Type 2 Diabetics Experience Hyperglycemia Throughout The Day?

POSTPRANDIAL (after meals) hyperglycemia is one of the earliest abnormalities of glucose homeostasis associated with type 2 diabetes and is markedly exaggerated in diabetic patients with fasting hyperglycemia. And research conducted with human patients, mice, and pancreas beta cell cultures all point to a single threshold at which elevated blood sugars cause permanent damage to your body: 140 mg/dl (7.8 mmol/l) after meals.

Better control of postprandial blood glucose levels contributes more to improvement in HbA1c levels than fasting glycemic control. And since HbA1c is the gold standard for determining glycemic control among people with both type 1 and type 2 diabetes, all diabetics struggle to control the blood sugar round-the-clock.

However, a new research study from The Netherlands suggests that diabetics face a Sisyphean task ‒ postprandial hyperglycemia is highly prevalent throughout the day in type 2 diabetes patients, including even those patients with HbA1c well below 7.0%.

Although postprandial hyperglycemia is recognized as an important target in type 2 diabetes treatment, information on the prevalence of postprandial hyperglycemia throughout the day is limited. The researchers therefore assessed the prevalence of hyperglycemia throughout the day in type 2 diabetes patients and healthy controls under standardized dietary, but otherwise free-living conditions.

The researchers recruited 60 male type 2 diabetes patients (HbA1c 7.5 ± 0.1%) and 24 age- and BMI-matched normal glucose tolerant controls to participate in a comparative study of daily glycemic control. During a 3-day experimental period, blood glucose concentrations throughout the day were assessed by continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).

The researchers discovered that type 2 diabetes patients experienced hyperglycemia (glucose concentrations > 180 mg/dl [10 mmol/l]) 38 ± 4% of the day. Even diabetes patients with an HbA1c level below 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) experienced hyperglycemia for as much as 24 ± 5% throughout the day. Hyperglycemia was negligible in the control group (3 ± 1%).

After evaluating the data, the researchers concluded that hyperglycemia is highly prevalent throughout the day in type 2 diabetes patients, including even those patients with HbA1c well below 7.0%. More importantly, “standard medical care with prescription of oral blood glucose lowering medication does not provide ample protection against postprandial hyperglycemia,” the authors wrote.

The aim of every diabetic is to keep postprandial blood sugar levels in line with the recommendations of the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists, an organization of specialists who treat diabetes, that blood sugar should not be allowed to rise above 140 mg/dl two hours after a meal. The International Diabetes Federation (IDF) has also adopted the 140 mg/dl post-meal blood sugar target.

Since, as Dutch study shows, a majority of patients with diabetes fail to achieve their glycemic goals, it means elevated postprandial glucose (PPG) concentrations contribute to suboptimal glycemic control.

What is the contribution of PPG to the long-term complications of diabetes? Many studies have demonstrated a positive association between diabetic complications and hyperglycemia. “Complications" is a euphemism for some very ugly outcomes that include blindness, amputation, kidney failure and death. Considering the interrelationships among glycemic measures, this is not surprising.

A team of Italian researchers led by A Gastardelli started examining beta cell response to glucose in people with normal blood sugars discovered that a small amount of beta cell dysfunction began to be detectable in people whose blood sugar rose only slightly over 100 mg/dl on a 2-hour glucose tolerance test. The beta cells are the cells in the pancreas that produce the insulin your body uses to control your blood sugar.

Analyzing their data further, they found that with every small increase in the 2-hour glucose tolerance test result, there was a corresponding increase in how much beta cell failure was detectable. The higher a person's blood sugar rose within "normal" range, the more beta cells were failing.

In another study, University of Utah neurologists found that patients who were not known to be diabetic, but who registered 140/mg or higher on the 2-hour sample taken during a glucose tolerance test were much more likely to have a diabetic form of neuropathy than those who had lower blood sugars. Even more telling, the researchers found that the length of time a patient had experienced this nerve pain correlated with how high their blood sugar had risen over 140 mg/dl on the 2-hour glucose tolerance test reading.

It is important to note that this study also showed that only the glucose tolerance test results corresponded to the incidence of neuropathy in these patients, not their fasting blood sugar levels or their results on the HbA1c test. This is significant because most American doctors do not offer their patients glucose tolerance tests, only the fasting glucose and HbA1c tests that fail to diagnose these obviously damaging post-meal blood sugars.

Given facts such as these, what does a diabetic do? Jenny Ruhlsuggests that if your blood sugar has been very high for a while, you can bring down the levels by proceeding in stages, setting your blood sugar targets progressively lower, a step at a time. But don't stay at higher than normal levels for any longer than is absolutely necessary. Once your body does adapt, you will probably feel much better and much more energetic than before.

Ruhl recommends patience while your body becomes accustomed to new, healthy, blood sugar levels, cautioning not to respond to feeling as if you were having a hypo by eating carbs to push up your blood sugar as long as your blood sugar tests at 80 mg/dl (4.4 mmol/l) or above. Give your body a chance to adapt and eventually you will feel completely normal when you have a normal blood sugar and may feel surprisingly toxic when your blood sugar reaches the dangerously high levels that you used to feel normal at, she says.

The 140 mg/dl (7.8 mmol/L) blood sugar target is a good start, but many of us find we feel better and get even more normal health if we shoot for truly normal blood sugars and keep our blood sugar under 120 mg/dl (6.7 mmol/L) at all times. If you can do it, go for it. Now that we know that heart attack risk rises significantly at HbA1c in the mid 5% range, getting to true normal is that much more important, Ruhl concludes.

After Cracking Metformin Code, Scientist Makes Breakthrough Discovery That Points The Way To New Class Of Diabetes Drugs

HDAC inhibitors may provide a novel way to cut excessive blood glucose levels at the source

RESEARCHERS have uncovered a novel mechanism that turns up glucose production in the liver when blood sugar levels drop, pointing towards a new class of drugs for the treatment of metabolic disease, the Salk Institute for Biological Studies announced in a press statement today.

In a uniquely collaborative study, the scientists have found evidence ‒ published in the May 13, 2011 issue of the journal Cell‒ that a group of enzymes, or proteins, currently under investigation for the treatment of cancer could potentially also work as a treatment for type 2 diabetes. This is significant because it not only portends a new treatment for diabetes, but it also could mean that a new treatment has already gotten through the costly and lengthy early stages of drug development.

The Salk discovery revolves around enzymes called histone deacetylases, or HDACs, which help the liver produce sugars when blood glucose runs low after prolonged periods of fasting, particularly at night. After a meal, insulin “instructs” muscle cells to store this glucose and turns off sugar production in the liver. In patients with type 2 diabetes, however, the body effectively doesn’t “listen” to insulin, and the liver keeps producing sugar.

Dr, Reuben J. Shaw

"These exciting results show that drugs that inhibit the activity of class II HDACs may be worthwhile to be pursued as potential diabetes drugs," said lead author Reuben Shaw, an assistant professor in Salk’s Molecular and Cell Biology Laboratory.

Up to this point, all experiments had been performed in cultured cells but the researchers were really interested in whether class II HDACs controlled blood glucose in mouse models of diabetes. Strikingly, suppression of all three HDACs simultaneously restored blood glucose levels to almost normal in four different models of type 2 diabetes.

"The key will be to specifically block HDACs involved in glucose control," said Shaw, "but the fact gluconeogenesis takes place in the liver makes this task easier as most drugs sooner or later travel to the liver once they hit the bloodstream."

"Our results predict then that some of those drugs, probably not the same ones that work on cancer but some of the ones that are sitting on the shelf that maybe weren’t effective for cancer but in fact hit these enzymes, that they could be potential therapeutics for diabetes," said Shaw. "That means that the time from this initial discovery until the time that this can be tested in the clinic is much shorter."

Ronald Evans, a professor in Salk’s Gene Expression Laboratory, said that while this discovery is novel, scientists have long noticed a link between cancer and diabetes, particularly because the risks of both diseases are increased in obese patients. This discovery -- that suppressing HDACs can treat diabetes as well as cancer -- is a way of turning this theory into a potential treatment.

"We know that along with increased weight and obesity there is an increased risk of cancer. We also know that cancer cells undergo a profound metabolic change and so the cancer metabolism has become a very big area (of study)," Evans said.

"So for those of us who study metabolism and study cancer, the link between these two seemingly separate areas, actually at the level of the genome, happen to work with several common pathways," he continued, "because they’re both dealing with either consuming energy, which is what happens with cancer, or storing energy, which is what happens with obesity."

Currently, metformin (Glucophage, Glucophage XR, Glumetza, Fortamet, Riomet), an oral biguanide anti-diabetic drug, is the most widely prescribed agent for treatment of type 2 diabetes. The drug mainly works by lowering glucose production by the liver, and thus lowering fasting blood glucose. Although metformin – approved in the United States in 1994, and in Europe prior to that – has been used for many years, its mechanism of action is not well understood.

"Metformin is originally derived from a plant found in Western Europe called 'French lilac' or 'Goat's Rue' because goats didn't like to eat it. They steered clear of the plant because it contains a compound that acts to naturally lower blood glucose in animals that eat it ‒ to prevent them from eating it again," Shaw explained.

Does Periodic Fasting Lower The Risk?

A few years ago, Shaw discovered how metformin helps insulin to control glucose levels: It binds to a "metabolic master switch" known as AMPK that blocks glucose production in the liver. Trying to identify novel targets of AMPK that might be relevant to diabetes, Maria Mihaylova, a graduate student in the Shaw laboratory, focused her efforts on a family of HDACs known as class II HDACs. They function as negative regulators of gene activity by stabilizing the tightly coiled structure of DNA in chromosomes, making it inaccessible to proteins that transcribe DNA.

Working closely with Ronald M. Evans and his team, Mihaylova found that inhibiting class II HDACs shut down genes encoding enzymes needed to synthesize glucose in liver. "We identified class II HDACs as direct targets of AMPK in a bioinformatics-based screen, but we didn't know which genes they might regulate in liver since they weren't even known to be found there," said Mihaylova.

In collaboration with her colleagues in Marc Montminy's lab, a professor in the Clayton Foundation Laboratories for Peptide Biology, and like Shaw and Evans a member of the Center for Nutritional Genomics at the Salk Institute, Mihaylova discovered that HDACs themselves associated with the DNA regulatory elements controlling the expression of the glucose synthesizing enzymes, but they only flocked there after she had treated cells with the fasting hormone glucagon.

