Hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes from India and Malaysia treated with sitagliptin or a sulfonylurea during Ramadan: a randomized, pragmatic study

Real-world evidence on the effectiveness and safety of gliclazide MR 60 mg in Bangladeshi patients with Type II diabetes during fasting: a sub-analysis from the global DIA-RAMADAN study

Aim: Many Muslims with Type II diabetes (T2DM) fast during Ramadan, which can put them at increased risk of hypoglycemia. This sub-analysis of the global DIA-RAMADAN study assessed the effectiveness and safety of gliclazide modified release (MR) 60 mg in the Bangladeshi cohort. Materials & methods: DIA-RAMADAN was an international, prospective, observational study conducted in adult T2DM patients intending to fast and receiving gliclazide MR 60 mg once daily for ≥90 days before Ramadan. Dosing was switched from morning to evening at the start of Ramadan. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with ≥1 symptomatic hypoglycemic event. Secondary outcomes included changes between inclusion (V0) and end of study visit (V1) in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), body weight and fasting plasma glucose (FPG). Results: Among the 98 Bangladeshi patients, 80 (81.6%) were at moderate/low-risk (category 3) for fasting and 18 (18.4%) were high-risk (category 2), as per International Diabetes Federation and Diabetes and Ramadan International Alliance (IDF-DAR) guidelines. Gliclazide MR was being prescribed as monotherapy to 59 (60.2%) patients and in combination with metformin to 39 (39.8%). There was no incidence of severe hypoglycemic events. Mean (±SD) HbA1c change from V0 was -0.1 ± 0.8% (p = 0.159). Mean (±SD) changes in FPG and body weight were -0.8 ± 39.7 mg/dl (p = 0.876) and -0.0 ± 1.5 kg (p = 0.810), respectively. Conclusion: In a real-world setting, this sub-analysis in Bangladeshi patients shows that patients with T2DM treated with gliclazide MR 60 mg can fast safely during Ramadan with a very low risk of hypoglycemia, while maintaining glycemic control and body weight.

Interventions for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus fasting during Ramadan

BACKGROUND

Fasting during Ramadan is obligatory for adult Muslims, except those who have a medical illness. Many Muslims with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) choose to fast, which may increase their risks of hypoglycaemia and dehydration.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions for people with type 2 diabetes fasting during Ramadan.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov (29 June 2022) without language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted during Ramadan that evaluated all pharmacological or behavioural interventions in Muslims with T2DM.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors screened and selected records, assessed risk of bias and extracted data independently. Discrepancies were resolved by a third author. For meta-analyses we used a random-effects model, with risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes with their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 RCTs with 5359 participants, with a four-week study duration and at least four weeks of follow-up. All studies had at least one high-risk domain in the risk of bias assessment. Four trials compared dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors with sulphonylurea. DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce hypoglycaemia compared to sulphonylureas (85/1237 versus 165/1258, RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.68; low-certainty evidence). Serious hypoglycaemia was similar between groups (no events were reported in two trials; 6/279 in the DPP-4 versus 4/278 in the sulphonylurea group was reported in one trial, RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.43 to 5.24; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of DPP-4 inhibitors on adverse events other than hypoglycaemia (141/1207 versus 157/1219, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.54) and HbA1c changes (MD -0.11%, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.36) (very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes). No deaths were reported (moderate-certainty evidence). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment satisfaction were not evaluated. Two trials compared meglitinides with sulphonylurea. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on hypoglycaemia (14/133 versus 21/140, RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.28) and HbA1c changes (MD 0.38%, 95% CI 0.35% to 0.41%) (very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes). Death, serious hypoglycaemic events, adverse events, treatment satisfaction and HRQoL were not evaluated. One trial compared sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors with sulphonylurea. SGLT-2 may reduce hypoglycaemia compared to sulphonylurea (4/58 versus 13/52, RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.79; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain for serious hypoglycaemia (one event reported in both groups, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.97) and adverse events other than hypoglycaemia (20/58 versus 18/52, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.67) (very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes). SGLT-2 inhibitors result in little or no difference in HbA1c (MD 0.27%, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.58; 1 trial, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Death, treatment satisfaction and HRQoL were not evaluated. Three trials compared glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analogues with sulphonylurea. GLP-1 analogues may reduce hypoglycaemia compared to sulphonylurea (20/291 versus 48/305, RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.74; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain for serious hypoglycaemia (0/91 versus 1/91, RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.99; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that GLP-1 analogues result in little to no difference in adverse events other than hypoglycaemia (78/244 versus 55/255, RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.61; very low-certainty evidence), treatment satisfaction (MD -0.18, 95% CI -3.18 to 2.82; very low-certainty evidence) or change in HbA1c (MD -0.04%, 95% CI -0.45% to 0.36%; 2 trials, 246 participants; low-certainty evidence). Death and HRQoL were not evaluated. Two trials compared insulin analogues with biphasic insulin. The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of insulin analogues on hypoglycaemia (47/256 versus 81/244, RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.40) and serious hypoglycaemia (4/131 versus 3/132, RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.89) (very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes). The evidence was very uncertain for the effect of insulin analogues on adverse effects other than hypoglycaemia (109/256 versus 114/244, RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.56; very low-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (1/131 versus 0/132, RR 3.02, 95% CI 0.12 to 73.53; very low-certainty evidence) and HbA1c changes (MD 0.03%, 95% CI -0.17% to 0.23%; 1 trial, 245 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Treatment satisfaction and HRQoL were not evaluated. Two trials compared telemedicine with usual care. The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of telemedicine on hypoglycaemia compared with usual care (9/63 versus 23/58, RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.74; very low-certainty evidence), HRQoL (MD 0.06, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.15; very low-certainty evidence) and HbA1c change (MD -0.84%, 95% CI -1.51% to -0.17%; very low-certainty evidence). Death, serious hypoglycaemia, AEs other than hypoglycaemia and treatment satisfaction were not evaluated. Two trials compared Ramadan-focused patient education with usual care. The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of Ramadan-focused patient education on hypoglycaemia (49/213 versus 42/209, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.66; very low-certainty evidence) and HbA1c change (MD -0.40%, 95% CI -0.73% to -0.06%; very low-certainty evidence). Death, serious hypoglycaemia, adverse events other than hypoglycaemia, treatment satisfaction and HRQoL were not evaluated. One trial compared drug dosage reduction with usual care. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of drug dosage reduction on hypoglycaemia (19/452 versus 52/226, RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.30; very low-certainty evidence). No participants experienced adverse events other than hypoglycaemia during the study (very low-certainty evidence). Death, serious hypoglycaemia, treatment satisfaction, HbA1c change and HRQoL were not evaluated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no clear evidence of the benefits or harms of interventions for individuals with T2DM who fast during Ramadan. All results should be interpreted with caution due to concerns about risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency between studies, which give rise to low- to very low-certainty evidence. Major outcomes, such as mortality, health-related quality of life and severe hypoglycaemia, were rarely evaluated. Sufficiently powered studies that examine the effects of various interventions on these outcomes are needed.

Roadmap for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes and Hypertension in the Middle East: Review of the 2022 EVIDENT Summit

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and hypertension are leading risk factors for death and disability in the Middle East. Both conditions are highly prevalent, underdiagnosed and poorly controlled, highlighting an urgent need for a roadmap to overcome the barriers to optimal glycaemic and blood pressure management in this region. This review provides a summary of the Evidence in Diabetes and Hypertension Summit (EVIDENT) held in September 2022, which discussed current treatment guidelines, unmet clinical needs and strategies to improve treatment outcomes for patients with T2DM and hypertension in the Middle East. Current clinical guidelines recommend strict glycaemic and blood pressure targets, presenting several treatment options to achieve and maintain these targets and prevent complications. However, treatment targets are infrequently met in the Middle East, largely due to high clinical inertia among physicians and low medication adherence among patients. To address these challenges, clinical guidelines now provide individualised therapy recommendations based on drug profiles, patient preferences and management priorities. Efforts to improve the early detection of prediabetes, T2DM screening and intensive, early glucose control will minimise long-term complications. Physicians can use the T2DM Oral Agents Fact Checking programme to help navigate the wide range of treatment options and guide clinical decision-making. Sulfonylurea agents have been used successfully to manage T2DM; a newer agent, gliclazide MR (modified release formulation), has the advantages of a lower incidence of hypoglycaemia with no risk of cardiovascular events, weight neutrality and proven renal benefits. For patients with hypertension, single-pill combinations have been developed to improve efficacy and reduce treatment burden. In conjunction with pragmatic treatment algorithms and personalised therapies, greater investments in disease prevention, public awareness, training of healthcare providers, patient education, government policies and research are needed to improve the quality of care of patients with T2DM and/or hypertension in the Middle East.

