Is gliclazide a sulfonylurea with difference? A review in 2016

National trends in utilisation of glucose lowering medicines by older people with diabetes in long-term care facilities

AIMS

To examine national trends in glucose lowering medicine (GLM) use among older people with diabetes in long-term care facilities (LTCFs) during 2009-2019.

METHODS

A repeated cross-sectional study of individuals ≥65 years with diabetes in Australian LTCFs (n = 140,322) was conducted. Annual age-sex standardised prevalence of GLM use and number of defined daily doses (DDDs)/1000 resident-days were estimated. Multivariable Poisson or Negative binomial regression models were used to estimate adjusted rate ratios (aRRs) and 95 % confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Prevalence of GLM use remained steady between 2009 (63.9%, 95 %CI 63.3-64.4) and 2019 (64.3%, 95 %CI 63.9-64.8) (aRR 1.00, 95 %CI 1.00-1.00). The percentage of residents receiving metformin increased from 36.0% (95 %CI 35.3-36.7) to 43.5% (95 %CI 42.9-44.1) (aRR 1.01, 95 %CI 1.01-1.01). Insulin use also increased from 21.5% (95 %CI 21.0-22.0) to 27.0% (95 %CI 26.5-27.5) (aRR 1.02, 95 %CI 1.02-1.02). Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor use increased from 1.0% (95 %CI 0.9-1.1) to 21.1% (95 %CI 20.7-21.5) (aRR 1.24, 95 %CI 1.24-1.25), while sulfonylurea use decreased from 34.4% (95 %CI 33.8-35.1) to 19.3% (95 %CI 18.9-19.7) (aRR 0.93, 95 %CI 0.93-0.94). Similar trends were observed in DDDs/1000 resident days.

CONCLUSIONS

The increasing use of insulin and ongoing use of sulfonylureas suggests a need to implement evidence-based strategies to optimise diabetes care in LTCFs.

Time to reposition sulfonylureas in type 2 diabetes management in Indian context: A pragmatic practical approach

Sulfonylureas (SU) continue to be a vital therapeutic category of oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Physicians consider modern SU (gliclazide and glimepiride) as "safe and smart" choices for T2DM management. The presence of multiple international guidelines and scarcity of a national guideline may contribute to the challenges faced by few physicians in choosing the right therapeutic strategy. The role of SU in diabetes management is explicit, and the present consensus aims to emphasize the benefits and reposition SU in India. This pragmatic, practical approach aims to define expert recommendations for the physicians to improve caregivers' knowledge of the management of T2DM, leading to superior patient outcomes.

Development, in vitro Evaluation, and in vivo Study of Adhesive Buccal Films for the Treatment of Diabetic Pediatrics via Trans Mucosal Delivery of Gliclazide

OBJECTIVE

Development and evaluation of bucco-adhesive films of Gliclazide for pediatric use.

METHODS

Sixteen films were formulated using a different combination of Gelatin, Hydroxy propyl methyl cellulose (HPMC), polyvinyl alcohol, Hydroxy propyl cellulose (HPC), chitosan, polyethylene glycol, sodium alginate, and carbopol. Compatibility study for drug and polymers was conducted using differential scanning calorimetry method and Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. All films were examined for drug content, weight variation, thickness, swelling index, muco-adhesion and folding endurance. In vitro drug release has been completed for two hours. Stability studies were conducted at 4°C, 25°C, and 40°C for selected films. The optimized formulation based on in vitro data was selected for a bioavailability study in rabbits.

RESULTS

The selected film formula (carbopol 2%, HPMC 2%) did not demonstrate interactions between the drug and polymers, while it showed accepted content, muco-adhesion, and mechanical properties. The in vitro release study showed rapid and complete release of drug from films. Stability studies confirmed accepted stability of the selected film at 4°C and 25°C, but the film get hard with few particles at 40°C. The bioavailability studies conducted showed that there was 2.1 fold increase in the AUC0-24 of selected film compared with oral tablets.

CONCLUSION

Bucco adhesive films of Gliclazide is a promising dosage form for the treatment of diabetes in children.

