A Randomized Controlled Study Comparing a DPP4 Inhibitor (Linagliptin) and Basal Insulin (Glargine) in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Long-term Care and Skilled Nursing Facilities: Linagliptin-LTC Trial

A Telehealth Program Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring and a Connected Insulin Pen Cap in Nursing Homes for Older Adults with Insulin-Treated Diabetes: The Trescasas Study

Objective: To assess the impact and feasibility of a telehealth program using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and a connected insulin pen cap (CIPC) in nursing homes for older adults with insulin-treated diabetes. Research Methods: This multicenter, prospective, sequential, single-arm study consisted of three phases: (1) baseline, blind CGM (Freestyle Libre Pro®); (2) intervention 1, CGM (Freestyle Libre2®) without alarms; and (3) intervention 2, CGM with alarms for hypo and hyperglycemia. Two telehealth visits from reference diabetes units were conducted to adjust antidiabetic treatments. Insulin treatment was tracked using the Insulclock® CIPC. The study's primary objective was to evaluate the reduction of hypoglycemia rate. Results: Of 82 eligible patients at seven nursing homes, 54 completed the study (age: 87.7 ± 7.1, 68-102 years, 56% women, duration of diabetes: 18.7 years, baseline glycated hemoglobin: 6.9% [52 mmol/mol]). The mean number of hypoglycemic events was significantly reduced from baseline (4.4) to intervention 1 (2.8; P = 0.060) and intervention 2 (2.1; P = 0.023). The time below range 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L) significantly decreased from 3.7% at baseline to 1.4% at intervention 2 (P = 0.036). The number of insulin injections significantly decreased from baseline to intervention 1 (1.2 to 0.99; P = 0.027). Nursing home staff expressed a positive view of the program, greater convenience, and potential to reduce hypoglycemia with the Freestyle Libre2® CGM versus the glucometer. Conclusions: A telehealth program using CGM and a CIPC was associated with improved glycemic profiles among institutionalized older individuals with diabetes receiving insulin and was well perceived by professionals.

Managing Diabetes in Older Adults: Current Approaches in Long-Term Care Facilities

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This narrative review aims to explore the literature on advancements in diabetes management within long-term care facilities (LTCFs). Managing chronic diseases like diabetes in LTCFs is particularly challenging due to the dynamic nature of these environments and the significant changes they have undergone over the past decade. Various factors, including rising care costs and government regulations, influence the quality-of-care residents receive in these settings.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many diabetes medications have not been extensively studied in LTCFs, and high-risk medications such as sulfonylureas and sliding scale insulin are still in use, potentially increasing the risk of morbidity and mortality among residents. Additionally, the adoption of diabetes technologies, such as continuous glucose monitors (CGMs) and insulin pumps, remains limited in LTCFs. Despite the high prevalence of diabetes, significant research gaps persist. Diabetes technologies have the potential to greatly improve diabetes management and outcomes for residents. However, more research is needed to evaluate their efficacy and safety in long-term care settings. Furthermore, there is a pressing need to address the gap in staff training on the use of these technologies. Closing these research gaps is essential for developing evidence-based guidelines and improving the quality of diabetes care in LTCFs.

A Qualitative Study of Older Adult Perspectives on Continuous Glucose Monitoring for Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) may improve self-management and reduce hypoglycemia risk among individuals with diabetes. However, little is known about how older adults with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D) experience and incorporate this technology into their daily lives.

OBJECTIVE

To explore experiences, preferences, barriers, and questions related to using CGM among older adults with insulin-treated T2D with and without experience using CGM.

DESIGN

Qualitative focus group study.

PARTICIPANTS

English-speaking older adults with T2D in a large, integrated healthcare delivery system. Groups included either experienced CGM users or adults who had not previously used CGM. Recruitment efforts prioritized individuals ≥ 75 years of age.

APPROACH

Transcripts were analyzed using the Framework Method to identify perspectives on CGM. Specific thematic categories were hypoglycemia-related benefits, general benefits, usefulness and ease of use concerns, and CGM questions.

