XI. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and patient self-management education to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information, refer to Bode (Ed.): Medical Management of Type 1 Diabetes (1), Burant (Ed): Medical Management of Type 2 Diabetes (2), and Klingensmith (Ed): Intensive Diabetes Management (3). The recommendations included are diagnostic and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was utilized to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes

Wnt/β-catenin signaling: components, mechanisms, and diseases

https://web.stanford.edu/group/nusselab/cgi-bin/wnt/sites/default/files/reviews/Cell%202012%20Clevers.pdf

Wnt/β-catenin signaling and disease.

D iabetes is a chronic illness that requires continuing medical care and ongoing patient self-management education and support to prevent acute complications and to reduce the risk of long-term complications. Diabetes care is complex and requires that many issues, beyond glycemic control, be addressed. A large body of evidence exists that supports a range of interventions to improve diabetes outcomes. These standards of care are intended to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payors, and other interested individuals with the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals, and tools to evaluate the quality of care. While individual preferences, comorbidities, and other patient factors may require modification of goals, targets that are desirable for most patients with diabetes are provided. These standards are not intended to preclude clinical judgment or more extensive evaluation and management of the patient by other specialists as needed. For more detailed information about management of diabetes, refer to references 1–3. The recommendations included are screening, diagnostic, and therapeutic actions that are known or believed to favorably affect health outcomes of patients with diabetes. A grading system (Table 1), developed by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and modeled after existing methods, was used to clarify and codify the evidence that forms the basis for the recommendations. The level of evidence that supports each recommendation is listed after each recommendation using the letters A, B, C, or E. These standards of care are revised annually by the ADA multidisciplinary Professional Practice Committee, and new evidence is incorporated. Members of the Professional Practice Committee and their disclosed conflicts of interest are listed in the Introduction. Subsequently, as with all position statements, the standards of care are reviewed and approved by the Executive Committee of ADA’s Board of Directors.

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2010

I. CLASSIFICATION AND DIAGNOSIS OF DIABETES, p. S12 A. Classification of diabetes B. Diagnosis of diabetes C. Categories of increased risk for diabetes (prediabetes) II. TESTING FOR DIABETES IN ASYMPTOMATIC PATIENTS, p. S13 A. Testing for type 2 diabetes and risk of future diabetes in adults B. Testing for type 2 diabetes in children C. Screening for type 1 diabetes III. DETECTION AND DIAGNOSIS OF GESTATIONAL DIABETES MELLITUS, p. S15 IV. PREVENTION/DELAY OF TYPE 2 DIABETES, p. S16 V. DIABETES CARE, p. S16 A. Initial evaluation B. Management C. Glycemic control 1. Assessment of glycemic control a. Glucose monitoring b. A1C 2. Glycemic goals in adults D. Pharmacologic and overall approaches to treatment 1. Therapy for type 1 diabetes 2. Therapy for type 2 diabetes E. Diabetes self-management education F. Medical nutrition therapy G. Physical activity H. Psychosocial assessment and care I. When treatment goals are not met J. Hypoglycemia K. Intercurrent illness L. Bariatric surgery M. Immunization VI. PREVENTION AND MANAGEMENT OF DIABETES COMPLICATIONS, p. S27 A. Cardiovascular disease 1. Hypertension/blood pressure control 2. Dyslipidemia/lipid management 3. Antiplatelet agents 4. Smoking cessation 5. Coronary heart disease screening and treatment B. Nephropathy screening and treatment C. Retinopathy screening and treatment D. Neuropathy screening and treatment E. Foot care VII. DIABETES CARE IN SPECIFIC POPULATIONS, p. S38 A. Children and adolescents 1. Type 1 diabetes Glycemic control a. Screening and management of chronic complications in children and adolescents with type 1 diabetes i. Nephropathy ii. Hypertension iii. Dyslipidemia iv. Retinopathy v. Celiac disease vi. Hypothyroidism b. Self-management c. School and day care d. Transition from pediatric to adult care 2. Type 2 diabetes 3. Monogenic diabetes syndromes B. Preconception care C. Older adults D. Cystic fibrosis–related diabetes VIII. DIABETES CARE IN SPECIFIC SETTINGS, p. S43 A. Diabetes care in the hospital 1. Glycemic targets in hospitalized patients 2. Anti-hyperglycemic agents in hospitalized patients 3. Preventing hypoglycemia 4. Diabetes care providers in the hospital 5. Self-management in the hospital 6. Diabetes self-management education in the hospital 7. Medical nutrition therapy in the hospital 8. Bedside blood glucose monitoring 9. Discharge planning IX. STRATEGIES FOR IMPROVING DIABETES CARE, p. S46

Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes—2011

Studies have shown that Japanese migrants to the US and Brazil have higher rate of diabetes than native Japanese, but little is known about migrants to the UK. We investigate the health status of Japanese migrants to the UK. We utilised the modified validated Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System State Questionnaire 2004. A UK computerised directory was searched for common Japanese names and 2192 anonymised postal questionnaires were dispatched. Data were compared to a nationwide survey of diabetes in Japan, the National Health and Nutrition Survey and the Health Survey for England. 589 replies were received and showed that the rates of obesity and overweight were lower than that of the native UK population. The prevalence of self-reported doctor-diagnosed diabetes, hypertension, hyperlipidaemia, heart-attack and stroke were 3.6%, 13.1%, 19.5%, 0.7% and 0.8% respectively. It appears that Japanese migrants adopt a lifestyle similar to the UK population, diverging from that of native Japanese. Rates of obesity are lower than the UK native population and smoking rates are lower than native Japanese. In conclusion, the migratory disease burden seen in Japanese migrants to the US and Brazil was not apparent in this sample population in the UK.

/pdf/the-health-status-of-japanese-people-living-in-the-uk-350p8pfjbq.pdf

The health status of Japanese people living in the UK.

AIMS/INTRODUCTION
Substantial variability in demographic and clinical characteristics exists among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, which may impact treatment. This post-hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of imeglimin 1,000 mg twice daily (BID) monotherapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients according to demographic and clinical characteristics.


MATERIALS AND METHODS
Data were pooled from two placebo-controlled, 24 week, randomized, double-blind studies in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Outcomes (least squares mean [LSM] change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24, and safety) were analyzed according to subgroups based on demographics, clinical characteristics, and comorbidities.


RESULTS
The difference in LSM change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24 was statistically significant for imeglimin vs placebo in all patient subgroups analyzed (P < 0.05 each), including demographics (age, body mass index), clinical characteristics (duration of type 2 diabetes mellitus, chronic kidney disease [CKD] stage, and prior medication use) and comorbidities (hypertension, dyslipidemia, risk of hepatic fibrosis and liver function parameter status). A statistically significant separation from placebo in HbA1c was observed at week 4 and maintained through week 24. No new safety concerns were identified with imeglimin in any patient subpopulations.


CONCLUSIONS
The efficacy and safety of imeglimin was demonstrated across patient subgroups, irrespective of baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Our findings confirm the efficacy and safety of imeglimin across a broad spectrum of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/jdi.14035

Effect of patient characteristics on the efficacy and safety of imeglimin monotherapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A post-hoc analysis of two randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

We showed a case with the onset of fulminant type 1 diabetes mellitus (FT1DM) whose HbA1c could not be measured with HPLC method. We think that the reason why his HbA1c was not be detected was associated with the presence of labile hemoglobin A1c (LHbA1c). These result mean that it is possible that LHbA1c can bring about a pitfall on HPLC method in diagnosis of onset of FT1DM.

A pitfall in hemoglobin A1c measurement with high performance liquid chromatography method in the diagnosis of onset of fulminant type 1 diabetes mellitus

Acute respiratory distress syndrome triggered by marked cytokine storm in a subject with diabetic ketoacidosis: A case report.

https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/naika/96/3/96_505/_pdf

Kohei Kaku

Papers

The health status of Japanese people living in the UK.

Effect of patient characteristics on the efficacy and safety of imeglimin monotherapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A post-hoc analysis of two randomized, placebo-controlled trials.

A pitfall in hemoglobin A1c measurement with high performance liquid chromatography method in the diagnosis of onset of fulminant type 1 diabetes mellitus

Acute respiratory distress syndrome triggered by marked cytokine storm in a subject with diabetic ketoacidosis: A case report.

Progress in chemotherapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus