The influence of diabetes mellitus and insulin therapy on biomechanical retention around dental implants: a study in rabbits.

The oral rehabilitation by dental implants in patients with diabetes remains a controversial issue. The aim of this study was to evaluate the influence of diabetes mellitus and insulin therapy on the bone healing around dental implants using torque removal. Twenty-seven rabbits were randomly divided into 3 groups with 9 animals each: control (C) group, induced diabetic (D) group, and insulin-treated diabetic (ITD) group (10 U/day). After 1 week, one implant was inserted at the tibial metaphysis of the animals. The glucose levels were periodically evaluated through the glucose-oxidase enzymatic method. The animals were killed at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after surgery and the biomechanical test was performed using a torque manometer. Statistically significant differences regarding the removal torque of the implant could not be found at 4 weeks (P = 0.2) among groups. Group C showed statistically higher values than groups D and ITD at the experimental periods of 8 (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.0002, respectively) and 12 weeks (P = 0.0053 and P = 0.001, respectively). There were no statistical differences between D and ITD groups in any of the experimental periods. Diabetes mellitus has negatively influenced the mechanical retention of implants placed at the tibial metaphysis of rabbits. Therapy with insulin did not induce any changes.

[Intensive insulin therapy--is it worth the effort?]

Diabetes mellitus is associated with a number of well-known, specific macro- and microvascular as well as neuropathic complications. The typical and specific association of microvascular and neuropathic complications with diabetes suggests a causal relationship with hyperglycemia or associated metabolic abnormalities. The results of the Diabetes Control and Complications Trial (DCCT) as well as other recent studies have demonstrated that in patients with insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM) the incidence of retinopathy, nephropathy and neuropathy can be reduced by intensive treatment. Strategies of intensified insulin therapy and the clinical importance of improved diabetic control are outlined in view of these studies.

A double-blind randomized study comparing the effects of continuing or not continuing rosiglitazone + metformin therapy when starting insulin therapy in people with type 2 diabetes

Aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of either continuing or discontinuing rosiglitazone + metformin fixed-dose combination when starting insulin therapy in people with Type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on oral therapy. Methods: In this 24-week double-blind study, 324 individuals with Type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on maximum dose rosiglitazone + metformin therapy were randomly assigned to twice-daily premix insulin therapy (target pre-breakfast and pre-evening meal glucose ≤ 6.5 mmol/l) in addition to either rosiglitazone + metformin (8/2000 mg) or placebo. Results: Insulin dose at week 24 was significantly lower with rosiglitazone + metformin (33.5 ± 1.5 U/day, mean ± se) compared with placebo [59.0 ± 3.0 U/day; model-adjusted difference -26.6 (95% CI -37.7, -15,5) U/day, P < 0.001]. Despite this, there was greater improvement in glycaemic control [HbA 1c rosiglitazone + metformin vs. placebo 6.8 ± 0.1 vs. 7.5 ± 0.1%; difference -0.7 (-0.8, -0.5)%, P < 0.001] and more individuals achieved glycaemic targets (HbA1c < 7.0% 70 vs. 34%, P < 0.001). The proportion of individuals reporting at least one hypoglycaemic event during the last 12 weeks of treatment was similar in the two groups (rosiglitazone + metformin vs. placebo 25 vs. 27%). People receiving rosiglitazone + metformin in addition to insulin reported greater treatment satisfaction than those receiving insulin alone. Both treatment regimens were well tolerated but more participants had oedema [12 (7%) vs. 4 (3%)] and there was more weight gain [3.7 vs. 2.6 kg; difference 1.1 (0.2, 2.1) kg, P = 0.02] with rosiglitazone + metformin. Conclusions: Addition of insulin to rosiglitazone + metformin enabled more people to reach glycaemic targets with less insulin, and was generally well tolerated. © 2007 The Authors.

Insulin therapy in people with type 2 diabetes:opportunities and challenges?

Given the continued interest in defining the optimal management of individuals with type 2 diabetes, the Editor of Diabetes Care convened a working party of diabetes specialists to examine this topic in the context of insulin therapy. This was prompted by recent new evidence on the use of insulin in such people. The group was aware of evidence that the benefits of insulin therapy are still usually offered late, and thus the aim of the discussion was how to define the optimal timing and basis for decisions regarding insulin and to apply these concepts in practice. It was noted that recent evidence had built upon that of the previous decades, together confirming the benefits and safety of insulin therapy, albeit with concerns about the potential for hypoglycemia and gain in body weight. Insulin offers a unique ability to control hyperglycemia, being used from the time of diagnosis in some circumstances, when metabolic control is disturbed by medical illness, procedures, or therapy, as well as in the longer term in ambulatory care. For those previously starting insulin, various other forms of therapy can be added later, which offer complementary effects appropriate to individual needs. Here we review current evidence and circumstances in which insulin can be used, consider individualized choices of alternatives and combination regimens, and offer some guidance on personalized targets and tactics for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes. © 2014 by the American Diabetes Association.

