Efficacy and safety of metformin for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis

Harnessing the Synergy of SGLT2 Inhibitors and Continuous Ketone Monitoring (CKM) in Managing Heart Failure among Patients with Type 1 Diabetes

Heart failure (HF) management in type 1 diabetes (T1D) is particularly challenging due to its increased prevalence and the associated risks of hospitalization and mortality, driven by diabetic cardiomyopathy. Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2-is) offer a promising avenue for treating HF, specifically the preserved ejection fraction variant most common in T1D, but their utility is hampered by the risk of euglycemic diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). This review investigates the potential of SGLT2-is in T1D HF management alongside emergent Continuous Ketone Monitoring (CKM) technology as a means to mitigate DKA risk through a comprehensive analysis of clinical trials, observational studies, and reviews. The evidence suggests that SGLT2-is significantly reduce HF hospitalization and enhance cardiovascular outcomes. However, their application in T1D patients remains limited due to DKA concerns. CKM technology emerges as a crucial tool in this context, offering real-time monitoring of ketone levels, which enables the safe incorporation of SGLT2-is into treatment regimes by allowing for early detection and intervention in the development of ketosis. The synergy between SGLT2-is and CKM has the potential to revolutionize HF treatment in T1D, promising improved patient safety, quality of life, and reduced HF-related morbidity and mortality. Future research should aim to employ clinical trials directly assessing this integrated approach, potentially guiding new management protocols for HF in T1D.

Double diabetes-when type 1 diabetes meets type 2 diabetes: definition, pathogenesis and recognition

Currently, the differentiation between type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D) is not straightforward, and the features of both types of diabetes coexist in one subject. This situation triggered the need to discriminate so-called double diabetes (DD), hybrid diabetes or type 1.5 diabetes, which is generally described as the presence of the insulin resistance characteristic of metabolic syndrome in individuals diagnosed with T1D. DD not only raises the question of proper classification of diabetes but is also associated with a significantly greater risk of developing micro- and macroangiopathic complications, which was independent of glycaemic control. When considering the global obesity pandemic and increasing incidence of T1D, the prevalence of DD may also presumably increase. Therefore, it is of the highest priority to discover the mechanisms underlying the development of DD and to identify appropriate methods to prevent or treat DD. In this article, we describe how the definition of double diabetes has changed over the years and how it is currently defined. We discuss the accuracy of including metabolic syndrome in the DD definition. We also present possible hypotheses connecting insulin resistance with T1D and propose possible methods to identify individuals with double diabetes based on indirect insulin resistance markers, which are easily assessed in everyday clinical practice. Moreover, we discuss adjuvant therapy which may be considered in double diabetic patients.

Treating obesity in type 1 diabetes mellitus - review of efficacy and safety

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Obesity is an epidemic in the United States with serious concomitant co-morbid conditions; people living with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1D) are not immune to the risk either. Weight gain in T1D is likely multifactorial, due to genetic, environmental and treatment-related factors. FDA-approved and other adjunctive weight loss therapies may benefit people living with T1D but there are risks to consider when providing recommendations or prescribing medications.

RECENT FINDINGS

We performed a PubMed search of studies assessing clinical outcomes of both approved and off-label medications used in the treatment of type 1 diabetes. Search terms included 'type 1 diabetes, obesity' and the following: (1) metformin, (2) pramlintide, (3) glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, (4) dual GLP-1 and gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP) agonists, (5) sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, (6) surgical treatment of obesity, (7) insulin pump, (8) insulin, (9) medical nutrition therapy, (10) diabetes self-management education, (11) exercise, (12) naltrexone-buproprion, (13) orlistat, and (14) phentermine-topiramate.

SUMMARY

Weight loss treatments provide a wide-range of benefits in reducing both morbidity and mortality in those who are obese. Treatments also have varying adverse effect profiles which may impact T1D treatment. In this review, we aim to summarize study outcomes in people with T1D, including risks and benefits, of on- and off-label weight loss treatments.

The Ketogenic Effect of SGLT-2 Inhibitors-Beneficial or Harmful?

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, also called gliflozins or flozins, are a class of drugs that have been increasingly used in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) due to their glucose-lowering, cardiovascular (CV), and renal positive effects. However, recent studies suggest that SGLT-2 inhibitors might also have a ketogenic effect, increasing ketone body production. While this can be beneficial for some patients, it may also result in several potential unfavorable effects, such as decreased bone mineral density, infections, and ketoacidosis, among others. Due to the intricate and multifaceted impact caused by SGLT-2 inhibitors, this initially anti-diabetic class of medications has been effectively used to treat both patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and those with heart failure (HF). Additionally, their therapeutic potential appears to extend beyond the currently investigated conditions. The objective of this review article is to present a thorough summary of the latest research on the mechanism of action of SGLT-2 inhibitors, their ketogenesis, and their potential synergy with the ketogenic diet for managing diabetes. The article particularly discusses the benefits and risks of combining SGLT-2 inhibitors with the ketogenic diet and their clinical applications and compares them with other anti-diabetic agents in terms of ketogenic effects. It also explores future directions regarding the ketogenic effects of SGLT-2 inhibitors.

Metformin: A Review of Potential Mechanism and Therapeutic Utility Beyond Diabetes

Metformin has been designated as one of the most crucial first-line therapeutic agents in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Primarily being an antihyperglycemic agent, metformin also has a plethora of pleiotropic effects on various systems and processes. It acts majorly by activating AMPK (Adenosine Monophosphate-Activated Protein Kinase) in the cells and reducing glucose output from the liver. It also decreases advanced glycation end products and reactive oxygen species production in the endothelium apart from regulating the glucose and lipid metabolism in the cardiomyocytes, hence minimizing the cardiovascular risks. Its anticancer, antiproliferative and apoptosis-inducing effects on malignant cells might prove instrumental in the malignancy of organs like the breast, kidney, brain, ovary, lung, and endometrium. Preclinical studies have also shown some evidence of metformin's neuroprotective role in Parkinson's disease, Alzheimer's disease, multiple sclerosis and Huntington's disease. Metformin exerts its pleiotropic effects through varied pathways of intracellular signalling and exact mechanism in the majority of them remains yet to be clearly defined. This article has extensively reviewed the therapeutic benefits of metformin and the details of its mechanism for a molecule of boon in various conditions like diabetes, prediabetes, obesity, polycystic ovarian disease, metabolic derangement in HIV, various cancers and aging.