Management of Diabetes and Hypertension within the Gulf Region: Updates on Treatment Practices and Therapies

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a leading cause of death globally, driven by the high rates of risk factors, such as diabetes and hypertension. As the prevalence of these risk factors is particularly high in the Gulf region, better diagnosis and management of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and hypertension has the potential to dramatically reduce adverse cardiovascular outcomes for individuals in that part of the world. This article provides a summary of presentations made during the EVIDENT summit, a virtual symposium on Evidence in Diabetes and Hypertension, held in September 2021, including a review of the various guidelines for both T2D and hypertension, as well as recent findings relevant to the safety and efficacy for therapies relating to these conditions. Of relevance to the Gulf region, the risk of hypoglycaemia with sulfonylureas during Ramadan was reviewed. For the management of T2D, sulfonylureas have been a long-standing medication used to achieve glycaemic control; however, differences have emerged between early and later generations, with recent studies suggesting improvements in the safety profiles of late-generation sulfonylureas. For patients with hypertension, incremental therapy changes are recommended to reduce the risk of cardiovascular complications that are associated with increasing blood pressure. For first-line therapy, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi), such as perindopril, have been demonstrated to reduce the risk of cardiovascular and all-cause mortality. The addition of calcium channel blockers and diuretics to ACEi has been shown to be effective in patients with poorly controlled hypertension. The different renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors are reviewed, and the benefit of combination therapies, including amlodipine and indapamide in patients with difficult-to-control hypertension, is investigated. The benefits of lifestyle modifications for these patients are also discussed, with important clinical considerations that are expected to inform patient management in daily clinical practice.

Hypoglycemic Events in Diabetic Patients under Non-insulin Regimens During Ramadan: A Frequentist Network Meta-Analysis.. [DOI: 10.1101/2022.05.28.22275730] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0]

Background

Diabetic Muslims who choose to fast during Ramadan encounter major risks such as hyperglycemia, hypoglycemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, and dehydration. Recently, newer antidiabetic agents have been found to be less likely to cause hypoglycemic emergencies. This meta-analysis aimed to present collective and conclusive results from major randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the risk of hypoglycemia among patients taking oral antidiabetics during Ramadan.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar for RCTs. We performed a frequentist network meta-analysis using the “netmeta” package of R software version 4.1.1 to investigate the risk of developing hypoglycemia after taking oral antidiabetic drugs during Ramadan.

Results

Nine RCTs with a total of 3464 patients were included in the final analysis. In the comparison of all antidiabetic drug classes with sulfonylureas, SGLT-2 inhibitors were associated with the lowest hypoglycemic risk (RR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04-0.78; P-score, 0.909), followed by GLP-1 agonists (RR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.17-0.56; P-score, 0.799), and DDP-4 inhibitors (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.43-0.75; P-score, 0.483). When comparing individual drugs, dapagliflozin was associated with the lowest hypoglycemic risk (RR, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.04-0.78; P-score, 0.874), followed by lixisenatide (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.09-0.71; P-score, 0.813), liraglutide (RR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.17-0.69; P-score, 0.715), and sitagliptin (RR. 0.51; 95% CI, 0.37-0.71; P-score, 0.515).

Conclusion

SGLT-2 inhibitors are associated with the least documented hypoglycemic events and adverse outcomes compared with other oral hypoglycemic drugs. These findings could have considerable public health and clinical implications when extrapolated to the global Muslim population with a similar clinical background.

Abstract Figure

The role of sulfonylureas in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is increasingly prevalent and associated with increased risk for cardiovascular and renal disease. After lifestyle modification, metformin is usually the first-line pharmacotherapy and sulfonylureas are traditionally added after metformin failure. However, with newer glucose lowering drugs that may have less risk of hypoglycemia or that may reduce cardiovascular and renal events, the position of sulfonylureas is being reevaluated.

AREAS COVERED

In this article, the authors review relevant publications related to the use of sulfonylureas.

EXPERT OPINION

Sulfonylureas are potent glucose lowering drugs. The risk of hypoglycemia varies with different drugs within the class and can be minimized by using the safer drugs, possibly in lower doses. Cardiovascular events do not appear to be increased with some of the newer generation drugs. The durability of glycemic control also appears comparable to other newer agents. Sulfonylureas are the preferred treatment for some types of monogenic diabetes and selection of T2D patients who may have greater benefit from sulfonylureas based on certain phenotypes and genotypes is likely to be refined further by precision medicine. Sulfonylureas are inexpensive and readily available everywhere and they are still the most frequently used second-line treatment for T2D in many parts of the world.

Evaluation of the effectiveness and tolerability of gliclazide modified release 60 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes observing fasting during Ramadan in Pakistan: An analysis from the global DIA-RAMADAN study

AIM

To assess safety and effectiveness of gliclazide MR 60 mg in people with controlled or suboptimal controlled T2DM treated with breakable gliclazide MR 60 mg formulation.

METHOD

This study data has been extracted from an international, observational study conducted in nine Asian and Middle Eastern countries. Total 220 patients with T2DM were recruited from Pakistan. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reporting at least 1 symptomatic HE, whereas secondary endpoints were changes in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) %, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) mg/dL, and body weight (kg) and proportion of patients reporting any HE (confirmed or severe), between inclusion visit (V0) and end of the study visit (V1).

RESULTS

During Ramadan, 3.6% (n = 8/220) patients had experienced at least one symptomatic HEs. A significant (p-value < 0.001) reduction was observed in HbA_1c: (mean [SD]) (-0.4 [0.9] %), and body weight (-0.7 [4.8] kg). Thirteen adverse events (AEs) unrelated to gliclazide MR were reported during the study pre-Ramadan and post-Ramadan periods.

CONCLUSION

This study shows safety and effectiveness profile of gliclazide MR 60 mg by emphasizing on the low risk of HEs, effective glycaemic control and body weight reduction in T2DM patients, who are inclined to fasting during Ramadan.

Sulfonylureas in the Current Practice of Type 2 Diabetes Management: Are They All the Same? Consensus from the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) Countries Advisory Board on Sulfonylureas

Since their inception in the commercial market in the mid-twentieth century, sulfonylureas (SUs) have remained a therapeutic option in the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Despite their established glucose-lowering effects, there is no consensus among global experts and modern guidelines regarding the priority of SUs in relation to other therapeutic options, given the lack of evidence that SUs are associated with a low risk of macrovascular events and excess mortality. However, findings from recent trials and real-time observations have resolved this contentious issue somewhat, albeit to varying degrees. The present consensus discusses the role of SUs in contemporary diabetes management in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) countries. Regional experts from these countries gathered virtually to formulate a consensus following presentations of topics relevant to SU therapy with an emphasis on gliclazide, including long-term efficacy, cost, end-organ benefits, and side effects, based on up-to-date evidence. The present narrative review reflects the conclusions of this assembly and provides a platform upon which future guidelines for the use of SUs in the GCC can be tailored.

Descriptive Regional Subanalysis of a Real-World Study in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Gliclazide MR During Fasting: DIA-RAMADAN

INTRODUCTION

To analyse the safety and effectiveness of gliclazide modified release (MR) in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus participating in Ramadan from three geographically and culturally different regions of the world included in the DIA-RAMADAN study.

METHODS

DIA-RAMADAN was a real-world, observational, international, non-comparative study. The global study population was divided into three regional subgroups, with data gathered at inclusion 6-8 weeks prior to Ramadan (V0), during Ramadan (4.5 weeks) and 4-6 weeks after Ramadan (V1). Primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reporting ≥ 1 symptomatic hypoglycaemic events (HE), which were collected using a patient diary along with other adverse events.

RESULTS

Patient numbers from the three regions were n = 564 (46.5%; Indian sub-continent), n = 354 (29.1%; Middle East) and n = 296 (24.4%; South-East Asia). Patient baseline characteristics, demographics, fasting habits and antidiabetic treatments varied between regions. There were similar proportions of symptomatic HE between regions, with no severe HE. Significant weight reductions were observed in all regions following Ramadan, along with reductions in HbA_1c and fasting plasma glucose.

CONCLUSION

These real-world study data indicate that gliclazide MR is safe and effective for management of type 2 diabetes during Ramadan in all three regions studied as part of DIA-RAMADAN.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT04132934. INFOGRAPHIC.

