Surender Kumar

Comparison of two protocols in the management of glucocorticoid-induced hyperglycemia among hospitalized patients

Context: There is limited literature focusing on the management of glucocorticoid-induced hyperglycemia (GCIH). Aims: The primary objective was to compare the mean blood glucose between the experimental group (new protocol) and the control group (standard protocol) in the management of GCIH. The secondary objective was to compare other parameters of glycemic efficacy, variability, and safety parameters. Methods: This was a randomized, open-labeled, parallel arm trial. Adult patients who were given glucocorticoid (minimum dose equivalent to prednisolone 10 mg) in the past 24 h and had 2 h postmeal plasma glucose ≥200 mg/dl were included in the study. Patients randomized to control group received standard basal-bolus insulin. In the experimental group, a “correctional insulin” matching the glycemic profile of the glucocorticoid administered was provided with or without “background” basal-bolus insulin. The parameters of glycemic efficacy, variability, and safety were compared. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Data of 67 patients included in the study were analyzed, of which 33 patients were in the experimental group and 34 patients in the control group. The mean blood glucose in the experimental and the control group was 170.32 ± 33.46 mg/dl and 221.05 ± 49.72, respectively (P = 0.0001). The parameters for glycemic variability were all significantly lower in patients in the experimental group. The hypoglycemia event rate was low in both the groups. Conclusion: When compared to the standard basal-bolus insulin protocol, the new protocol showed lower mean blood glucose and lower glycemic variability.

Hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes: Standpoint of an experts′ committee (India hypoglycemia study group)

The epidemic of type 2 diabetes and the recognition that achieving specific glycemic goals can substantially reduce morbidity have made the effective treatment of hyperglycemia a top priority. Despite compelling evidence that tight glycemic control is crucial for delaying disease progression, increased risk of hypoglycemia associated with such control underscore the complexity of diabetes management. In most cases, hypoglycemia results from an excess of insulin, either absolute or relative to the available glucose substrate and the factors perhaps exacerbating the risk are pharmacokinetic imperfections, behavioral, co-morbidities etc. Additionally, many patients remain undiagnosed, and many diagnosed patients are not treated appropriately. In this article, the challenges of hypoglycemia, confronting health care providers and their patients with diabetes, are discussed for making treatment decisions that will help minimize risk of hypoglycemia and eventually overcome formidable barriers to optimal diabetes management. Strategies to treat and minimize the frequency and severity of hypoglycemia without compromising on glycemic goals are also presented.

Liraglutide effect and action in diabetes-In (LEAD-In): A prospective observational study assessing safety and effectiveness of liraglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated under routine clinical practice conditions in India.

Background: This 26-week, open-label observational study assessed the incidence and type of adverse events (AEs) associated with liraglutide use according to the standard clinical practice settings and the local label in India. Materials and Methods: A total of 1416 adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with liraglutide in 125 sites across India were included in the study. Participants were newly diagnosed or already receiving antidiabetic medications. Safety and efficacy data were collected at baseline and at approximately weeks 13 and 26. The primary outcome was incidence and type of AEs while using liraglutide, with events classified by Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities system organ class and preferred term. The secondary objective was to assess other clinical parameters related to effective T2D management. Results: Twenty AEs, predominately gastrointestinal, were reported in 1.3% of the study population in scheduled visits up to week 26. No serious AEs, including death, were reported. Hypoglycemic episodes were reported in 7.3% of participants at baseline and 0.7% at week 26. No major hypoglycemic events were reported up to week 26 (baseline: 0.4%). Glycated hemoglobin was reduced from baseline (8.8 ± 1.3%) to week 26 by 1.6 ± 1.1% (P < 0.0001); significant improvements in fasting blood glucose, and 2-h postprandial blood glucose (post-breakfast, -lunch, and -dinner) were also observed. Mean body weight decreased by 8.1 ± 6.5 kg from baseline (92.5 ± 14.6 kg; P < 0.0001). Conclusions: From the number of AEs reported, it is suggested that liraglutide was well tolerated in subjects with T2D treated under standard clinical practice conditions in India. Liraglutide was effective, and no new safety concerns were identified.

Type 1 diabetes mellitus-common cases.

Tight glycemic control in type 1 diabetes mellitus patients is associated with the risk of hypoglycemia. Diabetic patients are forced to change their lifestyle to adjust to the disease condition and survive it. The best way to manage diabetes would be to develop a therapy, which could adjust to the patients conditions. Here, I present few cases wherein switching to a long-acting basal insulin analog helped combat recurrent hypoglycemic episodes experienced by the patients.

