暂无摘要。

UNASSIGNED: Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a long-term condition marked by high blood glucose levels caused by insulin resistance which will lead to complications of other diseases such as dyslipidemia, which also affects the health of the liver and kidneys. Butterfly pea flower (Clitorea ternatea L.) has phenolic and flavonoid compounds which have the potential as herbal medicines for antidiabetics.
UNASSIGNED: The purpose of this study is to examine the potential of butterfly pea flower extract (BPE) as an antidiabetic, anti-dyslipidemia, and renoprotection.
UNASSIGNED: In vivo test was performed on Sprague Dawley rats (Rattus norvegicus L.) induced by Streptozotocin-Nicotinamide and High Fat Diet-Propylthiouracil as models of DM and dyslipidemia, and BPE was administered orally (200, 400, and 800 mg/kg BW) for 28 days. glutathione peroxidase (GSH-Px), glutathione S-transferase (GST), tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), nuclear factor-kappa beta (NF-kB), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), liver albumin levels, serum blood urea nitrogen (BUN), serum creatinine, and serum uric acid (UA), were measured by ELISA and colorimetry methods.
UNASSIGNED: Treatment of BPE 800 mg/kg BW increased levels of GSH-Px, GST, albumin, and serum protein. BPE decreased TNF-α, NF-kB, and ALP. BPE also decreased BUN, serum CR, and serum UA.
UNASSIGNED: BPE has the potential to be used as a drug alternative for the treatment of DM and dyslipidemia as well as a hepatoprotective and renoprotective agent.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with dysbiosis in the gut microbiota (MB). Individually, each medication appears to partially correct this. However, there are no studies on the response of the MB to changes in A1c. Therefore, we investigated the MB\'s response to intensive glycemic control.
METHODS: We studied two groups of patients with uncontrolled T2DM, one group with an A1c <9% (18 patients-G1) and another group with an A1c >9% (13 patients-G2), aiming for at least a 1% reduction in A1c. We collected A1c and fecal samples at baseline, 6, and 12 months. G1 achieved an average A1c reduction of 1.1%, while G2 a reduction of 3.13%.
RESULTS: G1\'s microbiota saw a decrease in Erysipelotrichaceae_UCG_003 and in Mollicutes order (both linked to metabolic syndrome and associated comorbidities). G2, despite having a more significant reduction in A1c, experienced an increase in the proinflammatory bacteria Megasphaera and Acidaminococcus, and only one beneficial genus, Phascolarctobacterium, increased, producer of butyrate.
CONCLUSIONS: Despite a notable A1c outcome, G2 could not restore its MB. This seeming resistance to change, leading to a persistent inflammation component found in G2, might be part of the \"metabolic memory\" in T2DM.

暂无摘要。

CONCLUSIONS: Good glycemic control is the aim of managing type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) which is crucial for the prevention of long-term complications in individuals with T2DM. The aim of this study was to identify the factors associated with good glycemic control in individuals with T2DM following up at a rural health-care facility (HCF) in Goa. A cross-sectional study was conducted among 120 individuals with T2DM who regularly followed up at a rural HCF in Goa. Participants were selected using simple random sampling. It was found that the participants belonging to the 60-89 years of age group and those on mono/dual oral therapy were more likely to have good glycemic control. Participants\' glycated hemoglobin A1c decreased by 0.083% for every year of increase in age and increased by 0.044% for every centimeter increase in abdominal girth.

UNASSIGNED: We evaluated a potential move from one rapid-acting insulin analog to another, or their biosimilars, to aid better and faster decisions for diabetes management.
UNASSIGNED: A systematic literature review was performed according to PRISMA reporting guidelines. The MEDLINE/EMBASE/COCHRANE databases were searched for randomized control trials (RCTs) comparing aspart/lispro in type-1 (T1D) and type-2 (T2D) diabetes. The methodological quality of the included studies was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration\'s risk of bias assessment criteria.
UNASSIGNED: Of the 753 records retrieved, the six selected efficacy/safety RCTs and the additional three hand-searched pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics RCTs showed some heterogeneity in the presentation of the continuous variables; however, collectively, the outcomes demonstrated that lispro and aspart had comparable efficacy and safety in adult patients with T1D and T2D. Both treatments yielded a similar decrease in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and had similar dosing and weight changes, with similar treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAE) and serious adverse event (SAE) reporting, similar hypoglycemic episodes in both T1D and T2D populations, and no clinically significant differences for hyperglycemia, occlusions or other infusion site/set complications.
UNASSIGNED: Aspart and lispro demonstrate comparative safety and efficacy in patients with T1D/T2D. Since both are deemed equally suitable for controlling prandial glycemic excursions and both have similar safety attributes, they may be used interchangeably in clinical practice.
UNASSIGNED: CRD42023376793.

Our understanding of type 2 diabetes (T2D) has evolved dramatically. Advances have upended entrenched dogmas pertaining to the onset and progression of T2D, beliefs that have prevailed from the early era of diabetes research-and continue to populate our medical textbooks and continuing medical education materials. This review article highlights key insights that lend new governing principles for gold standard management of T2D. From the historical context upon which old beliefs arose to new findings, this article outlines evidence and perspectives on beta cell function, the underlying defects in glucoregulation, the remediable nature of T2D, and, the rationale supporting the shift to complication-centric prescribing. Practical approaches translate this rectified understanding of T2D into strategies that fill gaps in current management practices of prediabetes through late type 2 diabetes.

The effect of hydration in modulating metabolic disease risk is a comparatively recent concept. Diabetic patients are at increased risk of dehydration due to osmotic diuresis. Undiagnosed or undertreated hyperglycemia may lead to electrolyte imbalance and elevated renal burden of glucose excretion, which may alter fluid reabsorption in the kidney. Also, the presence of one or more contributory factors, such as inadequate fluid intake, strenuous exercise, high temperatures, alcohol consumption, diarrhea, acute illnesses, fever, nausea, and vomiting, may put diabetic patients at increased risk of dehydration and electrolyte imbalance. Certain antidiabetic agents used by diabetic patients may cause fluid retention/deficits and/or electrolyte abnormalities in a few patients. Thus, drinking ample amounts of water and fluids with appropriate electrolyte composition is important to prevent dehydration. Successful management of dehydration in patients with diabetes is an unmet need and can best be accomplished by maintaining adequate hydration status.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of semaglutide 2.4 mg, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, by race and ethnicity, across three phase 3 trials.
METHODS: The Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with Obesity (STEP) clinical trials evaluated the efficacy and safety of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg. Here, STEP 1 and 3 data were pooled for analysis; STEP 2 data were examined separately. All analyses were conducted using data from racial and ethnic subgroups. The primary outcome was the estimated treatment difference in percent body weight change for semaglutide 2.4 mg versus placebo.
RESULTS: Participants reported race as White (STEP 1 and 3, 75.3%; STEP 2, 59.4%), Black (8.8%; 8.9%), Asian (10.6%; 27.3%), or other racial group (5.3%; 4.4%); and ethnicity as Hispanic or Latino (13.9%; 11.9%) or not Hispanic or Latino (83.9%; 88.1%). There were no significant interactions between treatment effect and race (STEP 1 and 3: p ≥ 0.07; STEP 2: p ≥ 0.15) or ethnicity (p ≥ 0.40; p ≥ 0.85). The safety of semaglutide 2.4 mg was consistent across subgroups.
CONCLUSIONS: The treatment effect of semaglutide was statistically significant versus placebo and clinically relevant across all racial and ethnic subgroups in STEP 1 and 3 and STEP 2. All subgroups across both samples demonstrated good tolerability.