Mitigation of hypoglycemia during Ramadan using the flash glucose monitoring system following dose adjustment of insulin and sulphonylurea in patients taking multiple glucose-lowering therapies (The PROFAST-IT Study)

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

Patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on multiple glucose-lowering therapies who fast during Ramadan are at increased risk of hypoglycemia. We have assessed the utility of the flash glucose monitoring system after adjusting the dose of insulin and sulphonylureas to mitigate the risk of hypoglycemia in patients with T2DM who fast during Ramadan.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with T2DM on either basal insulin or a sulphonylurea and at least 2 other glucose-lowering agents received structured education and adjustment of insulin or sulphonylurea dose according to the PROFAST Ramadan protocol. Glucose variability and episodes of hypoglycemia were assessed using the flash glucose monitoring system (Free Style Libre) before and during Ramadan.

RESULTS

A total of 33 patients with T2DM (on sulphonylurea (SU+) (n = 21), on basal insulin (BI+) (n = 12) aged 50.8 ± 1.6 years with a diabetes duration of 13.1 ± 6.5 years were studied. The average sensor glucose was 154 ± 34 mg/dl (8.5 ± 1.88 mmol/l) with 65.2% in the target range before Ramadan and the average sensor glucose was 156 ± 36 mg/dl (8.6 ± 2.0 mmol/l) with 67.1% in the target range during Ramadan. The incidence of hypoglycemia in the whole group (2.9 v 2.9) and in the SU+ (3.7 vs 3.0) and BI+ (1.7 vs 2.9) groups and eHbA1c (P = 0.56, P = 0.93), average glucose (P = 0.56, P = 0.92) and time within range (P = 0.63, P = 0.73) did not change in the SU+ and BI+ groups, respectively, before and during Ramadan.

CONCLUSION

Structured education with adjustment of the dose of glucose lowering medication alongside use of the FGMS can effectively mitigate the increased risk of hypoglycemia in patients with T2DM on multiple glucose-lowering therapies who fast during Ramadan.

Impact of Ramadan Diurnal Intermittent Fasting on Hypoglycemic Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review of Randomized Controlled Trials and Observational Studies

Ramadan is the 9th month of the lunar calendar during which Muslims abstain from food and drink between dawn and sunset for 30 consecutive days. Ramadan fasting is observed by all healthy Muslim adults, as well many Muslims with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Hypoglycemic events (HE) are a serious complication associated with diabetes management and are associated with increased cardiovascular disease risk. Conflicting results have been reported concerning the incidence of HE among people with T2DM observing Ramadan fasting. This review summarizes available scientific evidence on the occurrence of HE and the effects of different moderators on the incidence of HE among patients with T2DM during Ramadan. We conducted a systematic review of available observational studies and randomized controlled trials (RCTs) for patients with T2DM who fasted during Ramadan, with HE as the primary outcome. Ten databases were searched for relevant studies from inception until October 31, 2020. In total, 68 studies (35 RCTs and 33 observational studies) met the inclusion criteria. Non-sulfonylureas hypoglycemic medications showed superior effects in lowering the incidence of HE over sulfonylureas hypoglycemic medications. Variable moderators were associated with experiencing HE during Ramadan in both observational studies and RCTs, including sex, geographical location, body anthropometric indicators, season, dietary behaviors, fasting duration, time since diagnosis, and pre-fasting education. This comprehensive systematic review covered the largest number of observational and clinical studies investigating the impact of Ramadan on HE among patients with T2DM. The study highlights the significance of different moderators that influence the effect of Ramadan fasting on HE, including dietary behaviors, fasting time duration, sex, season, country, pre-fasting education, age, and time since diagnosis. The study also highlighted the impact of different hypoglycemic medications on HE and noted the superiority of non-sulfonylureas over sulfonylureas hypoglycemic medications in lowering the risk for hypoglycemia in people with T2DM during Ramadan fasting.

Ramadan and Diabetes: A Narrative Review and Practice Update

Fasting in the Islamic month of Ramadan is obligatory for all sane, healthy adult Muslims. The length of the day varies significantly in temperate regions-typically lasting ≥ 18 h during peak summer in the UK. The synodic nature of the Islamic calendar means that Ramadan migrates across all four seasons over an approximately 33-year cycle. Despite valid exemptions, there is an intense desire to fast during this month, even among those who are considered to be at high risk, including many individuals with diabetes mellitus. In this review we explore the current scientific and clinical evidence on fasting in patients with diabetes mellitus, focussing on type 2 diabetes mellitus and type 1 diabetes mellitus, with brief reviews on pregnancy, pancreatic diabetes, bariatric surgery, the elderly population and current practice guidelines. We also make recommendations on the management of diabetes patients during the month of Ramadan. Many patients admit to a do-it-yourself approach to diabetes mellitus management during Ramadan, largely due to an under-appreciation of the risks and implications of the rigors of fasting on their health. Part of the issue may also lie with a healthcare professional's perceived inability to grasp the religious sensitivities of Muslims in relation to disease management. Thus, the pre-Ramadan assessment is crucial to ensure a safe Ramadan experience. Diabetes patients can be risk-stratified from low, medium to high or very high risk during the pre-Ramadan assessment and counselled accordingly. Those who are assessed to be at high to very high risk are advised not to fast. The current COVID-19 pandemic upgrades those in the high-risk category to very high risk; hence a significant number of diabetes patients may fall under the penumbra of the 'not to fast' advisory. We recognize that fasting is a personal choice and if a person chooses to fast despite advice to the contrary, he/she should be adequately supported and monitored closely during Ramadan and for a brief period thereafter. Current advancements in insulin delivery and glucose monitoring technologies are useful adjuncts to strategies for supporting type 1 diabetes patients considered to be high risk as well as 'high-risk' type 2 patients manage their diabetes during Ramadan. Although there is a lack of formal trial data, there is sufficient evidence across the different classes of therapeutic hypoglycaemic agents in terms of safety and efficacy to enable informed decision-making and provide a breadth of therapeutic options for the patient and the healthcare professional, even if the professional advice is to abstain. Thus, Ramadan provides an excellent opportunity for patient engagement to discuss important aspects of management, to improve control in the short term during Ramadan and to help the observants understand that the metabolic gains achieved during Ramadan are also sustainable in the other months of the year by maintaining a dietary and behavioural discipline. The application of this understanding can potentially prevent long-term complications.

ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL

The online version of this article (10.1007/s13300-020-00886-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Role of Gliclazide MR in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes: Report of a Symposium on Real-World Evidence and New Perspectives

In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who require additional glucose-lowering on top of first-line metformin monotherapy, sulfonylureas are the most common choice for second-line therapy followed by dipeptidyl peptidase inhibitors (DPP-4i). This article summarises presentations at a symposium entitled "Real-World Evidence and New Perspectives with Gliclazide MR" held at the International Diabetes Federation Congress in Busan, South Korea on 4 December 2019. Although guideline recommendations vary between countries, the guidelines with the highest quality ratings include sulfonylureas as one of the preferred choices as second-line therapy for T2DM. Data from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have consistently demonstrated that sulfonylureas are effective glucose-lowering agents and that the risk of severe hypoglycaemia with these agents is low. In addition, both RCTs and real-world observational studies have shown no increased risk of mortality or cardiovascular disease with the use of newer-generation sulfonylureas compared with other classes of glucose-lowering treatments. However, differences between sulfonylureas do exist, with gliclazide being associated with a significantly lower risk of mortality or cardiovascular mortality compared with glibenclamide, as well as the lowest incidence of severe hypoglycaemia compared with other agents in this class. Recent real-world studies into the effectiveness and safety of gliclazide appear to confirm these findings, and publication of new data from these studies in patients with T2DM in the UK, and in Muslim patients who are fasting during Ramadan, are awaited with interest. Another study being undertaken with gliclazide is a pan-India study in patients with maturity-onset diabetes of the young (MODY) subtypes 1, 3 and 12. Patients with these MODY subtypes respond particularly well to sulfonylurea treatment, and sulfonylureas are the first-line agents of choice in these patients. These new and ongoing studies will add to the cumulative data on the efficacy and safety of certain sulfonylureas in patients with diabetes.

The South Asian Health Foundation (UK) guidelines for managing diabetes during Ramadan

BACKGROUND

Fasting in the holy month of Ramadan is among the five pillars of Islam and is considered as a religious obligation by the Muslim population. People with diabetes observing the practice of fasts are at a higher risk of complications such as hypoglycaemia, hyperglycaemia and ketoacidosis due to changes in eating patterns and circadian rhythms. With the objective of mitigating these complications, the South Asian Health Foundation (UK) has developed the present guidelines based on robust evidence derived from epidemiological studies and clinical trials.

METHODS

We have highlighted the role of pre-Ramadan risk stratification and counselling by healthcare professionals with emphasis on the need for advice on adequate dietary and fluid intake, blood glucose monitoring and awareness of when to break the fast.

RESULTS

We reviewed the current literature and have given clinically-relevant recommendations on lifestyle modifications and glucose-lowering therapies such as metformin, sulphonylureas, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, sodium glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and insulin.

