2nd International Consensus Report on Gaps & Opportunities for the Clinical Translation of Precision Diabetes Medicine

Precision medicine is part of the logical evolution of contemporary evidence-based medicine that seeks to reduce errors and optimize outcomes when making medical decisions and health recommendations. Diabetes affects hundreds of millions worldwide, many of whom will develop life-threatening complications and die prematurely. Precision medicine can potentially address this enormous problem by accounting for the heterogeneous etiology, clinical presentation, and pathogenesis of common forms of diabetes and risk of complications. This 2nd International Consensus Report on Precision Diabetes Medicine summarize the findings from a systematic evidence review across the key pillars of precision medicine (prevention, diagnosis, treatment, prognosis) in four recognized forms of diabetes (monogenic, gestational, type 1, type 2). These reviews address key questions about translation of precision medicine research into practice. Although not complete, owing to the vast literature on this topic, they revealed opportunities for the immediate or near-term clinical implementation of precision diabetes medicine; further, we expose important gaps in knowledge, focusing on the need to obtain new clinically relevant evidence. Gaps include the need for common standards for clinical readiness, including consideration of cost-effectiveness, health equity, predictive accuracy, liability, and accessibility. Key milestones are outlined for the broad clinical implementation of precision diabetes medicine

Targeting metabolic health promotion to optimise maternal and offspring health

There is an increase in maternal metabolic burden due to the rise in pregnancies complicated by obesity, gestational diabetes, type 2 diabetes and polycystic ovary syndrome. Metabolic dysfunction during pregnancy is associated with increased risks of long-term morbidity and mortality for women and their offspring. Lifestyle interventions in pregnancy in women at risk of metabolic dysfunction have demonstrated short-term improvements such as reduced gestational weight gain and lowered risk of gestational diabetes. It is not known whether these interventions lead to sustained improvements in the metabolic health of the mother and baby. Pharmacological interventions have also shown benefits for the mother and baby in pregnancy, including improvements in glycaemic control, reduction in gestational weight gain and reduction in large for gestational age infants; however, there remains uncertainty over long-term outcomes for mother and child. Existing studies on interventions targeting metabolic health are limited to selected populations in the preconception and postpartum periods and lack follow-up beyond delivery of the intervention. The COVID-19 pandemic has refocused our attention on the effects of maternal metabolic ill-health that play a role in contributing to premature morbidity and mortality. There is an urgent need for strategies to accurately identify the growing number of women and offspring at risk of long-term adverse metabolic health. Strategies which focus on early identification and risk stratification using individualised risk scores in the pre and inter-conception periods must take priority if we are to target and improve the metabolic health of women and their offspring who are at highest risk

The top 10 research priorities in diabetes and pregnancy according to women, support networks and healthcare professionals.

Funder: Nuffield Department of Population Health, University of OxfordAIMS: To undertake a Priority Setting Partnership (PSP) to establish priorities for future research in diabetes and pregnancy, according to women with experience of pregnancy, and planning pregnancy, with any type of diabetes, their support networks and healthcare professionals. METHODS: The PSP used established James Lind Alliance (JLA) methodology working with women and their support networks and healthcare professionals UK-wide. Unanswered questions about the time before, during or after pregnancy with any type of diabetes were identified using an online survey and broad-level literature search. A second survey identified a shortlist of questions for final prioritisation at an online consensus development workshop. RESULTS: There were 466 responses (32% healthcare professionals) to the initial survey, with 1161 questions, which were aggregated into 60 unanswered questions. There were 614 responses (20% healthcare professionals) to the second survey and 18 questions shortlisted for ranking at the workshop. The top 10 questions were: diabetes technology, the best test for diabetes during pregnancy, diet and lifestyle interventions for diabetes management during pregnancy, emotional and well-being needs of women with diabetes pre- to post-pregnancy, safe full-term birth, post-natal care and support needs of women, diagnosis and management late in pregnancy, prevention of other types of diabetes in women with gestational diabetes, women's labour and birth experiences and choices and improving planning pregnancy. CONCLUSIONS: These research priorities provide guidance for research funders and researchers to target research in diabetes and pregnancy that will achieve greatest value and impact

