scholarly journals COVID-19, Type 1 Diabetes Clinical Practice, Research, and Remote Medical Care: A View From the Land Down-Under

2020 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
pp. 803-804 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nisha Venkatesh ◽  
Barbora Paldus ◽  
Melissa H. Lee ◽  
Richard J. MacIsaac ◽  
Alicia J. Jenkins ◽  
...  
2013 ◽  
Vol 123 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 59-65 ◽  
Author(s):  
Katarzyna Cyganek ◽  
Tomasz Klupa ◽  
Magdalena Szopa ◽  
Barbara Katra ◽  
Maciej T. Małecki

2021 ◽  
pp. jim-2020-001633
Author(s):  
Florentino Carral San Laureano ◽  
Mariana Tomé Fernández-Ladreda ◽  
Ana Isabel Jiménez Millán ◽  
Concepción García Calzado ◽  
María del Carmen Ayala Ortega

There are not many real-world studies evaluating daily insulin doses requirements (DIDR) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using second-generation basal insulin analogs, and such comparison is necessary. The aim of this study was to compare DIDR in individuals with T1D using glargine 300 UI/mL (IGlar-300) or degludec (IDeg) in real clinical practice. An observational, retrospective study was designed in 412 patients with T1D (males: 52%; median age 37.0±13.4 years, diabetes duration: 18.7±12.3 years) using IDeg and IGla-300 ≥6 months to compare DIDR between groups. Patients using IGla-300 (n=187) were more frequently males (59% vs 45.8%; p=0.004) and had lower glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (7.6±1.2 vs 8.1%±1.5%; p<0.001) than patients using IDeg (n=225). Total (0.77±0.36 unit/kg/day), basal (0.43±0.20 unit/kg/day) and prandial (0.33±0.23 unit/kg/day) DIDR were similar in IGla-300 and IDeg groups. Patients with HbA1c ≤7% (n=113) used significantly lower basal (p=0.045) and total (p=0.024) DIDR, but not prandial insulin (p=0.241), than patients with HbA1c between 7.1% and 8% and >8%. Patients using IGla-300 and IDeg used similar basal, prandial and total DIDR regardless of metabolic control subgroup. No difference in basal, prandial and total DIDR was observed between patients with T1D using IGla-300 or IDeg during at least 6 months in routine clinical practice.


BMC Medicine ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Thomas Inns ◽  
Kate M. Fleming ◽  
Miren Iturriza-Gomara ◽  
Daniel Hungerford

Abstract Background Rotavirus infection has been proposed as a risk factor for coeliac disease (CD) and type 1 diabetes (T1D). The UK introduced infant rotavirus vaccination in 2013. We have previously shown that rotavirus vaccination can have beneficial off-target effects on syndromes, such as hospitalised seizures. We therefore investigated whether rotavirus vaccination prevents CD and T1D in the UK. Methods A cohort study of children born between 2010 and 2015 was conducted using primary care records from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink. Children were followed up from 6 months to 7 years old, with censoring for outcome, death or leaving the practice. CD was defined as diagnosis of CD or the prescription of gluten-free goods. T1D was defined as a T1D diagnosis. The exposure was rotavirus vaccination, defined as one or more doses. Mixed-effects Cox regression was used to estimate hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Models were adjusted for potential confounders and included random intercepts for general practices. Results There were 880,629 children in the cohort (48.8% female). A total of 343,113 (39.0%) participants received rotavirus vaccine; among those born after the introduction of rotavirus vaccination, 93.4% were vaccinated. Study participants contributed 4,388,355 person-years, with median follow-up 5.66 person-years. There were 1657 CD cases, an incidence of 38.0 cases per 100,000 person-years. Compared with unvaccinated children, the adjusted HR for a CD was 1.05 (95% CI 0.86–1.28) for vaccinated children. Females had a 40% higher hazard than males. T1D was recorded for 733 participants, an incidence of 17.1 cases per 100,000 person-years. In adjusted analysis, rotavirus vaccination was not associated with risk of T1D (HR = 0.89, 95% CI 0.68–1.19). Conclusions Rotavirus vaccination has reduced diarrhoeal disease morbidity and mortality substantial since licencing in 2006. Our finding from this large cohort study did not provide evidence that rotavirus vaccination prevents CD or T1D, nor is it associated with increased risk, delivering further evidence of rotavirus vaccine safety.


2019 ◽  
Vol 36 (9) ◽  
pp. 1092-1099 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. M. Marren ◽  
S. Hammersley ◽  
T. J. McDonald ◽  
B. M. Shields ◽  
B. A. Knight ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 48 (2) ◽  
pp. 343-352 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen A. Montgomery ◽  
Sarah J. Ratcliffe ◽  
H. Jorge Baluarte ◽  
Kathryn M. Murphy ◽  
Steven Willi ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document