KEY RESULTS

The study included 26 participants: 17 (65%) were experienced CGM users, 58% were female; median age was 74 (range 62-88) years. Participants perceived and anticipated these CGM benefits: informing behavior changes, reducing in-the-moment hypoglycemia risk, improving awareness and decision-making, and strengthening clinician collaboration. Perceived CGM barriers included challenges with wearability and reliability, burdens to others, distrust of technology, sensory and learning challenges, insufficient clinician support or engagement, and access and payer hurdles. Despite these downsides, experienced users perceived CGM as a worthwhile alternative to daily fingerstick glucose checks. Non-users were able to formulate many usability questions, providing a snapshot of informational needs for this age group.

CONCLUSIONS

Older adults with insulin-treated T2D experienced or anticipated benefits from CGM for diabetes management. Findings indicate a need for tailored education and self-management support for older adults to learn and gain maximal benefit from this technology.

Diagnosis and management of type 2 diabetes mellitus in patients with ischaemic heart disease and acute coronary syndromes - a review of evidence and recommendations

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) represents a major healthcare condition of the 21st century. It is characterised by persistently elevated blood glucose occurring as a result of peripheral insulin resistance and reduced insulin production which may lead to multiple long-term health conditions such as retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy. The estimated number of individuals suffering from diabetes mellitus (DM) is expected to rise to 591 million by the year 2035 with 4.4 million in the United Kingdom (UK) alone, 90% of which is attributed to T2DM. Moreover, a significant proportion of individuals may have undetected diabetes mellitus, especially among those presenting with symptoms of ischaemic heart disease (IHD). This is particularly important in those individuals presenting with acute coronary syndromes (ACS) who are at the highest risk of complications and sudden cardiac death. Identifying abnormal levels of common biochemical markers of diabetes, such as capillary blood glucose or glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in these patients is important for early diagnosis, which will then allow for timely intervention to improve outcomes. However, a significant proportion of individuals who meet the criteria for the diagnosis of diabetes remain undiagnosed, representing missed opportunities for early intervention. This may result in a prolonged period of untreated hyperglycaemia, which can result resulting in significant further microvascular and macrovascular complications. There is an increased risk of IHD, heart failure, cerebrovascular accidents (CVA), and peripheral artery disease (PVD). These account accounting for 50% of deaths in patients with T2DM. Cardiovascular diseases in the context of diabetes particular represent a significant cause of morbidity and mortality with a two to three times higher risk of cardiovascular disease in individuals with T2DM than in those without the condition normo-glycaemia. In the United Kingdom UK alone, around 120 amputations, 770 CVA, 590 heart attacks, and more than 2300 presentations with heart failure per week are attributed to diabetes DM. with One 1 in six 6 hospital beds and around 10% of the healthcare budget may be being spent on managing diabetes DM or its complications. Therefore, it represents a significant burden on our healthcare system.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Guided Insulin Administration in Long-Term Care Facilities: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rt-CGM) in adjusting insulin therapy in long-term care facilities (LTCF).

DESIGN

Prospective randomized clinical trial.

SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS

Insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) admitted to LTCF.

METHODS

Participants in the standard of care wore a blinded CGM with treatment adjusted based on point-of-care capillary glucose results before meals and bedtime (POC group). Participants in the intervention (CGM group) wore a Dexcom G6 CGM with treatment adjusted based on daily CGM profile. Treatment adjustment was performed by the LTCF medical team, with a duration of intervention up to 60 days. The primary endpoint was difference in time in range (TIR 70-180 mg/dL) between treatment groups.

RESULTS

Among 100 participants (age 74.73 ± 11 years, 80% admitted for subacute rehabilitation and 20% for nursing home care), there were no significant differences in baseline clinical characteristics between groups, and CGM data were compared for a median of 17 days. There were no differences in TIR (53.38% ± 30.16% vs 48.81% ± 28.03%, P = .40), mean daily mean CGM glucose (184.10 ± 43.4 mg/dL vs 190.0 ± 45.82 mg/dL, P = .71), or the percentage of time below range (TBR) <70 mg/dL (0.83% ± 2.59% vs 1.18% ± 3.54%, P = .51), or TBR <54 mg/dL (0.23% ± 0.85% vs 0.56% ± 2.24%, P = .88) between rt-CGM and POC groups.

CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

The use of rtCGM is safe and effective in guiding insulin therapy in patients with T2D in LTCF resulting in a similar improvement in glycemic control compared to POC-guided insulin adjustment.

Prescription appropriateness of anti-diabetes drugs in elderly patients hospitalized in a clinical setting: evidence from the REPOSI Register

Diabetes is an increasing global health burden with the highest prevalence (24.0%) observed in elderly people. Older diabetic adults have a greater risk of hospitalization and several geriatric syndromes than older nondiabetic adults. For these conditions, special care is required in prescribing therapies including anti- diabetes drugs. Aim of this study was to evaluate the appropriateness and the adherence to safety recommendations in the prescriptions of glucose-lowering drugs in hospitalized elderly patients with diabetes. Data for this cross-sectional study were obtained from the REgistro POliterapie-Società Italiana Medicina Interna (REPOSI) that collected clinical information on patients aged ≥ 65 years acutely admitted to Italian internal medicine and geriatric non-intensive care units (ICU) from 2010 up to 2019. Prescription appropriateness was assessed according to the 2019 AGS Beers Criteria and anti-diabetes drug data sheets.Among 5349 patients, 1624 (30.3%) had diagnosis of type 2 diabetes. At admission, 37.7% of diabetic patients received treatment with metformin, 37.3% insulin therapy, 16.4% sulfonylureas, and 11.4% glinides. Surprisingly, only 3.1% of diabetic patients were treated with new classes of anti- diabetes drugs. According to prescription criteria, at admission 15.4% of patients treated with metformin and 2.6% with sulfonylureas received inappropriately these treatments. At discharge, the inappropriateness of metformin therapy decreased (10.2%, P < 0.0001). According to Beers criteria, the inappropriate prescriptions of sulfonylureas raised to 29% both at admission and at discharge. This study shows a poor adherence to current guidelines on diabetes management in hospitalized elderly people with a high prevalence of inappropriate use of sulfonylureas according to the Beers criteria.

Gaps in our knowledge of managing inpatient dysglycaemia and diabetes in non-critically ill adults: A call for further research

AIMS

To describe the gaps in knowledge for the care of people in the hospital who have dysglycaemia or diabetes.

METHODS

A review of the current literature and the authors' knowledge of the subject.

RESULTS

Recent data has suggested that the prevalence of hospitalised people with diabetes is approximately three times the prevalence in the general population and is growing annually. A wealth of observational data over the last 4 decades has shown that people with hyperglycaemia, severe hypoglycaemia or diabetes, all experience more harm whilst in the hospital than those who do not have the condition. This often equates to a longer length of stay and thus higher costs. To date, the proportion of federal funding aimed at addressing the harms that people with dysglycaemia experience in hospitals has been very small compared to outpatient studies. National organisations, such as the Joint British Diabetes Societies for Inpatient Care, the American Diabetes Association and the Endocrine Society have produced guidelines or consensus statements on the management of various aspects of inpatient care. However, whilst a lot of these have been based on evidence, much remains based on expert opinion and thus low-quality evidence.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights that inpatient diabetes is an underfunded and under-researched area.

Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2022. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the previous consensus statements on the management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes in adults, published since 2006 and last updated in 2019. The target audience is the full spectrum of the professional healthcare team providing diabetes care in the USA and Europe. A systematic examination of publications since 2018 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on social determinants of health, the healthcare system and physical activity behaviours including sleep. There is a greater emphasis on weight management as part of the holistic approach to diabetes management. The results of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes trials involving sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, including assessment of subgroups, inform broader recommendations for cardiorenal protection in people with diabetes at high risk of cardiorenal disease. After a summary listing of consensus recommendations, practical tips for implementation are provided.

Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2022. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the previous consensus statements on the management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes in adults, published since 2006 and last updated in 2019. The target audience is the full spectrum of the professional health care team providing diabetes care in the U.S. and Europe. A systematic examination of publications since 2018 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on social determinants of health, the health care system, and physical activity behaviors, including sleep. There is a greater emphasis on weight management as part of the holistic approach to diabetes management. The results of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes trials involving sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, including assessment of subgroups, inform broader recommendations for cardiorenal protection in people with diabetes at high risk of cardiorenal disease. After a summary listing of consensus recommendations, practical tips for implementation are provided.

Update on the management of diabetes in long-term care facilities

The number of patients with diabetes is increasing among older adults in the USA, and it is expected to reach 26.7 million by 2050. In parallel, the percentage of older patients with diabetes in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) will also rise. Currently, the majority of LTCF residents are older adults and one-third of them have diabetes. Management of diabetes in LTCF is challenging due to multiple comorbidities and altered nutrition. Few randomized clinical trials have been conducted to determine optimal treatment for diabetes management in older adults in LTCF. The geriatric populations are at risk of hypoglycemia since the majority are treated with insulin and have different levels of functionality and nutritional needs. Effective approaches to avoid hypoglycemia should be implemented in these settings to improve outcome and reduce the economic burden. Newer medication classes might carry less risk of developing hypoglycemia along with the appropriate use of technology, such as the use of continuous glucose monitoring. Practical clinical guidelines for diabetes management including recommendations for prevention and treatment of hypoglycemia are needed to appropriately implement resources in the transition of care plans in this vulnerable population.

Preoperative Management of Endocrine, Hormonal, and Urologic Medications: Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement (SPAQI) Consensus Statement

Perioperative medical management is challenging due to the rising complexity of patients presenting for surgical procedures. A key part of preoperative optimization is appropriate management of long-term medications, yet guidelines and consensus statements for perioperative medication management are lacking. Available resources utilize the recommendations derived from individual studies and do not include a multidisciplinary focus or formal consensus. The Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement (SPAQI) identified a lack of authoritative clinical guidance as an opportunity to utilize its multidisciplinary membership to improve evidence-based perioperative care. SPAQI seeks to provide guidance on perioperative medication management that synthesizes available literature with expert consensus. The aim of this Consensus Statement is to provide practical guidance on the preoperative management of endocrine, hormonal, and urologic medications. A panel of experts with anesthesiology, perioperative medicine, hospital medicine, general internal medicine, and medical specialty experience was drawn together and identified the common medications in each of these categories. The authors then utilized a modified Delphi approach to critically review the literature and generate consensus recommendations.

Inpatient Hyperglycemia and Transitions of Care: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

The transition of diabetes care from home to hospital, within the hospital, and upon discharge is fraught with gaps that can adversely affect patient safety and length of stay. We aimed to highlight the variability in care during these transitions and point out areas where research is needed.

METHODS

A PubMed search was performed with a combination of search terms that pertained to diabetes, hyperglycemia, hospitalization, locations in the hospital, discharge to home or a nursing facility, and diabetes medications. Studies with at least 50 patients that were written in the English language were included.

RESULTS

With the exception of transitioning from intravenous insulin infusion to subcutaneous insulin and perhaps admission to the regular floors, few studies pointedly focused on transitions of care, leading us to extrapolate recommendations based on data from disparate areas of care in the hospital. There is evidence at every stage of care, starting from the entry into the hospital and ending with discharge home or to a facility, that patients benefit from having protocols in place guiding overall care.

CONCLUSION

Pockets of care exist in hospitals where methods of effective diabetes management have been studied and implemented. However, there is no sustained continuum of care. Protocols and care teams that follow patients from one physical location to the other may result in improved clinical outcomes during and following a hospital stay.

Cardiovascular outcomes and safety with linagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, compared with the sulphonylurea glimepiride in older people with type 2 diabetes: A subgroup analysis of the randomized CAROLINA trial

AIM

To compare the cardiovascular (CV) safety of linagliptin with glimepiride in older and younger participants in the CAROLINA trial in both prespecified and post hoc analyses.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

People aged 40 to 85 years with relatively early type 2 diabetes, inadequate glycaemic control and elevated CV risk were randomly assigned to linagliptin 5 mg or glimepiride 1 to 4 mg. The primary endpoint was time to first occurrence of three-point major adverse CV events (MACE: CV death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, or non-fatal stroke). We evaluated clinical and safety outcomes across age groups.