Socioeconomic Differences in Preferences and Willingness-to-Pay for Insulin Delivery Systems in Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes

Background: An evaluation of patients' preferences is necessary to understand the demand for different insulin delivery systems. The aim of this study was to investigate the association between socioeconomic status (SES) and patients' preferences and willingness to pay (WTP) for various attributes of insulin administration for diabetes management. Methods: We conducted a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to determine patients' preferences and their WTP for hypothetical insulin treatments. Both self-reported annual household income and education completed were used to explore differences in treatment preferences and WTP for different attributes of treatment across different levels of SES. Results: The DCE questionnaire was successfully completed by 274 patients. Overall, glucose control was the most valued attribute by all socioeconomic groups, while route of insulin delivery was not as important. Patients with higher incomes were willing to pay significantly more for better glucose control and to avoid adverse events compared to lower income groups. In addition, they were willing to pay more for an oral short-acting insulin ($Can 71.65 [95% confidence interval, $40.68, $102.62]) compared to the low income group ($Can 9.85 [95% confidence interval, 14.86, 34.56; P < 0.01]). Conversely, there were no differences in preferences when the sample was stratified by level of education. Conclusions: This study revealed that preferences and WTP for insulin therapy are influenced by income but not by level of education. Specifically, the higher the income, the greater desire for an oral insulin delivery system, whereas an inhaled route becomes less important for patients.

A valuation of patients` willingness-to-pay for insulin delivery in diabetes

Objectives: The aim of this study was to determine the insulin-delivery system and the attributes of insulin therapy that best meet patients` preferences, and to estimate patients` willingness-to-pay (WTP) for them. Methods: This was a cross-sectional discrete choice experiment (DCE) study involving 378 Canadian patients with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Patients were asked to choose between two hypothetical insulin treatment options made up of different combinations of the attribute levels. Regression coefficients derived using conditional logit models were used to calculate patients` WTP. Stratification of the sample was performed to evaluate WTP by predefined subgroups. Results: A total of 274 patients successfully completed the survey. Overall, patients were willing to pay the most for better blood glucose control followed by weight gain. Surprisingly, route of insulin administration was the least important attribute overall. Segmented models indicated that insulin naive diabetics were willing to pay significantly more for both oral and inhaled short-acting insulin compared with insulin users. Surprisingly, type 1 diabetics were willing to pay $C11.53 for subcutaneous short-acting insulin, while type 2 diabetics were willing to pay $C47.23 to avoid subcutaneous short-acting insulin (p < .05). These findings support the hypothesis of a psychological barrier to initiating insulin therapy, but once that this barrier has been overcome, they accommodate and accept injectable therapy as a treatment option. Conclusions: By understanding and addressing patients` preferences for insulin therapy, diabetes educators can use this information to find an optimal treatment approach for each individual patient, which may ultimately lead to improved control, through improved compliance, and better diabetes outcomes.

Hypoglycémie chez des patients porteurs de pompe a insuline [Hypoglycemia in patients treated with an external insulin pump].

Hypoglycemia is a potentially serious complication of insulin therapy. Some insulin-dependent diabetic patients can benefit from continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion therapy (an "insulin pump"), which in most case improves glycemia control and decreases the occurrence of hypoglycemic episodes. However, such events may occur, particularly during initial treatment phases or pregnancy. Severe hypoglycemia is mainly managed by stopping the insulin pump and insuring an adequate carbohydrate intake. Patients with insulin pumps and their entourage should receive specific instruction in the adjustment of pump flow in the presence of dysglycemia-inducing circumstances (illness, physical exertion), as well as in anticipation of high-risk situations, such as motor-vehicle driving.

Diabetes and immune thrombocytopenic purpura: a new association with good response to anti-CD20 therapy.

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is rarely a component of primary immune dysregulation disorders. We report two cases in which T1D was associated with thrombocytopenia. The first patient, a 13-year-old boy, presented with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP), thyroiditis, and, 3 wk later, T1D. Because of severe thrombocytopenia resistant to immunoglobulins, high-dose steroids, and cyclosporine treatment, anti-cluster of differentiation (CD20) therapy was introduced, with consequent normalization of thrombocytes and weaning off of steroids. Three and 5 months after anti-CD20 therapy, levothyroxin and insulin therapy, respectively, were stopped. Ten months after stopping insulin treatment, normal C-peptide and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and markedly reduced anti-glutamic acid decarboxylase (GAD) antibodies were measured. A second anti-CD20 trial for relapse of ITP was initiated 2 yr after the first trial. Anti-GAD antibody levels decreased again, but HbA1c stayed elevated and glucose monitoring showed elevated postprandial glycemia, demanding insulin therapy. To our knowledge, this is the first case in which insulin treatment could be interrupted for 28 months after anti-CD20 treatment. In patient two, thrombocytopenia followed a diagnosis of T1D 6 yr previously. Treatment with anti-CD20 led to normalization of thrombocytes, but no effect on T1D was observed. Concerning the origin of the boys' conditions, several primary immune dysregulation disorders were considered. Thrombocytopenia associated with T1D is unusual and could represent a new entity. The diabetes manifestation in patient one was probably triggered by corticosteroid treatment; regardless, anti-CD20 therapy appeared to be efficacious early in the course of T1D, but not long after the initial diagnosis of T1D, as shown for patient two.

