Mucormycosis in COVID-19: A systematic review of cases reported worldwide and in India

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

There are increasing case reports of rhino-orbital mucormycosis in people with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), especially from India. Diabetes mellitus (DM) is an independent risk factor for both severe COVID-19 and mucormycosis. We aim to conduct a systematic review of literature to find out the patient's characteristics having mucormycosis and COVID-19.

METHODS

We searched the electronic database of PubMed and Google Scholar from inception until May 13, 2021 using keywords. We retrieved all the granular details of case reports/series of patients with mucormycosis, and COVID-19 reported world-wide. Subsequently we analyzed the patient characteristics, associated comorbidities, location of mucormycosis, use of steroids and its outcome in people with COVID-19.

RESULTS

Overall, 101 cases of mucormycosis in people with COVID-19 have been reported, of which 82 cases were from India and 19 from the rest of the world. Mucormycosis was predominantly seen in males (78.9%), both in people who were active (59.4%) or recovered (40.6%) from COVID-19. Pre-existing diabetes mellitus (DM) was present in 80% of cases, while concomitant diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) was present in 14.9%. Corticosteroid intake for the treatment of COVID-19 was recorded in 76.3% of cases. Mucormycosis involving nose and sinuses (88.9%) was most common followed by rhino-orbital (56.7%). Mortality was noted in 30.7% of the cases.

CONCLUSION

An unholy trinity of diabetes, rampant use of corticosteroid in a background of COVID-19 appears to increase mucormycosis. All efforts should be made to maintain optimal glucose and only judicious use of corticosteroids in patients with COVID-19.

Diabetes in COVID-19: Prevalence, pathophysiology, prognosis and practical considerations

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

High prevalence of diabetes makes it an important comorbidity in patients with COVID-19. We sought to review and analyze the data regarding the association between diabetes and COVID-19, pathophysiology of the disease in diabetes and management of patients with diabetes who develop COVID-19 infection.

METHODS

PubMed database and Google Scholar were searched using the key terms 'COVID-19', 'SARS-CoV-2', 'diabetes', 'antidiabetic therapy' up to April 2, 2020. Full texts of the retrieved articles were accessed.

RESULTS

There is evidence of increased incidence and severity of COVID-19 in patients with diabetes. COVID-19 could have effect on the pathophysiology of diabetes. Blood glucose control is important not only for patients who are infected with COVID-19, but also for those without the disease. Innovations like telemedicine are useful to treat patients with diabetes in today's times.

Chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine in the treatment of COVID-19 with or without diabetes: A systematic search and a narrative review with a special reference to India and other developing countries

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

No drugs are currently approved for Coronavirus Disease-2019 (COVID-19), although some have been tried. In view of recent studies and discussion on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), we aimed to review existing literature and relevant websites regarding these drugs and COVID-19, adverse effects related to drugs, and related guidelines.

AIMS AND METHODS

We systematically searched the PubMed database up till March 21, 2020 and retrieved all the articles published on chloroquine and HCQ and COVID-19.

RESULTS

Two small human studies have been conducted with both these drugs in COVID-19, and have shown significant improvement in some parameters in patients with COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Considering minimal risk upon use, a long experience of use in other diseases, cost-effectiveness and easy availability across India, we propose that both these drugs are worthy of fast track clinical trial for treatment, and may be carefully considered for clinical use as experimental drugs. Since HCQ has been approved for treatment of diabetes in India, it should be further researched in diabetes and COVID-19, a subgroup where significant mortality has been shown.

Comorbidities in COVID-19: Outcomes in hypertensive cohort and controversies with renin angiotensin system blockers

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

COVID-19 is already a pandemic. Emerging data suggest an increased association and a heightened mortality in patients of COVID-19 with comorbidities. We aimed to evaluate the outcome in hypertensive patients with COVID-19 and its relation to the use of renin-angiotensin system blockers (RASB).

METHODS

We have systematically searched the medical database up to March 27, 2020 and retrieved all the published articles in English language related to our topic using MeSH key words.