RESULTS

Of 6033 participants, 50.7% were aged <65 years, 35.3% were aged 65 to 74 years, and 14.0% were aged ≥75 years. During the 6.3-year median follow-up, CV/mortality outcomes did not differ between linagliptin and glimepiride overall (hazard ratio [HR] for three-point MACE 0.98, 95.47% confidence interval [CI] 0.84, 1.14) or across age groups (interaction P >0.05). Between treatment groups, reductions in glycated haemoglobin were comparable across age groups but moderate-to-severe hypoglycaemia was markedly reduced with linagliptin (HR 0.18, 95% CI 0.15, 0.21) with no differences among age groups (P = 0.23). Mean weight was -1.54 kg (95% CI -1.80, -1.28) lower for linagliptin versus glimepiride. Adverse events increased with age, but were generally balanced between treatment groups. Significantly fewer falls or fractures occurred with linagliptin.

CONCLUSIONS

Linagliptin and glimepiride were comparable for CV/mortality outcomes across age groups. Linagliptin had significantly lower risk of hypoglycaemia and falls or fractures than glimepiride, including in "older-old" individuals for whom these are particularly important treatment considerations.

Diabetes in ageing: pathways for developing the evidence base for clinical guidance

Older adults with diabetes are heterogeneous in their medical, functional, and cognitive status, and require careful individualisation of their treatment regimens. However, in the absence of detailed information from clinical trials involving older people with varying characteristics, there is little evidence-based guidance, which is a notable limitation of current approaches to care. It is important to recognise that older people with diabetes might vary in their profiles according to age category, functional health, presence of frailty, and comorbidity profiles. In addition, all older adults with diabetes require an individualised approach to care, ranging from robust individuals to those residing in care homes with a short life expectancy, those requiring palliative care, or those requiring end-of-life management. In this Review, our multidisciplinary team of experts describes the current evidence in several important areas in geriatric diabetes, and outlines key research gaps and research questions in each of these areas with the aim to develop evidence-based recommendations to improve the outcomes of interest in older adults.

Hospital Diabetes Meeting 2020

Patients with diabetes may experience adverse outcomes related to their glycemic control when hospitalized. Continuous glucose monitoring systems, insulin-dosing software, enhancements to the electronic health record, and other medical technologies are now available to improve hospital care. Because of these developments, new approaches are needed to incorporate evolving treatments into routine care. With the goal of educating healthcare professionals on the most recent practices and research for managing diabetes in the hospital, Diabetes Technology Society hosted the Virtual Hospital Diabetes Meeting on April 24-25, 2020. Because of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the meeting was restructured to be held virtually during the national lockdown to ensure the safety of the participants and allow them to remain at their posts treating COVID-19 patients. The meeting focused on (1) inpatient management and perioperative care, (2) diabetic ketoacidosis and hyperglycemic hyperosmolar state, (3) computer-guided insulin dosing, (4) Coronavirus Disease 2019 and diabetes, (5) technology, (6) hypoglycemia, (7) data and cybersecurity, (8) special situations, (9) glucometrics and insulinometrics, and (10) quality and safety. This meeting report contains summaries of each of the ten sessions. A virtual poster session will be presented within two months of the meeting.

Challenges and Strategies for Managing Diabetes in the Elderly in Long-Term Care Settings

Diabetes affects a large number of patients in the long-term care (LTC) setting, and their care is often complicated because of multimorbidity, diabetes-related complications, disability, dependency on caregivers, and geriatric syndromes, including frailty and cognitive impairment. This population includes patients receiving short-term rehabilitation in skilled nursing facilities, those who are residents in LTC facilities, and those receiving palliative or end-of-life care. An individualized approach to care based on clinical complexity, diabetes trajectory, and patients' preferences and goals is required. Such patients may experience one or more transitions of care and decline in condition. They are also prone to adverse drug events, cardiovascular events, and hypoglycemia. Facility-related challenges include varying staff competencies and practitioner preferences, inconsistent interdisciplinary communication, overly complex medication regimens, and poorly implemented care transitions.

