Development of Sugar Free and Fortified Chocolates with D-Optimal Design Approach

The increasing numbers of overweight or chronically obese individuals have led the market to produce sweet snacks and desserts that are low in calories, low in fat or low in sugar. Sugar replacers have low calorific value and lower glycaemic index as compared to sucrose which not only helps in controlling weight but also is safe for diabetics. The study is aimed to develop a sugar free chocolate by using a combination of various zero calorie sweeteners i.e., stevia, isomalt and erythritol through response surface methodology (RSM). The final run optimized by RSM consists of 21.9g cocoa butter, 5.1g erythritol, 0.10g stevia and 14.9g isomalt. Organoleptic evaluation of modified chocolates was evaluated using 9 point hedonic scale for the parameters like, appearance, color, aroma, taste, texture, mouthfeel, aftertaste and overall acceptability. The overall acceptability of sugar free chocolates was found to be 8.9. Further, the fortification of chocolates was done with the help of vitamins and minerals rich fruit powders such as beetroot powder, jamun seed powder and pink pithaya powder (dragon fruit). Vitamins and minerals analysis was performed for sugar free chocolate fortified with beetroot. Shelf-life study of sugar free chocolate fortified with beetroot was carried out

Adjunct Therapy in Type 1 Diabetes: A Survey to Uncover Unmet Needs and Patient Preferences Beyond HbA1c Measures.

Background: Adjunct therapy can help patients with type 1 diabetes achieve glycemic goals while potentially mitigating some of the side effects of insulin. In this study, we used a patient survey to identify the unmet needs in type 1 diabetes therapy, patient views of treatment benefit-risk trade-offs, and patient preferences for the use of an adjunct therapy. Methods: A quantitative survey was sent to 2084 adults with type 1 diabetes in November 2017. "Jobs-to-be-done" and conjoint analyses were performed on survey responses to identify unmet needs and the importance of treatment-associated benefits and risks to patients. A 5-point Likert scale measured the importance and satisfaction with patients' current therapy, and with gaps relating to unmet needs. In the conjoint analysis, patients were asked to choose between "packages" of attributes of two doses of adjunct therapy (200 and 400 mg) and placebo, based on established benefits and side effects. Results: A total of 1313 patients (63%) responded. The greatest unmet needs identified were simplifying treatment, lowering/maintaining glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), reducing mental effort, and increasing time in range (TIR). Conjoint analysis showed that reductions in body weight and TIR had the highest attribute importance (25% and 18%, respectively). The majority (93%) of patients had a preference for the adjunct therapy (either dose) over placebo. Conclusions: This survey highlights the importance of measures beyond HbA1c, such as treatment simplification and TIR, and patient preference for adjunct therapies that help address unmet needs in type 1 diabetes treatment

Reducing the environmental impact of surgery on a global scale: systematic review and co-prioritization with healthcare workers in 132 countries

Abstract Background Healthcare cannot achieve net-zero carbon without addressing operating theatres. The aim of this study was to prioritize feasible interventions to reduce the environmental impact of operating theatres. Methods This study adopted a four-phase Delphi consensus co-prioritization methodology. In phase 1, a systematic review of published interventions and global consultation of perioperative healthcare professionals were used to longlist interventions. In phase 2, iterative thematic analysis consolidated comparable interventions into a shortlist. In phase 3, the shortlist was co-prioritized based on patient and clinician views on acceptability, feasibility, and safety. In phase 4, ranked lists of interventions were presented by their relevance to high-income countries and low–middle-income countries. Results In phase 1, 43 interventions were identified, which had low uptake in practice according to 3042 professionals globally. In phase 2, a shortlist of 15 intervention domains was generated. In phase 3, interventions were deemed acceptable for more than 90 per cent of patients except for reducing general anaesthesia (84 per cent) and re-sterilization of ‘single-use’ consumables (86 per cent). In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for high-income countries were: introducing recycling; reducing use of anaesthetic gases; and appropriate clinical waste processing. In phase 4, the top three shortlisted interventions for low–middle-income countries were: introducing reusable surgical devices; reducing use of consumables; and reducing the use of general anaesthesia. Conclusion This is a step toward environmentally sustainable operating environments with actionable interventions applicable to both high– and low–middle–income countries