Effects of metformin on glycaemic variability in combination with insulin in overweight/obese patients with type 1 diabetes

BACKGROUND

The prevalence of overweight and obesity in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) individuals is increasing. Overweight people with T1DM may be insulin resistant. Glycaemic variability (GV) is an emerging measure of glycaemic control. The aim of this study is to investigate whether metformin, in adjunct to insulin, would have any favourable effect on GV.

METHODS

This was a multi-centre, open-label randomised crossover study. Twenty-four overweight/obese T1DM patients aged ⩾18 years old with HbA1c ⩾ 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) were recruited and randomised into two study arms. For first 6-week, one arm remained on standard of care (SOC), the other arm received metformin, adjunctive to SOC. After 2-week washout, patients crossed over and continued for another 6 weeks. Glycaemic variability, other glycaemic parameters and metabolic profile were monitored.

RESULTS

There were significant reduction in metformin group for GV: mean (0.18 ± 1.73 vs -0.95 ± 1.24, p = 0.014), %CV (-15.84 (18.92) vs -19.08 (24.53), p = 0.044), glycemic risk assessment of diabetes equation (-0.69 (3.83) vs -1.61 (3.61), p = 0.047), continuous overlapping net glycaemic action (0.25 ± 1.62 vs -0.85 ± 1.22, p = 0.013), J-index (-0.75 (21.91) vs -7.11 (13.86), p = 0.034), time in range (1.13 ± 14.12% vs 10.83 ± 15.47%, p = 0.032); changes of systolic blood pressure (2.78 ± 11.19 mmHg vs -4.30 ± 9.81 mmHg, p = 0.027) and total daily dose (TDD) insulin (0.0 (3.33) units vs -2.17 (11.45) units, p = 0.012). Hypoglycaemic episodes were not significant in between groups.

CONCLUSION

Metformin showed favourable effect on GV in overweight/obese T1DM patients and reduction in systolic blood pressure, TDD insulin, fasting venous glucose and fructosamine.

A combination of metformin and insulin improve cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk factors in individuals with type 1 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

This study aims to further clarify whether the addition of metformin to insulin treatment improve cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk factors in individuals with T1DM.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for randomized controlled trials in which the efficacy and safety of metformin were compared with those of a placebo for risk factors of cardiovascular and cerebrovascular disease among individuals with T1DM, and a meta-analysis was conducted.

RESULTS

Thirteen cardiovascular studies were identified. In the metformin group, mean carotid intimal media thickness was significantly reduced by 0.03 mm, ascending aortic pulse wave velocity by 6.3 m/s, descending aortic wall shear stress by 1.77 dyn/cm² (P = 0.02), insulin daily dose by 0.05 U/kg/d, body weight by 2.27 kg, fat-free mass by 1.32 kg, body mass index by 0.58 kg/m², hip circumference by 0.29 m, and low-density lipoprotein by 0.16 mmol/L, all above are P < 0.05. In the metformin group, flow-mediated dilation was increased by 1.29 %, glucose infusion rate/insulin by 18.22 mg/(kg⋅min)/μIU/μL, and waist-to-hip ratio by 0.02, all above are P < 0.00001. The metformin group showed no differences in blood pressure, reactive hyperemia index, waist circumference, triglyceride, total cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol, or body mass index Z score. For cerebrovascular studies were identified. But none of them had a risk factor assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin can ameliorate cardiovascular and cerebrovascular risk factors through non-hypoglycemic multiple pathways in individuals with T1DM.

Highlighting the Role of Obesity and Insulin Resistance in Type 1 Diabetes and Its Associated Cardiometabolic Complications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This narrative review appraises research data on the potentially harmful effect of obesity and insulin resistance (IR) co-existence with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM)-related cardiovascular (CVD) complications and evaluates possible therapeutic options.

RECENT FINDINGS

Obesity and IR have increasingly been emerging in patients with T1DM. Genetic, epigenetic factors, and subcutaneous insulin administration are implicated in the pathogenesis of this coexistence. Accumulating evidence implies that the concomitant presence of obesity and IR is an independent predictor of worse CVD outcomes. The prevalence of obesity and IR has increased in patients with T1DM. This increase can be partly attributed to general population trends but, additionally, to iatrogenic weight gain caused by insulin treatment. This association might be the missing link explaining the excess CVD burden observed in patients with T1DM despite optimal glycemic control. Data on newer agents for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treatment are unraveling novel ways to challenge this aggravating coexistence.

Glucose-Lowering Therapy beyond Insulin in Type 1 Diabetes: A Narrative Review on Existing Evidence from Randomized Controlled Trials and Clinical Perspective

Background: In Type 1 diabetes (T1D), according to the most recent guidelines, the everyday glucose-lowering treatment is still restricted to the use of subcutaneous insulin, while multiple therapeutic options exist for Type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: For this narrative review we unsystematically screened PubMed and Embase to identify clinical trials which investigated glucose-lowering agents as an adjunct to insulin treatment in people with T1D. Published studies up to March 2022 were included. We discuss the safety and efficacy in modifying cardiovascular risk factors for each drug, the current status of research, and provide a clinical perspective. Results: For several adjunct agents, in T1D, the scientific evidence demonstrates improvements in HbA1c, reductions in the risk of hypoglycemia, and achievements of lower insulin requirements, as well as positive effects on cardiovascular risk factors, such as blood lipids, blood pressure, and weight. As the prevalence of obesity, the major driver for double diabetes, is rising, weight and cardiovascular risk factor management is becoming increasingly important in people with T1D. Conclusions: Adjunct glucose-lowering agents, intended to be used in T2D, bear the potential to beneficially impact on cardiovascular risk factors when investigated in the T1D population and are suggested to be more extensively considered as potentially disease-modifying drugs in the future and should be investigated for hard cardiovascular endpoints.

Effect of metformin as an add-on therapy on neuregulin-4 levels and vascular-related complications in adolescents with type 1 diabetes: A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Inflammation is closely associated with atherosclerosis and plays a crucial role in the development of cardiovascular disease. Metformin sensitizes body cells to insulin, which may cause a reduction of atherogenic lipid fractions. Low neuregulin-4 (Nrg-4) levels, an adipokine, are linked to obesity, insulin resistance, impaired glucose tolerance and type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVES

We assessed the effect of oral supplementation with metformin on glycemic control, neuregulin-4 levels and carotid intima media thickness (CIMT) as a marker for subclinical atherosclerosis in adolescents with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and microvascular complications.

