The treatment of type 2 diabetes is a challenging problem. Most subjects with type 2 diabetes have progression of beta cell failure necessitating the addition of multiple antidiabetic agents and eventually use of insulin. Intensification of insulin leads to weight gain and increased risk of hypoglycemia. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are a class of antihyperglycemic agents which act by blocking the SGLT2 in the proximal tubule of the kidney. They have potential benefits in terms of weight loss and reduction of blood pressure in addition to improvements in glycemic control. Further, one of the SGLT2 inhibitors, empagliflozin has proven benefits in reducing adverse cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in a CV outcome trial. Adding SGLT2 inhibitors to insulin in subjects with type 2 diabetes produced favorable effects on glycemic control without the weight gain and hypoglycemic risks associated with insulin therapy. The general risks of increased genital mycotic infections, urinary tract infections, volume, and osmosis-related adverse effects in these subjects were similar to the pooled data of individual SGLT2 inhibitors. There are subsets of subjects with type 2 diabetes who may have insulin deficiency, beta cell autoimmunity, or is prone to diabetic ketoacidosis. In these subjects, SGLT2 inhibitors should be used with caution to prevent the rare risks of ketoacidosis.

Graves’ disease (GD) is the most common cause of hyperthyroidism in iodine-sufficient areas. It is important to distinguish GD from other causes of hyperthyroidism for optimal management. Thyroid stimulating hormone receptor antibody (TRAb) test is a commonly used test for this purpose. However, the sensitivity for this test in routine clinical practice may be affected by various factors leading to fallacies in diagnosis. Materials and Methods: A retrospective study was performed to assess the utility of an automated electrochemiluminescence TRAb immunoassay (Roche) in differentiating GD from non-Graves’ disease (NGD) in routine clinical practice. Results: In 227 subjects, 146 had GD and 81 had NGD. Total T3, Total T4, Free T4, and TRAb were significantly higher in people with GD in comparison to NGD. The area under the receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curve for the assay was 0.96 (95% CI: 0.926 to 0.984, P < 0.0001). The optimal threshold for the test derived from the ROC was 3.37 IU/L, which is more than the cut-off of 1.75 IU/L suggested by the manufacturer. The sensitivity/specificity of TRAb in the diagnosis of GD at presentation was 98.4%/62.9% at 1.75 IU/L and 91.2%/90.12% at 3.37 IU/L, respectively. Conclusion: The TRAb test is a sensitive test to differentiate between subjects with GD and NGD presenting with hyperthyroidism. However, the cutoff (1.75 IU/L) as per the kit manufacturer may lead to a lower specificity for diagnosis. A modified cut-off of 3.37 IU/L should be considered for optimizing the diagnostic efficacy of the test.

Objectives: The accurate and precise measurement of low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol (LDL-C) is important in the assessment of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk (ASCVD) in people with diabetes mellitus. This study aimed at comparing directly measured LDL-C with Friedewald formula (FF)-calculated LDL-C (c-LDL-C) in people with type-2 diabetes. Methods: Fasting lipid profiles of 1905 people with type-2 diabetes, whose LDL-C was estimated by direct LDL assay, were chosen for the study. In the same group, LDL-C was calculated with FF. Correlation and agreement between these methods were analyzed at various strata of triglycerides (TGs). The possibility of misclassifying people at various levels of LDL-C targets proposed in literature was calculated. Results: The mean LDL-C levels were lower in the c-LDL-C group across various TG strata. A significant correlation was found between c-LDL-C and direct LDL-C for all the study samples ( r = 0.948, P < .001) and across all TG strata. Analysis of agreement showed a positive bias for direct LDL-C which increased at higher strata of TGs. c-LDL-C underestimated ASCVD by misclassifying people at various LDL-C target levels. Conclusion: There is a difference between direct LDL-C and c-LDL-C values in people with diabetes and this may result in misclassifying ASCVD especially at lower levels of LDL-C and higher levels of TGs.