Citations

Importance Gestational diabetes is a common complication of pregnancy and the optimal management is uncertain. Objective To test whether early initiation of metformin reduces insulin initiation or improves fasting hyperglycemia at gestation weeks 32 or 38. Design, Setting, and Participants Double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 2 centers in Ireland (one tertiary hospital and one smaller regional hospital). Participants were enrolled from June 2017 through September 2022 and followed up until 12 weeks’ postpartum. Participants comprised 510 individuals (535 pregnancies) diagnosed with gestational diabetes based on World Health Organization 2013 criteria. Interventions Randomized 1:1 to either placebo or metformin (maximum dose, 2500 mg) in addition to usual care. Main Outcomes And Measures The primary outcome was a composite of insulin initiation or a fasting glucose level of 5.1 mmol/L or greater at gestation weeks 32 or 38. Results Among 510 participants (mean age, 34.3 years), 535 pregnancies were randomized. The primary composite outcome was not significantly different between groups and occurred in 150 pregnancies (56.8%) in the metformin group and 167 pregnancies (63.7%) in the placebo group (between-group difference, −6.9% [95% CI, −15.1% to 1.4%]; relative risk, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.78-1.02]; P = .13). Of 6 prespecified secondary maternal outcomes, 3 favored the metformin group, including time to insulin initiation, self-reported capillary glycemic control, and gestational weight gain. Secondary neonatal outcomes differed by group, with smaller neonates (lower mean birth weights, a lower proportion weighing >4 kg, a lower proportion in the >90% percentile, and smaller crown-heel length) in the metformin group without differences in neonatal intensive care needs, respiratory distress requiring respiratory support, jaundice requiring phototherapy, major congenital anomalies, neonatal hypoglycemia, or proportion with 5-minute Apgar scores less than 7. Conclusion and relevance Early treatment with metformin was not superior to placebo for the composite primary outcome. Prespecified secondary outcome data support further investigation of metformin in larger clinical trials. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02980276 ; EudraCT: 2016-001644-19

AbstractIntroductionType 1 diabetes mellitus occurs in one in every 275 pregnancies and can result in increased morbidity and mortality for both mother and baby. Several pregnancy complications can be reduced or prevented by attendance at pre‐pregnancy care (PPC). Despite this, less than 40% of pregnant women with pre‐gestational diabetes receive formal PPC. The aim of this scoping review is to identify the barriers to PPC attendance among women with type 1 diabetes.MethodsWe conducted a scoping review by searching five databases (Ebsco, Embase, Ovid and PubMed for literature and the ProQuest for any grey/unpublished literature) for studies in English between 2000 and 2022. Studies that evaluated attendance at PPC for women with type 1 diabetes were included.ResultsThere are multiple barriers to PPC attendance, and many of these barriers have been unchanged since the 1990s. Identified barriers can be grouped under patient‐centered and clinician‐centered headings. Patient factors include knowledge and awareness, unplanned pregnancies, negative perceptions of healthcare and communication issues, unclear attendance pathways and logistical issues including time off work and childcare. Clinician factors include physician knowledge, time constraints and lack of comfort discussing pregnancy/contraception.ConclusionThis review highlights the ongoing problem of poor attendance at PPC and identifies key barriers to be addressed when developing and implementing PPC programs for women with type 1 diabetes.

Introduction Diabetes mellitus is the most common metabolic complication of pregnancy and its prevalence worldwide is rising. The number of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) being conducted in people with diabetes is also increasing. Many studies preferentially publish findings on clinical endpoints and do not report patient-reported outcomes (PROs). In studies that do include PROs, PRO reporting is often of poor quality. Methods We will conduct this systematic review following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. Using a combination of medical subject headings and keywords (combined using Boolean operators), we will search web-based databases (PubMed, Cochrane and EMBASE) for RCTs published in English between 2013 and 2021. Two reviewers will review titles and abstracts. We will review the full texts of any relevant abstracts and extract the following data: date of publication or recruitment period, journal of publication, country of study, multicentre or single centre, population and number of participants, type of intervention, frequency of PRO assessment and type of PRO (or PRO measurement) used. We will also record if the PRO was a primary, secondary or exploratory outcome. We will exclude reviews, observational studies, unpublished data for example, conference abstracts and trial protocols. Any published RCT that includes data on a PRO as a primary or secondary outcome will then be compared against the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials—Patient-Reported Outcome extension checklist, a structured and approved framework for the publication of results of PROs. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval to conduct this study was obtained from the ethics committee at Galway University Hospitals on 24 March 2021 (CA 2592). We aim to publish our findings in a peer-reviewed journal and present our findings at national and international conferences. Systematic review registration This systematic review was registered prospectively with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO). Registration number CRD42021234917.

