Clinical practice recommendations for management of Diabetes Mellitus in Arab region: An expert consensus statement from Arab Diabetes Forum (ADF).

Prevalence of diabetes in Arab region has significantly increased, resulting in a significant economic burden on healthcare systems. This surge can be attributed to obesity, rapid urbanization, changing dietary habits, and sedentary lifestyles. The Arab Diabetes Forum (ADF) has established localized recommendations to tackle the region's rising diabetes prevalence. The recommendations, which incorporate worldwide best practices, seek to enhance the quality of treatment for people with diabetes by raising knowledge and adherence among healthcare providers. The guidelines include comprehensive recommendations for screening, diagnosing, and treating type 1 and type 2 diabetes in children and adults for better overall health results.

Knowledge gaps and perceptions of future research directions on management of diabetes during Ramadan fasting: An online survey of physicians.

OBJECTIVES: Current knowledge and research on diabetes and Ramadan form the basis for evidence-based clinical practice. In this context, we aimed to explore physicians' perceptions of current knowledge gaps about research fasting (RF), barriers to, and foreseeable directions for advancement of the field. METHODS: We conducted an online survey of a convenience sample of 260 physicians from 27 countries. The survey questionnaire addressed three main domains: perceived current knowledge gaps and unmet needs in research about RF and diabetes, barriers to the conduct of research, and future directions for furthering the evidence in this field. RESULTS: Majority of respondents (65.7%) were senior physicians in adult endocrinology/diabetes (45.9%) working at tertiary centers (65.2%). The majority (67.3%) reported seeing an average of 20+ patients with diabetes weekly and felt "very or fairly confident" in managing diabetes during RF (67.7%). The knowledge gaps identified were the management of high-risk patients with diabetes (54.1%), such as renal impairment (59.8%), and pregnancy (61.5%). The main barriers to research were lack of adequate funding to academic centers (75.7%) and lack of interest of institutions in the subject (64.6%). Future efforts should be directed at the conduct of large epidemiological studies (49.5%) or double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trials (48.6%) to address the former gaps. Research findings should be widely disseminated via hands-on workshops (recommended by 70.3% of respondents) or international conferences (61.2%). CONCLUSIONS: There is a wide agreement regarding the knowledge gaps in the management of diabetes during RF. Future efforts should focus on addressing these critical deficiencies.

Ramadan fasting and diabetes 2019: The year in review.

INTRODUCTION: The literature on health aspects of Ramadan fasting is widely spread in many journals making it not readily available to those interested in the subject. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A narrative, non-systematic review of the international literature from two major online databases (viz. Scopus, PubMed) in one year (2019). The search term "Ramadan fasting AND Diabetes" was used, and relevant literature was narrated in a concise thematic account. RESULTS: Research design included qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods. Articles included controlled trials, critical appraisals, literature narrations, and systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. The publications spanned a vast array of topics related to Ramadan fasting, including assessments of current safety and efficacy profiles of newer diabetes therapies, modes of insulin delivery, and utilization of advanced technology for the treatment and monitoring of blood glucose during Ramadan fasting. Increased interest was particularly evident in capturing the experience element manifested by perceptions, attitudes, and practices of both patients and healthcare professionals during Ramadan. The current literature consolidates previous data on the safety of fasting practices amongst the well-controlled. On the other hand, it emphasizes the need for more aggressive interventions for high-risk patients, promoting the usage of newer anti-diabetic agents and advanced glucose monitoring technology for safer fasting practices. CONCLUSIONS: The volume of global literature production related to Ramadan fasting and Diabetes remains modest. Observational studies of small size prevail. Greater improvements in both quality and quantity of research on Ramadan are needed.

Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic on Clinical Practice, Medical Education, and Research: An International Survey.

OBJECTIVES: Because of the mandatory sanitary measures established during the Covid-19 Pandemic, we have proposed to describe the new clinical, educative, and research practices of an international sample of doctors. METHODS: We have used an online electronic survey of a convenient sample of doctors from 40 countries using a multiple-choice online questionnaire, including three domains.  424 out of 456 respondents provided adequate responses. RESULTS: Most respondents were from medical (51.5%) and surgical (11.8%) specialties. Over half of the respondents practiced in academic centers and one fifth in the private sector. Coronavirus pandemic induced frequent changes in practice, such as seeing fewer patients in clinics than usual (34.9%) and utilization of telemedicine (31.3%). A significant disruption in medical education activities and residents' training was observed, resulting in the cancellation of many activities such as grand rounds, departmental and multidisciplinary meetings, and case conferences with over-reliance on virtual and on-demand educational sessions. The residents' supervision and support were significantly reduced. Almost 16% of respondents were involved in research work on coronavirus pandemic while a third continued their usual research activity, but half were not involved in any research at the time of the survey. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID19 pandemic has promoted new practices in the field as the recourse to telemedicine, virtual conferences, and thematic researches on COVID-19. The unexpected situation has opened new prospects for future doctors' preparation for these new means of practice and learning of medicine.