"In response to the glucagon, chemical modifications on class II HDACs are removed and they can translocate into the nucleus," she explains. There, they bind to FOXO, a key metabolic regulator, which had been shown previously to be shut down by insulin.

"It came as a big surprise that FOXO is activated by glucagon," explains Shaw. Further experiments confirmed that the genetic suppression of class II HDACs in liver cells led to an increase in acetylated FOXO, which now can neither bind DNA nor activate the genes encoding glucose-synthesizing enzymes.

A parallel study, led by Montminy and published in the same issue of Cell as Shaw's paper, shows that in fruit flies, FOXO not only controls the expression of a fat-digesting enzyme but is activated by a glucagon-like hormone in a manner similar to human FOXO.

"The central circuitry of how animals regulate metabolism in response to fasting and feeding is conserved from fly all the way to man emphasizing the importance of class II HDACs in coordinating how different hormones direct the creation and use of glucose," says Shaw, who is a co-author on Montminy's paper.

Shaw next plans to test whether these glucose loving HDACs may also play roles in certain forms of cancer as well.

Source: Salk Institute for Biological Studies

UK Trials to Determine if Metformin Given to Overweight Expectant Mothers Can Stop Them From Having Fat Babies Begin

HUNDREDS of overweight mothers-to-be are being given metformin up to three times a day during their pregnancy to stop them from having obese babies as part of a controversial trial in the UK. The trial involves 400 obese but non-diabetic volunteers at hospitals in Liverpool, Edinburgh and Coventry.

Half will take metformin from around 12 weeks into their pregnancy and half will take a placebo. Their health and their babies’ health will be monitored and the results are expected in four years. It is hoped the treatment will prevent the birth of overweight babies and bring down the need to carry out caesarean sections as well as preeclampsia.

The latest figures show that almost half of women of childbearing age in Britain are overweight or obese and more than 15 percent of pregnant women are obese. This raises their odds of dying in pregnancy, of their baby being stillborn and of a host of pregnancy complications, some of which can be fatal.

Indeed, one of the most alarming facts to emerge after the trails were announced is that each year the Liverpool Women’s Hospital, for example, cares for more than 500 pregnant women who have a body mass index of more than 40 – which translates as severely obese.

Doctors believe many overweight adults can trace their problems back to the womb, when the fetus absorbs too many sugars and fats because of the high levels of insulin in their mother’s blood. But rather than trying to help the expectant mother lose weight, the drug would help keep the weight of the unborn baby down by reducing the levels of blood sugar passed to babies in the womb

Metformin, long cleared for the treatment of diabetes in pregnancy, has been safely used by diabetics for decades and the UK researchers think early intervention administering it to obese expectant mothers could save youngsters from a lifetime of weight problems and ill-health.

The doctors behind the trial say obesity among pregnant women is reaching epidemic proportions and they need to protect the health of tomorrow’s children. However, many healthy women are likely to be uneasy about mass medication in pregnancy for a problem that can be treated through changes to diet and exercise.

Ian Campbell, medical director of charity Weight Concern, said: “In an ideal world we would be in a position to assist women to be of a near-normal bodyweight prior to conception. But that is not realistic in the current environment. The reality is that many women go through pregnancy carrying too much body fat and it is important we do something about it because it causes serious problems.”

Defending the exercise which has raised the hackles of several groups, Andrew Weeks, who is leading the trial, said: "It is about trying to improve outcomes in pregnancy for women who are overweight. The problem is babies tend to be larger and many of the downsides of being overweight during pregnancy relate to the birth."

Documents for the trial state: “Rates of obesity in adults and children are rising exponentially in the UK, as in other developed nations, and there are major causes for concern. The problem of maternal obesity, leading to programming of future life obesity risk in offspring, and manifest by excess birth weight, is reaching epidemic proportions. We believe that metformin will likely be an effective therapy in interrupting this cycle.”

Professor Norman, of Edinburgh University, said metformin was judged as a safe drug but the trial is needed to ensure the benefits outweighed any risks. She added that if the trial does show metformin to be of benefit, it is unlikely to work in all women and is most likely to be prescribed alongside advice on diet and exercise.

Nonetheless, women rightfully feel "uneasy" about the trial, said Alison Wetton, CEO of Britain's fastest growing weight loss organization, All About Weight. "No mother-to-be likes to take medication, and the fact that the widely-used diabetes pill, metformin, is being trialed to prevent obese babies being born to overweight mothers is disturbing to me, and I am sure most other women as well," she said.

Will Williams, scientific advisor for All About Weight, said that although there were "reasonable grounds" for the trial, it was "a shame that it is needed at all.” He said women wanting to conceive could instead lose weight by following a healthy weight loss plan, including diet and exercise, and "thus achieve all the things that the metformin trial is hoping to do, without the risks or costs of adding a drug with uncertain long term effects."

“This would be far preferable to popping a pill that may help pregnancy outcomes but is unlikely to break the cycle of an unhealthy lifestyle leading to overweight children and the continuing rise of obesity and diabetes in the general population," he stressed.

Related Posts:

Bad Diet for Expectant Mother Can Mean a Fat Baby

Fat Fathers Pass on Diabetes

Looking Beyond HbA1c: Research To Find New Diabetes Biomarkers Gains Traction

The discovery of several new biomarkers in the blood may further our understanding of exactly who’s at risk for diabetes
BETA cells within the pancreas produce and release insulin. Loss of the function of these cells compromises the body’s ability to control blood sugar and underlies the development of diabetes. So, one of the next frontiers of diabetes therapeutics is to change the progression rate of beta cell failure.