BackgroundPregestational diabetes mellitus (PGDM) is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes. Studies assessing interventions to improve maternal and infant outcomes have increased exponentially over recent years. Several outcomes in this field of maternal diabetes are rare, making it difficult to synthesise evidence.ObjectivesTo collect outcomes reported in studies assessing treatment interventions in pregnant women with PGDM.Search strategyCENTRAL, Web of Science, Medline, CINAHL, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov from their inception until 27 January 2020.Selection criteriaAny randomised controlled trial assessing treatment interventions in pregnant women with PGDM reported in English.Data collection and analysisTwo independent reviewers assessed the suitability of articles and retrieved the data. Outcomes extracted from the literature were broadly categorised into maternal, fetal/infant or other outcomes by the study advisory group.Main resultsSixty‐seven of the 1475 studies identified fulfilled the inclusion criteria. The median number of outcomes reported per study was 15 (range 1–46). The majority of studies were from North America and Europe. Insulin and metformin were the most commonly investigated pharmacological interventions. Glucose monitoring was the most assessed technological intervention. In all, 131 unique outcomes were extracted: maternal (n = 69), fetal/infant (n = 61) and other (n = 1).ConclusionsOutcome reporting in treatment interventions trials of pregnant women with PGDM is varied, making it difficult to synthesise evidence, especially for rare outcomes. Systems are needed to standardise outcome reporting in future clinical trials and so facilitate evidence synthesis in this area of maternal diabetes.RegistrationThe systematic review was registered prospectively with the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO) database (Registration number CRD42020173549).Tweetable abstractOutcome reporting is heterogeneous in intervention trials of pregnant women with diabetes existing before pregnancy.

Objective To develop a core outcome set (COS) for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of pregnant women with pregestational diabetes mellitus (PGDM). Design A consensus developmental study. Setting International. Population Two hundred and five stakeholders completed the first round. Methods The study consisted of three components. (1) A systematic review of the literature to produce a list of outcomes reported in RCTs assessing the effectiveness of interventions for the treatment of pregnant women with PGDM. (2) A three‐round, online eDelphi survey to prioritise these outcomes by international stakeholders (including healthcare professionals, researchers and women with PGDM). (3) A consensus meeting where stakeholders from each group decided on the final COS. Main outcome measures All outcomes were extracted from the literature. Results We extracted 131 unique outcomes from 67 records meeting the full inclusion criteria. Of the 205 stakeholders who completed the first round, 174/205 (85%) and 165/174 (95%) completed rounds 2 and 3, respectively. Participants at the subsequent consensus meeting chose 19 outcomes for inclusion into the COS: trimester‐specific haemoglobin A1c, maternal weight gain during pregnancy, severe maternal hypoglycaemia, diabetic ketoacidosis, miscarriage, pregnancy‐induced hypertension, pre‐eclampsia, maternal death, birthweight, large for gestational age, small for gestational age, gestational age at birth, preterm birth, mode of birth, shoulder dystocia, neonatal hypoglycaemia, congenital malformations, stillbirth and neonatal death. Conclusions This COS will enable better comparison between RCTs to produce robust evidence synthesis, improve trial reporting and optimise research efficiency in studies assessing treatment of pregnant women with PGDM. Tweetable abstract 165 key stakeholders have developed #Treatment #CoreOutcomes in pregnant women with #diabetes existing before pregnancy.

Core Outcome Sets (COS) contain an agreed minimum set of outcomes to be measured and reported in all studies in a specific area, with the objective of standardizing outcome reporting. COS may minimize research waste by identifying outcomes important to key stakeholders, allowing for improved evidence synthesis, and facilitating translation of research findings to clinical practice. Over the past 5 years, there has been significant progress in developing COS relevant to studies of diabetes in pregnancy. This review summarizes work in this area, reviews the role of patient and public involvement in COS development, and suggests areas for future research.