Management of Inpatient Hyperglycemia and Diabetes in Older Adults

Diabetes is one of the world's fastest growing health challenges. Insulin therapy remains a useful regimen for many elderly patients, such as those with moderate to severe hyperglycemia, type 1 diabetes, hyperglycemic emergencies, and those who fail to maintain glucose control on non-insulin agents alone. Recent clinical trials have shown that several non-insulin agents as monotherapy, or in combination with low doses of basal insulin, have comparable efficacy and potential safety advantages to complex insulin therapy regimens. Determining the most appropriate diabetes management plan for older hospitalized patients requires consideration of many factors to prevent poor outcomes related to dysglycemia.

Challenges and Strategies for Inpatient Diabetes Management in Older Adults

Adults older than 65 years of age are the fastest growing segment of the U.S. population. Aging is also one of the most important risk factors for diabetes, and about one-third of all individuals with diabetes are in this age-group. Older people with diabetes are more likely to have comorbidities such as hypertension, ischemic heart disease, chronic kidney disease, and cognitive impairment, which lead to higher rates of hospital admissions compared with individuals without diabetes. Professional organizations have recommended patient-centric individualized glycemic reduction approaches, with an emphasis on potential harms of intensive glycemic control and overtreatment in older adults. Insulin therapy remains a mainstay of diabetes management in the inpatient setting regardless of patients' age; however, there is uncertainty about optimal glycemic targets during the hospital stay. Increasing evidence supports selective use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, alone or in combination with low-dose basal insulin, in older noncritically ill patients with mild to moderate hyperglycemia. This article reviews the prevalence, diagnosis, and monitoring of, and the available treatment strategies for, diabetes among elderly patients in the inpatient setting.

Insulin Therapy in Hospitalized Patients

BACKGROUND

Hyperglycemia is prevalent and is associated with an increase in morbidity and mortality in hospitalized patients. Insulin therapy is the most appropriate method for controlling glycemia in hospital, but is associated with increased risk of hypoglycemia, which is a barrier to achieving glycemic goals.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

Optimal glycemic targets have not been established in the critical and noncritical hospitalized patients, and there are different modalities of insulin therapy. The primary purpose of this review is to discuss controversy regarding appropriate glycemic targets and summarize the evidence about the safety and efficacy of insulin therapy in critical and noncritical care settings.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search was conducted through PubMed with the following key words (inpatient hyperglycemia, inpatient diabetes, glycemic control AND critically or non-critically ill patient, Insulin therapy in hospital).

RESULTS

In critically ill patient, blood glucose levels >180 mg/dL may increase the risk of hospital complications, and blood glucose levels <110 mg/dL have been associated with an increased risk of hypoglycemia. Continuous intravenous insulin infusion is the best method for achieving glycemic targets in the critically ill patient. The ideal glucose goals for noncritically ill patients remain undefined and must be individualized according to the characteristics of the patients. A basal-bolus insulin strategy resulted in better glycemic control than sliding scale insulin and lower risk of hypoglycemia than premixed insulin regimen.

CONCLUSIONS

Extremes of blood glucose lead to poor outcomes, and target glucose range of 110-180 mg/dL may be appropriate for most critically ill patients and noncritically ill patients. Insulin is the most appropriate pharmacologic agent for effectively controlling glycemia in hospital. A continuous intravenous insulin infusion and scheduled basal-bolus-correction insulin are the preferred modalities for glycemic control in critically and noncritically ill hospitalized patients, respectively.