METHODS

This randomized placebo-controlled trial included 80 type 1 diabetic patients with microvascular complications who were randomly divided to receive either 24 weeks of metformin 500 mg/day or matching placebo. Fasting blood glucose (FBG), HbA1c, C-reactive protein (CRP), urinary albumin creatinine ratio (UACR), lipid profile, Nrg-4 and CIMT were assessed at baseline and study end.

RESULTS

Both groups were well-matched as regards baseline clinical and laboratory data (p greater than 0.05). After 24-weeks, metformin therapy for the intervention group resulted in a significant decrease of HbA1c, CRP, UACR, total cholesterol and CIMT while Nrg-4 levels were increased compared with baseline levels (p < 0.001) and with placebo group(p < 0.001). Baseline Nrg-4 levels were negatively correlated to FBG, HbA1c, total cholesterol, CRP and CIMT. Metformin was well-tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral metformin supplementation once daily for 24 weeks as an adjuvant therapy to intensive insulin in pediatric T1DM was safe and effective in improving glycemic control, dyslipidemia and Nrg-4 levels; hence, it decreased inflammation, microvascular complications and subclinical atherosclerosis.

Changes of insulin resistance status and development of complications in type 1 diabetes mellitus: Analysis of DCCT/EDIC study

AIM

There is no longitudinal study regarding the changes of insulin resistance (IR) status and the development of complications in type 1 diabetes (T1D). By analyzing data sets from DCCT/EDIC study, we investigated the associations of IR status changes and diabetic complications in T1D.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Estimated glucose disposal rate (eGDR) was calculated at entry of DCCT and in EDIC year 12 (average 18.5 years later) to represent IR. The participants (n = 957) were divided into four groups based on IR changes from baseline: RR group (stayed resistant; n = 49), RS group (became sensitive; n = 42), SR group (became resistant; n = 197), and SS group (stayed sensitive; n = 669). The association of diabetic complications were analyzed by using multivariable logistic regression models.

RESULTS

The improved IR decreased the risk of peripheral neuropathy, whereas the deteriorated IR increased the risk of diabetic complications including hypertension, peripheral artery disease, coronary artery calcification, retinopathy, albuminuria, peripheral neuropathy, and cardiac autonomic neuropathy (P < 0.05). Moreover, RR group (HR = 3.59, 95% CI (2.05-6.32)), RS group (HR = 2.27, 95% CI (1.11-4.64)) and SR group (HR = 1.90, 95% CI (1.24-2.92)) had higher risk of cardiovascular events compared to SS group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the importance of IR changes represented by eGDR in the development of diabetic complications. Patients with T1D and IR may require intensive therapy.

Metformin improves glycemic variability in adults with type 1 diabetes mellitus: an open-label randomized control trial

INTRODUCTION

Metformin has been demonstrated to enhance cardioprotective benefits in type 1 diabetes (T1DM). Although glycemic variability (GV) is associated with increased risk of CVD in diabetes, there is a scarcity of research evaluating the effect of metformin on GV in T1DM.

OBJECTIVES

In the present study, the effects of adjuvant metformin therapy on GV and metabolic control in T1DM were explored.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 65 adults with T1DM were enrolled and subjected to physical examination, fasting laboratory tests, and continuous glucose monitoring, and subsequently randomized 1:1 to 3 months of 1000-2000 mg metformin daily add-on insulin (MET group, n = 34) or insulin (non-MET group, n = 31). After, baseline measurements were repeated.

RESULTS

The mean amplitude of glycemic excursions was substantially reduced in MET group, compared with non-MET group (-1.58 (-3.35, 0.31) mmol/L vs 1.36 (-1.12, 2.24) mmol/L, P = 0.004). In parallel, the largest amplitude of glycemic excursions (-2.83 (-5.47, -0.06) mmol/L vs 0.45 (-1.29, 4.48) mmol/L, P = 0.004), the s.d. of blood glucose (-0.85 (-1.51, 0.01) mmol/L vs -0.14 (-0.68, 1.21) mmol/L, P = 0.015), and the coefficient of variation (-6.66 (-15.00, 1.50)% vs -1.60 (-6.28, 11.71)%, P = 0.012) all demonstrated improvement in the MET group, compared with the non-MET group. Significant reduction in insulin dose, BMI, and body weight was observed in patients in MET, not those in non-MET group.

CONCLUSION

Additional metformin therapy improved GV in adults with T1DM, as well as improving body composition and reducing insulin requirement. Hence, metformin as an adjunctive therapy has potential prospects in reducing the CVD risk in patients with T1DM in the long term.

Adjunctive therapies in type 1 diabetes mellitus

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Insulin is the mainstay of treatment in people living with type 1 diabetes mellitus due to an immune-mediated loss of beta cells. Yet despite advances in insulin therapy and other technological advances, glycemic control remains difficult to achieve. Therefore, we aim to highlight risks and benefits of adjunctive therapies that may improve type 1 diabetes care.

RECENT FINDINGS

We identified studies assessing clinical outcomes of adjunctive therapies that are both Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved and off-label in type 1 diabetes. Adjunctive therapies reviewed included metformin, pramlintide, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors.

SUMMARY

Although insulin is required in people living with type 1 diabetes mellitus, adjunctive therapies may positively impact glycemic control, reduce insulin requirements and lead to weight loss. In addition, the risk of hypoglycemia, gastrointestinal side effects and diabetes ketoacidosis may be increased with the use of these adjunctive therapies. Pramlintide is currently the only FDA-approved adjunctive therapy, whereas others require continued research to better understand risk-to-benefit ratio.

Metabolic syndrome in type 1 diabetes and its association with diabetes complications

AIM

To assess the prevalence of metabolic syndrome in type 1 diabetes, and its age-related association with diabetes complications.

METHODS

Australian National Diabetes Information Audit and Benchmarking (ANDIAB) was a well-established quality audit programme. It provided cross-sectional data on people attending specialist diabetes services across Australia. We determined the prevalence of metabolic syndrome (WHO criteria) in adults with type 1 diabetes and its associations with diabetes complications across age groups.