RESULTS

From the pooled data of all ten available Chinese studies (n = 2209) that have reported the characteristics of comorbidities in patients with COVID-19, hypertension was present in nearly 21%, followed by diabetes in nearly 11%, and established cardiovascular disease (CVD) in approximately 7% of patients. Although the emerging data hints to an increase in mortality in COVID-19 patients with known hypertension, diabetes and CVD, it should be noted that it was not adjusted for multiple confounding factors. Harm or benefit in COVID-19 patients receiving RASB has not been typically assessed in these studies yet, although mechanistically and plausibly both, benefit and harm is possible with these agents, given that COVID-19 expresses to tissues through the receptor of angiotensin converting enzyme-2.

CONCLUSION

Special attention is definitely required in patients with COVID-19 with associated comorbidities including hypertension, diabetes and established CVD. Although the role of RASB has a mechanistic equipoise, patients with COVID-19 should not stop these drugs at this point of time, as recommended by various world organizations and without the advice of health care provider.

Role of corticosteroid in the management of COVID-19: A systemic review and a Clinician's perspective

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Interest in corticosteroid therapy in COVID-19 has been rekindled after the results from Randomized Evaluation of COVid-19 thERapY (RECOVERY) Trial. However, the World health Organization has not recommended corticosteroid in the treatment of COVID-19. We sought to conduct a systematic review on the role of corticosteroid in the management of patients of COVID-19.

METHODS

A systematic electronic search of PubMed, Cochrane and MedRxiv database using specific keywords was made up till June 17, 2020. Full text of all the original articles with supplementary appendix that fulfilled the inclusion criteria were retrieved and a detailed analysis of results were represented.

RESULTS

Of the 5 studies (4 retrospective studies and 1 quasi-prospective study) conducted for evaluating the role of corticosteroids, 3 studies have shown benefit, while 2 studies shown no benefit and there was a suggestion of significant harm in critical cases in one sub-study. RECOVERY trial is the only randomized controlled trial that has shown a significant reduction of death by 35% in ventilated patients and by 20% amongst patients on supplemental oxygen therapy with the dexamethasone, although no benefit was observed in mild cases.

CONCLUSIONS

While the results from retrospective studies are heterogenous and difficult to infer of a definitive protective benefit with corticosteroids, RECOVERY trial found a significantly better outcome with dexamethasone, mostly in severe cases. Nonetheless, more studies are needed to replicate the outcome shown in RECOVERY trial for a substantial conclusion.

Molnupiravir in COVID-19: A systematic review of literature

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Molnupiravir is a newer oral antiviral drug that has recently been tested in COVID-19. We aim to conduct a systematic review of literature to find out the efficacy and safety of molnupiravir in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We systematically searched the electronic database of PubMed, MedRxiv and Google Scholar from inception until October 15, 2021, using MeSH keywords. Ongoing trials of molnupiravir in COVID-19 were additionally searched from the ClinicalTrials.Gov and ctri.nic.in/Clinicaltrials. We retrieved all the available granular details of phase 1 to 3 studies of molnupiravir in COVID-19. Subsequently we reviewed the results narratively.

RESULTS

Two phase 1 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled (DBRPC) studies of molnupiravir showed that 1600 mg daily dose is safe and tolerable, without any serious adverse events up to 5.5 days. One phase 2 DBPRC study found significantly lower time to clearance (RNA negativity) with molnupiravir 800 mg twice daily compared to the placebo (log-rank p value = 0.013) in mild to moderate COVID-19. Interim report of one phase 3 DBRPC study in non-hospitalized COVID-19 found a significant reduction in the risk of hospital admission or death by 50% (p = 0.0012). However, no significant benefit was observed with molnupiravir in the later stage of moderate to severe COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

Molnupiravir is first oral antiviral drug to demonstrate a significant benefit in reducing hospitalization or death in mild COVID-19 and could be an important weapon in the battle against SARS-CoV-2. However, its role in moderate to severe COVID-19 is questionable and more studies are needed.

Hyperglycemia without diabetes and new-onset diabetes are both associated with poorer outcomes in COVID-19

Hyperglycemia with or without blood glucose in diabetes range is an emerging finding not uncommonly encountered in patients with COVID-19. Increasingly, all evidence currently available hints that both new-onset hyperglycemia without diabetes and new-onset diabetes in COVID-19 is associated with a poorer outcome compared with normoglycemic individuals and people with pre-existing diabetes.