Efficacy and safety of linagliptin to improve glucose control in older people with type 2 diabetes on stable insulin therapy: A randomized trial

AIM

To assess the addition of linagliptin as an alternative to insulin uptitration in older people with type 2 diabetes on stable insulin therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This phase 4, randomized, multicentre, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, 24-week study recruited individuals on stable insulin, with baseline HbA1c 7.0%-10.0%, aged ≥60 years and body mass index ≤45 kg/m² . HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose were measured at study visits, and participants assessed glycaemic control with a self-monitoring blood glucose device. Adverse events (AEs) were reported during the study.

RESULTS

Three hundred and two participants were randomized 1:1 to linagliptin 5 mg qd and placebo, with one third of patients from Japan. Study population age and HbA1c (baseline mean ± SD) were 72.4 ± 5.4 years and 8.2 ± 0.8%, respectively; ~80% of participants were aged ≥70 years; 80% had macrovascular complications, one third had a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m² ; and half had been diagnosed with diabetes for >15 years. Linagliptin significantly improved glucose control at 24 weeks (HbA1c-adjusted mean change vs. placebo: -0.63%; P <0.0001) and the probability of achieving predefined HbA1c targets without hypoglycaemia (HbA1c <8.0%: OR 2.02; P <0.05 and HbA1c <7.0%: OR 2.44; P <0.01). Linagliptin versus placebo was well tolerated, with similar incidences of AEs, including clinically important hypoglycaemia (blood glucose <54 mg/dL) or severe hypoglycaemia.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of linagliptin improves glucose control without an excess of hypoglycaemia in older patients with type 2 diabetes on stable insulin therapy.

Glycaemic efficacy and safety of linagliptin compared to a basal-bolus insulin regimen in patients with type 2 diabetes undergoing non-cardiac surgery: A multicentre randomized clinical trial

AIMS

The use of incretin-based therapy, rather than or complementary to, insulin therapy is an active area of research in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We determined the glycaemic efficacy and safety of linagliptin compared to a basal-bolus insulin regimen in hospitalized surgical patients with T2D.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective open-label multicentre study randomized T2D patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery with admission blood glucose (BG) of 7.8 to 22.2 mmol/L who were under treatment with diet, oral agents or total insulin dose (TDD) ≤ 0.5 units/kg/day to either linagliptin (n = 128) daily or basal-bolus (n = 122) with glargine once daily and rapid-acting insulin before meals. Both groups received supplemental insulin for BG > 7.8 mmol/L. The primary endpoint was difference in mean daily BG between groups.

RESULTS

Mean daily BG was higher in the linagliptin group compared to the basal-bolus group (9.5 ± 2.6 vs 8.8 ± 2.3 mmol/L/dL, P = 0.03) with a mean daily BG difference of 0.6 mmol/L (95% confidence interval 0.04, 1.2). In patients with randomization BG < 11.1 mmol/L (63% of cohort), mean daily BG was similar in the linagliptin and basal-bolus groups (8.9 ± 2.3 vs 8.7 ± 2.3 mmol/L, P = 0.43); however, patients with BG ≥ 11.1 mmol/L who were treated with linagliptin had higher BG compared to the basal-bolus group (10.9 ± 2.6 vs 9.2 ± 2.2 mmol/L, P < 0.001). Linagliptin resulted in fewer hypoglycaemic events (1.6% vs 11%, P = 0.001; 86% relative risk reduction), with similar supplemental insulin and fewer daily insulin injections (2.0 ± 3.3 vs 3.1 ± 3.3, P < 0.001) compared to the basal-bolus group.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with T2D undergoing non-cardiac surgery who presented with mild to moderate hyperglycaemia (BG < 11.1 mmol/L), daily linagliptin is a safe and effective alternative to multi-dose insulin therapy, resulting in similar glucose control with lower hypoglycaemia.