Recognizing this as a research priority, the Foundation of the National Institutes of Health (FNIH) Biomarkers Consortium announced Tuesday the launch of a multi-year clinical study to improve tools for measuring the function of insulin-producing beta cells in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Researchers hope the initiative will lead to improved techniques for tracking progression of the disease and pave the way for more effective treatments.

The project ‒ “Diabetes Drug Development: Identification and Validation of Markers that Predict Long-Term Beta Cell Function and Mass” ‒ is being managed by the Metabolic Disorders Steering Committee (MDSC) of the FNIH Biomarkers Consortium.

It is a three-year, $5.1 million clinical study to standardize tests for measuring beta cell function in the clinical setting that aims to improve methods for the early prediction of the long-term response to an intervention and for identification of patients at risk for rapid beta cell function deterioration, thereby enabling future clinical studies that examine diabetes progression.

A biomarker is a biochemical feature or facet that can be used to measure the progress of disease or the effects of treatment. So the validation of biomarkers to measure the progression of diabetes will greatly facilitate the development of better medicines to treat and potentially prevent this disease and its often disabling complications.

Experts believe biomarkers will become one of the major driving forces of pharmaceutical research and drug development in the coming years.

Currently, diabetes researchers are working without the benefit of agreed-upon standards for gauging beta cell function and this initiative will give researchers practical tools that can be used to measure beta cell function over time and stimulate research to maintain and improve that function.

The project was developed through a rigorous consensus-building process by a team of experts from across the entire scientific community. The pharmaceutical industry, academic, and government representatives contributed their clinical trials expertise and scientific support to the design and execution of the studies.

Utilizing a collaborative approach, the FNIH Biomarkers Consortium has brought together diabetes experts from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), Food and Drug Administration (FDA), leading academic institutions, the pharmaceutical industry, and non-profit sector to develop the project.

Biomarkers play an integral part in conducting clinical trials and treating patients. In most instances, they help medical practitioners, researchers, and regulatory officials make well-informed, scientifically sound decisions.

However, in clinical studies, there is often uncertainty in how much weight to place on biomarker results versus clinical outcomes. This uncertainty emanates from opposing goals of the drug approval process. On one hand, the process must ensure that all therapeutics tested are safe and that the benefits outweigh the risks. On the other hand, the process should allow therapies to be accessible to patients as quickly as reasonably possible.

Judicious use of biomarkers in the drug development process can bring these goals into alignment. More efficient discovery and use of biomarkers in the development of anti-diabetes drugs will depend on advancing current understanding of the pathogenesis of diabetes and especially its macrovascular (pertaining to the larger blood vessels) complications.

The idea of using biomarkers to predict diabetes is not entirely new. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) values are now routinely being monitored to screen for at-risk patients. A study published in PLoS One last year shows that several new biomarkers in the blood may further our understanding of exactly who’s at risk for diabetes, and increase our knowledge of the etiology of the disease.

Veikko Salomaa and colleagues from the Department of Chronic Disease Prevention at the National Institute for Health and Welfare in Helsinki, Finland, tested nearly 13,000 people and found almost 600 cases of diabetes during routine follow-up exams.

According to the study, low levels of adiponectin, and high levels of apoB, C-reactive protein (CRP), and insulin, increase the chance that a woman will develop diabetes. When these factors were measured, proper diabetes prediction increased by 14% compared to when doctors only use classic risk factors, such as BMI and blood glucose levels, to predict disease.

The biomarkers that best predicted diabetes in men were low adiponectin, and high levels of CRP, interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL-1RA), and ferritin. Accounting for these biomarkers led to a 25% increase in correct diabetes detection in the cohort. Adiponectin is a hormone found in the body that modulates a number of metabolic processes, including glucose regulation and fatty acid catabolism.

The use of adiponectin, a hormone derived from fat cells, which is abundant in plasma and easy to measure through commercially available kits, was also confirmed as a robust biomarker predictive of glycemic efficacy in Type 2 diabetes and healthy subjects, after treatment with peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-agonists (PPAR), but not after treatment with non-PPAR drugs such as metformin by the first project to be completed by the Biomarkers Consortium.

The project conducted a statistical analysis of pooled and blinded pre-existing data from Phase II clinical trials contributed by four pharmaceutical companies and analyzed under the direction of a diverse team of scientists from industry, the National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Food & Drug Administration (FDA), and academic research institutions.

Source: FNIH Biomarker Consortium

mHealth: How Cell Phones Can Deliver Better Diabetes Care

AT long last, technology is coming to the rescue of diabetics, trying to make diabetes management easier. In fact, just in the past few years, there finally has been marvelous progress in diabetes care. This isn’t just with insulin pumps and home blood glucose monitoring systems. The technologies available now and those at the cusp of development are really encouraging and exciting.

It is heartening to see the advantages of the wireless world finally being brought to use beyond socializing. For diabetics, they’re being used as a means of communicating critical information about our health and the status of the conditions that can be mortally devastating and an expensive burden.

For example, after a year-long study researchers have demonstrated how a mHealth ‒ mobile-phone-based remote patient monitoring ‒ system helped patients in Canada with type 2 diabetes and uncontrolled hypertension get their blood pressure (BP) under control. The study findings were presented at a press briefing in Tampa, Florida at the American Telemedicine Association’s (ATA) 16th Annual International Meeting last week and discussed later in this report.