RESULTS

Metabolic syndrome prevalence was 30% in 2120 adults with type 1 diabetes. Prevalence increased with age: 21% in those aged <40 years, 35% in those aged 40-60 years, and 44% in those aged >60 years (P<0.001), which was driven by an increase in hypertension rate. Metabolic syndrome was associated with a higher prevalence of microvascular, macrovascular and foot complications, with the greatest impact at a younger age. The odds ratio for macrovascular complications with metabolic syndrome, compared with without, was 5.9 (95% CI 2.1-16.4) in people aged <40 years, 2.7 (95% CI 1.7-4.2) in those aged 40-60 years, and 1.7 (95% CI 1.1-2.7) in those aged >60 years (all P < 0.05). Metformin use was higher in those with metabolic syndrome (16% vs 4%; P<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In this large Australian cohort, metabolic syndrome was common in type 1 diabetes and identified people at increased risk of the spectrum of diabetes complications, particularly in young to middle-aged adults. Potential clinical implications are that therapies targeting insulin resistance in this high-risk group may reduce diabetes complications and should be explored.

The Causes of Insulin Resistance in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Is There a Place for Quaternary Prevention?

Diabetes mellitus was the first non-communicable disease that was recognized by the United Nations as a 21st-century pandemic problem. Recent scientific reports suggest that people with type 1 diabetes mellitus also develop insulin resistance, which is generally considered to be a distinctive feature of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The causes of insulin resistance in type 1 diabetes mellitus were explored, but there was a lack of publications that connected the risk factors of insulin resistance in type 1 diabetes mellitus with the proposition of repair mechanisms that are offered by quaternary prevention. Toward this end, the present review is an attempt to combine the previous reports on the causes of insulin resistance in type 1 diabetes mellitus and a brief review of quaternary prevention. The destructive effect of insulin resistance on many physiological processes that predisposes the individual to chronic diabetes complications creates an urgent need to introduce effective therapeutic methods for preventing the development and progression of this pathology.

Vascular and metabolic effects of metformin added to insulin therapy in patients with type 1 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The incidence of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is increasing among youth worldwide, translating to an increased risk ofearly-onset cardiovascular disease (CVD). Mounting studies have shown that metformin may reduce maximal carotidintima-media thickness (cIMT), improve insulin resistance and metabolic control in subjects with T1DM, and thus, may extend cardioprotective benefits. This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to assess the efficacy and safety of metformin added to insulin therapy on reducing CVD risks and improving metabolism in T1DM.

METHODS

PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared metformin and insulin combination (duration ≥3 months) to insulin treatment alone in T1DM. Data were expressed as weighted/standardized mean differences (MDs/SMDs) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes, along with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to evaluate the overall certainty of the evidence.

RESULTS

Nineteen RCTs (n = 1540) met the eligibility criteria. Metformin treatment significantly reduced carotid artery intima-media thickness (MD -0.06 mm [95% CI -0.88, -0.28], P < .001). Though no significant difference was found in insulin sensitivity (SMD 2.21 [95% CI -1.88, 6.29], P = .29), the total daily insulin dosage (SMD -0.81 [95% CI -1.25, -0.36], P < .001) along with traditional CVD risk factors showed improvement by better glycaemic control, partial lipid profiles, diastolic blood pressure, and limited weight gain, with neutral effect on diabetic ketoacidosis, lactic acidosis, and hypoglycaemia. However, metformin therapy increased the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin with insulin has the potential to retard the progression of atherosclerosis and provides better metabolic control in patients with T1DM, and thus, providing a potential therapeutic strategy for patients with T1DM on reducing CVD risks.

Liraglutide as Adjunct to Insulin Treatment in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A few Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) have evaluated the use of liraglutide in Type 1 Diabetes (T1D). Through the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim at critically appraising and summarizing those RCTs, providing precise effect estimates.

METHODS

We searched major databases and grey literature from their inception to October 2018, for RCTs with a duration ≥ 12 weeks, comparing liraglutide with placebo or any other comparator as adjunct to insulin in patients with T1D, investigating major efficacy and safety endpoints. This review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.

RESULTS

We included 5 trials with 2,445 randomized participants. Liraglutide provided modest reductions in HbA1c, with liraglutide 1.8 mg producing the greatest decrease (MD = -0.24%, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.16, I2=0%). Significant weight reduction, up to 4.87 kg with liraglutide 1.8 mg was also observed (95% CI -5.31 to -4.43, I2=0%). Decrease in total daily insulin dose, primarily driven by a decrease in bolus insulin requirements, was demonstrated. Liraglutide decreased non-significantly the odds for severe hypoglycemia (OR=0.80, 95% CI 0.57-1.14, I2=0%), while it increased significantly the odds for gastrointestinal adverse events (for nausea, OR=4.70, 95% CI 3.68-6.00, I2=37%, and for vomiting, OR=2.50, 95% CI 1.54-4.72, I2=27%). A significant increase in heart rate was also demonstrated. No association with diabetic ketoacidosis or malignancies was identified.

CONCLUSION

In patients with T1D, liraglutide might prove be an adjunct to insulin, improving glycemic control, inducing body weight loss and decreasing exogenous insulin requirements and severe hypoglycemia.

Effects of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter Inhibitor/Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Add-On to Insulin Therapy on Glucose Homeostasis and Body Weight in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes: A Network Meta-Analysis

Many patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) do not achieve the glycemic target goal with insulin treatment. In this study, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of add-on to insulin therapy in patients with T1D. We conducted direct and indirect network meta-analyses using Bayesian models and ranked hypoglycemic agents via mixed treatment comparison, using data from the CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Science Citation Index Expanded databases. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving patients with T1D treated with insulin and add-on metformin or sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitors or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists from January 1970 to September 2019 were included in this study. Twenty-three RCTs with 5,151 subjects were divided into the following groups: insulin alone, insulin+metformin, insulin+canagliflozin, insulin+dapagliflozin, insulin+empagliflozin, insulin+sotagliflozin, insulin+liraglutide, and insulin+exenatide. HbA1c level in the insulin+sotagliflozin group was significantly lower than that in the insulin alone group (mean difference: -0.43, 95% credible interval: -0.62 to -0.23). Total daily insulin dose in the insulin+sotagliflozin group was significantly lower than that in the insulin alone group. Compared with that in the insulin alone group, body weight in the groups treated with insulin+add-on canagliflozin, sotagliflozin, and exenatide was significantly decreased by 4.5, 2.8, and 5.1 kg, respectively. Hypoglycemic episodes did not differ among the groups. In patients with T1D, insulin+sotagliflozin decreased the HbA1c level, daily insulin dose, and body weight without hypoglycemia compared with insulin monotherapy. Insulin+canagliflozin or insulin+exenatide was effective in reducing body weight compared with insulin alone. In conclusion, sotagliflozin treatment decreased not only the HbA1c levels and insulin dose but also the body weight without causing hypoglycemia in patients with T1D. Treatment with canagliflozin and exenatide effectively reduced body weight in patients with T1D. However, ketoacidosis associated with the use of SGLT inhibitors should be considered in these patients. Thus, our results suggest that sotagliflozin has a high probability of being ranked first as an adjunctive therapy to insulin in patients with T1D.