CONCLUSIONS

An individualised patient-centric treatment plan is essential to not only achieve optimal glycaemic outcomes but also enable people with diabetes to observe a risk-free month of fasting during Ramadan.

A real-world study in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with gliclazide modified-release during fasting: DIA-RAMADAN

AIMS

To explore the real-world safety and effectiveness of gliclazide modified release (MR) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) fasting during Ramadan.

METHODS

DIA-RAMADAN (NCT04132934) was a prospective, international, observational study conducted in nine countries. Patients >18 years of age with T2DM (N = 1244) were examined at an inclusion visit (V0) occurring 6-8 weeks before the start of Ramadan. Patients received a diary to report treatment changes, hypoglycaemic events (HEs), and other adverse events. Gliclazide MR was taken once daily for 14-18 weeks. A second visit (V1) was conducted 4-6 weeks after the end of Ramadan. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients reporting ≥1 symptomatic HE. Changes in HbA_1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and body weight were secondary endpoints.

RESULTS

The proportion of patients reporting ≥1 symptomatic HE during Ramadan was low (2.2%) with no reported severe HEs. There was a significant reduction in HbA_1c (-0.3%), FPG (-9.7 mg/dL), body weight (-0.5 kg) and body mass index (-0.2 kg/m²) between V0 and V1 (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with T2DM treated with gliclazide MR during Ramadan have a low risk of hypoglycaemia and maintain glycaemic control and weight while fasting.

Qualitative evaluation of A Safer Ramadan, a structured education programme that addresses the safer observance of Ramadan for Muslims with Type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Muslims can choose to fast during Ramadan. Guidelines exist for providing clinical support for this group, but there is a lack of culturally tailored diabetes management interventions to provide guidance. The study evaluates the implementation of a programme developed to meet this need.

METHODS

A Safer Ramadan is a multi-faceted package comprising a self-management and community awareness programme, and healthcare professional training. Implementation of the programme took place in two cities in the UK, prior to Ramadan 2017. Uptake and attendance were determined, and qualitative interviews and focus groups were completed with people attending the programme, and with various stakeholders involved in implementation and delivery.

RESULTS

Success of the implementation varied and engagement by primary care was limited. Three central themes emerged from the interviews highlighting barriers and facilitators of the programme implementation. These were the referral pathway, programme content and feedback on the delivery of the programme.

CONCLUSIONS

Provision of interventions that provide support and education for Muslims during Ramadan was implemented in communities and valued by GPs and practice nurses. However, heavy workloads to support delivery made it difficult for practices to engage. Recommendations for future delivery of the programme indicate that greater attention should be given to marketing and its supporting practices. Furthermore, training for practice nurses to support patients prior to Ramadan and provision of funding is required.

Initial increase in glucose variability during Ramadan fasting in non-insulin-treated patients with diabetes type 2 using continuous glucose monitoring

There are no studies evaluating the glucose variability in different periods of Ramadan fasting in patients with type 2 diabetes using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). This study examined the effect of Ramadan fasting on interstitial glucose (IG) variability in early,- late-, and post-Ramadan compared to pre-Ramadan days in non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes patients. Participants had a CGM system connected 2 or 3 days before Ramadan start, which was removed on the third or fourth day of Ramadan. CGM performance continued for a total of 6 days. A second CGM performance started on the 27th or 28th day of Ramadan and ended on the 4th or 5th post-Ramadan day. First, CGM recordings were divided into pre-Ramadan and early-Ramadan CGM, and second recordings into late-Ramadan and post-Ramadan. At each visit, blood pressure, body weight, and waist circumference were measured, and fasting blood samples were collected for HbA1c and plasma glucose. All patients received recommended Ramadan education before Ramadan. Thirty-three patients (mean age 55.0 ± 9.8 years, 73% males) were prospectively included. IG variability, estimated as mean amplitude of glycaemic excursions (MAGE), increased significantly in early-Ramadan compared to pre-Ramadan (P = 0.006) but not in late-Ramadan and post-Ramadan recording days. Only patients on >2 anti-diabetic drugs (n = 16, P = 0.019) and those on sulphonylureas (n = 14, P = 0.003) showed significant increase in MAGE in early-Ramadan. No significant changes were seen in coefficient of variation, time in range, time in hyperglycaemia, or time in hypoglycaemia. Except for an initial increase in glucose variability, fasting Ramadan for patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes did not cause any significant changes in glucose variability or time in hypoglycaemia during CGM recording days compared to non-fasting pre-Ramadan period.

Diabetes in developing countries

There has been a rapid escalation of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in developing countries, with varied prevalence according to rural vs urban habitat and degree of urbanization. Some ethnic groups (eg, South Asians, other Asians, and Africans), develop diabetes a decade earlier and at a lower body mass index than Whites, have prominent abdominal obesity, and accelerated the conversion from prediabetes to diabetes. The burden of complications, both macro- and microvascular, is substantial, but also varies according to populations. The syndemics of diabetes with HIV or tuberculosis are prevalent in many developing countries and predispose to each other. Screening for diabetes in large populations living in diverse habitats may not be cost-effective, but targeted high-risk screening may have a place. The cost of diagnostic tests and scarcity of health manpower pose substantial hurdles in the diagnosis and monitoring of patients. Efforts for prevention remain rudimentary in most developing countries. The quality of care is largely poor; hence, a substantial number of patients do not achieve treatment goals. This is further amplified by a delay in seeking treatment, "fatalistic attitudes", high cost and non-availability of drugs and insulins. To counter these numerous challenges, a renewed political commitment and mandate for health promotion and disease prevention are urgently needed. Several low-cost innovative approaches have been trialed with encouraging outcomes, including training and deployment of non-medical allied health professionals and the use of mobile phones and telemedicine to deliver simple health messages for the prevention and management of T2D.

A systematic review on efficacy and safety of the current hypoglycemic agents in patients with diabetes during Ramadan fasting

The fasting in the holy month of Ramadan is passionately practised among the Muslims population around the world. Patients with diabetes are generally considered to have various risks with fasting. The recent pharmacologic and technical advances in the management of diabetes may have enabled these patients to practice safe fasting. The purpose of this review is to scientific evidence on the safety and efficacy of the current hypoglycemic agents during Ramadan. METHODS: An extensive Electronic search via PubMed and Google scholar was accomplished through using different search terms. The eligible studies were limited to only published Randomised controlled trial (RCT) and prospective observational studies from 2007 to 2018 on patients with all types of diabetes on any pharmacological management, who intended to fast in Ramadan. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: The current era witnessed a gradual shift in the management of these patients with diabetes who elected to fast in Ramadan, despite the variable health-related risks with fasting. Results from available RCTs and observational studies in patients with type 2 diabetes showed lower risk of hypoglycemia, similar or better efficacy for glycemic and weight control with SGLT2 inhibitors, incretin mimetics and the newer insulin analogues compared to Sulfonylurea. Gliclazide is a relatively safer option among all sulfonylurea. Patients requiring insulin did better with insulin analogues, especially the newer premixed formulation at the time of breaking fast compared to the former insulin formulation. Current commonly used newer hypoglycemic agents are generally safe during Ramadan, however, their safety in the higher risk diabetes patients is highly needed.

Pharmacology of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and its use in the management of metabolic syndrome: a comprehensive review on drug repositioning

OBJECTIVES

Despite advances in our understanding of metabolic syndrome (MetS) and the treatment of each of its components separately, currently there is no single therapy approved to manage it as a single condition. Since multi-drug treatment increases drug interactions, decreases patient compliance and increases health costs, it is important to introduce single therapies that improve all of the MetS components.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

We conducted a PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Web of Science, US FDA, utdo.ir and clinicaltrial.gov search, gathered the most relevant preclinical and clinical studies that have been published since 2010, and discussed the beneficial effects of dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitors to prevent and treat different constituent of the MetS as a single therapy. Furthermore, the pharmacology of DPP-4 inhibitors, focusing on pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, drug interactions and their side effects are also reviewed.

RESULTS

DPP-4 inhibitors or gliptins are a new class of oral anti-diabetic drugs that seem safe drugs with no severe side effects, commonly GI disturbance, infection and inflammatory bowel disease. They increase mass and function of pancreatic β-cells, and insulin sensitivity in liver, muscle and adipose tissue. It has been noted that gliptin therapy decreases dyslipidemia. DPP-4 inhibitors increase fatty oxidation, and cholesterol efflux, and decrease hepatic triglyceride synthase and de novo lipogenesis. They delay gastric emptying time and lead to satiety. Besides, gliptin therapy has anti-inflammatory and anti-atherogenic impacts, and improves endothelial function and reduces vascular stiffness.