Telehealth: The New Frontier
Telemedicine is the use of medical information exchanged from one site to another via electronic communications to improve patients' health status. Closely associated with telemedicine is the term "telehealth," which is often used to encompass a broader definition of remote healthcare that does not always involve clinical services. Videoconferencing, transmission of still images, e-health including patient portals, remote monitoring of vital signs, continuing medical education and nursing call centers are all considered part of telemedicine and telehealth.

Telemedicine is not a separate medical specialty. Products and services related to telemedicine are often part of a larger investment by health care institutions in either information technology or the delivery of clinical care. Even in the reimbursement fee structure, there is usually no distinction made between services provided on site and those provided through telemedicine and often no separate coding required for billing of remote services.

Of course, nothing replaces weight loss and proper diet. But communications technology can be used as a means to inform, monitor and support patients and health care providers and medical companies are quickly learning how to leverage emerging communication and electronic technologies to make diabetes management more efficient, reducing hospitalizations and ultimately decreasing the cost of the disease to individuals and on society.

Mobile Health: The New Hot Topic
Dale C. Alverson, MD, ATA president and medical director of the Center for Telehealth at the University of New Mexico Health Sciences Center in Albuquerque, said "mobile health, or mHealth, is the hot topic in telemedicine technology. These are applications for remote monitoring of patients with chronic disease, such as diabetes and chronic congestive heart failure, through a mobile phone-based system."

This technology is "becoming ubiquitous," he added, "and in our program, we are seeing the providers and the patients adopting this technology in ways we may never have dreamed of. It adds that mobility and that sense of connection between patient and provider."

Killer Apps That Are Revolutionizing Diabetes Care

This was ably demonstrated by Joseph Cafazzo, PhD, PEng, senior director of eHealth Innovation at the University Health Network, in Toronto, Ontario, Canada, and his colleagues who developed and tested an mHealth intervention to automate capture of BP readings through a mobile-phone-based system that provides "actionable messages to patients and critical alerts to physicians."

Their study involved 110 men and women with type 2 diabetes and uncontrolled systolic hypertension. Study subjects had a mean age of 62 years and a mean weight of 90.2 kg (198.4 lbs).

Over the course of 1 year, half of the subjects monitored their BP at home with a standard home BP monitoring system (the control group). The other half used a Bluetooth-enabled BP monitor that transmitted readings through a mobile-phone-based remote patient monitoring system to their family physician (the intervention group). These patients were also given automated reminders after 3 days of not taking their measurements.

The ChroniCare system

At baseline, patients' mean daytime BP was 142.7/77.1 mm Hg. After 1 year, Dr. Cafazzo reported, the intervention group had a 9.1 mm Hg dip in systolic BP (P < .0001) and a 4.6 mm Hg dip in diastolic BP (P < .0001). In contrast, there was virtually no change in the control group. According to the investigators, "50% of patients in the telemonitoring group had their BP under good control (130/80 mm Hg)," compared with only 29% in the control group (P < .05).

Self-awareness: Gateway to Better Self-care
"The family doctors caring for these patients really had nothing to do with the improvements. This was really a self-care tool and the patients were performing better self-care because they were more self-aware, more accountable," Dr. Cafazzo said.

By contrast, study patients who merely checked their BP at home, without reporting it to their physician through the remote system, had no marked change in BP during the study. "The act of just giving a patient a [BP] home monitor had no effect; it had to have the telemonitoring component," Dr Cafazzo pointed out.

"We believe that patients become far more self-aware and more accountable to their care provider knowing that the data are going back to their care provider and that the care provider will be acting on it," he explained.

During the briefing, Dr. Cafazzo also shared similarly promising findings from a recently completed study in which a mobile-phone-based system significantly improved uncontrolled BP in a group of chronic heart failure patients.

For the heart failure patient, he explained, "we have a decision support engine that looks at the data and only sends relevant data to the clinician when the algorithm determines that the patient is deteriorating at home." This is a "first of its kind," he added, in terms of using a mobile-phone-based system to monitor multiple parameters.

Next Target: Adolescents With Diabetes
Dr. Cafazzo also presented preliminary findings from the first clinical trial of an iPhone application called "Bant," which has a fully integrated glucometer and targets adolescents 12 to 16 years of age with type 1 diabetes. The study currently has 28 adolescents enrolled.

"This is a very difficult population," he said. "They are transitioning from being totally dependent on their parent's care to asserting their independence, and unfortunately their HbA1c often starts to increase. We knew this population would be amenable to the iPhone, but that their attention span would be very short."

To entice these young people, the researchers incorporated a social networking application. "There is essentially a microblogging chat room where these kids can exchange their experiences; so far, kids are using it and usually they talk about music, the iPhone, anything but their diabetes," Dr. Cafazzo reported.

There is also a redeemable point system that rewards participants with iTunes for taking and reporting their blood sugar levels regularly. "The rewards mechanism appears to be working very well," Dr. Cafazzo said.

Not surprisingly, it is because of studies like these that the health care market is seeing a large influx of companies who are putting technology to use in a growing field of healthcare communications and health-record management. At a basic level, this means using technology to manage health records and share information with a patient’s physician or other approved health care providers and caregivers ‒ including family members. At an advanced level, the possibilities are endless.

