Safety and efficacy of insulin detemir in clinical practice: 14-week follow-up data from type 1 and type 2 diabetes patients in the PREDICTIVETM European cohort

2007 ◽  
Vol 61 (3) ◽  
pp. 523-528 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Dornhorst ◽  
H-J Lüddeke ◽  
S. Sreenan ◽  
C. Koenen ◽  
J. B. Hansen ◽  
...  
Author(s):  
Khalid Mohamed ◽  
Rami Alharbi ◽  
Yazeed Aljoahni ◽  
Abdulmajeed Alamri ◽  
Mohammed Saeed ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 22 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Peter Bramlage ◽  
Stefanie Lanzinger ◽  
Sascha R. Tittel ◽  
Eva Hess ◽  
Simon Fahrner ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Recent European Society of Cardiology (ESC)/European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) guidelines provide recommendations for detecting and treating chronic kidney disease (CKD) in diabetic patients. We compared clinical practice with guidelines to determine areas for improvement. Methods German database analysis of 675,628 patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes, with 134,395 included in this analysis. Data were compared with ESC/EASD recommendations. Results This analysis included 17,649 and 116,747 patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively. The analysis showed that 44.1 and 49.1 % patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes, respectively, were annually screened for CKD. Despite anti-diabetic treatment, only 27.2 % patients with type 1 and 43.5 % patients with type 2 achieved a target HbA1c of < 7.0 %. Use of sodium-glucose transport protein 2 inhibitors (1.5 % type 1/8.7 % type 2 diabetes) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (0.6 % type 1/5.2 % type 2 diabetes) was limited. Hypertension was controlled according to guidelines in 41.1 and 67.7 % patients aged 18–65 years with type 1 and 2 diabetes, respectively, (62.4 vs. 68.4 % in patients > 65 years). Renin angiotensin aldosterone inhibitors were used in 24.0 and 40.9 % patients with type 1 diabetes (micro- vs. macroalbuminuria) and 39.9 and 47.7 %, respectively, in type 2 diabetes. Conclusions Data indicate there is room for improvement in caring for diabetic patients with respect to renal disease diagnosis and treatment. While specific and potentially clinically justified reasons for non-compliance exist, the data may serve well for a critical appraisal of clinical practice decisions.


2021 ◽  
pp. 193229682110288
Author(s):  
Lynn E. Kassel ◽  
Jessica J. Berei ◽  
Jamie M. Pitlick ◽  
Joel E. Rand

Bariatric surgery is a known and effective treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus and exogenous insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes mellitus require adjusted insulin dosing after surgery to avoid hypoglycemia. This review describes insulin dose adjustments following a variety of bariatric procedures. After searching the available literature and assessing for eligibility, 8 articles were included. The Johns Hopkins Research Evidence Appraisal Tool for literature appraisal was used. The results of this review reveal insulin dose adjustment varies based upon surgical procedure type and time of follow-up from the procedure.


2017 ◽  
Vol 38 ◽  
pp. 300-303 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marjolein K. Sechterberger ◽  
Sigrid C.J. van Steen ◽  
Esther M.N. Boerboom ◽  
Peter H.J. van der Voort ◽  
Rob J. Bosman ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai-Cheng Chang ◽  
Shih-Chieh Shao ◽  
Shihchen Kuo ◽  
Chen-Yi Yang ◽  
Hui-Yu Chen ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Head-to-head comparison of clinical effectiveness between dulaglutide and liraglutide in Asia is limited. This study was aimed to assess the real-world comparative effectiveness of dulaglutide versus liraglutide. Methods We conducted a retrospective cohort study by utilizing multi-institutional electronic medical records to identify real-world type 2 diabetes patients treated with dulaglutide or liraglutide during 2016-2018 in Taiwan and followed up until 2019. Effectiveness outcomes were assessed at every three months in the one-year follow-up. Propensity score techniques were applied to enhance between-group comparability. Significant differences in changes of effectiveness outcomes between treatment groups during the follow-up were examined and further analyzed using mixed-model repeated-measures approaches. Results A total of 1,512 subjects receiving dulaglutide and 1,513 subjects receiving liraglutide were identified. At 12 months, significant HbA1c changes from baseline were found in both treatments (dulaglutide: -1.06%, p<0.001; liraglutide: -0.83%, p<0.001), with a significant between-group difference (-0.23%, 95% confidence interval: -0.38 to -0.08%, p<0.01). Both treatments yielded significant declines in weight, alanine aminotransferase level, and estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline (dulaglutide: -1.14 kg, -3.08 U/L and -2.08 ml/min/1.73 m2, p<0.01; liraglutide: -1.64 kg, -3.65 U/L and -2.33 ml/min/1.73 m2, p<0.001), whereas only dulaglutide yielded a significant systolic blood pressure reduction (-2.47 mmHg, p<0.001). Between-group differences in changes of weight, blood pressure, and liver and renal functions at 12 months were not statistically significant. Conclusions In real-world T2D patients, dulaglutide versus liraglutide was associated with better glycemic control and comparable effects on changes of weight, blood pressure, and liver and renal functions.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document