Remdesivir in COVID-19: A critical review of pharmacology, pre-clinical and clinical studies

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Remdesivir is a broad spectrum anti-viral drug that has shown to inhibit SARS-CoV-2, in vitro and in vivo. In absence of any effective treatment for SARS-CoV-2 infection (COVID-19), remdesivir has been tried for a compassionate use in severe COVID-19. Newer randomized controlled studies that have recently become available, showed a mixed result. We aimed to systematically search the literature to understand the pharmacology and clinical effects of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We systematically searched the PubMed, ClinicalTrial.Org and MedRxiv database up till May 5, 2020 using specific key words such as "Remdesivir" or 'GS-5734″ AND "COVID-19" or "SARS-CoV-2" and retrieved all the article published in English language, that have reported the pharmacology and the clinical outcomes of remdesivir in patients with COVID-19.

RESULTS

Initial compassionate use of remdesivir has shown a fairly good result, but difficult to quantify, in the absence of control arm. While the very first double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial conducted in Wuhan, did not find any significant benefit compared to the control, the preliminary result of another similar multi-country trial has shown a significant faster time to recovery but without any difference in mortality.

CONCLUSIONS

Remdesivir has shown a mixed result in patients with COVID-19 with an acceptable side effect. However, jury is still out while awaiting the results from the forthcoming trials.

Antibody response after first and second-dose of ChAdOx1-nCOV (CovishieldTM®) and BBV-152 (CovaxinTM®) among health care workers in India: The final results of cross-sectional coronavirus vaccine-induced antibody titre (COVAT) study

BACKGROUND

We assessed the humoral immune response of both ChAdOx1-nCOV (CovishieldTM) and BBV-152 (CovaxinTM) vaccines in Indian health care workers (HCW).

METHODS

A Pan-India, Cross-sectional, Coronavirus Vaccine-induced Antibody Titre (COVAT) study was conducted that measured SARS-CoV-2 anti-spike binding antibody quantitatively, 21 days or more after the first and second dose of two vaccines in both severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-2) naïve and recovered HCW. Primary aim was to analyze antibody response (seropositivity rate, Geometric Mean Titre [GMT] and 95% Confidence Interval [CI]) following each dose of both vaccines and its correlation to age, sex, blood group, body mass index (BMI) and comorbidities. Here we report the results of anti-spike antibody response after first and two completed doses.

RESULTS

Among the 515 HCW (305 Male, 210 Female) who took two doses of both vaccines, 95.0% showed seropositivity to anti-spike antibody. However, both seropositivity rate and GMT (95% CI) of anti-spike antibody was significantly higher in Covishield vs. Covaxin recipients (98.1 vs. 80.0%; 129.3 vs. 48.3 AU/mL; both p < 0.001). This difference persisted in 457 SARS-CoV-2 naïve and propensity-matched (age, sex and BMI) analysis of 116 participants. Age > 60-years, males, people with any comorbidities, and history of hypertension (HTN) had a significantly less anti-spike antibody GMT compared to age ≤ 60 years, females, no comorbidities and no HTN respectively, after the completion of two doses of either vaccine. Gender, presence of comorbidities, and vaccine type were independent predictors of antibody seropositivity rate and anti-spike antibody titre levels in multiple logistic and log transformed linear regression analysis. Both vaccine recipients had similar solicited mild to moderate adverse events and none had severe or unsolicited side effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Both vaccines elicited good immune response after two doses, although seropositivity rates and GMT of anti-spike antibody titre was significantly higher in Covishield compared to Covaxin recipients.

