp-ucMGP in 760 persons were performed with the InaKtif MGP Kit with the IDS-iSYS Multi-Discipline Automated System. DXA data (792 persons) measured with the Lunar iDXA system and physical performance data (786 persons) were available. Dp-ucMGP plasma levels correlate with sarcopenia parameters like gait speed (ρ = −0.192, p < 0.001), appendicular skeletal muscle mass (ρ = 0.102, p = 0.005) and appendicular skeletal muscle mass index (ρ = 0.112, p = 0.001). They are lower in persons with sarcopenia (p < 0.001) and higher in persons with reduced physical performance (p = 0.019). Persons in the lowest dp-ucMGP quartile have the highest risk for reduced muscle mass, decreasing with each quartile, whereas persons in the highest quartile have the highest risk of reduced muscle strength. Dp-ucMGP might be a good biomarker candidate in sarcopenia characterization.

Sarcopenia is linked with increased risk of falls, osteoporosis and mortality. No consensus exists about a gold standard “dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry (DXA) index for muscle mass determination” in sarcopenia diagnosis. Thus, many indices exist, but data on sarcopenia diagnosis agreement are scarce. Regarding sarcopenia diagnosis reliability, the impact of influencing factors on sarcopenia prevalence, diagnosis agreement and reliability are almost completely missing. For nine DXA-derived muscle mass indices, we aimed to evaluate sarcopenia prevalence, diagnosis agreement and diagnosis reliability, and investigate the effects of underlying parameters, presence or type of adjustment and cut-off values on all three outcomes. The indices were analysed in the BioPersMed cohort (58 ± 9 years), including 1022 asymptomatic subjects at moderate cardiovascular risk. DXA data from 792 baselines and 684 follow-up measurements (for diagnosis agreement and reliability determination) were available. Depending on the index and cut-off values, sarcopenia prevalence varied from 0.6 to 36.3%. Height-adjusted parameters, independent of underlying parameters, showed a relatively high level of diagnosis agreement, whereas unadjusted and adjusted indices showed low diagnosis agreement. The adjustment type defines which individuals are recognised as sarcopenic in terms of BMI and sex. The investigated indices showed comparable diagnosis reliability in follow-up examinations

Background and aims: Regular physical activity and exercise represent a corner stone in the treatment of type 1 diabetes (T1D) , however, exercise-induced hypoglycemia remains the major barrier to a physically active lifestyle. Therefore, the ULTRAFLEXI-1 study compared two basal insulin analogues, Glargine 300U/ml (IGlar U300) and Degludec (IDeg) , in two different doses (100% and 75% of the regular dose) when used around spontaneous exercise sessions in adults with T1D. Methods: We performed a randomized, single-center, four-period, cross-over trial (EudraCT: 2019-003209-89) and included adults with T1D treated with multiple daily insulin injections and an HbA1c ≤10% (≤86 mmol/mol) . In each of the four 2-weeks-periods, participants attended six spontaneous evening cycling sessions (60 minutes, moderate intensity) . The days of exercising were randomized and announced at 8 A.M. to the participants. The basal insulin used on the exercise days during the four periods were: IGlar U300 100% or 75% of the regular dose or IDeg 100% or 75%, respectively. 100% of the regular basal insulin dose was used at all non-exercise days. CGM was performed using a blinded Dexcom G6 device. The primary outcome was TBR ( Results: 25 people were enrolled (14 male) , aged 41.4±11.9 years, with a mean diabetes duration of 16.8±10.4 years and a mean HbA1c of 7.5±0.8%. (59±9 mmol/mol) . Mean TBR during the 24-hour periods following the exercise sessions was 2.71±2.56% for IGlar U300 (100%) and 4.37%±3.43% for IDeg (100%) (p=0.025) as well as 2.28±2.67% for IGlar U300 compared to 2.55 ±2.87% with IDeg when using the 75% dose on exercise days (p=0.720) . Conclusion: Time spent in hypoglycemia after spontaneous exercise sessions was significantly lower in people with type 1 diabetes receiving IGlar U300 as compared to IDeg when the 100% dose was used. Disclosure O. Moser: Research Support; Dexcom, Inc., Sanofi, Speaker’s Bureau; Medtronic. M. L. Eckstein: None. L. Hönger: None. J. Lenz: None. I. Mursic: None. C. Sternad: None. M. Zanker: None. H. Ziko: None. P. N. Pferschy: None. N. J. Tripolt: None. H. Sourij: Advisory Panel; AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novo Nordisk, Research Support; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Sanofi, Speaker’s Bureau; Amgen Inc., AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novartis AG, Novo Nordisk. A. Mueller: None. F. Aberer: Other Relationship; Amgen Inc., Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Sanofi. F. Aziz: None. H. Kojzar: None. C. Sourij: None. A. M. Obermayer: None. F. M. Abbas: None. P. Birnbaumer: None. Funding Sanofi-aventis (DCV-2018-12349)