Comparison of analog insulin mix 50:50 with human insulin mix 30:70 in persons with type 2 diabetes during Ramadan.

AIM OF THE STUDY: To test if changing the Iftar insulin to a 50:50 mixed analog insulin from a 30:70 human insulin at the same total dose leads to improvement in the postprandial blood glucose (taken as after the main meal). Since the intermediate acting insulin dose is effectively lowered, the pre-Suhur blood glucose is also tested to see if this rises. METHODS: The Iftar human 30:70 mixed insulin is substituted for a 50:50 one using insulin lispro protamine suspension and 50% insulin lispro (Humalog® Mix50/50™), whilst maintaining the same total dose. The participants were also changed to 75% insulin lispro protamine suspension and 25% insulin lispro (Humalog® Mix75/25™) at the same pre-Ramadan dose for their Suhur injection (Experimental group). A similar number of controls continued their 30:70 mixed human insulin at the same dose during Ramadan (Control group). Pre-Ramadan and during Ramadan fasting and postprandial (3 hours) and pre-Suhur blood glucose (BG) are tested in 20 subjects and 20 controls by the patients using home glucose meters. Hypoglycaemia, defined as a BG of ≤ 70 mg%, was tested for by the patients and noted if they experience symptoms of it. Severe hypoglycaemia occurred if the patient needed assistance for recovery. No insulin dose adjustments are made in either group and any other anti-diabetic treatment was continued. Pre- and post-Ramadan HbA1 c and body weight are measured. The number of days fasted and baseline characteristics are age, gender, and duration of diabetes are also noted. Differences between groups in parameters were assessed using ANCOVA to adjust for pre-Ramadan values of age, gender, and duration of diabetes. RESULTS: All the participants fasted for at least 29 days. The 2 groups were not significantly different at baseline. During Ramadan, mean postprandial BG in the Experimental group was lower by 21.1 mg% (1.2 mmol/l) (95% CI 12.6, 29.7; P < 0.001). Similarly, after Ramadan mean HbA1 c in the Experimental group was lower by 0.4% (95% CI 0.1%, 0.8%; P = 0.01). No significant differences between the groups were detected in mean bodyweight after Ramadan (P = 0.86) or mean fasting BG during Ramadan (P = 0.07). There was no difference in incidence of hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: Switching from human insulin mix 30:70 to analog insulin mix 50:50 results in better post main meal control in Ramadan, without affecting HbA1c, or increasing the incidence of hypoglycaemia.

Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of insulin aspart in people with type 2 diabetes, as biphasic insulin aspart or with Basal insulin: findings from the multinational, non-interventional a1chieve study.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of the study was to investigate the clinical safety and effectiveness of starting insulin aspart (aspart) therapy in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) as a sub-analysis of the multinational, non-interventional A1chieve study. METHODS: Insulin-naïve and insulin-experienced people with T2DM in routine clinical care starting aspart alone at baseline and continuing aspart alone, changing to biphasic insulin aspart 30 (aspart premix) or adding a basal insulin by study end, were included. Safety, tolerability, and efficacy were evaluated over 24 weeks. RESULTS: Overall, 3,898 people started aspart at baseline. Of the 3,313 with 24-week data, 1,545 (46.6%) continued with aspart, 1,379 (41.6%) switched to aspart premix, and 214 (6.5%) added basal insulin, while the remainder switched to other regimens. No serious adverse drug reactions were reported. The proportion of participants reporting hypoglycemia decreased from baseline to week 24 in the aspart alone group (11.2% versus 4.1%, p < 0.001) and in the aspart + basal insulin group (13.1% versus 7.5%, p = 0.040), and was 3.7% at week 24 in the aspart premix group. The mean HbA1c decreased from baseline to week 24 (aspart: -2.1 ± 2.0% [-23 ± 22 mmol/mol], aspart premix: -2.3 ± 1.7% [-25 ± 19 mmol/mol], aspart + basal insulin: -2.0 ± 2.1% [-22 ± 23 mmol/mol]; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Insulin aspart therapy was well tolerated and was associated with improved glucose control over 24 weeks in people with T2DM.