Sources: American Telemedicine Association, Medscape News, PubMed

Related articles:
Sustaining better diabetes care in remote indigenous Australian communities

A feasibility study of remote monitoring of CAPD patient’s blood pressure and blood glucose measurements via the internet

Mobile phone-based remote patient monitoring system for management of hypertension in diabetic patients

“Normal” Blood Sugar Levels May Still Mean You Have Prediabetes

FPG between 91 and 99 mg/dl is a strong independent predictor of type 2 diabetes, claims new study

Type 2 diabetes is a lifestyle disease in which the body no longer responds appropriately to the hormone insulin, which helps ferry sugar from the blood into our cells after a meal. When fasting blood sugar levels reach 126 mg/dl or more, doctors will diagnose diabetes.

Prediabetes means that your blood sugar level is higher than normal, but it's not yet increased enough to be classified as type 2 diabetes. Still, without intervention, prediabetes is likely to become type 2 diabetes in 10 years or less. (Scroll to end for Prediabetes FAQs)

Traditionally, blood sugar levels below 100 mg/dl have been considered “safe”, whereas levels between 100 and 126 signal a “higher risk” of diabetes (prediabetes). But according to the new study by Dr. Paolo Brambilla and colleagues at the University Milano Bicocca in Italy, the currently accepted "normal" blood sugar range might be too wide.

“FPG (Fasting Plasma Glucose) between 91 and 99 mg/dl is a strong independent predictor of type 2 diabetes and should be used to identify people to be further investigated and aided with preventive measures,” the researchers say. The conclusion significantly expands the "prediabetes" label.

To back their claim, the researchers report that in the course of their study they discovered people at the high end of what's considered the "normal" blood sugar range are twice as likely to get the disease as are those in the low end. The findings are in line with an earlier study from Oregon, and the Italian researchers say they can help identify the people who need extra medical attention.

The researchers looked at data for nearly 14,000 men and women who'd had blood drawn several times at their clinic. The patients were between 40 and 69 years old and all of them had normal blood sugar levels at first. Over the next seven to eight years, on average, about two percent of the women and nearly three percent of the men developed diabetes.

Less than one percent of those who started out with fasting blood sugar levels between 51 and 82 mg/dl wound up with the disease, while more than three percent did so if they had values between 91 and 99. After controlling for other factors that might influence the likelihood of getting diabetes, that corresponded to a two-fold difference in risk of developing the disease.

Research has shown that if you have prediabetes, the long-term damage of diabetes — especially to your heart and circulatory system — may already be starting. If your blood sugar tests over 100 mg/dl fasting more than once, your fasting blood sugar is likely to go over the 125 mg/dl level used to diagnose full diabetes within 3 years.

More importantly, if your blood sugar is at 100 mg/dl fasting, it is very likely that your post-meal blood sugar is heading towards the diabetic range, which is over 200 mg/dl which is why your fasting blood sugar is deteriorating. High post-meal blood sugars kill beta cells. If you can bring down those post-meal highs, you may be able to prevent the beta cell death that is destroying your fasting control!

While opinion is divided on the question whether doctors should treat these people any different, as the researchers suggest, everyone agrees that people should strive to manage their weight and be physically active irrespective of what their blood sugar level is.

The bald reality is that, according to the American Diabetes Association, in the US alone there are three times as many prediabetics as people with diabetes (79:27 million). And It is estimated that there will be 418 million people worldwide with prediabetes by 2025.

How to Tell if You Have Prediabetes
The American Diabetes Association says while diabetes and prediabetes occur in people of all ages and races, some groups have a higher risk for developing the disease than others and warns that Diabetes is more common in African Americans, Latinos, Native Americans, and Asian Americans/Pacific Islanders, as well as the aged population. This means they are also at increased risk for developing prediabetes.

There are three different tests your doctor can use to determine whether you have prediabetes:

• The A1C test

• The fasting plasma glucose test (FPG)

• The oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT).

The blood glucose levels measured after these tests determine whether you have a normal metabolism, or whether you have prediabetes or diabetes.

If your blood glucose level is abnormal following the FPG, you have impaired fasting glucose (IFG); if your blood glucose level is abnormal following the OGTT, you have impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). Both are also known as prediabetes.

The American Diabetes Association Risk Test for Diabetes can help you determine if you are at increased risk for diabetes or prediabetes. A high score may indicate that you have prediabetes or at risk for prediabetes. Take the test and find out for sure.

ADA Prediabetes FAQs

What is prediabetes and how is it different from diabetes?
Prediabetes is the state that occurs when a person's blood glucose levels are higher than normal but not high enough for a diagnosis of diabetes. About 11 percent of people with prediabetes in the Diabetes Prevention Program standard or control group developed type 2 diabetes each year during the average 3 years of follow-up. Other studies show that many people with prediabetes develop type 2 diabetes in 10 years.

What are the symptoms of prediabetes?
The reason why so many people suffer from prediabetes and are completely unaware of it is because it is quite possible for no symptoms to manifest themselves. Both diabetes and prediabetes develop at a gradual rate.

How do I know if I have prediabetes?
Doctors can use either the fasting plasma glucose test (FPG) or the oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) to detect prediabetes. Both require a person to fast overnight. In the FPG test, a person's blood glucose is measured first thing in the morning before eating. In the OGTT, a person's blood glucose is checked after fasting and again 2 hours after drinking a glucose-rich drink.