Effect of metformin on clinical and biochemical hyperandrogenism in adolescent girls with type 1 diabetes

Background Hyperandrogenism with or without polycystic ovarian syndrome is seen in adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1D), especially those with suboptimal control. Objective To assess the effect of metformin on hyperandrogenism and ovarian function in adolescents with T1D. Methods This prospective study included 28 T1D females showing signs of hyperandrogenism. History taking (detailed diabetes history and menstrual history) and anthropometric measurements (weight, height, body mass index [BMI], waist and hip circumference) were initially performed, and then the patients were assessed for the manifestations of hyperandrogenism (acne, hirsutism as well as pelvic ultrasound [U/S] for ovarian morphology). Biochemical evaluation for ovulation (progesterone assessment during the luteal phase), sex steroids (estradiol, testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate [DHEAS] and androstenedione), prolactin, glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c]) and gonadotropin levels (follicle stimulating hormone [FSH] and luteinizing hormone [LH]) was done. Patients were subjected to 500 mg metformin twice daily orally for 1 year, and then the patients were re-evaluated for clinical and biochemical parameters. Results Metformin therapy resulted in a significant reduction in weight (p = 0.001), BMI (p = 0.002), acne (p = 0.008), hirsutism score (0.007), LH (p = 0.008), testosterone (p < 0.001) and androstenedione levels (p = 0.028) in adolescent girls with T1D. Regarding menstrual irregularities, there was a significant reduction in the number of patients with oligomenorrhea (68%) with a p value of <0.001. However, there were no significant reduction in the daily insulin requirements (p = 0.782) or HbA1c (p = 0.068). Nausea and/or abdominal pain were the commonly reported side effects of metformin (64%). Conclusions Metformin as an insulin sensitizing agent improved the BMI and cycle regularity together with clinical and biochemical hyperandrogenism in T1D adolescent girls. However, it did not improve their glycemic control.

Sodium-glucose co-transporter inhibitors as adjunctive treatment to insulin in type 1 diabetes: A review of randomized controlled trials

Many patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) struggle to achieve glycaemic control and experience significant fluctuations in glucose concentrations, despite insulin treatment. Sodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT)-2 inhibitors and dual SGLT-1/2 inhibitors increase glucose elimination via the kidneys and reduce hyperglycaemia via insulin-independent mechanisms. This review examines available efficacy and safety data for these agents under investigation as adjunctive therapy for T1D. Across randomized trials of up to 52 weeks, SGLT-2 inhibitors or SGLT-1/2 inhibitors as an adjunct to insulin demonstrated significant reductions in glycated haemoglobin, glucose exposure, and measures of glycaemic variability, as well as increased time in the target glycaemic range, compared with placebo. Non-glycaemic benefits included reductions in body weight and insulin doses, as well as improvements in some cardiovascular risk factors and treatment satisfaction. SGLT-2 inhibitors and SGLT-1/2 inhibitors were associated with similar rates of hypoglycaemia but a higher incidence of genitourinary infections, compared with placebo. Diabetic ketoacidosis occurred more often with SGLT-2 inhibitors and SGLT-1/2 inhibitors vs placebo, although the incidence was generally low. Risk mitigation strategies in light of clinical trial data are also discussed. Positive data from randomized controlled trials of the SGLT-2 inhibitor dapagliflozin have led to the approval of dapagliflozin as an adjunct to insulin in adults with T1D having body mass index ≥27 kg/m² in whom insulin does not provide adequate glycaemic control in Europe and to approval as an adjunct to insulin for adults with T1D in Japan.

Factors Affecting Cardiovascular Risk in Children, Adolescents, and Young Adults with Type 1 Diabetes

Cardiovascular risk and obesity are becoming major health issues among individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D). The aim of this study was to evaluate cardiovascular risk factors and obesity in youth with T1D in Lithuania. Methods. 883 patients under 25 years of age with T1D for at least 6 months were investigated. Anthropometric parameters, blood pressure, and microvascular complications were evaluated, and the lipid profile and HbA1c were determined for all patients. Results. Study subjects' mean HbA1c was 8.5 ± 2%; 19.5% were overweight and 3.6% obese. Hypertension and dyslipidemia were diagnosed in 29.8% and 62.6% of participants, respectively. HbA1c concentration was directly related to levels of total cholesterol (r = 0.274, p < 0.001), LDL (r = 0.271, p < 0.001), and triglycerides (r = 0.407, p < 0.001) and inversely associated with levels of HDL (r = 0.117, p = 0.001). Prevalence of dyslipidemia increased with duration of diabetes (p < 0.05). Hypertension was more prevalent in overweight and obese compared to normal-weight patients (40.6 and 65.6 vs. 25.6%, respectively, p < 0.001). Frequency of microvascular complications was higher among patients with dyslipidemia (27.2 vs. 18.8%, p = 0.005) and among those with hypertension (25.9 vs. 23.2%, p < 0.001). Conclusion. The frequency of cardiovascular risk factors is high in youth with T1D and associated with diabetes duration, obesity, and metabolic control.

Metabolic Effects of Metformin in Humans

BACKGROUND

Both insulin deficiency and insulin resistance due to glucagon secretion cause fasting and postprandial hyperglycemia in patients with diabetes.

INTRODUCTION

Metformin enhances insulin sensitivity, being used to prevent and treat diabetes, although its mechanism of action remains elusive.

RESULTS

Patients with diabetes fail to store glucose as hepatic glycogen via the direct pathway (glycogen synthesis from dietary glucose during the post-prandial period) and via the indirect pathway (glycogen synthesis from "de novo" synthesized glucose) owing to insulin deficiency and glucagoninduced insulin resistance. Depletion of the hepatic glycogen deposit activates gluconeogenesis to replenish the storage via the indirect pathway. Unlike healthy subjects, patients with diabetes experience glycogen cycling due to enhanced gluconeogenesis and failure to store glucose as glycogen. These defects raise hepatic glucose output causing both fasting and post-prandial hyperglycemia. Metformin reduces post-prandial plasma glucose, suggesting that the drug facilitates glucose storage as hepatic glycogen after meals. Replenishment of glycogen store attenuates the accelerated rate of gluconeogenesis and reduces both glycogen cycling and hepatic glucose output. Metformin also reduces fasting hyperglycemia due to declining hepatic glucose production. In addition, metformin reduces plasma insulin concentration in subjects with impaired glucose tolerance and diabetes and decreases the amount of insulin required for metabolic control in patients with diabetes, reflecting improvement of insulin activity. Accordingly, metformin preserves β-cell function in patients with type 2 diabetes.

CONCLUSION

Several mechanisms have been proposed to explain the metabolic effects of metformin, but evidence is not conclusive and the molecular basis of metformin action remains unknown.

Obesity and diabetes-Not only a simple link between two epidemics

Diabetes (DM) as well as obesity, due to their increasing incidence, were recognized as epidemic by the World Health Organization. Obesity is involved not only in the aetiopathogenesis of the most common worldwide type of DM-type 2 diabetes-but also in the development of its complications. There is also increasing scientific evidence regarding the role of obesity and overweight in type 1 diabetes. Weight gain may be considered as a complication of insulin treatment but also reveals significant pathophysiological impact on various stages of the disease. Another very important aspect related to DM as well as obesity is the microbiome, which is highly variable. The function of the gut microflora, its interaction with the whole organism, and its role in the development of obesity and type 1 diabetes as well as type 2 diabetes are still not fully understood and subject of ongoing investigations. This review presents a summary of recently published results concerning the relation of obesity/overweight and DM as well as their associations with the microbiome.

Adjuvant Pharmacotherapies to Insulin for the Treatment of Type 1 Diabetes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Insulin therapy alone fails to achieve target glycemic control in the majority of individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D), motivating the investigation of additive medications. This review focuses on the recent findings on the use of adjunctive pharmacotherapy in T1D.

RECENT FINDINGS

Metformin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists have been associated with weight reduction and decrease in daily insulin requirements without sustainable improvement in glycemic control. Sodium-glucose cotransporter (SGLT)-2 inhibitors, dual SGLT-1/2 inhibitors, and pramlintide have been shown to reduce hemoglobin A1c, induce weight loss, and lower insulin dose. The benefits of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, and alpha glucosidase inhibitors appear to be more limited. Gastrointestinal symptoms and increased hypoglycemia are adverse effects of certain classes. Although not devoid of side effects, additive pharmacotherapies in T1D can improve glycemic control and lower body weight and insulin requirement. Longer studies are needed before consideration for widespread clinical care.

What role for metformin in type 1 diabetes?

Tight glycaemic control is key to reducing the risk of cardiovascular and microvascular complications in people with type 1 diabetes.¹ Standard treatment involves optimising insulin therapy to achieve an HbA_1c level of 48mmol/mol (6.5%) or lower. Although not licensed for use in type 1 diabetes, metformin is included in some clinical guidelines as adjuvant therapy for people with type 1 diabetes who are overweight and wish to improve glycaemic control while minimising the dose of insulin.^1,2 The REMOVAL study is the largest trial to date that has investigated the longer-term effects of metformin in people with type 1 diabetes.³ Here, we consider the role of metformin in individuals with type 1 diabetes in light of these results and other study findings.

Effect of metformin on glycaemic control in patients with type 1 diabetes: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

For type 1 diabetes (T1D) patients, adding metformin to insulin therapies is thought to improve blood glucose levels, but current evidence does not support this clinical benefit. Additional data from large clinical trials are now available; therefore, we conducted a meta-analysis of studies on assessing the efficacy and adverse effects of metformin.

METHODS

We searched the MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases for data from randomized controlled trials. We performed statistical analyses by using Review Manager 5.2.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized controlled trials that compared metformin versus placebo met our inclusion criteria and were included in the study. The final meta-analysis included a total of 1183 participants with T1D. Metformin was associated with reductions in BMI (-1.14, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.24, P = .01), insulin requirements (-0.47, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.23, P = .0001), total cholesterol (-0.23, 95% CI -0.34 to -0.12, P < .0001), and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (-0.20, 95% CI -0.29 to -0.11, P < .0001) in T1D patients. No clear evidence indicated that metformin improved HbA1c, triglyceride, or high-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels. A safety analysis showed that metformin slightly increased the risk of severe hypoglycaemia (1.23, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.52, P = .05) and mainly gastrointestinal adverse events (2.67, 95% CI 2.06 to 3.45, P < .00001). No evidence showed that metformin increased diabetic ketoacidosis events.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with placebo, metformin was not associated with glycaemic control in T1D patients. Although it exhibited other benefits, such as lower BMI and reduced insulin requirements, total cholesterol, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, negative outcomes, such as gastrointestinal adverse effects and severe hypoglycaemia, should also be considered in the use of metformin for T1D patients.

Safety and efficacy of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in type 1 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are currently FDA approved for the management of type 2 diabetes. Our objective was to review the available evidence of the effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on HbA_1c, body weight, and total daily insulin dose, as well as their safety profile in patients with type 1 diabetes.

METHODS

Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by conducting a systematic search of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus and Cochrane library databases through August 2017. Data on study design, sample size, mean ± standard deviation of HbA_1c, body weight, and total daily insulin dose, as well as reported adverse events were extracted. Weighted mean differences (WMDs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model.

RESULTS

Relative to placebo, therapy with SGLT2 inhibitors led to significant reductions in HbA_1c (WMD 0.39; 95% CI 0.27, 0.51), body weight (WMD 2.76; 95% CI 1.11, 4.40), and total daily insulin dose (WMD 5.03; 95% CI 1.83, 8.23). In addition, there was no significant difference in the rate of adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study lends supports for the development of SGLT2 inhibitors in combination with insulin as a treatment option for patients with type 1 diabetes.

A Review of Insulin Resistance in Type 1 Diabetes: Is There a Place for Adjunctive Metformin?