Achieving postprandial glucose control with lixisenatide improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin: a post-hoc analysis of pooled data

Abstract Background To examine the impact on glycemic control of achieving postprandial glucose (PPG) target with lixisenatide, a once-daily glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist approved in the US, in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on basal insulin, an agent that primarily targets fasting plasma glucose. Methods A post hoc pooled analysis was conducted using clinical trial data extracted from the intent-to-treat subpopulation of patients with T2D who participated in the 24-week, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-arm parallel-group, multicenter GetGoal-L (NCT00715624), GetGoal-Duo 1 (NCT00975286) and GetGoal-L Asia trials (NCT00866658). Results Data from 587 lixisenatide-treated patients and 484 placebo-treated patients were included. Patients on lixisenatide were more likely to achieve a PPG target of < 10 mmol/L (< 180 mg/dL) than placebo-treated patients (P < 0.001), regardless of baseline fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels. More importantly, those who reached the PPG target experienced a significantly greater reduction in mean HbA1c, were more likely to achieve HbA1c target of < 53 mmol/mol (< 7.0%), and experienced weight loss. Those outcomes were achieved with no significant differences in the risk of symptomatic hypoglycemia compared with placebo. Conclusion Compared with placebo, addition of lixisenatide to basal insulin improved HbA1c and reduced PPG, without increasing hypoglycemia risk. These findings highlight the importance of PPG control in the management of T2D, and provide evidence that adding an agent to basal insulin therapy that also impacts PPG has therapeutic value for patients who are not meeting glycemic targets. Trial registration NCT00715624. Registered 15 July 2008, NCT00975286. Registered 11 September 2009, NCT00866658. Registered 20 March 2009

Estimation of Annual Health Care Costs for Adults with Type 1 Diabetes in the United States.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes health care resource utilization (HCRU) studies tend to focus on patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) or pool patients with T2D and type 1 diabetes (T1D). There is a paucity of recent data on the cost of treating patients with T1D in the United States. OBJECTIVES: To (a) estimate the per-patient per-year (PPPY) HCRU and costs, from a payer perspective, associated with treating U.S. adults with T1D and (b) compare these with the HCRU and costs for patients with T2D. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study used claims data from the Optum Clinformatics database between January 2015 and December 2017. Adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with a diagnosis of T1D were propensity score-matched to adults with T2D. Overall and nondiabetes-related HCRU and costs were assessed for T1D and T2D and compared between the 2 groups. RESULTS: Propensity scores were used to match 10,103 patient pairs from T1D and T2D cohorts (mean ages 54.4 and 56.9 years, respectively). In the T1D cohort, inpatient, emergency department (ED), outpatient, and prescription claims occurred in 14.0%, 17.3%, 85.5%, and 100% of patients, respectively, resulting in a mean total cost of U.S. $18,817 PPPY (diabetes-related =$11,002; nondiabetes-related = $7,816). The T1D cohort had significantly higher mean total costs than the T2D cohort ($18,817 vs. 14,148 PPPY; P < 0.001). When extrapolating these findings to a commercial health plan with 1 million covered lives, the estimated total direct medical costs of T1D would be 103.4 million. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the total annual cost of managing an adult with T1D is significantly higher than that of an adult with T2D. Nondiabetes costs accounted for 40% of the total per-patient cost, similar to patients with T2D, confirming that as patients with T1D live longer lives, they may also be at greater risk for cardiometabolic complications. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Sanofi U.S. and Lexicon Pharmaceuticals as part of a business partnership in a diabetes program at the time this study was conducted. Joish and Davies are employees and stockholders of Lexicon Pharmaceuticals. Zhou, Preblick, and Paranjape are employees and stockholders of Sanofi. Lin was a postdoctoral fellow at Sanofi through Rutgers University during this project. Deshpande provided consulting services through Communication Symmetry. Verma is an employee of Evidera, which was contracted by Sanofi for work on this study. Pettus is a consultant for Diasome, Insulet, Lexicon, Lilly, Mannkind, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Senseonics

Validating the experimental approaches for electrophysiological recording of hypothalamic POMC neurons and in vivo insulin receptor knockdown

Supplemental fil