Precision gestational diabetes treatment: a systematic review and meta-analyses

Background: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) affects approximately 1 in 7 pregnancies globally. It is associated with short- and long-term risks for both mother and baby. Therefore, optimizing treatment to effectively treat the condition has wide-ranging beneficial effects. However, despite the known heterogeneity in GDM, treatment guidelines and approaches are generally standardized. We hypothesized that a precision medicine approach could be a tool for risk-stratification of women to streamline successful GDM management. With the relatively short timeframe available to treat GDM, commencing effective therapy earlier, with more rapid normalization of hyperglycaemia, could have benefits for both mother and fetus. Methods: We conducted two systematic reviews, to identify precision markers that may predict effective lifestyle and pharmacological interventions. Results: There was a paucity of studies examining precision lifestyle-based interventions for GDM highlighting the pressing need for further research in this area. We found a number of precision markers identified from routine clinical measures that may enable earlier identification of those requiring escalation of pharmacological therapy (to metformin, sulphonylureas or insulin). This included previous history of GDM, Body Mass Index and blood glucose concentrations at diagnosis. Conclusions: Clinical measurements at diagnosis could potentially be used as precision markers in the treatment of GDM. Whether there are other sensitive markers that could be identified using more complex individual-level data, such as omics, and if these can feasibly be implemented in clinical practice remains unknown. These will be important to consider in future studies

Precision gestational diabetes treatment: a systematic review and meta-analyses.

BACKGROUND: Gestational Diabetes Mellitus (GDM) affects approximately 1 in 7 pregnancies globally. It is associated with short- and long-term risks for both mother and baby. Therefore, optimizing treatment to effectively treat the condition has wide-ranging beneficial effects. However, despite the known heterogeneity in GDM, treatment guidelines and approaches are generally standardized. We hypothesized that a precision medicine approach could be a tool for risk-stratification of women to streamline successful GDM management. With the relatively short timeframe available to treat GDM, commencing effective therapy earlier, with more rapid normalization of hyperglycaemia, could have benefits for both mother and fetus. METHODS: We conducted two systematic reviews, to identify precision markers that may predict effective lifestyle and pharmacological interventions. RESULTS: There was a paucity of studies examining precision lifestyle-based interventions for GDM highlighting the pressing need for further research in this area. We found a number of precision markers identified from routine clinical measures that may enable earlier identification of those requiring escalation of pharmacological therapy (to metformin, sulphonylureas or insulin). This included previous history of GDM, Body Mass Index and blood glucose concentrations at diagnosis. CONCLUSIONS: Clinical measurements at diagnosis could potentially be used as precision markers in the treatment of GDM. Whether there are other sensitive markers that could be identified using more complex individual-level data, such as omics, and if these can feasibly be implemented in clinical practice remains unknown. These will be important to consider in future studies

Impact of COVID‐19 on gestational diabetes pregnancy outcomes in the UK : a multicentre retrospective cohort study

Objective To determine the impact of implementing emergency care pathway(s) for screening, diagnosing and managing women with gestational diabetes (GDM) during COVID-19. Design Retrospective multicentre cohort. Setting Nine National Health Service (NHS) Hospital Trusts/Health boards in England and Scotland. Population 4915 women with GDM pre-pandemic (1 April 2018 to 31 March 2020), and 3467 women with GDM during the pandemic (1 May 2020 to 31 March 2021). Methods We examined clinical outcomes for women with GDM prior to and during the pandemic following changes in screening methods, diagnostic testing, glucose thresholds and introduction of virtual care for monitoring of antenatal glycaemia. Main Outcome Measures Intervention at birth, perinatal mortality, large-for-gestational-age infants and neonatal unit admission. Results The new diagnostic criteria more often identified GDM women who were multiparous, had higher body mass index (BMI) and greater deprivation, and less frequently had previous GDM (all p < 0.05). During COVID, these women had no differences in the key outcome measures. Of the women, 3% were identified with pre-existing diabetes at antenatal booking. Where OGTT continued during COVID, but virtual care was introduced, outcomes were also similar pre- and during the pandemic. Conclusions Using HbA1c and fasting glucose identified a higher risk GDM population during the pandemic but this had minimal impact on pregnancy outcomes. The high prevalence of undiagnosed pre-existing diabetes suggests that women with GDM risk factors should be offered HbA1c screening in early pregnancy