Pharmacotherapy in obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of anti-obesity drugs

Introduction: Obesity poses a significant increase in morbidity and mortality and thus five anti-obesity drugs have been approved currently by US FDA. Several phase 3 trials have shown a significant improvement in cardio-metabolic profile including significant weight reduction with these agents compared to placebo.Areas covered: We systematically searched the database of PubMed, Embase, The Cochrane Library and The ClinicalTrials.gov up to 30 September 2019 and retrieved all the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that were conducted with these five drugs for ≥1 year and explicitly reported their efficacy versus placebo. Subsequently, we have conducted the meta-analysis to primarily study the effect of these anti-obesity drugs on weight reduction. We additionally reviewed the effect of these drugs on other cardio-metabolic parameters including key adverse events.Expert opinion: This meta-analysis finds a significant reduction in body weight with orlistat (N = 10,435; ∆ -3.07 Kg, 95% CI, -3.76 to -2.37), phentermine plus topiramate (N = 2985; ∆ -9.77 Kg; 95% CI, -11.73 to -7.81), lorcaserin (N = 16,856; ∆ -3.08 Kg; 95% CI, -3.49 to -2.66), naltrexone plus bupropion (N = 3239; ∆ -4.39 Kg; 95% CI, -5.05 to -3.72) and liraglutide (N = 4978; ∆ -5.25 Kg; 95% CI, -6.17 to -4.32), compared to placebo (all p < 0.00001).

"Hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: A Systematic Review and meta-analysis."

BACKGROUNDS AND AIMS

The role of hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) in the treatment of COVID-19 is not fully known. We studied the efficacy of HCQ compared to the control in COVID-19 subjects on - a. viral clearance measured by reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) and, b. death due to all cause.

METHODS

PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane and MedRxiv database were searched using the specific keywords up to April 30, 2020. Studies that met our objectives were assessed for the risk of bias applying various tools as indicated. Three studies each that reported the outcome of viral clearance by RT-PCR and death due to all cause, were meta-analyzed by applying inverse variance-weighted averages of logarithmic risk ratio (RR) using a random effects model. Heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using the I2 statistic and funnel plots, respectively.

RESULTS

Meta-analysis of 3 studies (n = 210) on viral clearance assessed by RT-PCR showed no benefit (RR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.38; p = 0.74), although with a moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 61.7%, p = 0.07). While meta-analysis of 3 studies (n = 474) showed a significant increase in death with HCQ, compared to the control (RR, 2.17; 95% 1.32 to 3.57; p = 0.002), without any heterogeneity (I2 = 0.0%, p = 0.43).

CONCLUSIONS

No benefit on viral clearance but a significant increase in mortality was observed with HCQ compared to control in patients with COVID-19.

Gender difference in cardiovascular outcomes with SGLT-2 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonist in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cardio-vascular outcome trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Type 2 diabetes confers a differential risk of cardiovascular (CV) disease according to the gender. Whether newly approved anti-diabetic drugs like sodium-glucose co-transport-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2Is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) that have shown a significant reduction in the CV end-points in CV outcome trials (CVOTs) also have a differential impact gender-wise, is still not clearly known.

METHODS

We systematically searched the medical database up to December 31, 2019 and retrieved all the dedicated CVOTs conducted with SGLT-2Is and GLP-1RAs that explicitly reported the outcome of major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Subsequently, we pooled the hazard ratio (HR) of MACE in both sexes separately and meta-analyzed the result gender-wise.

RESULTS

The meta-analysis of three CVOTs conducted with SGLT-2Is (N = 34,322), demonstrated a significant reduction in MACE in men but not in women (Men - HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.83 to 0.97; P = 0.006; Women - HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.00; P = 0.06) compared to placebo. The meta-analysis of seven CVOTs conducted with GLP-1RAs (N = 56,004) demonstrated a significant reduction in MACE in both sex (Men - HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.82 to 0.93; P < 0.0001; Women - HR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.79 to 0.99; P = 0.03), against the placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

The reduction in MACE with SGLT-2Is appears to be significantly less in women with diabetes vs men, while GLP-1RAs confers a similar reduction in MACE, irrespective of the gender. Whether these results are related to inadequate statistical power (underrepresentation of women) in CVOT, or it reflects a true gender difference, still remains to be established.

Impact of COVID-19 and comorbidities on health and economics: Focus on developing countries and India

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Presence of comorbidities in patients with Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) have often been associated with increased in-hospital complications and mortality. Intriguingly, several developed countries with a higher quality of life have relatively higher mortality with COVID-19, compared to the middle- or low-income countries. Moreover, certain ethnic groups have shown a higher predilection to contract COVID-19, with heightened mortality. We sought to review the available literature with regards to impact of COVID-19 and comorbidities on the health and economics, especially in context to the developing countries including India.