11625 Background: Improving body image and self-esteem are top ASCO priorities in the survivorship care of men with prostate cancer (PCa). Body image and global self-esteem, influenced by physical self-worth, are negatively affected by PCa treatment. We investigate whether exercise can improve physical self-worth in men treated for PCa and if improving self-worth is associated with changes in quality of life (QoL) and mental health. Methods: We performed a secondary analysis of a phase II randomized controlled trial comparing the effects of Exercise for Cancer Patients(EXCAP), a structured, 6-week, home-based exercise intervention, to usual care (UC) in men with non-metastatic PCa receiving radiation or Androgen Deprivation Therapy (ADT). The Physical Self-Perception Profile (PSPP), a valid 30-item questionnaire where higher scores indicate greater physical self-worth, was assessed at pre- and post-intervention. Changes between arms were compared using ANCOVA. Spearman correlations were calculated for pre/post-intervention change scores for PSPP and QoL, depression, and anxiety as measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy (FACT), Center of Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) scale, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), respectively. Results: Fifty-eight men were randomized; average age was 67.1 years. Physical self-worth at baseline moderated the effect of the intervention. Compared to UC, EXCAP improved physical self-worth in those with baseline PSPP scores above the median (p < 0.04). Exercisers with baseline PSPP scores in the top quartile demonstrated a more significant improvement over UC (p < 0.01). Improvements in physical self-worth were associated with improved QoL (r = 0.29, p = 0.04), depression (r = -0.28, p = 0.04) and anxiety (r = -0.30, p = 0.03). Conclusions: Exercise significantly improves physical self-worth in men with PCa on radiation or ADT, and greater physical self-worth is associated with improved QoL, depression and anxiety. Those with higher baseline physical self-worth derived the most benefit from exercise. Exercise should be prescribed to boost self-esteem and body image in men receiving radiation or ADT for PCa. Clinical trial information: NCT00815672.

Cancer cachexia is a syndrome characterized by weight loss with accompanying loss of muscle and/or fat mass and leads to impaired patient function and physical performance and is associated with a poor prognosis. It is prevalent in older adults with cancer; age-associated physiologic muscle wasting and weakness, also known as sarcopenia, can compound deficits associated with cancer cachexia in older adults and makes studying this condition more complex in this population. Multiple measurement options are available to assess the older patient with cancer and cachexia and/or sarcopenia including anthropometric measures, imaging modalities such as Dual X-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) and Computed Tomography (CT), muscular strength and physical performance testing, and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). A geriatric assessment (GA) is a useful tool when studying the older patient with cachexia given its comprehensive ability to capture aging-sensitive PROs. Interventions focused on nutrition and increasing physical activity may improve outcomes in older adults with cachexia. Efforts to develop targeted pharmacologic therapies with cachexia have not been successful thus far. Formal treatment guidelines, an updated consensus definition for cancer cachexia and the development of a widely adapted assessment tool, much like the GA utilized in geriatric oncology, could help advance the field of cancer cachexia over the next decade.

Introduction Selective reporting bias, inconsistency in the chosen outcomes between trials and irrelevance of the chosen outcomes for women, limit the efficiency and value of research for prevention and treatment of gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM). One way to address these challenges is to develop core outcome sets (COSs). Methods and analysis The aim of this manuscript is to present a protocol for a study to develop COSs for GDM prevention and treatment. This is a three-phase project consisting of (1) a systematic review of the literature to create two lists of outcomes that have been reported in trials and systematic reviews of trials of interventions for the prevention and treatment of GDM, (2) a three-round, web-based e-Delphi survey with key stakeholders to prioritise these outcomes and (3) a consensus meeting to resolve any remaining disagreements and to agree on two COSs. Ethics and dissemination Ethical approval to conduct this study was obtained from the ethics committee at Galway University Hospitals on 13 December 2018 (Reference: C.A.2078). We will disseminate our research findings through peer-reviewed, open access publications and present at international conferences to reach a wide range of knowledge users.

Abstract Background: Pancreatic cancer is associated with development of cachexia, a wasting syndrome thought to limit survival. Few studies have longitudinally quantified peripheral tissues or identified biomarkers predictive of future tissue wasting. Methods: Adipose and muscle tissue were measured by computed tomography (CT) at diagnosis and 50 to 120 days later in 164 patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. Tissue changes and survival were evaluated by Cox proportional hazards regression. Baseline levels of circulating markers were examined in relation to future tissue wasting. Results: Compared with patients in the bottom quartile of muscle change per 30 days (average gain of 0.8 ± 2.0 cm2), those in the top quartile (average loss of 12.9 ± 4.9 cm2) had a hazard ratio (HR) for death of 2.01 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.12–3.62]. Patients in the top quartile of muscle attenuation change (average decrease of 4.9 ± 2.4 Hounsfield units) had an HR of 2.19 (95% CI, 1.18–4.04) compared with those in the bottom quartile (average increase of 2.4 ± 1.6 Hounsfield units). Changes in adipose tissue were not associated with survival. Higher plasma branched chain amino acids (BCAA; P = 0.004) and lower monocyte chemoattractant protein-1 (MCP-1; P = 0.005) at diagnosis were associated with greater future muscle loss. Conclusions: In patients with advanced pancreatic cancer, muscle loss and decrease in muscle density in 2 to 4 months after diagnosis were associated with reduced survival. BCAAs and MCP-1 levels at diagnosis were associated with subsequent muscle loss. Impact: BCAAs and MCP-1 levels at diagnosis could identify a high-risk group for future tissue wasting.