<p>This commentary summarizes recently published research, giving several important findings. Deficiency of skeletal muscle appears, like excess of visceral fat, to strongly contribute to the development of diabetes. Concerns about GLP-1RA in contributing to low muscle mass may be overstated, with the benefits of the class appearing to outweigh adverse effects; however, approaches to prevention of muscle loss with GLP-1RA and with diabetes itself are important. Low muscle strength is a strong predictor of mortality and frailty; and resistance exercise may be a key approach in patient management. Cardiovascular risks differ between type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D), with risk reduction important for both.</p><p>Obesity treatments (semaglutide, tirzepatide, and bariatric surgery) generally lower the risk of obesity-related cancers, but bariatric surgery may increase the risk for procedure-related cancers. Metabolic syndrome raises the risk of developing Parkinson's disease. Both hypoglycemia and higher levels of HbA1c are associated with the development of dementia.</p><p>In analysis of development of T2D among participants with prediabetes in the UK biobank, the 12% with sarcopenia at baseline, based on lower handgrip strength, muscle mass and walking pace, had 19.3% versus 14.9% T2D rates over a mean 11.4 year-follow-up. Those with sarcopenia had, on average, slightly higher baseline BMI, but interestingly the association of sarcopenia with T2D was particularly great among those with waist: hip ratio < 0.9, suggesting sarcopenia to be an additional factor, like excess visceral fat, in causing development of T2D [<span>1</span>].</p><p>Botte and coworkers offer an interesting perspective on the role of low muscle strength (related both to low muscle mass and low muscle quality) in metabolic disorders [<span>2</span>]. Given the recognition of the importance of sarcopenia, it is instructive to summarize portions of their analysis. Low muscle strength is associated with ~2.5-fold greater all-cause mortality [<span>3-5</span>]. With aging, myosteatosis may have a particularly great impact on muscle strength, predicting fall risk and all-cause mortality more than muscle mass in older adults [<span>6</span>]. BMI correlates with higher appendicular lean mass, but not with grip strength [<span>7</span>]. Potential sarcopenia treatment approaches include selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMS) [<span>8</span>], growth hormone secretagogues [<span>9</span>], ghrelin agonists, and fast-twitch skeletal muscle troponin inhibitors [<span>10</span>], but at present none of these appear satisfactory. Recent efforts have targeted the myostatin pathway, which physiologically leads to inhibition of muscle growth [<span>11</span>]. Bimagrumab, an activin receptor antagonist, promotes skeletal muscle growth and fat loss, and may have benefits for bone health. While activins are also involved in reproductive hormone regulation, the selectivity
{"title":"Recent Articles—Skeletal Muscle and Other Topics in Diabetes","authors":"Zachary Bloomgarden","doi":"10.1111/1753-0407.70169","DOIUrl":"10.1111/1753-0407.70169","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This commentary summarizes recently published research, giving several important findings. Deficiency of skeletal muscle appears, like excess of visceral fat, to strongly contribute to the development of diabetes. Concerns about GLP-1RA in contributing to low muscle mass may be overstated, with the benefits of the class appearing to outweigh adverse effects; however, approaches to prevention of muscle loss with GLP-1RA and with diabetes itself are important. Low muscle strength is a strong predictor of mortality and frailty; and resistance exercise may be a key approach in patient management. Cardiovascular risks differ between type 1 diabetes (T1D) and type 2 diabetes (T2D), with risk reduction important for both.</p><p>Obesity treatments (semaglutide, tirzepatide, and bariatric surgery) generally lower the risk of obesity-related cancers, but bariatric surgery may increase the risk for procedure-related cancers. Metabolic syndrome raises the risk of developing Parkinson's disease. Both hypoglycemia and higher levels of HbA1c are associated with the development of dementia.</p><p>In analysis of development of T2D among participants with prediabetes in the UK biobank, the 12% with sarcopenia at baseline, based on lower handgrip strength, muscle mass and walking pace, had 19.3% versus 14.9% T2D rates over a mean 11.4 year-follow-up. Those with sarcopenia had, on average, slightly higher baseline BMI, but interestingly the association of sarcopenia with T2D was particularly great among those with waist: hip ratio < 0.9, suggesting sarcopenia to be an additional factor, like excess visceral fat, in causing development of T2D [<span>1</span>].</p><p>Botte and coworkers offer an interesting perspective on the role of low muscle strength (related both to low muscle mass and low muscle quality) in metabolic disorders [<span>2</span>]. Given the recognition of the importance of sarcopenia, it is instructive to summarize portions of their analysis. Low muscle strength is associated with ~2.5-fold greater all-cause mortality [<span>3-5</span>]. With aging, myosteatosis may have a particularly great impact on muscle strength, predicting fall risk and all-cause mortality more than muscle mass in older adults [<span>6</span>]. BMI correlates with higher appendicular lean mass, but not with grip strength [<span>7</span>]. Potential sarcopenia treatment approaches include selective androgen receptor modulators (SARMS) [<span>8</span>], growth hormone secretagogues [<span>9</span>], ghrelin agonists, and fast-twitch skeletal muscle troponin inhibitors [<span>10</span>], but at present none of these appear satisfactory. Recent efforts have targeted the myostatin pathway, which physiologically leads to inhibition of muscle growth [<span>11</span>]. Bimagrumab, an activin receptor antagonist, promotes skeletal muscle growth and fat loss, and may have benefits for bone health. While activins are also involved in reproductive hormone regulation, the selectivity","PeriodicalId":189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes","volume":"17 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1753-0407.70169","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145547347","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Sabika Ayesha, Umaima Parveen, Noor Un Nisa Irshad