Pharmacotherapy of type 2 diabetes: An update and future directions

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a widely prevalent disease with substantial economic and social impact for which multiple conventional and novel pharmacotherapies are currently available; however, the landscape of T2D treatment is constantly changing as new therapies emerge and the understanding of currently available agents deepens. This review aims to provide an updated summary of the pharmacotherapeutic approach to T2D. Each class of agents is presented by mechanism of action, details of administration, side effect profile, cost, and use in certain populations including heart failure, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, obesity, chronic kidney disease, and older individuals. We also review targets of novel therapeutic T2D agent development. Finally, we outline an up-to-date treatment approach that starts with identification of an individualized goal for glycemic control then selection, initiation, and further intensification of a personalized therapeutic plan for T2D.

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.

CYP2C19 Loss-of-function Polymorphisms are Associated with Reduced Risk of Sulfonylurea Treatment Failure in Chinese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

Sulfonylureas (SUs) are predominantly metabolized by cytochrome p450 2C9 (CYP2C9) and cytochrome p450 2C19 (CYP2C19) enzymes. CYP2C9 polymorphisms are associated with greater treatment response and hypoglycemic risk in SU users. However, there are no large scale pharmacogenetic studies investigating the effect of loss‐of‐function alleles CYP2C19*2 and CYP2C19*3, which occur frequently in East Asians. Retrospective pharmacogenetic analysis was performed in 11,495 genotyped patients who were enrolled in the Hong Kong Diabetes Register between 1995 and 2017, with follow‐up to December 31, 2019. The associations of CYP2C19 polymorphisms with SU treatment failure, early HbA1c response, and severe hypoglycemia were analyzed by Cox regression or logistic regression assuming an additive genetic model. There were 2341 incident SU users that were identified (mean age 59 years, median diabetes duration 9 years), of which 324 were CYP2C19 poor metabolizers (CYP2C19 *2/*2 or *2/*3 or *3/*3). CYP2C19 poor metabolizers had lower risk of SU treatment failure (hazard ratio 0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72–0.97, P = 0.018) and were more likely to reach the HbA1c treatment target < 7% (odds ratio 1.52, 95% CI 1.02–2.27, P = 0.039) than wild‐type carriers (CYP2C19 *1/*1) following adjustment for multiple covariates. There were no significant differences in severe hypoglycemia rates among different CYP2C19 genotype groups. CYP2C19 polymorphisms should be considered during personalization of SU therapy.

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.

Identification of Prognostic Signature and Gliclazide as Candidate Drugs in Lung Adenocarcinoma

Background

Lung adenocarcinoma (LUAD) is the most common pathological type of lung cancer, with high incidence and mortality. To improve the curative effect and prolong the survival of patients, it is necessary to find new biomarkers to accurately predict the prognosis of patients and explore new strategy to treat high-risk LUAD.

Methods

A comprehensive genome-wide profiling analysis was conducted using a retrospective pool of LUAD patient data from the previous datasets of Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) including GSE18842, GSE19188, GSE40791 and GSE50081 and The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA). Differential gene analysis and Cox proportional hazard model were used to identify differentially expressed genes with survival significance as candidate prognostic genes. The Kaplan–Meier with log-rank test was used to assess survival difference. A risk score model was developed and validated using TCGA-LUAD and GSE50081. Additionally, The Connectivity Map (CMAP) was used to predict drugs for the treatment of LUAD. The anti-cancer effect and mechanism of its candidate drugs were studied in LUAD cell lines.

Results

We identified a 5-gene signature (KIF20A, KLF4, KRT6A, LIFR and RGS13). Risk Score (RS) based on 5-gene signature was significantly associated with overall survival (OS). Nomogram combining RS with clinical pathology parameters could potently predict the prognosis of patients with LUAD. Moreover, gliclazide was identified as a candidate drug for the treatment of high-RS LUAD. Finally, gliclazide was shown to induce cell cycle arrest and apoptosis in LUAD cells possibly by targeting CCNB1, CCNB2, CDK1 and AURKA.

Conclusion

This study identified a 5-gene signature that can predict the prognosis of patients with LUAD, and Gliclazide as a potential therapeutic drug for LUAD. It provides a new direction for the prognosis and treatment of patients with LUAD.

Patterns and preferences of antidiabetic drug use in Turkish patients with type 2 diabetes - A nationwide cross-sectional study (TEMD treatment study)

AIMS

The treatment preferences in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are affected by multiple factors. This survey aims to find out the profiles of the utilization of antidiabetics and their determinants.

METHODS

The nationwide, multicenter TEMD survey consecutively enrolled patients with T2DM (n = 4678). Medications including oral antidiabetics (OAD) and injectable regimens were recorded. Multiple injectable regimens with or without OADs were defined as complex treatments.