How do I stop prediabetes developing into Type 2 diabetes?

The good news may be that, if you have become aware of the disease early, your condition can still be cured. The two principle factors for consideration are the changing of diet and the addition of appropriate physical exercise to your lifestyle. By making these changes, it may be possible to return blood sugar levels to normal. Prediabetes is a serious medical condition that can be treated.

The recently completed Diabetes Prevention Program study conclusively showed that people with prediabetes can prevent the development of type 2 diabetes by making changes in their diet and increasing their level of physical activity. They may even be able to return their blood glucose levels to the normal range. But for a comprehensive and individual plan you should see your doctor.

Is prediabetes the same as Impaired Glucose Tolerance or Impaired Fasting Glucose?
Yes. Doctors sometimes refer to this state of elevated blood glucose levels as Impaired Glucose Tolerance or Impaired Fasting Glucose (IGT/IFG), depending on which test was used to detect it.

Why do we need to give it a new name? Has the condition changed?
The condition has not changed, but what we know about it has. We are giving IGT/IFG a new name for several reasons. prediabetes is a clearer way of explaining what it means to have higher than normal blood glucose levels. It means you are likely to develop diabetes and may already be experiencing the adverse health effects of this serious condition. People with prediabetes are at higher risk of cardiovascular disease. People with prediabetes have a 1.5-fold risk of cardiovascular disease compared to people with normal blood glucose. People with diabetes have a 2- to 4-fold increased risk of cardiovascular disease. We now know that people with prediabetes can delay or prevent the onset of type 2 diabetes through lifestyle changes.

How does the FPG test define diabetes and prediabetes?
Normal fasting blood glucose is below 100 mg/dl. A person with prediabetes has a fasting blood glucose level between 100 and 125 mg/dl. If the blood glucose level rises to 126 mg/dl or above, a person has diabetes.

How does the OGTT define diabetes and prediabetes?
In the OGTT, a person's blood glucose is measured after a fast and 2 hours after drinking a glucose-rich beverage. Normal blood glucose is below 140 mg/dl 2 hours after the drink. In prediabetes, the 2-hour blood glucose is 140 to 199 mg/dl. If the 2-hour blood glucose rises to 200 mg/dl or above, a person has diabetes.

Which test is better?
According to the expert panel, either test is appropriate to identify prediabetes.

Why do I need to know if I have prediabetes?
If you have prediabetes, you can and should do something about it. Studies have shown that people with prediabetes can prevent or delay the development of type 2 diabetes by up to 58 percent through changes to their lifestyle that include modest weight loss and regular exercise. The expert panel recommends that people with prediabetes reduce their weight by 5-10 percent and participate in some type of modest physical activity for 30 minutes daily. For some people with prediabetes, intervening early can actually turn back the clock and return elevated blood glucose levels to the normal range.

What is the treatment for prediabetes?
Treatment consists of losing a modest amount of weight (5-10 percent of total body weight) through diet and moderate exercise, such as walking, 30 minutes a day, 5 days a week. Don't worry if you can't get to your ideal body weight. A loss of just 10 to 15 pounds can make a huge difference. If you have prediabetes, you are at a 50 percent increased risk for heart disease or stroke, so your doctor may wish to treat or counsel you about cardiovascular risk factors, such as tobacco use, high blood pressure, and high cholesterol.

Who should get tested for prediabetes?
If you are overweight and age 45 or older, you should be checked for prediabetes during your next routine medical office visit. If your weight is normal and you're over age 45, you should ask your doctor during a routine office visit if testing is appropriate. For adults younger than 45 and overweight, your doctor may recommend testing if you have any other risk factors for diabetes or prediabetes. These include high blood pressure, low HDL cholesterol and high triglycerides, a family history of diabetes, a history of gestational diabetes or giving birth to a baby weighing more than 9 pounds, or belonging to an ethnic or minority group at high risk for diabetes.

How often should I be tested?
If your blood glucose levels are in the normal range, it is reasonable to be checked every 3 years. If you have prediabetes, you should be checked for type 2 diabetes every 1-2 years after your diagnosis.

Could I have prediabetes and not know it?
Absolutely. People with prediabetes don't often have symptoms. In fact, millions of people have diabetes and don't know it because symptoms develop so gradually, people often don't recognize them. Some people have no symptoms at all. Symptoms of diabetes include unusual thirst, a frequent desire to urinate, blurred vision, or a feeling of being tired most of the time for no apparent reason.

Sources: American Diabetes Association, Diabetes Care, Diabetes UK

Group Visits To Doctor Can Help Diabetics Get High-Value, High-Quality Health Care At Reduced Cost

THE American Association of Clinical Endocrinology (AACE) at its 20th Annual Meeting and Clinical Congress in San Diego last month issued new clinical practice guidelines for developing comprehensive care plans for patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The guidelines emphasize a personalized approach to controlling diabetes and achieving blood glucose targets with care plans that take into account patients’ risk factors for complications, comorbid conditions, and psychological, social, and economic status.

While it is recognized that every individual patient’s needs are unique, there are times when simple group visits also work wonders for diabetics manage their condition. It's a small but slowly growing trend that promises to get more attention with the tight supply of primary care physicians, who find it hard to squeeze in time to teach their patients how to deal with a complex chronic illness like diabetes.