CONCLUSION

The gathered data prove the efficacy of DPP-4 inhibitors in managing MetS in some levels beyond anti-diabetic effects. This review could be a lead for designing new DPP-4 inhibitors with greatest effects on MetS in future. Introducing drugs with polypharmacologic effects could increase the patient's compliance and decrease the health cost that there is not in multi-drug therapy. Graphical abstract ᅟ.

A pilot study using flash continuous glucose monitoring in patients with type-2 diabetes on multiple anti-diabetic agents during Ramadan

BACKGROUND

This study aims to examine the incidence of hypoglycaemia, based on activity, during Ramadan in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were on were on three or more anti-diabetic medications.

METHODS

Type 2 diabetes patients who fasted during Ramadan and were on three or more anti-diabetic medications were studied for two weeks using flash glucose monitoring. The patients were asked to document all episodes of hypoglycaemia and were classified as active or sedentary according to their daytime activity.

RESULTS

The study included 16 patients of whom 10 were active and 6 were sedentary. There were 13 males and 3 females; mean age was 53.4 ± 6.4 years; mean diabetes duration was 15 ± 5.9 years, and mean HbA1C was 7.9 ± 1.3%. Over the two weeks; there were 7.9 episodes of hypoglycaemia recorded per patient; 50% of which were asymptomatic. There was no difference at baseline in age, BMI, HBA1C, diabetes duration, and anti-diabetic medications between the active and sedentary groups. The active group had better glucose control; median blood glucose was (7.1 (5.1-8.5) vs 10.6 (9.6-11.5) mmol p < 0.01), mean estimated HBA1C was (6.2 ± 1.2% vs 8.3 ± 1.0%; p = 0.047). The active group had more episodes of hypoglycaemia compared to the sedentary group (11.6 vs 1.8 hypo episode per patient/two weeks; p = 0.019); most of which were asymptomatic.

CONCLUSION

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who are on three or more anti-diabetic medications should be warned about the increased risk of asymptomatic hypoglycaemia during Ramadan. Anti-diabetic medication adjustments during Ramadan should take into account the degree of activity. Flash glucose monitoring system can help patients to fast safely during Ramadan and detect asymptomatic hypoglycaemia.

The place of gliclazide MR in the evolving type 2 diabetes landscape: A comparison with other sulfonylureas and newer oral antihyperglycemic agents

The sulfonylureas are effective oral glucose-lowering agents with a long history of clinical use. While all have the same general mechanism of action, their pharmacokinetic properties are influenced by factors such as dosage, rate of absorption, duration of action, route of elimination, tissue specificity, and binding affinity for pancreatic β-cell receptor. The result is a class of agents with similar HbA1c-lowering efficacy, but well-documented differences in terms of effects on hypoglycemia, and cardiovascular and renal safety. This review examines the differences between currently available sulfonylureas with a focus on how gliclazide modified release (MR) differs from other members of this class and from newer oral antihyperglycemic agents in the form of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) and sodium- glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. The first part focuses on major outcome trials that have been conducted with the sulfonylureas and new oral agents. Consideration is then given to factors important for day-to-day prescribing including efficacy and durability, weight changes, hypoglycemia, renal effects and cost. Based on current evidence, third-generation sulfonylureas such as gliclazide MR possess many of the properties desired of a type 2 diabetes drug including high glucose-lowering efficacy, once-daily oral administration, few side effects other than mild hypoglycemia, and cardiovascular safety.

Ramadan fasting in diabetes-exercise in problem-solving

AIM

Appropriate management of a diabetic patient with co-morbidities, who is willing to fast during Ramadan. Case presentation A 45 year old male patient with T2DM for 5 years, current A1c of 8.3% and other co-morbidities is currently treated with metformin 500mg BID and glimepiride 2mg. During the pre-Ramadan assessment, glimepiride 2mg was changed to extended release gliclazide 60mg. It resulted in an improvement in his glycemic and microalbuminuria status without any hypoglycemic episodes.

CONCLUSION

Appropriate risk stratification with medication adjustment and Ramadan-specific diabetes education are the important aspects of T2DM management in patients willing to fast during Ramadan.

Clinical practice points for diabetes management during RAMADAN fast

Diabetes management during Ramadan is very crucial from the patient perspective as it can present significant risk of hypoglycemia and death when proper care is not taken. Moreover, managing diabetes in fasting Ramadan patients require different mechanisms than the routine diabetes management and pose significant challenge to the health care practitioners. Here we set forth to review the available literature of various clinical trials and studies on different antidiabetic agents in the context of Ramadan. On the basis of available evidence, we suggest that gliclazide is effective and it could be safely recommended in type 2 diabetic patients fasting during Ramadan.

Predetermined Anti-Diabetic Drug Regimen Adjustments during Ramadan Fasting: An Observational Study of Safety

BACKGROUND

Many Muslim type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients choose to fast the month of Ramadan despite the possible adverse health effects brought about by the change in dietary habits, among other things. Clinical data regarding the safety of multi-drug regimens during fasting are particularly scarce. The aim of the study was to evaluate the safety of a drug protocol devised by the authors to accommodate Ramadan's dietary changes, involving dose adjustments of four anti-diabetic drug regimens in T2DM patients fasting Ramadan.

METHODS

In this prospective, observational, open-label study, 301 T2DM patients who wished to fast Ramadan were followed during Ramadan and the preceding month. The incidence of hypoglycemia, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and non-ketotic hyperosmolar state (NKHS) was monitored. Patients were classified into four groups: A group (those taking metformin, sulfonylurea and insulin [n=33]); B group (metformin and sulfonylurea [n=89]); C group (metformin and insulin [n=96]); and D group (premixed 70/30, glargine or regular insulin [n=82]). During Ramadan, drug doses were adjusted as percentages of their pre-Ramadan values: 75% for sulfonylureas, 75% for glargine, 75% for premixed insulin 70/30 in two doses, and 75% for regular insulin. Metformin was adjusted to a twice-daily regimen.

RESULTS

No cases of DKA or NKHS were reported. Hypoglycemia occurred at a lower rate than pre-Ramadan values in groups C, and D; and a similar rate in groups A, and B.

CONCLUSION

The data suggested that using the above protocol to adjust the doses of anti-diabetic drugs is safe in T2DM patients in regards to hypoglycemia, DKA, and NKHS.

Diabetes and Ramadan: Practical guidelines

Ramadan fasting is one of the five pillars of Islam and is compulsory for all healthy Muslims from puberty onwards. Exemptions exist for people with serious medical conditions, including many with diabetes, but a large number will participate, often against medical advice. Ensuring the optimal care of these patients during Ramadan is crucial. The International Diabetes Federation (IDF) and Diabetes and Ramadan (DAR) International Alliance have come together to deliver comprehensive guidelines on this subject. The key areas covered include epidemiology, the physiology of fasting, risk stratification, nutrition advice and medication adjustment. The IDF-DAR Practical Guidelines should enhance knowledge surrounding the issue of diabetes and Ramadan fasting, thereby empowering healthcare professionals to give the most up-to-date advice and the best possible support to their patients during Ramadan.

Diabetes and Ramadan: A concise and practical update

Despite the fact that the month of Ramadan includes 29–30 days and the duration of fasting for each day can last for between 12 and 16 h, it was estimated that a large number of individuals with diabetes do fast during Ramadan. In light of recent advancement of new pharmacological agents, drugs such as vildagliptin, sitagliptin, and liraglutide were found to be safe to use during this month of fasting. These therapeutic agents can also be used in combination with metformin. The use of sulfonylureas, in most of the recent guidelines about diabetes and Ramadan, seems not to gain much support due to the risk of hypoglycemia. In this review, we also addressed the use of insulin injection, insulin pump, and education before, during, and after Ramadan. Further research is needed to determine (i) the therapeutic benefit of new antidiabetic agents and (ii) the benefit of new technologies for the treatment of diabetes.

Efficacy and safety of liraglutide compared to sulphonylurea during Ramadan in patients with type 2 diabetes (LIRA-Ramadan): a randomized trial

AIMS

Compare effects of liraglutide 1.8 mg and sulphonylurea, both combined with metformin, on glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) fasting during Ramadan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this up to 33-week, open-label, active-controlled, parallel-group trial, adults [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 7%-10% (53-86 mmol/mol); body mass index ≥20 kg/m(2) ; intent to fast] were randomized (1:1) ≥10 weeks before Ramadan to either switch to once-daily liraglutide (final dose 1.8 mg) or continue pre-trial sulphonylurea at maximum tolerated dose, both with metformin.

PRIMARY ENDPOINT

change in fructosamine, a validated marker of short-term glycaemic control, during Ramadan.

