When is a Partner not a Partner? Conceptualisations of 'family' in EU Free Movement Law

This paper considers the definitions of spouse, civil partner and partner in European Union (EU) free movement of persons law in order to question the EU's heterocentric approach to defining 'family' in this context. It argues that the term 'spouse' should include same-sex married partners in order to ensure that there is no discrimination on the grounds of sexual orientation. It further highlights the problems created by basing free movement rights of civil partners on host state recognition of such partnerships. This approach allows Member States to discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation and is therefore not compatible with EU equality law in others areas. The position of unmarried or unregistered partners is also considered; in particular, the paper examines the requirement of a duly-attested durable relationship and its impact on same-sex partners wishing to move from one Member State to another. The paper argues that it is time to reconsider the law in this area and bring it in line with the EU's commitment to eliminate discrimination on several grounds, including sexual orientation. © 2011 Taylor and Francis Group, LLC

Long-Term Gynecological Outcomes in Women with Congenital Adrenal Hyperplasia due to 21-Hydroxylase Deficiency

Background. Our knowledge on long-term outcome in CAH remains incomplete. Methods. In a prospective study (33 CAH patients, 33 age-matched controls), reproductive outcomes, self-rating of genital appearance and function, and sexuality were correlated to degree of initial virilisation, genotype, and surgery. Results. Patients had larger median clitoral lengths (10.0 mm [range 2–30] versus 3.5 [2–8], P < .001), shorter vaginal length (121 mm [100–155] versus 128 [112–153], P = .12), lower uterine volumes (29.1 ml [7.5–56.7] versus 47.4 [15.9–177.5], P = .009), and higher ovarian volumes (4.4 ml [1.3–10.8] versus 2.8 [0.6–10.8], P = .09) than controls. Satisfaction with genital appearance was lower and negatively correlated to degree of initial virilisation (rs = ≤−0.39, P ≤ .05). More patients had never had intercourse (P = .001), and age at 1st intercourse was higher (18 yrs versus 16 yrs, P = .02). Conclusion. Despite overall acceptable cosmetic results, reproductive outcomes were suboptimal, supporting that multidisciplinary teams should be involved in adult follow up of CAH patients

Differential impact of glucose administered intravenously and orally on circulating mir-375 levels in human subjects

Background: To date, numerous nucleic acid species have been detected in the systemic circulation including microRNAs (miRNAs); however their functional role in this compartment remains unclear. Objective: The aim of this study was to determine whether systemic levels of miRNAs abundant in blood, including the neuroendocrine tissue-enriched miR-375, are altered in response to a glucose challenge. Design: Twelve healthy males were recruited for an acute cross-over study which consisted of two tests each following an eight-hour fasting period. An oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was performed and blood samples were collected over a 3-hour period. Following a period of at least one week, the same participants were administered an isoglycemic intravenous glucose infusion (IIGI) with the same blood collection protocol. Results: The glucose response curve following the IIGI mimicked that obtained after the OGTT, but as expected systemic insulin levels were lower during the IIGI compared to the OGTT (P<0.05). MiR-375 levels in circulation were increased only in response to an OGTT and not during an IIGI. In addition, the response to the OGTT also coincided with the transient increase of circulating glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), glucagon-like peptide-2 (GLP-2), and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP). Conclusions: The present findings show levels of miR-375 increase following administration of an OGTT and in light of its enrichment in cells of the gut, suggest that the gastrointestinal tract may play a significant role to the abundance and function of this microRNA in the blood

Treatment with insulin (analogues) and breast cancer risk in diabetics; a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro, animal and human evidence

INTRODUCTION: Several studies have suggested that anti-diabetic insulin analogue treatment might increase cancer risk. The aim of this study was to review the postulated association between insulin and insulin analogue treatment and breast cancer development, and plausible mechanisms. METHOD: A systematic literature search was performed on breast cell-line, animal and human studies using the key words 'insulin analogue' and 'breast neoplasia' in MEDLINE at PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases. A quantitative and qualitative review was performed on the epidemiological data; due to a limited number of reported estimates, a meta-analysis was performed for glargine only. A comprehensive overview was composed for in vitro and animal studies. Protein and gene expression was analysed for the cell lines most frequently used in the included in vitro studies. RESULTS: In total 16 in vitro, 5 animal, 2 in vivo human and 29 epidemiological papers were included. Insulin AspB10 showed mitogenic properties in vitro and in animal studies. Glargine was the only clinically available insulin analogue for which an increased proliferative potential was found in breast cancer cell lines. However, the pooled analysis of 13 epidemiological studies did not show evidence for an association between insulin glargine treatment and an increased breast cancer risk (HR 1.04; 95 % CI 0.91-1.17; p=0.49) versus no glargine in patients with diabetes mellitus. It has to be taken into account that the number of animal studies was limited, and epidemiological studies were underpowered and suffered from methodological limitations. CONCLUSION: There is no compelling evidence that any clinically available insulin analogue (Aspart, Determir, Glargine, Glulisine or Lispro), nor human insulin increases breast cancer risk. Overall, the data suggests that insulin treatment is not involved in breast tumour initiation, but might induce breast tumour progression by up regulating mitogenic signalling pathways