There is a rising trend of overweight and obesity among individuals with type 1 diabetes. This is often associated with insulin resistance, increased insulin dose requirements and poor glycemic control. Insulin resistance is also seen during puberty and is strongly related to increased risk of cardiovascular disease. The role of metformin as an adjunct to ongoing intensive insulin therapy in type 1 diabetics has been evaluated in several randomized trials, including the recently concluded T1D Exchange Network trial in adolescents and the REMOVAL trial in adults. Metformin reduces the insulin dose requirement, insulin-induced weight gain, and total and LDL cholesterol, but results in an increased risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects and a minor increase in the risk of hypoglycemia. In addition, metformin has been shown to reduce maximal carotid intima media thickness and therefore may extend cardioprotective benefits in type 1 diabetes. The role of metformin as adjunctive therapy in type 1 diabetes needs to be explored further in outcome trials.

Insulin sensitizer prevents and ameliorates experimental type 1 diabetes

Insulin-dependent type-1 diabetes (T1D) is driven by autoimmune β-cell failure, whereas systemic resistance to insulin is considered the hallmark of insulin-independent type-2 diabetes (T2D). In contrast to this canonical dichotomy, insulin resistance appears to precede the overt diabetic stage of T1D and predict its progression, implying that insulin sensitizers may change the course of T1D. However, previous attempts to ameliorate T1D in animal models or patients by insulin sensitizers have largely failed. Sensitization to insulin by MEthyl-substituted long-chain DICArboxylic acid (MEDICA) analogs in T2D animal models surpasses that of current insulin sensitizers, thus prompting our interest in probing MEDICA in the T1D context. MEDICA efficacy in modulating the course of T1D was verified in streptozotocin (STZ) diabetic rats and autoimmune nonobese diabetic (NOD) mice. MEDICA treatment normalizes overt diabetes in STZ diabetic rats when added on to subtherapeutic insulin, and prevents/delays autoimmune T1D in NOD mice. MEDICA treatment does not improve β-cell insulin content or insulitis score, but its efficacy is accounted for by pronounced total body sensitization to insulin. In conclusion, potent insulin sensitizers may counteract genetic predisposition to autoimmune T1D and amplify subtherapeutic insulin into an effective therapeutic measure for the treatment of overt T1D.

Effect of Metformin on Vascular Function in Children With Type 1 Diabetes: A 12-Month Randomized Controlled Trial

CONTEXT

Children with type 1 diabetes have vascular dysfunction preceding atherosclerosis. Early interventions are needed to reduce cardiovascular disease.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of metformin on vascular function in children with type 1 diabetes.

DESIGN

Twelve-month double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

SETTING

Tertiary pediatric diabetes clinic.

PARTICIPANTS

Ninety children (8 to 18 years of age), >50th percentile body mass index (BMI), with type 1 diabetes.

INTERVENTION

Metformin (up to 1 g twice a day) or placebo.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Vascular function measured by brachial artery ultrasound [flow-mediated dilatation/glyceryl trinitrate-mediated dilatation (GTN)].

RESULTS

Ninety participants were enrolled [41 boys, 13.6 (2.5) years of age, 45 per group], 10 discontinued intervention, and 1 was lost to follow-up. On metformin, GTN improved, independent of glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), by 3.3 percentage units [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.3, 6.3, P = 0.03] and insulin dose reduced by 0.2 U/kg/d (95% CI 0.1, 0.3, P = 0.001) during 12 months, with effects from 3 months. Metformin had a beneficial effect on HbA1c at 3 months (P = 0.001) and difference in adjusted HbA1c between groups during 12 months was 1.0%; 95% CI 0.4, 1.5 (10.9 mmol/mol; 95% CI 4.4, 16.4), P = 0.001. There were no effects on carotid/aortic intima media thickness, BMI, lipids, blood pressure, or other cardiovascular risk factors. Median (95% CI) adherence, evaluated by electronic monitoring, was 75.5% (65.7, 81.5), without group differences. More gastrointestinal side effects were reported on metformin (incidence rate ratio 1.65, 95% CI 1.08, 2.52, P = 0.02), with no difference in hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin improved vascular smooth muscle function and HbA1c, and lowered insulin dose in type 1 diabetes children. These benefits and good safety profile warrant further consideration of its use.

The effect of adding metformin to insulin therapy for type 1 diabetes mellitus children: A systematic review and meta-analysis

We aimed to assess the effectiveness of adding metformin to insulin in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) children for improving metabolic outcomes. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) conducted on children age 6 to 19 years who are diagnosed with T1DM, and examined the effect of adding Metformin to standard insulin therapy. We performed literature searches on Ovid Midline, Ovid Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from the date of inception of the database to February 15, 2016. Two reviewers screened titles and abstracts independently, assessed full text eligibility, and extracted information from eligible trials. The primary outcome is glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), and the secondary outcomes are health-related quality of life, body mass index (BMI), lipid profile, total insulin daily dose, hypoglycaemia, and diabetes ketoacidosis. We screened 736 studies, and included 6 RCTs with 325 patients. All RCTs were of low risk of bias, and included adolescents (mean age 15 years). The meta-analysis showed that the addition of Metformin resulted in decreased total insulin daily dose (TIDD) (unit/kg/d) (mean difference [MD] = -0.15, 95%CI, -0.24, -0.06), and reduced BMI kg/m² (MD -1.46, 95%CI -2.54, 0.38), and BMI z-score (MD= - 0.11, 95%CI -0.21, -0.01), and similar HbA1c (%) (MD= - 0.05, 95%CI, -0.19, 0.29). The overall evidence quality was high to moderate. Current evidence does not support use of Metformin in T1DM adolescents to improve HbA1c. However, Metformin may provide modest reduction in TIDD and BMI.

Metformin as add-on to intensive insulin therapy in type 1 diabetes mellitus

We aimed to evaluate the effect of adjuvant metformin to intensive insulin therapy in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). A 10-year retrospective study in 2 cohorts was performed: the MET cohort (n = 181) consisted of patients with T1DM on adjuvant metformin for ≥6 months and the CTR cohort (n = 62) consisted of patients with T1DM who refused metformin (n = 25) or adhered to metformin for <6 months (n = 36). Data on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), body mass index (BMI) and daily insulin dose were recorded yearly. A third cross-sectional cohort, the REF cohort (n = 961), consisting of patients with T1DM not offered adjuvant metformin, was used as a reference for baseline comparison. At the study start, BMI was significantly higher and insulin doses were lower in patients in the MET cohort, while HbA1c levels were similar. In the first years of metformin therapy, small but non-significant decreases were seen in BMI and insulin dose in patients in the MET cohort, while after 10 years no persistent effect on HbA1c, insulin dose or BMI was seen. In conclusion, although metformin may have short-term effects on BMI and insulin dose when used as adjunct therapy in patients with T1DM, no long-term beneficial effects were observed when patients were followed for 10 years.

