No abstract

Introduction To evaluate the efficacy of empagliflozin compared to pioglitazone in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Methods In this prospective randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we assigned 106 patients with NAFLD and T2DM to receive empagliflozin 10 mg ( n = 35), pioglitazone 30 mg ( n = 34), or placebo ( n = 37) for 24 weeks. Liver fat content and liver stiffness were measured using fibroscans. Body composition assessment was performed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DEXA) scans. The primary end point was change from baseline in liver steatosis, using the controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) score. Results A borderline significant decrease in CAP score was observed with empagliflozin compared to placebo, mean difference: − 29.6 dB/m (− 39.5 to − 19.6) versus − 16.4 dB/m (− 25.0 to − 7.8), respectively; p = 0.05. Using multivariate analysis, we observed a significant reduction in the placebo-corrected change in liver stiffness measurement (LSM) with empagliflozin compared to pioglitazone: − 0.77 kPa (− 1.45, − 0.09), p = 0.02, versus 0.01 kPa (95% CI − 0.70, 0.71, p = 0.98), p for comparison = 0.03. Changes in serum aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT), fasting insulin, homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), HOMA2-IR, fibrosis-4 index (FIB4 index), NAFLD fibrosis score, aspartate aminotransferase to platelet ratio index (APRI), android/gynecoid ratio (A/G ratio), and skeletal muscle index (SMI) were comparable between the two treatment groups, while significant reductions of the body weight and visceral fat area were observed only in the empagliflozin group ( p < 0.001 and p = 0.01, respectively) and both were increased in the placebo and pioglitazone groups. There were no serious adverse events in either group. Conclusion Treatment for 24 weeks with empagliflozin, in contrast to pioglitazone, was associated with improvement of liver steatosis and fibrosis in patients with NAFLD and T2DM. In addition, body weight and abdominal fat area were decreased in the empagliflozin group. Trial Registration Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (IRCT), IRCT20190122042450N3. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13300-021-01011-3.

Background: This study was designed to determine the level of fear of hypoglycemia (FoH), pediatric parenting stress and selfefficacy in parents of children with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: In this cross-sectional study, 61 families of children with T1D who had been diagnosed for at least 6 months recruited from "Gabric Diabetes Education Association" in Tehran. Sixty mothers and 41 fathers of 61 children (26 girls, age: 6.0-12.7 years) were assessed using the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-Parent (HFS-P), Pediatric Inventory for Parents (PIP) and Self-Efficacy for Diabetes Scale-Parent (SED-P) questionnaires. Pearson correlation analysis was used to compute the correlation between HFS-P, PIP and SEDP scores separately for mother and fathers. Results: Only 8.3% of children had controlled diabetes. Internal reliability of the Persian version of all questionnaires was good. FoH were higher for mothers. Mothers whose children had diabetes for less than two years had significantly lower mean HFS-Behavior subscale (HFS-B) scores than mothers whose children had diabetes for more than two years. There was a positive correlation between fathers’ mean HFS-B score and children’s total insulin dose per day. Parents' FoH score was positively correlated with increased pediatric parenting stress. Findings also showed considerable emotional distress in 51% of mothers and 29.7% of fathers. Frequency of selfmonitoring blood glucose tests (SMBG) correlated negatively with HbA1c. Conclusion: We concluded that parents with high levels of FoH and stress may benefit from diabetes education. Important implications for education are considering psychological adjustment, recognizing diabetes-related fear and stress in parents, encouraging fathers to become actively involved in the child’s diabetes management and emphasizing the importance of SMBG.

Coronavirus disease is an infectious disease caused by a new virus which causes respiratory illness. Older adults and people who have previous chronic medical conditions are at higher risk for more serious complications from COVID-19. Hypovitaminosis D is attributed to the increased risk of lung injury and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) as well as diabetes, Cardiovascular event and associated comorbidities, which are the main causes of severe clinical problem in COVID-19 patients. Considering the protective role of vitamin D through modulating the innate and adaptive immune system as well as inhibition of Renin Angiotensin System (RAS), vitamin D supplementation might boost the immune system of COVID-19 patients and reduce severity of the disease in vitamin D deficient individuals.