A pilot study on the effect of D-allulose on postprandial glucose levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus during Ramadan fasting

The Metabolic and Endocrine Effects of a 12-Week Allulose-Rich Diet

The global rise in type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity necessitates innovative dietary interventions. This study investigates the effects of allulose, a rare sugar shown to reduce blood glucose, in a rat model of diet-induced obesity and T2D. Over 12 weeks, we hypothesized that allulose supplementation would improve body weight, insulin sensitivity, and glycemic control. Our results showed that allulose mitigated the adverse effects of high-fat, high-sugar diets, including reduced body weight gain and improved insulin resistance. The allulose group exhibited lower food consumption and increased levels of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), enhancing glucose regulation and appetite control. Additionally, allulose prevented liver triglyceride accumulation and promoted mitochondrial uncoupling in adipose tissue. These findings suggest that allulose supplementation can improve metabolic health markers, making it a promising dietary component for managing obesity and T2D. Further research is needed to explore the long-term benefits and mechanisms of allulose in metabolic disease prevention and management. This study supports the potential of allulose as a safe and effective intervention for improving metabolic health in the context of dietary excess.

Interventions for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus fasting during Ramadan

BACKGROUND

Fasting during Ramadan is obligatory for adult Muslims, except those who have a medical illness. Many Muslims with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) choose to fast, which may increase their risks of hypoglycaemia and dehydration.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of interventions for people with type 2 diabetes fasting during Ramadan.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov (29 June 2022) without language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) conducted during Ramadan that evaluated all pharmacological or behavioural interventions in Muslims with T2DM.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors screened and selected records, assessed risk of bias and extracted data independently. Discrepancies were resolved by a third author. For meta-analyses we used a random-effects model, with risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes with their associated 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We assessed the certainty of evidence using the GRADE approach.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 RCTs with 5359 participants, with a four-week study duration and at least four weeks of follow-up. All studies had at least one high-risk domain in the risk of bias assessment. Four trials compared dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors with sulphonylurea. DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce hypoglycaemia compared to sulphonylureas (85/1237 versus 165/1258, RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.68; low-certainty evidence). Serious hypoglycaemia was similar between groups (no events were reported in two trials; 6/279 in the DPP-4 versus 4/278 in the sulphonylurea group was reported in one trial, RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.43 to 5.24; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of DPP-4 inhibitors on adverse events other than hypoglycaemia (141/1207 versus 157/1219, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.52 to 1.54) and HbA1c changes (MD -0.11%, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.36) (very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes). No deaths were reported (moderate-certainty evidence). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and treatment satisfaction were not evaluated. Two trials compared meglitinides with sulphonylurea. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect on hypoglycaemia (14/133 versus 21/140, RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.28) and HbA1c changes (MD 0.38%, 95% CI 0.35% to 0.41%) (very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes). Death, serious hypoglycaemic events, adverse events, treatment satisfaction and HRQoL were not evaluated. One trial compared sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors with sulphonylurea. SGLT-2 may reduce hypoglycaemia compared to sulphonylurea (4/58 versus 13/52, RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.79; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain for serious hypoglycaemia (one event reported in both groups, RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.06 to 13.97) and adverse events other than hypoglycaemia (20/58 versus 18/52, RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.67) (very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes). SGLT-2 inhibitors result in little or no difference in HbA1c (MD 0.27%, 95% CI -0.04 to 0.58; 1 trial, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). Death, treatment satisfaction and HRQoL were not evaluated. Three trials compared glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analogues with sulphonylurea. GLP-1 analogues may reduce hypoglycaemia compared to sulphonylurea (20/291 versus 48/305, RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.74; low-certainty evidence). The evidence was very uncertain for serious hypoglycaemia (0/91 versus 1/91, RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.01 to 7.99; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that GLP-1 analogues result in little to no difference in adverse events other than hypoglycaemia (78/244 versus 55/255, RR 1.50, 95% CI 0.86 to 2.61; very low-certainty evidence), treatment satisfaction (MD -0.18, 95% CI -3.18 to 2.82; very low-certainty evidence) or change in HbA1c (MD -0.04%, 95% CI -0.45% to 0.36%; 2 trials, 246 participants; low-certainty evidence). Death and HRQoL were not evaluated. Two trials compared insulin analogues with biphasic insulin. The evidence was very uncertain about the effects of insulin analogues on hypoglycaemia (47/256 versus 81/244, RR 0.43, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.40) and serious hypoglycaemia (4/131 versus 3/132, RR 1.34, 95% CI 0.31 to 5.89) (very low-certainty evidence for both outcomes). The evidence was very uncertain for the effect of insulin analogues on adverse effects other than hypoglycaemia (109/256 versus 114/244, RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.44 to 1.56; very low-certainty evidence), all-cause mortality (1/131 versus 0/132, RR 3.02, 95% CI 0.12 to 73.53; very low-certainty evidence) and HbA1c changes (MD 0.03%, 95% CI -0.17% to 0.23%; 1 trial, 245 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Treatment satisfaction and HRQoL were not evaluated. Two trials compared telemedicine with usual care. The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of telemedicine on hypoglycaemia compared with usual care (9/63 versus 23/58, RR 0.42, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.74; very low-certainty evidence), HRQoL (MD 0.06, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.15; very low-certainty evidence) and HbA1c change (MD -0.84%, 95% CI -1.51% to -0.17%; very low-certainty evidence). Death, serious hypoglycaemia, AEs other than hypoglycaemia and treatment satisfaction were not evaluated. Two trials compared Ramadan-focused patient education with usual care. The evidence was very uncertain about the effect of Ramadan-focused patient education on hypoglycaemia (49/213 versus 42/209, RR 1.17, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.66; very low-certainty evidence) and HbA1c change (MD -0.40%, 95% CI -0.73% to -0.06%; very low-certainty evidence). Death, serious hypoglycaemia, adverse events other than hypoglycaemia, treatment satisfaction and HRQoL were not evaluated. One trial compared drug dosage reduction with usual care. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of drug dosage reduction on hypoglycaemia (19/452 versus 52/226, RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.30; very low-certainty evidence). No participants experienced adverse events other than hypoglycaemia during the study (very low-certainty evidence). Death, serious hypoglycaemia, treatment satisfaction, HbA1c change and HRQoL were not evaluated.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no clear evidence of the benefits or harms of interventions for individuals with T2DM who fast during Ramadan. All results should be interpreted with caution due to concerns about risk of bias, imprecision and inconsistency between studies, which give rise to low- to very low-certainty evidence. Major outcomes, such as mortality, health-related quality of life and severe hypoglycaemia, were rarely evaluated. Sufficiently powered studies that examine the effects of various interventions on these outcomes are needed.