The efficacy and safety of SGLT2 inhibitors for adjunctive treatment of type 1 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To assess the efficacy and safety of the SGLT-2 inhibitors as adjunct therapy to insulin in T1DM, clinical trials indexed in PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMbase from inception through April 5, 2016. A meta-analysis was conducted on trials of SGLT-2 inhibitors in patients with T1DM on insulin therapy using RevMan 5.3 software. Of the 371 articles identified, ten met eligibility criteria. Seven clinical trials including four randomized controlled trials and 581 patients were included. Compared with the control group, SGLT-2 inhibitors group had significantly reduced fasting plasma glucose by 0.69 mmol/L [1.32; 0.07], glycosylated hemoglobin A1C by 0.37% [0.54; 0.20], body weight by 2.54 kg [3.48; 1.60] and total daily insulin dose by 6.22 IU [8.04; 4.40]. The total incidence of adverse events (AEs), hypoglycemia, and genital and urinary infections were also similar to placebo, while an increased incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) (n = 16) was seen in SGLT-2 inhibitors group. The present study demonstrates that SGLT-2 inhibitors are effective as adjunct therapy to insulin in T1DM, heralding improved glycemic control, reduced body weight and total daily insulin dose without an increase in total AEs, hypoglycemia, or genital and urinary infections. However, the risk of DKA should be carefully monitored in future clinical trials.

The Effect of Metformin on Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background. The effect of metformin in combination with insulin in adolescents with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) is controversial. Methods and Results. The PubMed and EMBASE online databases were searched. Five double-blind randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included 301 adolescents with T1DM were identified. Metformin plus insulin was associated with reduced hemoglobin A1C levels, total daily insulin dosage, body mass index (BMI), and body weight. However, the subgroup analysis demonstrated that HbA1c levels were not significantly changed in overweight/obese adolescents and were significantly reduced in the general patients. On the contrary, BMI and body weight were significantly reduced in overweight/obese adolescents but not in the general patients. Metformin was associated with higher incidence of adverse events. Conclusions. Among adolescents with T1DM, administering adjunctive metformin therapy in addition to insulin was associated with improved HbA1c levels, total daily insulin dosage, BMI, and body weight. However, there may be differences in the effects of this regimen between overweight/obese and nonobese adolescents. The risk of an adverse event may be increased with metformin treatment. These results provide strong evidence supporting future high-quality, large-sample trials.

Prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors in youth with type 1 diabetes and elevated body mass index

AIM

The prevalence of cardiovascular risk factors in children with type 1 diabetes and elevated BMI in the USA is poorly defined. We aimed to test the hypothesis that children with type 1 diabetes who are overweight or obese have increased frequencies of hypertension, dyslipidemia, and micro-/macroalbuminuria compared to their healthy weight peers.

METHODS

We studied 11,348 children 2 to <18 years of age enrolled in T1D Exchange between September 2010 and August 2012 with type 1 diabetes for ≥1 year and BMI ≥ 5th age-/sex-adjusted percentile (mean age 12 years, 49 % female, 78 % non-Hispanic White). Overweight and obesity were defined based on Centers for Disease Control and Prevention criteria. Diagnoses of hypertension, dyslipidemia, and micro-/macroalbuminuria were obtained from medical records. Logistic and linear regression models were used to assess factors associated with weight status.

RESULTS

Of the 11,348 participants, 22 % were overweight and 14 % obese. Hypertension and dyslipidemia were diagnosed in 1.0 % and 3.8 % of participants, respectively; micro-/macroalbuminuria was diagnosed in 3.8 % of participants with available data (n = 7,401). The odds of either hypertension or dyslipidemia were higher in obese than healthy weight participants [OR 3.5, 99 % confidence interval (CI) 2.0-6.1 and 2.2, 99 % CI 1.6-3.1, respectively]. Obese participants tended to be diagnosed with micro-/macroalbuminuria less often than healthy weight participants (OR 0.6, 99 % CI 0.4-1.0).

CONCLUSIONS

Obese children with type 1 diabetes have a higher prevalence of hypertension and dyslipidemia than healthy weight children with type 1 diabetes. The possible association of obesity with lower micro-/macroalbuminuria rates warrants further investigation.

Recent advances in type 1 diabetes

Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is caused by an autoimmune attack on pancreatic beta cells that leads to insulin deficiency. The incidence of T1D in Australia has doubled over the past 20 years. T1D treatment focuses on physiological insulin replacement, aiming for near-normal blood glucose levels. Hypoglycaemia is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in T1D. Optimal T1D management is complex, and is enhanced by empowering individuals in all aspects of managing diabetes. New technologies, including insulin pumps, continuous glucose monitors and sensor-augmented pumps, can assist people achieve better glycaemic control and reduce the risk of severe hypoglycaemia. Women with T1D can achieve significantly better outcomes during pregnancy and for their infants by planning for their pregnancy and by intensive glycaemic control. Several trials are underway that seek to identify the determinants of autoimmunity and to develop therapies that prevent T1D in at-risk individuals. Pancreatic and islet cell transplants are proven therapies, but are only offered to individuals with diabetes and renal failure (pancreas) or severe hypoglycaemia unawareness (islet cell transplants). Although T1D is still associated with considerable premature mortality, recent findings show that a significant improvement in life expectancy has occurred.

Management of Severe Insulin Resistance in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes

Managing severe insulin resistance (IR) in patients with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) can be challenging for both clinicians and patients. As average weight for patients with T1DM has increased in recent decades, IR in this population has become more widespread. Currently, almost 50 % of patients with T1DM are overweight or obese. While intensive insulin therapy is associated with reduction in complications, aggressive treatment can lead to weight gain. With increasing weight, insulin can become less effective to control glycemia, resulting in higher insulin doses and hence more weight gain. Novel strategies to break this vicious cycle are needed. This review will investigate current research on insulin formulations, lifestyle modification, adjunct therapies, and surgery that may help better manage patients with T1DM and IR.