World Diabetes Foundation

Cancer during pregnancy is relatively rare. The incidence is underestimated due to the lack of international registries covering both high‐income and low‐ and middle‐income countries, and is expected to rise with increasing maternal age and increasing global adoption of cell‐free DNA testing for aneuploidy. Physiological changes during pregnancy often make the diagnosis challenging and delayed. Lack of experience and knowledge about this condition may also contribute to late diagnosis, suboptimal management, and occasionally inadvertent fetal and/or maternal harm. The principles of cancer management in pregnancy for most cancer types do not differ significantly from the non‐pregnant population. The impact of investigations for diagnosis and staging, risks of surgery, systemic chemotherapy, and/or radiotherapy on fetal well‐being and preterm birth need to be considered for treatment and management planning, in addition to maternal wishes. Working in a multidisciplinary setting, ideally with medical and radiation oncologists, surgeons, radiologists, cancer specialist nurses, geneticists, psychologists, teratologists, and clinical pharmacologists, obstetricians, obstetric physicians, neonatologists, and experienced nursing and midwifery staff helps provide optimal care for the woman. This best practice advice aims to provide recommendations on the diagnosis and management of cancer in pregnancy, which can be adopted in all resource settings.

Gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) is associated with a range of adverse pregnancy outcomes as well as increased risk of future type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. In India, 10%–35% of pregnant women develop GDM. In this study, we investigated women’s experiences with the dietary and pharmaceutical treatment for GDM in rural and urban Tamil Nadu, India. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 19 women diagnosed with GDM. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Three overall aspects were discovered with several sub-aspects characterizing women’s experiences: emotional challenges (fear and apprehension for the baby’ health and struggling to accept a treatment seen as counterintuitive to being safe and healthy), interpersonal challenges (managing treatment in the near social relations and social support, and coordinating treatment with work and social life), and health system-related challenges (availability and cost of treatment, interaction with health care providers). Some aspects acted as barriers. However, social support and positive, high-quality interactions with health care providers could mitigate some of these barriers and facilitate the treatment process. Greater efforts at awareness creation in the social environment and systemic adjustments in care delivery targeting the individual, family, community and health system levels are needed in order to ensure that women with GDM have the opportunity to access treatment and are enabled and motivated to follow it as well.

The St. Vincent's Declaration1 outlined commitments to improve diabetes care in Europe. One amongst its several ambitious goals was to achieve pregnancy outcomes in women with diabetes that approximate those of women without diabetes. Given that most European governments were co-signatories and the declaration had support of the World Health Organization (WHO) Regional Office for Europe and the International Diabetes Federation (IDF), it was reasonable to expect that swift action would be taken. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

OBJECTIVETo evaluate the usefulness of a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) at 24–28 weeks’ gestation to screen for gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM).RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSThe medical records and results of a 75-g 2-h oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) of 24,854 pregnant women without known pre-GDM attending prenatal clinics in 15 hospitals in China were examined.RESULTSFPG cutoff value of 5.1 mmol/L identified 3,149 (12.1%) pregnant women with GDM. FPG cutoff value of 4.4 mmol/L ruled out GDM in 15,369 (38.2%) women. With use of this cutoff point, 12.2% of patients with mild GDM will be missed. The positive predictive value is 0.322, and the negative predictive value is 0.928.CONCLUSIONSFPG at 24–28 weeks’ gestation could be used as a screening test to identify GDM patients in low-resource regions. Women with an FPG between ≥4.4 and ≤5.0 mmol/L would require a 75-g OGTT to diagnose GDM. This would help to avoid approximately one-half (50.3%) of the formal 75-g OGTTs in China.