Safety and effectiveness of bolus insulin aspart in people with type 2 diabetes: a1chieve sub-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This sub-analysis evaluated clinical safety and effectiveness of bolus insulin aspart [with/without oral glucose-lowering drugs (OGLDs)] as the only insulin therapy. METHODS: A1chieve was an international, multicenter, prospective, open-label, non-interventional, observational, 24-week study in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus starting/switching to biphasic insulin aspart 30, insulin detemir or insulin aspart treatment (alone/in combination) in routine clinical practice. This sub-analysis evaluated clinical safety and effectiveness of bolus insulin aspart (±OGLDs) as the only insulin therapy. Data were analyzed for all patients, insulin-experienced and insulin-naive sub-groups, and sub-groups defined by the number of OGLDs prescribed at baseline (no OGLDs, one OGLD or ≥two OGLDs). Safety and effectiveness endpoints were assessed at baseline and following 24 weeks' therapy. RESULTS: In total, 2,026 patients were included (insulin-experienced, n = 561; insulin-naive, n = 1,465) in this sub-analysis. Significant improvements from baseline after 24 weeks' treatment with insulin aspart ± OGLDs were observed across all sub-groups for: glycated hemoglobin (range of means across sub-groups -1.6 to -2.4%; p < 0.001 for all comparisons), fasting plasma glucose (-2.5 to -3.8 mmol/l; p < 0.001 for all comparisons), post-breakfast post-prandial glucose (-3.4 to -5.8 mmol/l; p < 0.001 for all comparisons), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL; p < 0.001 for all comparisons). The proportion of patients reporting hypoglycemia events was significantly reduced from baseline after 24 weeks (insulin-naive cohort: 7.9-2.8%; p < 0.001; insulin-experienced cohort: 23.2-7.8%; p < 0.001). There were no reports of major hypoglycemia events at 24 weeks; risk of nocturnal hypoglycemia was <0.6 events/person-year. No serious adverse drug reactions were reported. CONCLUSION: Insulin aspart ± OGLDs is associated with significant improvements in glycemic control and HRQoL, without increased risk of hypoglycemia, in people with type 2 diabetes and sub-optimal glucose control.

Clinical experience with biphasic insulin aspart in people with type 2 diabetes: Results from the Libya cohort of the A1chieve study.

BACKGROUND: The A1chieve, a multicentric (28 countries), 24-week, non-interventional study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of insulin detemir, biphasic insulin aspart and insulin aspart in people with T2DM (n = 66,726) in routine clinical care across four continents. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data was collected at baseline, at 12 weeks and at 24 weeks. This short communication presents the results for patients enrolled in biphasic insulin aspart sub group from Libya. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients were enrolled in the biphasic insulin aspart subgroup. All the patients were prior insulin users. At baseline glycaemic control was poor (mean HbA1c: 9.3%). After 24 weeks of treatment there was an improvement in HbA1c (-0.9%). Hypoglycaemic events reduced from 7.2 events/patient-year to 3.7 events/patient-year in 24 weeks. SADRs did not occur in any of the study patients. CONCLUSION: Starting or switching to biphasic insulin aspart was associated with improvement in glycaemic control with a low rate of hypoglycaemia.

The A1chieve study: a 60 000-person, global, prospective, observational study of basal, meal-time, and biphasic insulin analogs in daily clinical practice.

While evidenced-based guidelines promote glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) targets <7.0% in order to reduce the long-term risk of diabetic complications, many individuals with type 2 diabetes do not achieve these targets. Fear of hypoglycemia provides a major barrier to improving blood glucose control as a result of delayed insulin initiation and failure to appropriately titrate insulin following initiation. Modern insulin analogs were designed to achieve improved blood glucose control with similar hypoglycemic risk compared with non-analog insulins (or similar blood glucose control with reduced hypoglycemic risk). While this has been demonstrated in randomized controlled trials, there is a need to confirm these findings in an everyday clinical setting. The A(1)chieve study will evaluate adverse events and effectiveness of premix (biphasic insulin aspart 30 [NovoMix 30]), basal (insulin detemir [Levemir]), and meal-time (insulin aspart [NovoRapid]) insulin analogs in people with type 2 diabetes in near-routine clinical practice. A(1)chieve is an international, prospective, multi-center, open-label, non-interventional, 24-week study of people with type 2 diabetes using an insulin analog. The study will recruit 60 000 people from 30 countries across four continents (Asia, Africa, South America, and Europe). The primary aim of the study is to assess the adverse event profile of the study insulins in routine clinical practice, including rates of hypoglycemia. In addition, effectiveness (HbA(1c), fasting plasma glucose, and postprandial plasma glucose) and patient quality of life outcomes will be measured. Comprehensive epidemiological data will be collected at baseline, including recent plasma glucose results and hypoglycemic episodes, prevalence of diabetes-related complications, and measures of current standards of care. Thus, A(1)chieve should provide important information about how insulin analogs perform in daily clinical practice.