Liver disease is an important cause of mortality in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). It is estimated that diabetes is the most common cause of liver disease in the United States. Virtually, entire spectrum of liver disease is seen in T2DM including abnormal liver enzymes, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease, cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and acute liver failure. The treatment of diabetes mellitus (DM) in cirrhotic patients has particular challenges as follows: (1) about half the patients have malnutrition; (2) patients already have advanced liver disease when clinical DM is diagnosed; (3) most of the oral antidiabetic agents (ADAs) are metabolized in the liver; (4) patients often have episodes of hypoglycemia. The aim of this consensus group convened during the National Insulin Summit 2015, Puducherry, was to focus on the challenges with glycemic management, with particular emphasis to safety of ADAs across stages of liver dysfunction. Published literature, product labels, and major clinical guidelines were reviewed and summarized. The drug classes included are biguanides (metformin), the second- or third-generation sulfonylureas, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and currently available insulins. Consensus recommendations have been drafted for glycemic targets and dose modifications of all ADAs. These can aid clinicians in managing patients with diabetes and liver disease.

Aims and Methods: Effect of angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) on outcomes in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) is uncertain. Available evidence is limited to a few retrospective observational studies with small number of patients. We did a meta-analysis to assess the effect of ACEi/ARB in patients with COVID-19 on severity of disease, risk for hospitalisation, and death compared to those not on ACEi/ARB. We searched the Cochrane library, PubMed, Embase, ClinicalTrial.gov and medRxiv for studies published until 25.04.2020. Inclusion criteria included all studies with patients with confirmed COVID-19 either taking, or not taking, ACEi/ARB. Depending on degree of heterogeneity, fixed or random effect model was selected to calculate effect size (Odds ratio). Results: Six studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. These included 423 patients on ACEi/ARB, and 1419 not on ACEi/ARB. Compared to patients with COVID-19 not on ACEi/ARB, there was a statistically significant 43% reduction (OR 0.57, CI: 0.37-0.88, I2: 0.000) in the odds of death in those on ACEi/ARB. There was a statistically non-significant 38% reduction (OR: 0.62, 95% CI: 0.31-1.23, I2=70.36) in the odds of developing severe disease and 19% reduction (OR 0.81; 95% CI: 0.42-1.55, I2: 0.000) in the odds of hospitalisation among those on ACEi/ARB. Discussion: It is safe to use ACEi/ARB in patients with COVID-19 requiring these medications for associated comorbidities. Although limited by confounding factors typical of a meta-analysis of retrospective observational studies, our data suggests that use of these medications may reduce the odds of death. Conclusion: Our meta-analysis of the updated studies on SARS-CoV-2 reassures the medical fraternity on the use of and continuation of ACEi/ARB, supporting all recent recommendations .

Objective: There are no controlled studies on the role of systemic corticosteroids (CS) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). In the absence of high-quality evidence, understandably the recommendations from various organizations are cautious. Several randomized controlled trials are underway but shall take time to conclude. We therefore undertook a meta-analysis to ascertain the role of CS in the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19. Data Sources: Electronic databases, including Pubmed, Cochrane library and Embase, were searched, using the keywords of interest and the PICO search technique, from inception to 12th April 2020. Study Selection: Studies highlighting the use of CS in coronavirus infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and COVID-19 were selected based on pre-determined inclusion criteria. Data extraction: Data was extracted into an excel sheet and transferred to comprehensive meta-analysis software version 3, Biostat Inc., Englewood, NJ, USA, for analysis. Data synthesis: Five studies with SARS-CoV-2 infection were included in the meta-analysis. The rate ratio (RR) for mortality in patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection was 1.26 (95% CI: 0.96-1.65, I2: 74.46), indicating lack of benefit of CS therapy on mortality in critically ill patients with COVID-19. The RR for mortality on analysis of the three studies that particularly reported on patients with significant pulmonary compromise secondary to SARS-CoV-2 infection was neutral (RR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.63-1.33, I2: 63.38). Conclusions: The use of CS in critically ill patients with COVID-19 did not improve or worsen mortality. Pending further information from controlled studies, CS can be used in critically ill patients with COVID-19 with critical illness related corticosteroid insufficiency and moderate to severe ARDS without the risk of increased mortality.

Aim: To develop an evidence-based expert group opinion on the role of insulin motivation to overcome insulin distress during different stages of insulin therapy and to propose a practitioner's toolkit for insulin motivation in the management of diabetes mellitus (DM). Background: Insulin distress, an emotional response of the patient to the suggested use of insulin, acts as a major barrier to insulin therapy in the management of DM. Addressing patient-, physician-and drug-related factors is important to overcome insulin distress. Strengthening of communication between physicians and patients with diabetes and enhancing the patients' coping skills are prerequisites to create a sense of comfort with the use of insulin. Insulin motivation is key to achieving targeted goals in diabetes care. A group of

The current diabetes management strategies not only aim at controlling glycaemic parameters but also necessitate continuous medical care along with multifactorial risk reduction through a comprehensive management concept. The sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are a group of evolving antidiabetic agents that have the potential to play a pivotal role in the comprehensive management of patients with diabetes due to their diverse beneficial effects. SGLT2i provide moderate glycaemic control, considerable body weight and blood pressure reduction, and thus have the ability to lower the risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications. Some of the unique characteristics associated with SGLT2i, such as reduction in body weight (more visceral fat mass loss than subcutaneous fat loss), reduction in insulin resistance and improvement in β-cell function, as measured by homeostatic model assessment-β (HOMA-β) could be potentially beneficial and help in overcoming some of the challenges faced by Indian patients with diabetes. In addition, a patient-centric approach with individualised treatment during SGLT2i therapy is inevitable in order to reduce diabetic complications and improve quality of life. Despite their broad benefits profile, the risk of genital tract infections, volume depletion, amputations and diabetic ketoacidosis associated with SGLT2i should be carefully monitored. In this compendium, we systematically reviewed the literature from Medline, Cochrane Library, and other relevant databases and attempted to provide evidence-based recommendations for the positioning of SGLT2i in the management of diabetes in the Indian population. Funding : AstraZeneca Pharma India Limited.

The Asian-Indian phenotype of type 2 diabetes mellitus is uniquely characterized for cardiometabolic risk. In the context of implementing patient-centric holistic cardio-metabolic risk management as a priority, the choice of various combinations of antidiabetic agents should be individualized. Combined therapy with two classes of antidiabetic agents, namely, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors and sodiumglucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, target several pathophysiological pathways. The wideranging clinical outcomes associated with this combination, including improvement of glycemia and adiposity, reduction of metabolic and vascular risk, safety, and simplicity for sustainable compliance, are extremely relevant to the Asian Indian patient population living with T2DM. In this review we describe the available evidence in detail and present a rational

No abstract

No abstract