BackgroundDiabetes mellitus (DM) is recognised as an important risk factor to tuberculosis (TB). India has high TB burden, along with rising DM prevalence. There are inadequate data on prevalence of DM and pre-diabetes among TB cases in India. Aim was to determine diabetes prevalence among a cohort of TB cases registered under Revised National Tuberculosis Control Program in selected TB units in Tamil Nadu, India, and assess pattern of diabetes management amongst known cases.Methods827 among the eligible patients (n = 904) underwent HbA1c and anthropometric measurements. OGTT was done for patients without previous history of DM and diagnosis was based on WHO criteria. Details of current treatment regimen of TB and DM and DM complications, if any, were recorded. A pretested questionnaire was used to collect information on sociodemographics, habitual risk factors, and type of TB.FindingsDM prevalence was 25.3% (95% CI 22.6–28.5) and that of pre-diabetes 24.5% (95% CI 20.4–27.6). Risk factors associated with DM among TB patients were age (31–35, 36–40, 41–45, 46–50, >50 years vs <30 years) [OR (95% CI) 6.75 (2.36–19.3); 10.46 (3.95–27.7); 18.63 (6.58–52.7); 11.05 (4.31–28.4); 24.7 (9.73–62.7) (p<0.001)], positive family history of DM [3.08 (1.73–5.5) (p<0.001)], sedentary occupation [1.69 (1.10–2.59) (p = 0.016)], and BMI (18.5–22.9, 23–24.9 and ≥25 kg/m2 vs <18.5 kg/m2) [2.03 (1.32–3.12) (p = 0.001); 0.87 (0.31–2.43) (p = 0.78); 1.44 (0.54–3.8) (p = 0.47)]; for pre-diabetes, risk factors were age (36–40, 41–45, 46–50, >50 years vs <30 years) [2.24 (1.1–4.55) (p = 0.026); 6.96 (3.3–14.7); 3.44 (1.83–6.48); 4.3 (2.25–8.2) (p<0.001)], waist circumference [<90 vs. ≥90 cm (men), <80 vs. ≥80 cm (women)] [3.05 (1.35–6.9) (p = 0.007)], smoking [1.92 (1.12–3.28) (p = 0.017)] and monthly income (5000–10,000 INR vs <5000 INR) [0.59 (0.37–0.94) (p = 0.026)]. DM risk was higher among pulmonary TB [3.06 (1.69–5.52) (p<0.001)], especially sputum positive, than non-pulmonary TB.InterpretationNearly 50% of TB patients had either diabetes or pre-diabetes.

There is a high burden of both diabetes (DM) and tuberculosis (TB) in China, and as DM increases the risk of TB and adversely affects TB treatment outcomes, there is a need for bidirectional screening of the two diseases. How this is best performed is not well determined. In this pilot project in China, we aimed to assess the feasibility and results of screening DM patients for TB within the routine healthcare setting of five DM clinics. Agreement on how to screen, monitor and record was reached in May 2011 at a national stakeholders meeting, and training was carried out for staff in the five clinics in July 2011. Implementation started in September 2011, and we report on 7 months of activities up to 31 March 2012. DM patients were screened for TB at each clinic attendance using a symptom-based enquiry, and those positive to any symptom were referred for TB investigations. In the three quarters, 72% of 3174 patients, 79% of 7196 patients and 68% of 4972 patients were recorded as having been screened for TB, resulting in 7 patients found who were already known to have TB, 92 with a positive TB symptom screen and 48 of these newly diagnosed with TB as a result of referral and investigation. All patients except one were started on anti-TB treatment. TB case notification rates in screened DM patients were several times higher than those of the general population, were highest for the five sites combined in the final quarter (774/100 000) and were highest in one of the five clinics in the final quarter (804/100 000) where there was intensive in-house training, special assignment of staff for screening and colocation of services. This pilot project shows that it is feasible to carry out screening of DM patients for TB resulting in high detection rates of TB. This has major public health and patient-related implications.

To assess the yield of finding additional TB or diabetes mellitus (DM) cases through systematic screening and to determine the effectiveness of preventive TB therapy in people with DM. We systematically reviewed studies that had screened for active TB or implemented preventive therapy for TB among people with DM, and those that screened for DM among patients with TB. We searched published literature through PubMed and EMBASE and included studies that reported the number of TB cases identified among people with DM; the number of DM cases identified among patients with TB, or the relative incidence of TB between people with DM who received a TB prophylaxis and those who did not. We assessed the yield of screening by estimating the prevalence of TB or DM in each study, the prevalence ratio and difference where comparison populations were available, and the number of persons to screen to detect an additional case of TB or DM. Twelve studies on screening for TB in people with DM and 18 studies on screening for DM in patients with TB met our inclusion criteria. Screening for TB in persons with DM demonstrated that TB prevalence in this population is high, ranging from 1.7% to 36%, and increasing with rising TB prevalence in the underlying population as well as with DM severity. Screening patients with TB for DM also yielded high prevalences of DM ranging from 1.9% to 35%. Two studies examining the role of TB preventive therapy in people with DM did not provide sufficient details for clear evidence of the effectiveness. Active screening leads to the detection of more TB and DM with varying yield. This review highlights the need for further research in screening and preventive therapy.