RESULTS

Similar reductions in fructosamine levels were observed for both groups during Ramadan [liraglutide (-12.8 µmol/L); sulphonylurea (-16.4 µmol/L); estimated treatment difference (ETD) 3.51 µmol/L (95% CI: -5.26; 12.28); p = 0.43], despite lower fructosamine levels in the liraglutide group at start of Ramadan. Fewer documented symptomatic hypoglycaemic episodes were reported in liraglutide-treated (2%, three subjects) versus sulphonylurea-treated patients (11%, 18 subjects). No severe hypoglycaemic episodes were reported by either group. Body weight decreased more during Ramadan with liraglutide (ETD: -0.54 kg; 95% CI: -0.94;-0.14; p = 0.0091). The proportion of patients reporting adverse events was similar between groups. Liraglutide led to greater HbA1c reduction [ETD: -0.59% (-6.40 mmol/mol), 95% CI: -0.79; -0.38%; -8.63; -4.17 mmol/mol; p < 0.0001].

CONCLUSIONS

Despite lower fructosamine levels and body weight at the beginning of Ramadan, use of liraglutide showed similar glycaemic improvements, fewer hypoglycaemic episodes and greater body weight reduction compared with sulphonylurea. LIRA-Ramadan provides evidence for liraglutide being safe and efficacious for management of T2D during Ramadan fasting.

Effect of Vildagliptin Versus Sulfonylurea in Muslim Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Fasting During Ramadan in Egypt: Results from VIRTUE Study

INTRODUCTION

Fasting in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with high risk of hypoglycemia. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of vildagliptin in T2DM patients fasting during Ramadan in a real-life setting in Egypt.

METHODS

In this 16-week prospective and noninterventional study, data were collected up to 6 weeks before and after Ramadan fasting. Patients who had received vildagliptin or sulfonylurea (SU) either as dual therapy with metformin or as monotherapy were enrolled into the study.

RESULTS

Two hundred fifty four patients were enrolled in the study, out of which 246 [121 (97.6%) treated with vildagliptin and 125 (99.2%) with SU] were included in the safety analysis set. A significantly lower proportion of patients experienced ≥1 hypoglycemic event (HE) with vildagliptin as compared to those receiving SUs (1.7% vs. 19.2%, respectively; p < 0.001). No patient in either group reported a grade 2 HE. At week 16, mean change in HbA1c from baseline for vildagliptin and SU were -0.1% and +0.3%, respectively, with a between-treatment difference of -0.4% (p < 0.001). Mean change in body weight from baseline for vildagliptin and SU were -0.8 and -0.1 kg, with a between-treatment difference of -0.7 kg (p = 0.011). A higher proportion of SU-treated patients experienced adverse events compared to those treated with vildagliptin (23.2% vs. 5.8%, respectively), the primary reason being the high incidence of hypoglycemia in the SU group (n = 24, 19.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with vildagliptin was associated with lower incidence of hypoglycemia compared with SU and showed good glycemic and weight control in patients with T2DM fasting during Ramadan in a real-life setting in Egypt.

FUNDING

Novartis Pharma AG.

Filling the Knowledge Gap in Diabetes Management During Ramadan: the Evolving Role of Trial Evidence

Muslim patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who fast during Ramadan face challenges in diabetes management due to substantial alterations in lifestyle and treatment that frequently accompany the decision to fast. International guidelines for treating T2D do not fully address the clinical issues unique to fasting, and other guidance documents lack the large and high-quality evidence base available for non-fasting conditions. We reviewed 10 randomized controlled trials and 20 observational studies in T2D during Ramadan to assess the quality of evidence and identify issues in trial design that should be addressed in future studies. Results indicated that heterogeneity in key aspects of trial design precluded meaningful comparisons across studies. These included patients' baseline treatment at entry; use of a cutoff for glycemic control [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c)] for eligibility; exclusion of patients with a history of recurrent hypoglycemia or hypoglycemia unawareness, or with other serious systemic diseases; duration of treatment and follow-up, selection of safety versus efficacy as primary end point; and definition and measurement of those end points. Fructosamine was rarely used as an efficacy end point, despite the advantage of reflecting glycemic control over a period more closely aligned with the duration of Ramadan fasting than HbA1c. Adherence to treatment, definition and adherence to fasting, and changes in diet and exercise were reported inconsistently, and when reported, not in a fashion that would allow adequate control of confounding due to these variables. Despite a large body of evidence demonstrating their safety and efficacy in non-fasting populations, only two trials reported data for glucagon-like peptide-1 analogs, and neither involved a head-to-head comparison against dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. More rigorous studies using trial designs suited to the unique conditions of a fasting population and capturing both standardized efficacy and safety end points are needed to provide better guidance to optimal treatment of T2D during Ramadan fasting.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk AG.

Comparative studies of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor vs sulphonylurea among Muslim Type 2 diabetes patients who fast in the month of Ramadan: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To systematically review the literature to compare the use of DPP4 inhibitors vs sulphonylurea in type 2 diabetic Muslim patients who fast in Ramadan, with regards to its safety, tolerability, glycemic control, and body weight changes.

METHODS

All English-language medical literature published from inception till October 2014 which met the inclusion criteria were reviewed and analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of nine papers were included, reviewed and analyzed. The total sample size was 4276 patients. All studies used either of the two DPP4 inhibitors - Vildagliptin or Sitagliptin, vs sulphonylurea or meglitinides. Patients receiving DPP4 inhibitors were less likely to develop symptomatic hypoglycemia (risk ratio 0.46; 95% CI, 0.30-0.70), confirmed hypoglycemia (risk ratio 0.36; 95% CI, 0.21-0.64) and severe hypoglycemia (risk ratio 0.22; 95% CI, 0.10-0.53) compared with patients on sulphonylureas. There was no statistically significant difference in HbA1C changes comparing Vildagliptin and sulphonylurea.

CONCLUSION

DPP4 inhibitor is a safer alternative to sulphonylurea in Muslim patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who fast during the month of Ramadan as it is associated with lower risk of symptomatic, confirmed and severe hypoglycemia, with efficacy comparable to sulphonylurea.

Is gliclazide a sulfonylurea with difference? A review in 2016

Sulfonylureas (SUs) remain the most commonly prescribed drug after metformin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), despite the availability of several newer agents. The primary reason of SUs being most popular is their quick glycemic response, time-tested experience and least cost. Although SUs are one amongst the several other second line agents after metformin in all major guidelines, the new Dutch type 2 guidelines specifically advise gliclazide as the preferred second line drug instead of SUs as a class. The World Health Organization (WHO) has also included gliclazide in their Model List of Essential Medicines 2013 motivated by its safety data in elderly patients. Specifically advising gliclazide may have been based on emerging evidence suggesting cardiovascular neutrality of gliclazide over other SUs. This prompted us to do a literature review of gliclazide efficacy and safety data compared to other SUs as well as oral anti-diabetic drugs.

Strategies to Make Ramadan Fasting Safer in Type 2 Diabetics: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials and Observational Studies

Ramadan is the holy month for Muslims whereby they fast from predawn to after sunset and is observed by all healthy Muslim adults as well as a large population of type 2 diabetic Muslims.To determine the comparative effectiveness of various strategies that have been used for type 2 diabetic Muslim who fast during Ramadan.A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies (RCT) as well as observational studies for patients with type 2 diabetes who fasted during Ramadan was conducted. Eight databases were searched from January 1980 through October 2015 for relevant studies. Two reviewers independently screened and assessed study for eligibility, assessed the risk of bias, and extracted relevant data. A network meta-analysis for each outcome was fitted separately, combining direct and indirect evidence for each comparison.Twenty-nine studies, 16 RCTs and 13 observational studies each met the inclusion criteria. The most common strategy used was drug changes during the Ramadan period, which found that the use of DPP-4 (Dipeptidyl peptidase inhibitor -4) inhibitors were associated with a reduction in incidence of experiencing hypoglycemia during Ramadan in both RCTs (pooled relative risk: 0.56; 95% confidence interval: 0.44-0.72) as well as in observational studies (pooled relative risk: 0.27; 0.09-0.75). Ramadan-focused education was shown to be beneficial in reducing hypoglycemia in observational studies but not RCTs (0.25 versus 1.00). Network meta-analyses suggest that incretin mimetics can reduce the risk of hypoglycemia by nearly 1.5 times.The newer antidiabetic agents appear to lower the risk of hypoglycemia and improved glycemic control when compared with sulfonylureas. Ramadan-focused education shows to be a promising strategy but more rigorous examination from RCTs are required.