Diet plus insulin compared to diet alone in the treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus: a systematic review

Fetuses of mothers with gestational diabetes mellitus are at increased risk to develop perinatal complications mainly due to macrosomia. However, in view of the marked heterogeneity of this disease, it seems difficult to set guidelines for diagnosis and treatment. This complicates the choice of assigning patients either to diet or to insulin therapy. Also of concern is how much benefit could be expected from insulin therapy in preventing fetal complications in these patients. In a systematic review of the literature assessing the efficacy of insulin in preventing macrosomia in fetuses of mothers with gestational diabetes, we found six randomized controlled trials comparing diet alone to diet plus insulin. The studies included a total of 1281 patients (644 in the diet plus insulin group and 637 in the diet group), with marked differences among trials concerning diagnostic criteria, randomization process and treatment goals. Meta-analysis of the data resulted in a risk difference of -0.098 (95%CI: -0.168 to -0.028), and a number-necessary-to-treat of 11 (95%CI: 6 to 36), which means that it is necessary to treat 11 patients with insulin to prevent one case of macrosomia. This indicates a potential benefit of insulin, but not significantly enough to set treatment guidelines. Because of the heterogeneous evidence available in the literature about this matter, we conclude that larger trials addressing the efficacy of these two therapeutic modalities in preventing macrosomia are warranted.

Prediction of postprandial blood glucose under intra-patient variability and uncertainty and its use in the design of insulin dosing strategies for type 1 diabetic patients

In this thesis I propose a novel method to estimate the dose and injection-to-meal time for low-risk intensive insulin therapy. This dosage-aid system uses an optimization algorithm to determine the insulin dose and injection-to-meal time that minimizes the risk of postprandial hyper- and hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetic patients. To this end, the algorithm applies a methodology that quantifies the risk of experiencing different grades of hypo- or hyperglycaemia in the postprandial state induced by insulin therapy according to an individual patient’s parameters. This methodology is based on modal interval analysis (MIA). Applying MIA, the postprandial glucose level is predicted with consideration of intra-patient variability and other sources of uncertainty. A worst-case approach is then used to calculate the risk index. In this way, a safer prediction of possible hyper- and hypoglycaemic episodes induced by the insulin therapy tested can be calculated in terms of these uncertainties.

Intensive insulin treatment induces insulin resistance in diabetic rats by impairing glucose metabolism-related mechanisms in muscle and liver

Insulin replacement is the only effective therapy to manage hyperglycemia in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). Nevertheless, intensive insulin therapy has inadvertently led to insulin resistance. This study investigates mechanisms involved in the insulin resistance induced by hyperinsulinization. Wistar rats were rendered diabetic by alloxan injection, and 2 weeks later received saline or different doses of neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin (1.5, 3, 6, and 9 U/day) over 7 days. Insulinopenic-untreated rats and 6U- and 9U-treated rats developed insulin resistance, whereas 3U-treated rats revealed the highest grade of insulin sensitivity, but did not achieve good glycemic control as 6U- and 9U-treated rats did. This insulin sensitivity profile was in agreement with glucose transporter 4 expression and translocation in skeletal muscle, and insulin signaling, phosphoenolpyruvate carboxykinase/glucose-6-phosphatase expression and glycogen storage in the liver. Under the expectation that insulin resistance develops in hyperinsulinized diabetic patients, we believe insulin sensitizer approaches should be considered in treating T1DM. Journal of Endocrinology (2011) 211, 55-64

Short-term stromal alterations in the rat ventral prostate following alloxan-induced diabetes and the influence of insulin replacement

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Insulin analogues in the treatment of diabetes in pregnancy

Pregnancy affects both maternal and fetal metabolism, and even in non-diabetic women, it exerts a diabetogenic effect. Among pregnant women, 2% to 14% develop gestational diabetes. Pregnancy can also occur in women with preexisting diabetes, which may predispose the fetus to many alterations in organogenesis, restrict growth, and the mother, to some diabetes-related complications, such as retinopathy and nephropathy, or to acceleration of the course of these complications, if they are already present. Women with gestational diabetes generally start their treatment with diet and lifestyle changes; when these changes are not enough for optimal glycemic control, insulin therapy must then be considered. Women with type 2 diabetes using oral hypoglycemic agents are advised to change to insulin therapy. Those with preexisting type 1 diabetes should start intensive glycemic control. As basal insulin analogues have frequently been used off-label in pregnant women, there is a need to evaluate their safety and efficacy. The aim of this review is to report the use of both short- and long-acting insulin analogues during pregnancy and to enable clinicians, obstetricians, and endocrinologists to choose the best insulin treatment for their patients.