METHODS

A Boolean search was carried out in PubMed, MedRxiv and Google Scholar databases up till August 23, 2020 using the specific keywords, to find the prevalence of comorbidities and its outcome in patients with COVID-19.

RESULTS

All available evidence consistently suggests that presence of comorbidities is associated with a poor outcome in patients with COVID-19. Diabetes prevalence is highest in Indian COVID-19 patients, compared to other countries. Majority of the patients with COVID-19 are asymptomatic ranging from 26 to 76%.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal masking is the need of hour during unlock period. Low-income countries such as India, Brazil and Africa with less resources and an average socio-economic background, must adopt a strict policy for an affordable testing programs to trace, test, identify and home quarantine of asymptomatic cases. Despite the huge number of COVID-19 patients, India still has low volume research at the moment.

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: Novel mechanism of actions

The pharmacological actions of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) are largely predictable as they interact directly with GLP-1 receptors on beta cells to mediate their glucose lowering effects by increasing GLP-1 in pharmacological range and not at all dependent upon endogenous GLP-1 secretion. The mechanism of action of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4I) are relatively less clear although classical mechanism is to inhibit the endogenous GLP-1 metabolism and thereby increasing GLP-1 level in the physiological range. DPP-4I also increase the half-life of GLP-1 to some extent by inhibiting their quick degradation by DPP enzyme ubiquitously present in the body. Interestingly, even with the effective blockade with currently existing DPP-4I, the half-life of GLP-1 only increases from 1 min to 5 min and therefore its residual time in plasma still remains pretty short. Intriguingly, this GLP-1 rise is so modest and so short-lived that it may be difficult to believe that this would sufficiently engage and activate the GLP-1 receptor in beta cell to produce significant insulinotropic effect. However, in clinical trials as well as in real life scenario, the anti-glycemic efficacies seen with DPP-4I are quite satisfactory and sometime very much competitive to GLP-1RA as evident from their head-to-head trials including meta-analysis. This efficacy outcome challenges the "only" GLP-1 dependent mechanism of glucose lowering and provokes an insight that other neuro-endocrine pathway may be playing a second fiddle. This review will collate those emerging concept and put a perspective as to how DPP-4I might be working though other pathway besides direct GLP-1 mediated receptor activation.

Assessment of risk, severity, mortality, glycemic control and antidiabetic agents in patients with diabetes and COVID-19: A narrative review

AIMS

Rising prevalence of non-communicable diseases world-wide has made diabetes an important comorbidity in patients with coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19). We sought to review the risk, severity and mortality in COVID-19 and its relation to the glycemic control, and role of anti-diabetic agents in patients with diabetes.

METHODS

A Boolean search was made in PubMed, MedRxiv and Google Scholar database until May 10, 2020 and full articles with supplementary appendix were retrieved using the specific key words related to the topic.

RESULTS

There is a high prevalence of diabetes in patients with COVID-19. Patients with diabetes had a significantly more severe variety of COVID-19 and increased mortality, compared to the groups without diabetes. Moreover, poor glycemic control is associated with a significantly higher severe COVID-19 and increased mortality, compared to the well-controlled glycemic groups. No data currently available for or against any anti-diabetic agents in COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

Diabetes, in particular poorly-controlled group is associated with a significantly higher risk of severe COVID-19 and mortality. This calls for an optimal glycemic control and an increased emphasis on future preventative therapies including the vaccination programs for these groups in addition to the traditional risk prevention such as social distancing and self-isolation.

Does poor glucose control increase the severity and mortality in patients with diabetes and COVID-19?

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Diabetes in often associated with an increased severity and mortality in patients with COVID-19. We aimed to find out whether the severity and mortality in patients with diabetes with COVID-19 has any correlation to the level of glycemic control.

METHODS

A Boolean search was made in PubMed database using the specific keywords related to our objectives up till May 14, 2020 and full text of article retrieved with the supplements published in English language.