Insulin icodec is a basal insulin in development for once-weekly (OW) dosing. The aim of this study was to compare the hypoglycemia frequency and response after icodec vs. insulin glargine U100 (IGlar) overdosing. In a randomized, open-label, two-period crossover trial, 43 individuals with T2D on basal insulin±metformin (mean±SD age 56±9 yrs, HbA1c 7.2±0.7%) received OW icodec for 6 weeks and once-daily IGlar for 12 days at equimolar total weekly doses based on the individual daily run-in IGlar dose (mean 30±14 U) titrated to a fasting SMPG target of 80-130 mg/dL. Once at steady state, double (DD) and triple (TD) doses of icodec and IGlar were followed by hypoglycemia induction 44 h (icodec) or 7 h (IGlar) post-dose (expected time of maximum glucose-lowering effect) : First, euglycemia was maintained at 100 mg/dL by variable i.v. glucose. Then, PG was allowed to decrease to a nadir of no less than 45 mg/dL maintained for 15 min. Euglycemia was restored by constant i.v. glucose. Hypoglycemic symptom score (HSS) and counterregulatory hormones were assessed at PG 100 mg/dL and at predefined PG levels until nadir PG. For DD, clinically significant hypoglycemia (PG In conclusion, a DD or TD of once-weekly insulin icodec does not lead to increased risk of hypoglycemia compared to once-daily IGlar. During hypoglycemia, a comparable symptomatic response and a moderately greater endocrine response were seen for icodec vs. IGlar. Disclosure E.Svehlikova: n/a. K.Niss arfelt: Employee; Novo Nordisk. R.Cailleteau: Employee; Novo Nordisk A/S, Stock/Shareholder; Novo Nordisk A/S. S.Deller: None. K.Thomsen: Employee; Novo Nordisk. M.Hart: None. I.Mursic: None. T.Pieber: Advisory Panel; Arecor, Novo Nordisk A/S, Research Support; AstraZeneca, European Union, JDRF, Novo Nordisk Foundation, Sanofi, Speaker's Bureau; Novo Nordisk A/S, Roche Diagnostics. H.Haahr: Employee; Novo Nordisk A/S, Stock/Shareholder; Novo Nordisk A/S. Funding Novo Nordisk

OBJECTIVE To investigate the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties and safety of a novel formulation of insulin aspart (AT247) versus two currently marketed insulin aspart formulations (NovoRapid [IAsp] and Fiasp [faster IAsp]). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This single-center, randomized, double-blind, three-period, crossover study was conducted in 19 men with type 1 diabetes, receiving single dosing of trial products (0.3 units/kg) in a random order on three visits. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics were assessed during a euglycemic clamp lasting up to 8 h. RESULTS Onset of insulin appearance was earlier for AT247 compared with IAsp (−12 min [95% CI −14; −8], P = 0.0004) and faster IAsp (−2 min [−5; −2], P = 0.0003). Onset of action was accelerated compared with IAsp (−23 min [−37; −15], P = 0.0004) and faster IAsp (−9 min [−11; −3], P = 0.0006). Within the first 60 min, a higher exposure was observed for AT247 compared with IAsp by the area under the curve (AUC) glucose infusion rate (GIR) from 0 to 60 min (AUCAsp0–60min: treatment ratio vs. IAsp 2.3 [1.9; 2.9] vs. faster IAsp 1.5 [1.3; 1.8]), which was underpinned by a greater early glucose-lowering effect (AUCGIR,0–60min: treatment ratio vs. IAsp 2.8 [2.0; 5.5] vs. faster IAsp 1.7 [1.3; 2.3]). Furthermore, an earlier offset of exposure was observed for AT247 compared with IAsp (−32 min [−58; −15], P = 0.0015) and faster IAsp (−27 min [−85; −15], P = 0.0017), while duration of the glucose-lowering effect, measured by time to late half-maximum effect, did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS AT247 exhibited an earlier insulin appearance, exposure, and offset, with corresponding enhanced early glucose-lowering effect compared with IAsp and faster IAsp. It therefore represents a promising candidate in the pursuit for second-generation prandial insulin analogs to improve postprandial glycemic control.

PurposeAccumulating evidence points towards a close relationship between cardiovascular, endocrine and metabolic diseases. The BioPersMed Study (Biomarkers of Personalised Medicine) is a single-centre prospective observational cohort study with repetitive examination of participants in 2-year intervals. The aim is to evaluate the predictive impact of various traditional and novel biomarkers of cardiovascular, endocrine and metabolic pathways in asymptomatic individuals at risk for cardiovascular and/or metabolic disease.ParticipantsBetween 2010 and 2016, we recruited 1022 regional individuals into the study. Subjects aged 45 years or older presenting with at least one traditional cardiovascular risk factor or manifest type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) were enrolled. The mean age of the participants was 57±8 years, 55% were female, 18% had T2DM, 33% suffered from arterial hypertension, 15% were smokers, 42% had hyperlipidaemia, and only 26% were at low cardiovascular risk according to the Framingham ‘Systematic COronary Risk Evaluation’.Findings to dateStudy procedures during screening and follow-up visits included a physical examination and comprehensive cardiovascular, endocrine, metabolic, ocular and laboratory workup with biobanking of blood and urine samples. The variety of assessed biomarkers allows a full phenotyping of individuals at cardiovascular and metabolic risk. Preliminary data from the cohort and relevant biomarker analyses were already used as control population for genomic studies in local and international research cooperation.Future plansParticipants will undergo comprehensive cardiovascular, endocrine and metabolic examinations for the next decades and clinical outcomes will be adjudicated prospectively.

BACKGROUND Lactulose is approved for the symptomatic treatment of constipation, a gastrointestinal (GI) complication common in individuals with diabetes. Lactulose products contain carbohydrate impurities (e.g., lactose, fructose, galactose), which occur during the lactulose manufacturing process. These impurities may affect the blood glucose levels of individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) using lactulose for the treatment of mild constipation. A previous study in healthy subjects revealed no increase in blood glucose levels after oral lactulose intake. However, it is still unclear whether the intake of lactulose increases blood glucose levels in individuals with diabetes. AIM To evaluate the blood glucose profile after oral lactulose intake in mildly constipated, non-insulin-dependent subjects with T2DM in an outpatient setting. METHODS This prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled, single-center trial was conducted at the Clinical Research Center at the Medical University of Graz, Austria, in 24 adult Caucasian mildly constipated, non-insulin-dependent subjects with T2DM. Eligible subjects were randomized and assigned to one of six treatment sequences, each consisting of four treatments stratified by sex using an incomplete block design. Subjects received a single dose of 20 g or 30 g lactulose (crystal and liquid formulation), water as negative control or 30 g glucose as positive control. Capillary blood glucose concentrations were measured over a period of 180 min post dose. The primary endpoint was the baseline-corrected area under the curve of blood glucose concentrations over the complete assessment period [AUCbaseline_c (0-180 min)]. Quantitative comparisons were performed for both lactulose doses and formulations vs water for the equal lactulose dose vs glucose, as well as for liquid lactulose vs crystal lactulose. Safety parameters included GI tolerability, which was assessed at 180 min and 24 h post dose, and adverse events occurring up to 24 h post dose. RESULTS In 24 randomized and analyzed subjects blood glucose concentration-time curves after intake of 20 g and 30 g lactulose were almost identical to those after water intake for both lactulose formulations despite the different amounts of carbohydrate impurities (≤ 3.0% for crystals and approx. 30% for liquid). The primary endpoint [AUCbaseline_c (0-180 min)] was not significantly different between lactulose and water regardless of lactulose dose and formulation. Also with regard to all secondary endpoints lactulose formulations showed comparable results to water with one exception concerning maximum glucose level. A minor increase in maximum blood glucose was observed after the 30 g dose, liquid lactulose, in comparison to water with a mean treatment difference of 0.63 mmol/L (95% confidence intervals: 0.19, 1.07). Intake of 30 g glucose significantly increased all blood glucose endpoints vs 30 g liquid and crystal lactulose, respectively (all P < 0.0001). No differences in blood glucose response were observed between the different lactulose formulations. As expected, lactulose increased the number of bowel movements and was generally well tolerated. Subjects experienced only mild to moderate GI symptoms due to the laxative action of lactulose. CONCLUSION Blood glucose AUCbaseline_c (0-180 min) levels in mildly constipated, non-insulin dependent subjects with T2DM are not affected by the carbohydrate impurities contained in 20 g and 30 g crystal or liquid lactulose formulations.