A Pilot Study on the Efficacy of a Diabetic Diet Containing the Rare Sugar D-Allulose in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Prospective, Randomized, Single-Blind, Crossover Study

High sugar consumption increases the risk of diabetes, obesity, and cardiovascular diseases. Regarding the diet of patients with diabetes, artificial sweeteners are considered a safe alternative to sugar; however, there is also a risk that artificial sweeteners exacerbate glucose metabolism. D-allulose (C-3 isomer of d-fructose), which is a rare sugar, has been reported to have antidiabetic and antiobesity effects. In this study, the efficacy of a diabetic diet containing D-allulose was investigated in patients with type 2 diabetes using an intermittently scanned continuous glucose monitoring system (isCGM). This study was a validated, prospective, single-blind, randomized, crossover comparative study. Comparison of peak postprandial blood glucose (PPG) levels after consumption of a standard diabetic diet and a diabetic diet containing 8.5 g of D-allulose was the primary endpoint. A D-allulose-containing diabetic diet improved PPG levels in type two diabetes patients compared with a strictly energy-controlled diabetic diet. The results also showed a protective effect on endogenous pancreatic insulin secretory capacity owing to reduced insulin requirement. In patients with type two diabetes mellitus, diabetic diets containing 8.5 g D-allulose were effective in improving PPG levels.

Knowledge of diabetes and the practice of diabetes self-management during Ramadan fasting among patients with type 2 diabetes in Malaysia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To assess the level of diabetes knowledge and its association with diabetes self-management practices during Ramadan fasting among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted involving a sample of Malaysian patients with T2D. Patients aged 18 years and above, and attending an outpatient diabetic unit of a government hospital were recruited between February and April 2021. A self-administered questionnaire was utilized to assess diabetes knowledge and diabetes self-management practices.

RESULTS

A total of 306 participants completed the questionnaire. Most of them were females (54.2%) and above 55 years old (75.1%). Resultantly, knowledge of diabetes was considered average among 52% of the participants. Only 9.5% of them avoided the consumption of sweet foods during iftar. Practicing late suhoor (p = 0.012) and self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) (p = 0.026) during Ramadan were significantly associated with a better diabetes knowledge score. Education level (p = 0.000), working status (p = 0.030), and monthly income (p = 0.000) were significantly associated with participants' knowledge level of diabetes. A higher proportion (72.2%) of the participants completed fasting for a month during Ramadan 2020. Meanwhile, hypoglycemia was the main reason (38.8%) for incomplete fasting.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings reflect the need to improve patients' knowledge of diabetes and diabetes self-management practices, especially during Ramadan. Such objectives could be achieved by considering the associated factors identified in this study.