Clinical experience with insulin detemir, biphasic insulin aspart and insulin aspart in people with type 2 diabetes: Results from the North India cohort of the A 1 chieve study

Background: The A1chieve, a multicentric (28 countries), 24-week, non-interventional study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of insulin detemir, biphasic insulin aspart and insulin aspart in people with T2DM (n = 66,726) in routine clinical care across four continents. Materials and Methods: Data was collected at baseline, at 12 weeks and at 24 weeks. This short communication presents the results for patients enrolled from West India. Results: A total of 4192 patients were enrolled in the study. Four different insulin analogue regimens were used in the study. Patients had started on or were switched to biphasic insulin aspart (n = 2846), insulin detemir (n = 596), insulin aspart (n = 517), basal insulin plus insulin aspart (n = 140) and other insulin combinations (n = 83). At baseline glycaemic control was poor for both insulin naïve (mean HbA1c: 8.8%) and insulin user (mean HbA1c: 9.1%) groups. After 24 weeks of treatment, both the groups showed improvement in HbA1c (insulin naïve: −1.6%, insulin users: −1.7%). SADRs including major hypoglycaemic events or episodes did not occur in any of the study patients. Conclusion: Starting or switching to insulin analogues was associated with improvement in glycaemic control with a low rate of hypoglycaemia.

Clinical experience with insulin detemir, biphasic insulin aspart and insulin aspart in people with type 2 diabetes: Results from the North India cohort of the A1chieve study.

Background: The A1chieve, a multicentric (28 countries), 24-week, non-interventional study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of insulin detemir, biphasic insulin aspart and insulin aspart in people with T2DM (n = 66,726) in routine clinical care across four continents. Materials and Methods: Data was collected at baseline, at 12 weeks and at 24 weeks. This short communication presents the results for patients enrolled from North India. Results: A total of 4912 patients were enrolled in the study. Four different insulin analogue regimens were used in the study. Patients had started on or were switched to biphasic insulin aspart (n = 3619), insulin detemir (n = 880), insulin aspart (n = 331), basal insulin plus insulin aspart (n = 37) and other insulin combinations (n = 44). At baseline glycaemic control was poor for both insulin naïve (mean HbA1c: 9.8%) and insulin user (mean HbA1c: 9.8%) groups. After 24 weeks of treatment, both the study groups showed improvement in HbA1c (insulin naïve: −2.7%, insulin users: −2.6%). SADRs including major hypoglycaemic events or episodes did not occur in any of the study patients. Conclusion: Starting or switching to insulin analogues was associated with improvement in glycaemic control with a low rate of hypoglycaemia.

Adrenal incidentalomas: A collection of six interesting cases and brief review of literature.

Introduction: Adrenal incidentalomas (AI) are detected in approximately 4-7% of patients in imaging studies. Majority are benign, but careful evaluation is warranted to rule out carcinoma and functional adenomas. Aim: The purpose of presenting these cases is to highlight the approach to management of AI in terms of diagnosis, follow-up, and treatment. Materials and Methods: Seven patients presenting in the endocrine clinic with AI were evaluated for their presenting clinical features and investigated. Results: Case 1 was a 49-year-old female, with adrenal androgen secreting adrenocortical carcinoma with amenorrhoea which was mistaken as menopause. She had minimal hirsutism, which was mistaken as postmenopausal hirsutism. Case 2 was a 39-year-old male, presenting with hyperglycemia found to have Conns’ syndrome with aldosterone producing adenoma on routine ultrasound. Case 3 was a 32-year-old male, presenting with gastritis and bloating, where ultrasound showed bilateral large adrenal masses revealed as diffuse large B cell lymphoma on biopsy. Case 4 was a 21-year-old boy, who had pheochromocytoma misdiagnosed as benign intracranial hypertension (HTN). Case 5 was a 59-year-old hypertensive male, presenting with fever had pheochromocytoma with catecholamine excess, producing fever. Case 6 was isolated adrenal tuberculosis who presented with chronic diarrhea. Conclusion: AI are common, though prevalence varies depending on the reason for scanning, the characteristics of the population studied, and the radiological techniques used. Most are non-secreting cortical adenomas. AI should be evaluated both biochemically and radiologically. When a hormonal disorder is suspected clinically, targeted, diagnostic testing for autonomous cortisol secretion, pheochromocytoma, and hyperaldosteronism is indicated.