The associations of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors as add-on to metformin with fracture risk in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIM: To investigate whether sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor use as compared to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor use as add-on to metformin is associated with the risk of any fracture or major osteoporotic fractures (MOFs). METHODS: A cohort study using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD) Aurum database was conducted. All patients aged 18 years and older with a first-ever prescription for a DPP-4 inhibitor or an SGLT2 inhibitor as add-on to metformin between January 1, 2013 and June 30, 2020 were selected. Patients starting with SGLT2 inhibitors were matched (up to 1:3) on propensity scores to patients starting with DPP-4 inhibitors. Propensity scores were calculated based on sex, age, body mass index, comorbidities, comedication and lifestyle factors. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the risk of fracture with SGLT2 inhibitor use as compared to DPP-4 inhibitor use. RESULTS: A total of 13 807 SGLT2 inhibitor users (age 55.4 ± 10.6 years, 36.7% female) were included in this study, matched with 28 524 DPP-4 inhibitor users (age 55.4 ± 8.0 years, 36.4% female). The risk of any fracture with current SGLT2 inhibitor use was similar compared with current DPP-4 inhibitor use (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.09, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.91-1.31), as was the risk of MOFs (aHR 0.89, 95% CI 0.64-1.22) and the risk of fractures at any of the individual MOF sites. Additionally, no association was found with duration of SGLT2 inhibitor use (longest duration >811 days) for any of the individual SGLT2 inhibitor agents, or after stratification by sex and age. CONCLUSION: Use of SGLT2 inhibitors was not associated with the risk of any fracture, MOFs or fracture at the individual MOF sites when compared to DPP-4 inhibitor use

Obesity, Type 2 Diabetes and Bone in Adults.

In an increasingly obese and ageing population, type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and osteoporotic fracture are major public health concerns. Understanding how obesity and type 2 diabetes modulate fracture risk is important to identify and treat people at risk of fracture. Additionally, the study of the mechanisms of action of obesity and T2DM on bone has already offered insights that may be applicable to osteoporosis in the general population. Most available evidence indicates lower risk of proximal femur and vertebral fracture in obese adults. However the risk of some fractures (proximal humerus, femur and ankle) is higher, and a significant number fractures occur in obese people. BMI is positively associated with BMD and the mechanisms of this association in vivo may include increased loading, adipokines such as leptin, and higher aromatase activity. However, some fat depots could have negative effects on bone; cytokines from visceral fat are pro-resorptive and high intramuscular fat content is associated with poorer muscle function, attenuating loading effects and increasing falls risk. T2DM is also associated with higher bone mineral density (BMD), but increased overall and hip fracture risk. There are some similarities between bone in obesity and T2DM, but T2DM seems to have additional harmful effects and emerging evidence suggests that glycation of collagen may be an important factor. Higher BMD but higher fracture risk presents challenges in fracture prediction in obesity and T2DM. Dual energy X-ray absorptiometry underestimates risk, standard clinical risk factors may not capture all relevant information, and risk is under-recognised by clinicians. However, the limited available evidence suggests that osteoporosis treatment does reduce fracture risk in obesity and T2DM with generally similar efficacy to other patients

Treatment with insulin (analogues) and breast cancer risk in diabetics; a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro, animal and human evidence

INTRODUCTION: Several studies have suggested that anti-diabetic insulin analogue treatment might increase cancer risk. The aim of this study was to review the postulated association between insulin and insulin analogue treatment and breast cancer development, and plausible mechanisms. METHOD: A systematic literature search was performed on breast cell-line, animal and human studies using the key words 'insulin analogue' and 'breast neoplasia' in MEDLINE at PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases. A quantitative and qualitative review was performed on the epidemiological data; due to a limited number of reported estimates, a meta-analysis was performed for glargine only. A comprehensive overview was composed for in vitro and animal studies. Protein and gene expression was analysed for the cell lines most frequently used in the included in vitro studies. RESULTS: In total 16 in vitro, 5 animal, 2 in vivo human and 29 epidemiological papers were included. Insulin AspB10 showed mitogenic properties in vitro and in animal studies. Glargine was the only clinically available insulin analogue for which an increased proliferative potential was found in breast cancer cell lines. However, the pooled analysis of 13 epidemiological studies did not show evidence for an association between insulin glargine treatment and an increased breast cancer risk (HR 1.04; 95 % CI 0.91-1.17; p=0.49) versus no glargine in patients with diabetes mellitus. It has to be taken into account that the number of animal studies was limited, and epidemiological studies were underpowered and suffered from methodological limitations. CONCLUSION: There is no compelling evidence that any clinically available insulin analogue (Aspart, Determir, Glargine, Glulisine or Lispro), nor human insulin increases breast cancer risk. Overall, the data suggests that insulin treatment is not involved in breast tumour initiation, but might induce breast tumour progression by up regulating mitogenic signalling pathways.Toxicolog

Treatment with insulin (analogues) and breast cancer risk in diabetics; a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro, animal and human evidence

INTRODUCTION: Several studies have suggested that anti-diabetic insulin analogue treatment might increase cancer risk. The aim of this study was to review the postulated association between insulin and insulin analogue treatment and breast cancer development, and plausible mechanisms. METHOD: A systematic literature search was performed on breast cell-line, animal and human studies using the key words 'insulin analogue' and 'breast neoplasia' in MEDLINE at PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases. A quantitative and qualitative review was performed on the epidemiological data; due to a limited number of reported estimates, a meta-analysis was performed for glargine only. A comprehensive overview was composed for in vitro and animal studies. Protein and gene expression was analysed for the cell lines most frequently used in the included in vitro studies. RESULTS: In total 16 in vitro, 5 animal, 2 in vivo human and 29 epidemiological papers were included. Insulin AspB10 showed mitogenic properties in vitro and in animal studies. Glargine was the only clinically available insulin analogue for which an increased proliferative potential was found in breast cancer cell lines. However, the pooled analysis of 13 epidemiological studies did not show evidence for an association between insulin glargine treatment and an increased breast cancer risk (HR 1.04; 95 % CI 0.91-1.17; p=0.49) versus no glargine in patients with diabetes mellitus. It has to be taken into account that the number of animal studies was limited, and epidemiological studies were underpowered and suffered from methodological limitations. CONCLUSION: There is no compelling evidence that any clinically available insulin analogue (Aspart, Determir, Glargine, Glulisine or Lispro), nor human insulin increases breast cancer risk. Overall, the data suggests that insulin treatment is not involved in breast tumour initiation, but might induce breast tumour progression by up regulating mitogenic signalling pathways.Toxicolog

Treatment with insulin (analogues) and breast cancer risk in diabetics; a systematic review and meta-analysis of in vitro, animal and human evidence

INTRODUCTION: Several studies have suggested that anti-diabetic insulin analogue treatment might increase cancer risk. The aim of this study was to review the postulated association between insulin and insulin analogue treatment and breast cancer development, and plausible mechanisms. METHOD: A systematic literature search was performed on breast cell-line, animal and human studies using the key words 'insulin analogue' and 'breast neoplasia' in MEDLINE at PubMed, EMBASE, and ISI Web of Science databases. A quantitative and qualitative review was performed on the epidemiological data; due to a limited number of reported estimates, a meta-analysis was performed for glargine only. A comprehensive overview was composed for in vitro and animal studies. Protein and gene expression was analysed for the cell lines most frequently used in the included in vitro studies. RESULTS: In total 16 in vitro, 5 animal, 2 in vivo human and 29 epidemiological papers were included. Insulin AspB10 showed mitogenic properties in vitro and in animal studies. Glargine was the only clinically available insulin analogue for which an increased proliferative potential was found in breast cancer cell lines. However, the pooled analysis of 13 epidemiological studies did not show evidence for an association between insulin glargine treatment and an increased breast cancer risk (HR 1.04; 95 % CI 0.91-1.17; p=0.49) versus no glargine in patients with diabetes mellitus. It has to be taken into account that the number of animal studies was limited, and epidemiological studies were underpowered and suffered from methodological limitations. CONCLUSION: There is no compelling evidence that any clinically available insulin analogue (Aspart, Determir, Glargine, Glulisine or Lispro), nor human insulin increases breast cancer risk. Overall, the data suggests that insulin treatment is not involved in breast tumour initiation, but might induce breast tumour progression by up regulating mitogenic signalling pathways.Toxicolog