RESULTS

A total of 4678 patients with T2DM (mean age: 58.5 ± 10.4 years, 59% female) were enrolled. More than half of patients (n = 2372; 50.7%) were using injectable regimens with or without OADs, and others (n = 2306, 49.3%) were using only OADs. The most common OADs were metformin (93.5%), secretagogues (40.1%), and DPP-4 inhibitors (37.2%). The rates of the use of basal, basal-bolus and premix insulin were 26.5%, 39.5% and 22.4%, respectively. Patients using OADs achieved better glycemia, blood pressure and weight control (p < 0.001 for all) but poorer LDL-C control (p < 0.001). The independent associates of complex treatments were diabetes duration, obesity, eGFR, glycated haemoglobin, macro and microvascular complications, education level, and self-reported hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

This study is the first nationwide report to show that almost half of the patients with T2DM are using injectable regimens in Turkey.

Pharmacological treatment initiation for type 2 diabetes in Australia: are the guidelines being followed?

AIM

To determine the patterns and predictors of pharmacological treatment initiation for type 2 diabetes and whether treatment initiation is consistent with Australian clinical practice guidelines that recommend metformin monotherapy.

METHODS

Individuals aged 40-99 years initiating a non-insulin type 2 diabetes medication between July 2013 and February 2018 were identified from a 10% random national sample of pharmacy dispensing data. Logistic regression was used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the predictors of initiating sulfonylurea monotherapy, non-guideline monotherapy and combination therapy compared with metformin monotherapy. Predictors included age, sex, initiation year and comorbidities determined using the Rx-Risk comorbidity index.

RESULTS

Of the 47 860 initiators, [47% women, mean age 60.7 (sd 12.1) years], 85.8%, 4.6%, 1.9% and 7.7% received metformin monotherapy, sulfonylurea monotherapy, non-guideline monotherapy and combination therapy, respectively. Increasing age was associated with increasing odds of initiating sulfonylurea monotherapy and non-guideline monotherapy. Combination therapy initiation was less likely in women (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.69-0.79) and people with more comorbidities (e.g. OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.29-0.44 for seven or more comorbidities vs. no comorbidities) but more likely in congestive heart failure (OR 1.42, 95% CI 1.22-1.65), cerebrovascular disease (OR 1.50, 95% CI 1.32-1.69) and dyslipidaemia (OR 1.29, 95% CI 1.19-1.40).

CONCLUSION

Treatment initiation in Australia is largely consistent with clinical practice guidelines, with 86% of individuals initiating metformin monotherapy. Initiation on combination therapy was more common in men and in those with fewer comorbidities.

Antidiabetic drugs and blood pressure changes.Pharmacol Res. 2020;161:105108. [PMID: 32738493 DOI: 10.1016/j.phrs.2020.105108]

New era antidiabetic drugs are characterized by cardiovascular safety, including specific outcome benefits observed in randomized clinical trials (RCTs). It has been postulated that the favorable effects of new antidiabetic agents are related both to better control of blood pressure (BP) levels and to activation of multiple anti-atherosclerotic properties. In this review, we aimed to assess whether antidiabetic drugs have a pressor effect in glucose control and outcome-oriented RCTs, and to summarize the activated pathophysiological mechanisms relevant to BP control following the use of different antidiabetic drug classes. We also tried to determine which, if any, are the BP-lowering effects of more intense vs less intense glucose-lowering strategy irrespectively of trial antidiabetic regimen. To provide more robust results and evidence-based argumentation, a meta-analysis of placebo-controlled antidiabetic drug RCTs was undertaken to estimate the ongoing BP reduction for all considered and each separate drug class alone. This quantitative synthesis might be helpful for the clinician 1) to select or avoid the use of some classes of antidiabetic agents with a potential favorable or adverse pressor effect, respectively 2) to organize the overall drug regimen in patients with diabetes mellitus and minimize side effects because of concomitant use of drugs with established pressor effect (i.e. antihypertensive agents). This review was also organized to indicate whether BP change associated with different antidiabetic treatments may explain the specific macrovascular outcome benefits. Between all antidiabetic drugs including exogenous insulin, only sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors produce a clinically important BP-lowering effect, but this BP reduction alone cannot explain the observed cardiovascular benefit.