Effectiveness and Safety of Newer Antidiabetic Medications for Ramadan Fasting Diabetic Patients

Hypoglycemia is the most common side effects for most glucose-lowering therapies. It constitutes a serious risk that faces diabetic patients who fast during Ramadan (the 9th month in the Islamic calendar). New glucose-lowering classes like dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors are efficacious in controlling blood glucose level with less tendency to induce hypoglycemia and thus may constitute a good choice for diabetic patients during Ramadan. This study reviews the safety and efficacy of newer glucose-lowering therapies during Ramadan. This study was accomplished through a careful literature search about studies that assess the benefit and side effects of these new glucose-lowering therapies during Ramadan during September 2015. Vildagliptin, sitagliptin, liraglutide, exenatide, and dapagliflozin were the only studied glucose-lowering therapies. All of the studied newer glucose-lowering therapies except dapagliflozin were associated with reduced risk to induce hypoglycemia. Gastrointestinal upset was common with the usage of liraglutide while increased thirst sensation was common with dapagliflozin. In conclusion DPP-4 inhibitors such as vildagliptin and sitagliptin may form a suitable glucose-lowering therapy option for Ramadan fasting patients.

Options for Controlling Type 2 Diabetes during Ramadan

The Muslim population is about 1.5 billion worldwide. Based on a global diabetes prevalence of 4.6%, it is estimated that there are about 50 million Muslims with diabetes around the world who observe fasting during the month of Ramadan each year. Ramadan, one of the five pillars of Islam, and which takes place during the ninth month of the Islamic calendar, involves fasting from sunrise to sunset. During the fast, Muslims are required to refrain from eating food, drinking, using medications, and smoking from dawn until after sunset, with no restrictions on food or fluid intake between sunset and dawn. Islam exempts people from the duty of fasting if they are sick, or if fasting may affect their health, as fasting for patients with diabetes carries a risk of an assortment of complications, including hypoglycemia, postprandial hyperglycemia, and metabolic complications, associated with dehydration. Nevertheless, a large number of people with diabetes who still choose to fast during Ramadan despite the advice of their doctor, and the permission received from religious authorities thus create medical challenges for themselves and their health-care providers. It is thus important for patients with diabetes who wish to fast during Ramadan to make the necessary preparations to engage in fasting as safely as possible. This review presents a guide to the care of diabetic patients during Ramadan to help them fast safely if they wish to do so.

Incidence of hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with gliclazide versus DPP-4 inhibitors during Ramadan: A meta-analytical approach

AIM

Hypoglycemia can be a concern for patients with type 2 diabetes when fasting during Ramadan. In this analysis, we assessed the incidence of symptomatic hypoglycemic events in fasting patients treated with gliclazide or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was performed to identify randomized clinical trials comparing the efficacy and safety of gliclazide with DPP-4 inhibitors when treating adults with type 2 diabetes fasting during Ramadan. The primary endpoint of all included studies was the incidence of symptomatic hypoglycemic events.

RESULTS

The pooled analysis included three randomized trials. There was no evidence of heterogeneity between the studies (I(2)=0%). There was no significant difference in the incidence of symptomatic hypoglycemic events in patients fasting during Ramadan treated with either a DPP-4 inhibitor or gliclazide (5.6% versus 7.2%, risk ratio 1.12, 95% CI 0.73-1.73, p=0.61).

CONCLUSION

Patients treated with either gliclazide or DPP-4 inhibitors while fasting during Ramadan have similarly low risks of experiencing symptomatic hypoglycemia. Gliclazide is an effective oral antidiabetic that may be suitable for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes during Ramadan. Individualized Ramadan-focused advice and evening intake of treatment may improve the management of patients with diabetes during Ramadan.

Safety and effectiveness of non-insulin glucose-lowering agents in the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes who observe Ramadan: a systematic review and meta-analysis

AIM

To determine which non-insulin glucose-lowering treatment regimens are most appropriate in people with type 2 diabetes who choose to fast during Ramadan.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies that compared non-insulin glucose-lowering agents in people with type 2 diabetes fasting during Ramadan. Those studies which reported hypoglycaemia, weight and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change were included. Data were pooled using random effects models.

RESULTS

A total of 16 studies were included: 9 RCTs and 7 observational studies. There was evidence that dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors led to fewer hypoglycaemic events compared with sulphonylureas. Sitagliptin significantly reduced the number of patients with ≥1 hypoglycaemic episodes during Ramadan [risk ratio (RR) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.36, 0.64; p > 0.0001]. This was not replicated in the RCTs of vildagliptin, but a significant reduction was found in the observational studies (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10, 0.75; p = 0.01) with high heterogeneity (I(2)  = 86.7%). Significant reductions in HbA1c and weight were seen in the observational studies of vildagliptin versus sulphonylureas. The use of liraglutide led to significant weight loss (-1.81 kg, 95% CI -2.91, -0.71; p = 0.001) compared with sulphonylureas. Pioglitazone significantly increased weight compared with placebo (3.48 kg, 95% CI 2.82, 4.14; p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis supports the use of DPP-4 inhibitors during Ramadan rather than sulphonylureas for reduction in hypoglycaemia without a cost to diabetes control and weight. The glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 agonist liraglutide provides clinical benefits, but more studies are required. RCTs of DPP-4 inhibitors compared with GLP-1 agonists and novel therapies including the sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 and α-glucosidase inhibitors are needed to inform evidence-based guidelines.

[Sulfonylureas in today's blood glucose lowering therapy. New data on advantages and potential barriers of an "old" antidiabetic group]

Sulfonylurea compounds have been basic elements of antidiabetic treatment in type 2 diabetes for a long time. However, with the introduction of incretin type insulin secretagogues it is often arises, whether is still there a place for sulfonylureas in the today's therapy. To answer this question the author overviews general pharmaceutical characteristics of the sulfonylurea compounds as well as individual particularities of the second generation derivatives used at present in Hungary. The author details also the most important differences between incretin type drugs - first of all dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors - and sulfonylureas. On the basis of available data it can be concluded in accordance with the latest international guidelines, that sulfonylureas have still role in the blood glucose lowering therapy of type 2 diabetes, though they became somewhat pushed back among insulin secretagogue type drugs. If a sulfonylurea compound is the drug of choice, it is important to select the appropriate molecule (in case of normal renal function gliclazide or glimepiride). It is also important to re-educate the patient, as well as to apply the minimal dose providing the desired glycaemic effect.

Fasting during Ramadan: efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability of vildagliptin in diabetic patients

Diabetes management during Ramadan fasting is challenging to the physician in terms of minimizing the risk of hypoglycemia. As compared to oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) and sulfonylureas (SUs), which carry a higher and significant risk of hypoglycemia, newer antidiabetic agents such as dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors have demonstrated lower risk of hypoglycemia during Ramadan fasting, with better patient compliance. In addition to diabetes education and pre-Ramadan assessments, the physician should also consider use of DPP-4 inhibitors (such as vildagliptin) during Ramadan fasting to minimize the risk of hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetic subjects. Severe episodes of hypoglycemia have been demonstrated in recent research and clinical trials with OHAs/SUs. Conversely, these research observations have also demonstrated comparative safety and efficacy with lower risk of hypoglycemia associated with vildagliptin. Current research review has collected evidence-based clinical trials and observations for the drug vildagliptin to minimize the risk of hypoglycemia during Ramadan fasting, while at the same time focusing the role of diabetes self-management education (DSME), pre-Ramadan assessments, and patient care.

Recommendations for management of diabetes during Ramadan: update 2015

Since the first ADA working group report on the recommendations for management of diabetes during Ramadan in 2005 and our update in 2010, we received many inquiries asking for regular updates on information regarding education, nutritional habits and new oral and injectable agents that may be useful for the management of patients with diabetes during Ramadan. Patients can be stratified into their risk of hypoglycemia and/or complications prior to the start of the fasting period of Ramadan. Those at high risk of hypoglycemia and with multiple diabetic complications should be advised against prolonged fasting. Even in the lower hypoglycemia risk group, adverse effects may still occur. In order to minimize adverse side effects during fasting in patients with diabetes and improve or maintain glucose control, education and discussion of glucose monitoring and treatment regimens should occur several weeks prior to Ramadan. Agents such as metformin, thiazolidinediones and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors appear to be safe and do not need dose adjustment. Most sulfonylureas may not be used safely during Ramadan except with extreme caution; besides, older agents, such as chlorpropamide or glyburide, should not be used. Reduction of the dosage of sulfonylurea is needed depending on the degree of control prior to fasting. Misconceptions and local habits should be addressed and dealt with in any educational intervention and therapeutic planning with patients with diabetes. In this regard, efforts are still needed for controlled prospective studies in the field of efficacy and safety of the different interventions during the Ramadan Fast.