Evidence-Based Management of Diabetes in Older Adults

The number of older adults with diabetes is rapidly increasing worldwide. A variety of factors contribute to the age-related increase in the incidence of diabetes. The lack of empiric evidence in the field has limited the management guidelines to mostly expert opinion. Given uncertainty over the rate at which to lower blood glucose levels and the optimal method of doing so, the goals of diabetes control in older people must be individualized. If the patient requires insulin therapy, the newer insulins, with their improved pharmacodynamic consistency and reduced risk of hypoglycemia, should be preferred. Several oral agents are preferable for people with sufficient endogenous insulin because they do not cause hypoglycemia when used as monotherapy. Some of these oral agents have been found to have cardioprotective effects. Older people with diabetes also require management of the other risk factors for cardiovascular disease, with antihypertensive drugs, cholesterol-lowering agents and low-dose aspirin. However, the precise targets for blood pressure control and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels continue to evolve as more data become available. Diabetes care in older adults should focus on enhancing the individual's quality of life rather than trying to normalize blood glucose levels or reach predetermined blood pressure and LDL cholesterol targets.

Safety and Efficacy of DPP4 Inhibitor and Basal Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes: An Updated Review and Challenging Clinical Scenarios

The safety and efficacy of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors as monotherapy or in combination with other oral antidiabetic agents or basal insulin are well established. DPP4 inhibitors stimulate glucose-dependent insulin secretion and inhibit glucagon production. As monotherapy, they reduce the hemoglobin A1c level by about 0.6-0.8%. The addition of a DPP4 inhibitor to basal insulin is an attractive option, because they lower both postprandial and fasting plasma glucose concentrations without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia or weight gain. The present review summarizes the extensive evidence on the combination therapy of DPP4 inhibitors and insulin-based regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes. We focus our discussion on challenging clinical scenarios including patients with chronic renal impairment, elderly persons and hospitalized patients. The evidence indicates that these drugs are highly effective and safe in the elderly and in the presence of mild, moderate and severe renal failure improving glycemic control with low risk of hypoglycemia. In addition, several randomized-controlled trials have shown that the use of DPP4 inhibitors in combination with basal insulin represents an alternative to the basal-bolus insulin regimen in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes.

Inpatient Glycemic Management in the Setting of Renal Insufficiency/Failure/Dialysis

PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW

Chronic diabetic nephropathy and renal dysfunction from other causes are common in hospitalized patients with diabetes. Available diabetes management guidelines aim to reduce hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia, both independent risk factors for hospital outcomes. Renal dysfunction, which increases the risk of hypoglycemia, adds a layer of complexity in diabetes management. Therefore, modified glucose goals and treatment regimens may be required.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent prospective and retrospective studies provide direction on safe insulin therapy for diabetes inpatients with renal compromise. Studies of newer diabetes pharmacotherapy provide data on oral agent use in the inpatient setting. Diabetes therapy should be modified with changing renal function. Glucose management in patients on peritoneal or hemodialysis is challenging. Reducing weight-based doses of insulin and use of newer insulins can reduce hypoglycemia risk. Safety and efficacy of DPP-4 inhibitors has been evaluated in the hospital and nursing home setting. Metformin, SGLT-2 inhibitors, and GLP1 receptor agonists can be used in several stages of renal dysfunction prior to and at discharge.

Failing to meet the needs of generations of care home residents with diabetes: a review of the literature and a call for action

In residential care homes and aged-care facilities globally, between one in three and one in four residents may have diabetes, an often complex highly co-morbid illness that leads to frailty, dependency, disability and reduced life expectancy. Residents with diabetes also have a high risk of hypoglycaemia, avoidable hospital admissions, and represent one of the most difficult challenges to health professionals and care staff in optimizing their diabetes and medical care. This detailed review examines the literature relating to care home diabetes over the last 25 years to assess what has been achieved in characterizing residents with diabetes, and what we know about the various but limited intervention studies that have been carried out internationally. The guidance and guidelines that have been published to assist clinicians in planning effective and safe care for this rather vulnerable group of people with diabetes are also reviewed. The review presents the first diagrammatic representation of a likely physiological cascade depicting the mainly irreversible functional decline a resident with diabetes might experience, provides modern principles of care for each resident with diabetes, and identifies what priority recommendations are required to be implemented if diabetes care is to improve. The review concludes that action is required since diabetes care still remains fragmented, sub-optimal, and in need of investment, otherwise care home residents with diabetes will continue to have their needs unfulfilled.