Is Gliclazide Associated with a Lower Obesity-Related Cancer Risk Compared to Other Sulfonylureas? A Long-term Prospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Gliclazide has been suspected to be associated with a lower obesity-related cancer risk; however, current evidence is limited by important methodologic shortcomings. This study aimed to evaluate whether gliclazide is preferred over other sulfonylureas regarding obesity-related cancer risk.

METHODS

In this prospective cohort study, an annual benchmarking database in Dutch primary care (Zwolle Outpatient Diabetes project Integrating Available CareZODIAC, 1998-2014) was linked to the Netherlands Cancer Registry and the Dutch Personal Record Database. Of the 71,648 patients with type 2 diabetes, we included 26,207 who used sulfonylureas and had no history of cancer or insulin use at baseline. Obesity-related cancer was defined using the latest definition of the World Cancer Research Fund. Cox regression analyses were used to estimate HRs, with both baseline sulfonylurea and cumulative exposure modeled and corrected for baseline covariates.

RESULTS

During follow-up for 167,692 person-years, there were 1,111 obesity-related cancer events. For males, the adjusted HRs [95% confidence interval (CI)] for baseline sulfonylurea compared with gliclazide were as follows: glibenclamide, 1.10 (0.92-2.69); glimepiride, 1.13 (0.68-1.84); and tolbutamide, 0.93 (0.59-1.48). For females, these were as follows: glibenclamide, 1.49 (0.72-3.13); glimepiride, 0.96 (0.59-1.54); and tolbutamide, 0.84 (0.54-1.28). The adjusted HRs (95% CI) for one more year of cumulative exposure compared with gliclazide were as follows: glibenclamide, 0.90 (0.71-1.14); glimepiride, 0.96 (0.87-1.06); and tolbutamide, 1.00 (0.92-1.09). For females, these were as follows: glibenclamide, 0.93 (0.77-1.13); glimepiride, 0.99 (0.90-1.10); and tolbutamide, 1.04 (0.96-1.13).

CONCLUSIONS

Obesity-related cancer risk was comparable between gliclazide and other sulfonylureas.

IMPACT

Gliclazide is not preferred over other sulfonylureas regarding obesity-related cancer risk.

Transport and Biotransformation of Gliclazide and the Effect of Deoxycholic Acid in a Probiotic Bacteria Model

Introduction: Inter-individual differences in gut microflora composition may affect drug metabolism and overall therapeutic response. Gliclazide is a drug characterized by large inter-individual differences in therapeutic response; however, the causes of these differences are not fully explained and may be the outcome of microbial biotransformation. Recently, great attention has been paid to studies on bile acid (BA) interactions with gut microflora and the role of BAs in the modification of drug transport through biological membranes.

The Aim: Considering the assumption of gliclazide–probiotic–BAs interactions, the aim of the study was to investigate the transport and biotransformation of gliclazide in probiotic bacteria, as well as the effects of deoxycholic acid (DCA) on gliclazide transport into bacterial cells.

Materials and Methods: Probiotics were incubated with gliclazide with or without DCA for 24 h at 37°C. The intracellular and extracellular concentrations of gliclazide were determined at seven time points by high-performance liquid chromatography. Gliclazide biotransformation by the enzymatic activity of probiotic bacteria was examined using appropriate software packages.

Results: During the 24 h incubation with probiotic bacteria, significantly lower extracellular concentrations of gliclazide were observed at all time points compared to controls, while in the group with DCA, the decrease in concentration was noticed only at 24 h. The total concentration of gliclazide throughout the whole period was significantly lower compared to control. Proposed pathways of gliclazide biotransformation by probiotic bacteria involve reactions of hydrolysis and hydroxylation.

Conclusion: Based on the results obtained, it can be concluded that there are interactions of gliclazide–probiotics–DCA, at both the level of active and passive transport into the cells, and at the level of drug biotransformation by enzymatic activity of probiotic bacteria. The effect of these interactions on the final therapeutic response of gliclazide should be further studied and confirmed in in vivo conditions.