The diabetic patient in Ramadan

During the month of Ramadan, all healthy, adult Muslims are required to fast from dawn to sunset. Fasting during Ramadan involves abstaining from food, water, beverages, smoking, oral drugs, and sexual intercourse. Although the Quran exempts chronically ill from fasting, many Muslims with diabetes still fast during Ramadan. Patients with diabetes who fast during the month of Ramadan can have acute complications. The risk of complications in fasting individuals with diabetes increases with longer periods of fasting. All patients with diabetes who wish to fast during Ramadan should be prepared by undergoing a medical assessment and engaging in a structured education program to undertake the fast as safely as possible. Although some guidelines do exist, there is an overwhelming need for better designed clinical trials which could provide us with evidence-based information and guidance in the management of patients with diabetes fasting Ramadan.

A randomized controlled trial comparing the GLP-1 receptor agonist liraglutide to a sulphonylurea as add on to metformin in patients with established type 2 diabetes during Ramadan: the Treat 4 Ramadan Trial

AIMS

To compare a sulphonylurea with the glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist liraglutide in combination with metformin in patients on mono/dual oral therapy with established type 2 diabetes fasting during Ramadan.

METHODS

Ninety-nine adults intending to fast during Ramadan [50% male, mean age 52 years, body mass index (BMI) 32 kg/m(2)] were randomized from two UK sites. Baseline data were collected ≥14 days prior to Ramadan and at 3 and 12 weeks after Ramadan.

RESULTS

At 12 weeks, more patients in the liraglutide compared with the sulphonylurea group achieved a composite endpoint of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) < 7%, no weight gain and no severe hypoglycaemia but this did not reach statistical significance [odds ratio (OR) 4.08, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97, 17.22, p = 0.06]. From a baseline of 7.7% there was no change in HbA1c at 12 weeks in the sulphonylurea (+0.02%) compared with a 0.3% reduction in the liraglutide group (adjusted coefficient -0.41, 95% CI -0.83, 0.01, p = 0.05). Significant reductions were also observed in weight and diastolic blood pressure (BP) in the liraglutide compared with the sulphonylurea group. Treatment satisfaction was comparable across the treatment groups. There were no episodes of severe hypoglycaemia in either group, however, self-recorded episodes of blood glucose ≤3.9 mmol/l were significantly lower with liraglutide (incidence rate ratio 0.29, 95% CI 0.19, 0.41, p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Liraglutide compared with sulphonylurea is well tolerated and maybe an effective therapy in combination with metformin during Ramadan with more patients able to achieve target HbA1c, lose or maintain weight with no severe hypoglycaemia. This was achieved with a high level of treatment satisfaction.

A double-blind, randomized trial, including frequent patient-physician contacts and Ramadan-focused advice, assessing vildagliptin and gliclazide in patients with type 2 diabetes fasting during Ramadan: the STEADFAST study

Background

Several observational studies were conducted with vildagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) fasting during Ramadan, showing significantly lower incidences of hypoglycemia with vildagliptin versus sulfonylureas, including gliclazide. It was of interest to complement the existing real-life evidence with data from a randomized, double-blind, clinical trial.

Clinical Trials Identifier

NCT01758380.

Methods

This multiregional, double-blind study randomized 557 patients with T2DM (mean glycated hemoglobin [HbA_1c], 6.9%), previously treated with metformin and any sulfonylurea to receive either vildagliptin (50 mg twice daily) or gliclazide plus metformin. The study included four office visits (three pre-Ramadan) and multiple telephone contacts, as well as Ramadan-focused advice. Hypoglycemic events were assessed during Ramadan; HbA_1c and weight were analyzed before and after Ramadan.

Results

The proportion of patients reporting confirmed (<3.9 mmol/L and/or severe) hypoglycemic events during Ramadan was 3.0% with vildagliptin and 7.0% with gliclazide (P=0.039; one-sided test), and this was 6.0% and 8.7%, respectively, for any hypoglycemic events (P=0.173). The adjusted mean change pre- to post-Ramadan in HbA_1c was 0.05%±0.04% with vildagliptin and −0.03%±0.04% with gliclazide, from baselines of 6.84% and 6.79%, respectively (P=0.165). In both groups, the adjusted mean decrease in weight was −1.1±0.2 kg (P=0.987). Overall safety was similar between the treatments.

Conclusion

In line with the results from previous observational studies, vildagliptin was shown in this interventional study to be an effective, safe, and well-tolerated treatment in patients with T2DM fasting during Ramadan, with a consistently low incidence of hypoglycemia across studies, accompanied by good glycemic and weight control. In contrast, gliclazide showed a lower incidence of hypoglycemia in the present interventional than the previous observational studies. This is suggested to be linked to the specific circumstances of this study, including frequent patient–physician contacts, Ramadan-focused advice, a recent switch in treatment, and very well-controlled patients, which is different from what is often seen in real life.

[The use of gliclazide in individualized sulfonylurea therapy]

In addition to the common blood glucose lowering effect, sulfonylurea compounds are different in many aspects from each other. Based on earlier findings the second generation gliclazide has special advantages within this group. Although the number of experimental and clinical observations on gliclazide is continuously increasing, these novel findings are not in the focus anymore due to the appearance of new antidiabetics. This article reviews recent experimental (effect on receptors, the absence of Epac2 activation, antioxidant properties, possible incentive of factors participating in beta-cell differentiation) and pharmacogenomic data, and compares them with clinical observations obtained from gliclazide treatment (hypoglycemias, parameters of cardiovascular outcome). The data underline the advantages of gliclazide, the highly pancreas-selective nature, preservation of the ischemic precondition, favourable hemodynamic properties and potential reduction of the beta-cell loss as compared to other compounds of the group. However, gliclazide is not free from disadvantages characteristic to sulfonylureas in general (blood glucose independent insulin stimulation, beta-cell depletion). Comparing gliclazide with other derivatives of the group, the above data indicate individual benefits for the application when sulfonylurea compound is the drug of choice.

Experience with DPP-4 inhibitors in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes fasting during Ramadan

A large proportion of Muslim patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) elect to fast during the holy month of Ramadan. For these patients hypo- and hyperglycemia constitute two major complications associated with the profound changes in food pattern during the Ramadan fast, and efficacious treatment options with a low risk of hypoglycemia are therefore needed to manage their T2DM as effectively and safely as possible. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors modulate insulin and glucagon secretion in a glucose-dependent manner, and consequently a low propensity of hypoglycemia has consistently been reported across different patient populations with these agents. Promising data with DPP-4 inhibitors have now also started to emerge in patients with T2DM fasting during Ramadan. The objective of this review is to provide a comprehensive overview of the currently available evidence and potential role of DPP-4 inhibitors in the management of patients with T2DM fasting during Ramadan whose diabetes is treated with oral antidiabetic drugs, and to discuss the mechanistic basis for their beneficial effects in this setting.

Experience with Vildagliptin in Type 2 Diabetic Patients Fasting During Ramadan in France: Insights from the VERDI Study

AIM

To assess in real life the rate of hypoglycemia during Ramadan in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in France, according to their ongoing dual therapy of metformin-vildagliptin or metformin-sulfonylurea/glinide (IS).

METHODS

Prospective, non-interventional study with 2 visits (within 8 weeks before and 6 weeks after the end of Ramadan 2012). Study diaries were not used to collect events or record values of glucose monitoring. One hundred and ninety-eight patients on stable oral dual therapy for ≥2 months and with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≤8.0% were recruited by 62 centers: 83 in the IS cohort and 115 in the vildagliptin cohort.

RESULTS

Approximately 90% of patients were from Maghreb. The two cohorts were well balanced: 60% men, mean age 59 years, BMI 28 kg/m(2), metformin dose ~2,000 mg/day, and HbA1c 7.2%. Distinct therapeutic management was planned in view of Ramadan with drug-adaptation intended in 61.4% of IS and 18.3% of vildagliptin patients. Hypoglycemia was reported in 37% of IS and 34% of vildagliptin patients; episodes declared as confirmed in 30.8% and 23.5%, respectively, and episodes documented as adverse event (AE) in 17.9% (22 episodes) and 7.5% (13 episodes), respectively (P = 0.025). Severe episodes were reported in 3.9% of IS and 1.7% of vildagliptin patients. 10.4% of IS and 2.6% of vildagliptin patients reported severe episodes and/or unscheduled medical visits due to hypoglycemia (P = 0.029). Glycemic control remained stable in both cohorts. Compliance with fasting was high, as well as adherence to drug with ≥5 missed-dose for 15.4% of IS and 8.5% of vildagliptin patients.

CONCLUSION

Although the overall frequency of malaise suggestive of hypoglycemia was high, which would be expected with prolonged fasting in a well-controlled T2DM population during hot summer days, the incidence of more severe and better-documented episodes (AE, severe event, event leading to unscheduled medical visit) were much lower, with consistently less events with vildagliptin therapy.