Group visit programs are rapidly proliferating in group practice and managed care organizations throughout the United States in an effort to leverage existing resources and to provide high-value, high-quality health care in this era of increasing purchaser and patient demands for enhanced services at reduced cost.

Group visits typically include group education, shared problem-solving, focused private or semi-private medical evaluations that allow individualized medication adjustment, and ordering of preventive services and referrals. Sessions may last from 60 minutes to several hours and typically include 3 to 20 patients. The draw for patients lies in the potential for group visits to provide better access and to improve counseling, between-patient learning, and self-efficacy.

What's in it for the doctor? Dr. Ray Dorsey, a neurologist, studied the pros and cons of group appointments and found he learned more about how his Parkinson's patients were faring by watching them interact with others than when he had them one-on-one. Indeed, group visits gave him the opportunity to observe his patients for a longer period of time and appreciate problems he may not readily have appreciated during a routine office visit.

"I can see if you're getting worse over the course of the visit, your ability to eat, to walk, to converse and to think," says Dorsey, who led a pilot study of group checkups for Parkinson's patients at the University of Rochester Medical Center, adding, "This is a new way of delivering health care. People are thirsting for better ways." Dorsey reported his findings last week in the journal Neurology.

"Many heads are better than one. They think of questions you wouldn't normally think of by yourself," says Jim Euken, a retired judge and Parkinson's patient from Belmont, NY. He began exercising on a bicycle after one of Dorsey's group visits discussed research showing some patients can still cycle when they can barely walk, for unknown reasons. “I still think I learned more and I think the process was better doing it in a group format," he confirmed.

Research has shown patients often enjoy interacting in a group environment that can provide encouragement and tips that they may not receive in a short clinical visit. On the other hand, physicians may benefit from the change of pace and a chance to creatively and more thoroughly address the issues presented by chronic conditions common in primary care.

Peer pressure among patients helps, family physician Dr. George Whiddon of Quincy, Florida, told Associated Press. He has about 40 diabetic patients divided into groups for shared checkups at Tallahassee Memorial Family Medicine Quincy, and he wants to add more.

One woman with uncontrolled diabetes for years confessed to fellow patients that she'd ignored Whiddon's eat-better-take-your-meds advice for too long. "Now I only have one toe left. I should have listened," Whiddon recalled her saying. "That had more impact than anything I said all day."

The use of group visits is an innovative approach now receiving attention for its potential to improve the care of established patients with chronic conditions, such as diabetes, while using available resources more efficiently. The terminology of group visits includes “group visits,” “shared medical appointments,” “cluster visits,” and “problem-solving DIGMA (drop-in group medical appointments).”

Of course, group appointments don't replace the patient's annual in-depth physical. But many people with chronic illnesses, especially if they're not well-controlled, are supposed to have additional follow-up visits about every three months — an opportunity for shared checkups that stress patient education.

But how well do these group visits work? Evidence is mixed. An Italian study published last year found that diabetics who took part in them lowered their blood sugar, blood pressure and cholesterol more than similar patients who got regular individual office visits.

A separate study at two Veterans Affairs Medical Centers, in North Carolina and Virginia, tracked people with poorly controlled diabetes and blood pressure and also concluded shared appointments can improve care for some people. Those in group visits significantly improved their blood pressure and needed less emergency care, but there was no difference in diabetes improvement between patients who had shared checkups or regular ones.

Shared check-ups aim to help patients who are battling certain chronic diseases, and they're far from the typical 15-minute office visit. They're stretched over 90 minutes or even two hours, offering more time to quiz the doctor about concerns, learn about managing the disease — and get tips from fellow patients.

What needs to be stressed, though, is that group and individual visits work well together and complement each other: the strengths of one model are often the weaknesses of the other, and vice versa.

Edward B. Noffsinger, a pioneer in the field of group medical visits, sounds a note of caution. “While a carefully thought-out group visit program can maximize benefits to patients, physicians, purchasers, insurers, and health care organizations alike, it is very important that any potential for abuse also be thoroughly examined and scrupulously prevented if these benefits are to be fully realized,” he says.

He points out that in today's challenging, competitive health care environment, group visits can be abused in two basic ways: 1) by putting fewer resources into group visits than adequately supported, properly run programs require, or 2) by attempting to extract more from group visits than is commensurate with good care.

“If we wait until some abuse of group visits actually occurs and receives negative publicity, we could incur a public relations black eye, which could seriously undermine the credibility of all such programs in the future ‒ a predictable, preventable, and completely unnecessary injury to the image of group visit programs,” he says.

Moreover, should third-party insurers, upon recognizing the multiple economic and patient care benefits which group visits can offer, over-incentivize them relative to individual visits, abuse could result which would reduce the voluntary nature of group visits for physicians and patients alike.

“Despite all of these concerns surrounding potential abuses, group visits will undoubtedly continue to grow in importance and be ever more frequently used during the coming years. Without question, group visits have an important role to play in the future of health care,” Noffsinger concludes.

Sources: Associated Press, Neurology, American Academy of Family Physicians, NIH

Related Posts:

Individualized Care Plans Necessary for Treating Diabetes, Says AACE

NIH Unveils 10-Year New Strategic Plan to Combat Diabetes

Caring Doctors Improve Patients’ A1c, LDL Scores