Mutations in gliclazide-associated genes may predict poor bladder cancer prognosis

In recent years, an increasing number of patients have had diabetes and cancer simultaneously; thus, it is crucial for physicians to select hypoglycemic drugs with the lowest risk of inducing cancer. Gliclazide is a widely used sulfonylurea hypoglycemic drug, but its cancer risk remains controversial. Here, we explored the primary targets of gliclazide and its associated genes by querying an available database to construct a biological network. By using DrugBank and STRING, we found two primary targets of gliclazide and 50 gliclazide-associated genes, which were then enrolled for Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) enrichment analysis using WebGestalt. From this analysis, we obtained the top 15 KEGG pathways. Accurate analysis of these KEGG pathways revealed that two pathways, one linked to bladder cancer and the other linked to the phosphoinositide 3-kinase-AKT signaling pathway, are functionally associated with gliclazide, and from these we identified four overlapping genes. Finally, genomic analysis using cBioPortal showed that genomic alterations of these four overlapping genes predict poor prognosis for patients with bladder cancer. In conclusion, gliclazide should be used with caution as a hypoglycemic drug for diabetic patients with cancer, especially bladder cancer. In addition, this study provides a functional network analysis to flexibly explore drug interaction systems and estimate their safety.

Potential Applications of Gliclazide in Treating Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Formulation with Bile Acids and Probiotics

A major advancement in therapy of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is the discovery of new treatment which avoids and even replaces the absolute requirement for injected insulin. The need for multiple drug therapy of comorbidities associated with T1DM increases demand for developing novel therapeutic alternatives with new mechanisms of actions. Compared to other sulphonylurea drugs used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, gliclazide exhibits a pleiotropic action outside pancreatic β cells, the so-called extrapancreatic effects, such as antiinflammatory and cellular protective effects, which might be beneficial in the treatment of T1DM. Results from in vivo experiments confirmed the positive effects of gliclazide in T1DM that are even more pronounced when combined with other hypoglycaemic agents such as probiotics and bile acids. Even though the exact mechanism of interaction at the molecular level is still unknown, there is a clear synergistic effect between gliclazide, bile acids and probiotics illustrated by the reduction of blood glucose levels and improvement of diabetic complications. Therefore, the manipulation of bile acid pool and intestinal microbiota composition in combination with old drug gliclazide could be a novel therapeutic approach for patients with T1DM.

Cardiovascular safety of DPP-4 inhibitors compared with sulphonylureas: Results of randomized controlled trials and observational studies

After failure of metformin monotherapy, another glucose-lowering agent should be added to improve glucose control. The clinician has several pharmacological choices, including the addition of a sulphonylurea (SU) or a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i). While the cardiovascular safety of SUs remains a matter of controversy, DPP-4is have proven their non-inferiority vs placebo in recent cardiovascular (CV) outcome trials. In the absence of a head-to-head CV outcome trial-the CAROLINA, comparing linagliptin with glimepiride, is still ongoing-only indirect information can be found in the literature to compare CV outcomes (major CV events, myocardial infarction, ischaemic stroke, CV death and all-cause mortality) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with SUs or DPP-4is. Thus, this comprehensive review summarizes the CV outcomes (excluding heart failure) reported in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of SUs vs placebo or other glucose-lowering agents, DPP-4is vs placebo or other glucose-lowering agents and SUs vs DPP-4is in phase-II/III studies. Also, the results of observational studies reporting CV events in patients treated with either SUs or DPP-4is have been carefully examined. Overall, the CV safety of SUs appears to be poorer than that of DPP-4is in both RCTs and cohort studies. However, the results are somewhat disparate, and such heterogeneity may be explained by different patient characteristics across studies, but also perhaps by differences between various molecules in each pharmacological class. In particular, some doubt about a class effect affecting SU CV safety has been raised. The results of CAROLINA are expected to shed more light on SU CV concerns, especially compared with DPP-4is.

Consensus Recommendations on Sulfonylurea and Sulfonylurea Combinations in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus - International Task Force

For decades, sulfonylureas (SUs) have been important drugs in the antidiabetic therapeutic armamentarium. They have been used as monotherapy as well as combination therapy. Focus on newer drugs and concerns about the risk of severe hypoglycemia and weight gain with some SUs have led to discussion on their safety and utility. It has to be borne in mind that the adverse events associated with SUs should not be ascribed to the whole class, as many modern SUs, such as glimepiride and gliclazide modified release, are associated with better safety profiles. Furthermore, individualization of treatment, using SUs in combination with other drugs, backed with careful monitoring and patient education, ensures maximum benefits with minimal side effects. The current guidelines, developed by experts from Africa, Asia, and the Middle East, promote the safe and smart use of SUs in combination with other glucose-lowering drugs.

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.