RESULTS

Two studies available so far have studied the outcomes of severity and mortality in patients with diabetes stratified on glycemic control. Both the studies have unequivocally found that patients with poorly-controlled hyperglycemia (blood glucose >180 mg/dl) have significantly higher level of poor prognostic markers biochemically, compared to the well-controlled arms (blood glucose <180 mg/dl). Moreover, significant increase in severity and mortality was observed in cohorts with poorly-controlled blood glucose due to any cause (diabetes or stress hyperglycemia), compared to the well-controlled cohorts with COVID-19, even after the adjustment of multiple confounders.

CONCLUSIONS

Poorly-controlled hyperglycemia increases the severity and mortality in patients with COVID-19. All treating physician must strive for a good glycemic control (blood glucose <180 mg/dl) in patients with or without diabetes.

An updated practical guideline on use of molnupiravir and comparison with agents having emergency use authorization for treatment of COVID-19

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Molnupiravir is a newer oral antiviral drug that has recently received emergency use authorization (EUA) in USA, UK and India. We aim to conduct an update on our previous systematic review to provide practical clinical guideline for using molnupiravir in patients with COVID-19.

METHODS

We systematically searched the electronic database of PubMed, MedRxiv and Google Scholar until January 5, 2022, using key MeSH keywords.

RESULTS

Final result of phase 3 study in 1433 non-hospitalized COVID-19 patients showed a significant reduction in composite risk of hospital admission or death (absolute risk difference, -3.0% [95% confidence interval {CI}, -5.9 to -0.1%]; 1-sided P = 0.02) although with a non-significant 31% relative risk reduction (RRR). RRR for death alone was 89% (95% CI, 14 to 99; P-value not reported). Number needed to treat to prevent 1 death or 1 hospitalization or death composite appears to be closely competitive to other agents having EUA in people with COVID-19. However, cost-wise molnupiravir is comparatively cheaper compared to all other agents.

CONCLUSION

Molnupiravir could be a useful agent in non-pregnant unvaccinated adults with COVID-19 who are at increased risk of severity including hospitalization. However, it is effective only when used within 5-days of onset of symptoms. A 5-days course seems to be safe without any obvious short-term side effects.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors and euglycemic ketoacidosis: Wisdom of hindsight

Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) are newly approved class of oral anti-diabetic drugs, in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, which reduces blood glucose through glucouresis via the kidney, independent, and irrespective of available pancreatic beta-cells. Studies conducted across their clinical development program found, a modest reduction in glycated hemoglobin ranging from -0.5 to -0.8%, without any significant hypoglycemia. Moreover, head-to-head studies versus active comparators yielded comparable efficacy. Interestingly, weight and blood pressure reduction were additionally observed, which was not only consistent but significantly superior to active comparators, including metformin, sulfonylureas, and dipeptydylpeptide-4 inhibitors. Indeed, these additional properties makes this class a promising oral anti-diabetic drug. Surprisingly, a potentially fatal unwanted side effect of diabetic ketoacidosis has been noted with its widespread use, albeit rarely. Nevertheless, this has created a passé among the clinicians. This review is an attempt to pool those ketosis data emerging with SGLT-2i, and put a perspective on its implicated mechanism.

Bariatric surgery and diabetes remission: Who would have thought it?

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and obesity are increasingly common and major global health problems. The Edmonton obesity staging system clearly pointed towards increased mortality proportionate to the severity of obesity. Obesity itself triggers insulin resistance and thereby poses the risk of T2DM. Both obesity and T2DM have been associated with higher morbidity and mortality and this calls for institution of effective therapies to deal with the rising trend of complications arising out of this dual menace. Although lifestyle changes form the cornerstone of therapy for both the ailments, sustained results from this modalities is far from satisfactory. While Look AHEAD (action for HEAalth in diabetes) study showed significant weight loss, reduction in glycated hemoglobin and higher remission rate of T2DM at 1(st) year following intensive lifestyle measures; recurrence and relapse rate bounced back in half of subjects at 4 years, thereby indicating that weight loss and glycemic control is difficult to maintain in the long term with lifestyle interventions. Same recurrence phenomenon was also observed with pharmacotherapy with rimonabant, sibutramine and orlistat. Bariatric surgery has been seen to associate with substantial and sustained weight loss in morbidly obese patients. Interestingly, bariatric surgeries also induce higher rates of short and long-term diabetes remission. Although the exact mechanism behinds this diabetes remission are not well understood; improved insulin action, beta-cell function and complex interplay of hormones in the entero-insular axis appears to play a major role. This article reviews the effectiveness of bariatric procedures on remission or improvement in diabetes and put a perspective on its implicated mechanisms.