Objectives: To evaluate the effect of SGLT2i on the development of DKA during insulin depletion in T1DM. Methods: Sixteen male, C-peptide negative T1DM subjects were enrolled in this open, randomized, crossover, bicentric trial with two 7-day treatment periods (with/without SGLT2i). At the end of each treatment period, insulin was withdrawn for a maximum of 12h, followed by recovery phase (12h). Results: SGLT2i led to significantly lower plasma glucose (PG) values during insulin depletion (PGmax with/without SGLT2i: 174±40 (mean±SD) vs. 302±48 mg/dL; 95% CI for ratio: 0.51-0.60), but to higher beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) values (Figure) and a steeper BHB increase (delta BHB: 8.1±2.0 vs. 6.0±1.7 µmol/L/min; 95% CI for ratio: 1.22-1.49). pH, bicarbonate and base excess during insulin depletion were comparable. Baseline glucagon (7.8±2.5 vs. 5.0±1.6 pmol/L; 95% CI for ratio: 1.26-1.95) and FFA levels (0.65±0.27 vs. 0.43±0.31 mmol/L; 95% CI for ratio: 1.08-2.28) were higher with SGLT2i, but data indicate that after increase during insulin depletion comparable concentrations were reached for both. Conclusions: SGLT2i keeps PG in near normal ranges during DKA development and recovery, potentially impeding DKA diagnosis. While SGLT2i leads to higher ketone levels, increased baseline glucagon and FFA, an effect on pH and acidosis was not demonstrated. Disclosure I. Mursic: None. E. Svehlikova: None. W. Regittnig: None. T. Augustin: None. C. Magnes: None. A. Eberl: None. T. Heise: Advisory Panel; Self; Mylan, Novo Nordisk A/S. Research Support; Self; ADOCIA, Aerami, Becton, Dickinson and Company, Biocon, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Eli Lilly and Company, Gan & Lee Pharmaceuticals, MedImmune, Merck KGaA, Mylan, Nordic Bioscience, Novo Nordisk A/S, Poxel SA, Sanofi, Xeris Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Zealand Pharma A/S. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk A/S. O. Klein: None. M. Wolf: None. M. Urschitz: None. M. Brunner: None. H. Sourij: Advisory Panel; Self; Amgen, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. Research Support; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. T. Pieber: Advisory Panel; Self; ADOCIA, Arecor, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk A/S, Sanofi. Research Support; Self; AstraZeneca, Novo Nordisk A/S. Speaker’s Bureau; Self; Novo Nordisk A/S, Roche Diagnostics K.K.