Once-weekly basal insulin icodec: Looking ONWARDS from pharmacology to clinical trials

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Insulin icodec is currently the most advanced candidate insulin suitable for once-weekly administration. We aim to conduct a systematic review of the literature to find out the efficacy and safety of insulin icodec in patients with diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

We systematically searched the electronic database of PubMed, and Google Scholar from inception until August 20, 2022, using MeSH keywords. Ongoing trials of insulin icodec were additionally searched from the ClinicalTrials.Gov. We retrieved all the available granular details of phase 1 to phase 3 studies of insulin icodec in both type 1 and type 2 diabetes.

RESULTS

Phase 1 study showed insulin icodec having a half-life of 196 h (>1 week) while a steady state is achieved after 3 to 4 weekly injections. Phase 2 studies compared once-weekly icodec to insulin glargine (U-100) and found a similar glucose control with no significantly greater hypoglycemia risks. Top-line results from the five phase 3 studies reported better glucose control with once-weekly icodec compared to both once-daily insulin glargine (ONWARDS 1) and once-daily degludec (in both ONWARDS 2 and 4) with similar rates of hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes, although there was a higher hypoglycemic event with insulin icodec in type 1 diabetes (ONWARDS 6) compared to once-daily degludec despite a similar glycemic control.

CONCLUSION

A brighter prospect of once-weekly insulin icodec is on the card in particular in type 2 diabetes in terms of reducing injection pricks by >85% vs. once-daily basal insulin analogs, although few unknowns still exist.

Non-insulin anti-diabetic agents in patients with type 2 diabetes and COVID-19: A Critical Appraisal of Literature

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Several observational studies have recently reported the outcomes of non-insulin anti-diabetic agents (ADA) in patients with T2DM and coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). We sought to review the literature to appraise the clinicians on these outcomes.

METHODS

A literature search using the specific keywords was carried out in the database of PubMed, MedRxiv and Google Scholar up till December 11, 2020 applying Boolean method. Full text of all the relevant articles that reported the outcomes of ADA in patients with T2DM and COVID-19 were retrieved. Subsequently, an appraisal of literature report was narratively presented.

RESULTS

Available studies that reported the outcomes of ADA are either case series or retrospective cohorts or prospective observational studies, in absence of the randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Results from these observational studies suggest that amongst all the non-insulin ADA, metformin users prior to the hospitalization had improved outcomes compared to the non-users. Data for dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) are encouraging although inconsistent. No documentation of any harm or benefit has been observed for sulfonylureas (SUs), sodium glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs). No data is yet available for pioglitazone.

CONCLUSION

Metformin and DPP-4i should be continued in patients with T2DM until hospitalization or unless contraindicated. No evidence of harm suggests that SUs, SGLT-2i or GLP-1RAs may not be stopped unless very sick, hospitalized or contraindicated. The results from RCTs are needed to claim any meaningful benefit with either metformin or DPP-4i in patients with T2DM and COVID-19.

Is gliclazide a sulfonylurea with difference? A review in 2016

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

Incretin response in Asian type 2 diabetes: Are Indians different?

Incretin-based therapy has clearly emerged as one of the most sought out strategy in managing type 2 diabetes, primarily because they generally do not causes hypoglycemia and possess weight-neutral or weight losing properties. Efficacy-wise too, these agents, are more or less similar to commonly used drugs metformin and sulfonylureas. Interestingly, some studies recently suggested that glycemic response to these incretin-based therapies could also differ ethnicity-wise. Subsequently, meta-analysis from these studies also suggested that Asians may have better response to these incretin-based therapies. This review will be an attempt to critically analyze those studies available in literature and to address as to why East-Asians and South-Asians may have different incretin response compared to non-Asians.