<p>The study conducted by Gao et al. offers valuable evidence regarding the therapeutic potential of sitagliptin in the management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) [<span>1</span>]. The authors have identified opportunities for adjunctive therapies in a condition that continues to be a morbidity by demonstrating enhancements in ulcer healing and endothelial progenitor cell (EPC) mobilization. Nonetheless, several methodological and interpretative considerations need discussion to place these results in a broader clinical context.</p><p>A major concern is the trial's inadequate blinding. The authors state that “blinding was applied exclusively to the personnel responsible for performing area calculations and laboratory evaluator evaluations,” yet patients and treating clinicians were aware of allocation because no placebo was used. This is not a true double-blind study and risks performance and observer bias. In double-blind randomized controlled trials, such as the protocol by O'Reilly et al. [<span>2</span>], both patients and clinicians are blinded to ensure wound care and unbiased outcome assessment. Awareness of sitagliptin could have influenced wound care intensity, follow-up decisions, or judgments of healing, exaggerating the benefit.</p><p>Second, the lack of standardized conventional therapy further complicates interpretation. “Conventional therapy” was described broadly to include vasodilators, neurotrophic agents, antibiotics, and wound debridement, but administration was left to the clinician's discretion. In contrast to O'Reilly et al., where standard wound care methods were routinely implemented, such diversity presents significant confounding factors. If the sitagliptin group received more consistent background therapy, observed differences in healing may reflect uneven supportive care rather than a true pharmacologic effect.</p><p>Third, the outcome definition is limited. Ulcer healing was defined strictly as 100% area reduction, with substantial partial improvements (e.g., 80%–99%) excluded from the primary endpoint. This all-or-nothing approach neglects clinically meaningful outcomes. As Gottrup et al. emphasized [<span>3</span>], wound-healing studies should also consider infection, pain, resource use, and cost-effectiveness. Moreover, while Gao et al. reported CD34+ and SDF-1α changes, reliance on surrogate endpoints is insufficient. Pichu et al. review that biomarker data alone cannot substitute for patient-centered outcomes or hard endpoints such as amputation or recurrence [<span>4</span>].</p><p>Finally, the short follow-up duration represents a significant methodological flaw. Follow-up was capped at 12 weeks or until complete healing. However, it frequently takes several months for Wagner Grades 3–4 ulcers to close. In order to evaluate healing, safety, and amputation outcomes, patients with advanced DFUs treated with cryopreserved umbilical cord were monitored for a year in the Marston et al. study [<span>5</span>]. Limit
{"title":"Comment on “Sitagliptin, a DPP-4 Inhibitor, Effectively Promotes the Healing of Diabetic Foot Ulcer: A Randomized Controlled Trial”","authors":"Sabika Ayesha, Umaima Parveen, Noor Un Nisa Irshad","doi":"10.1111/1753-0407.70165","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1753-0407.70165","url":null,"abstract":"<p>The study conducted by Gao et al. offers valuable evidence regarding the therapeutic potential of sitagliptin in the management of diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) [<span>1</span>]. The authors have identified opportunities for adjunctive therapies in a condition that continues to be a morbidity by demonstrating enhancements in ulcer healing and endothelial progenitor cell (EPC) mobilization. Nonetheless, several methodological and interpretative considerations need discussion to place these results in a broader clinical context.</p><p>A major concern is the trial's inadequate blinding. The authors state that “blinding was applied exclusively to the personnel responsible for performing area calculations and laboratory evaluator evaluations,” yet patients and treating clinicians were aware of allocation because no placebo was used. This is not a true double-blind study and risks performance and observer bias. In double-blind randomized controlled trials, such as the protocol by O'Reilly et al. [<span>2</span>], both patients and clinicians are blinded to ensure wound care and unbiased outcome assessment. Awareness of sitagliptin could have influenced wound care intensity, follow-up decisions, or judgments of healing, exaggerating the benefit.</p><p>Second, the lack of standardized conventional therapy further complicates interpretation. “Conventional therapy” was described broadly to include vasodilators, neurotrophic agents, antibiotics, and wound debridement, but administration was left to the clinician's discretion. In contrast to O'Reilly et al., where standard wound care methods were routinely implemented, such diversity presents significant confounding factors. If the sitagliptin group received more consistent background therapy, observed differences in healing may reflect uneven supportive care rather than a true pharmacologic effect.</p><p>Third, the outcome definition is limited. Ulcer healing was defined strictly as 100% area reduction, with substantial partial improvements (e.g., 80%–99%) excluded from the primary endpoint. This all-or-nothing approach neglects clinically meaningful outcomes. As Gottrup et al. emphasized [<span>3</span>], wound-healing studies should also consider infection, pain, resource use, and cost-effectiveness. Moreover, while Gao et al. reported CD34+ and SDF-1α changes, reliance on surrogate endpoints is insufficient. Pichu et al. review that biomarker data alone cannot substitute for patient-centered outcomes or hard endpoints such as amputation or recurrence [<span>4</span>].</p><p>Finally, the short follow-up duration represents a significant methodological flaw. Follow-up was capped at 12 weeks or until complete healing. However, it frequently takes several months for Wagner Grades 3–4 ulcers to close. In order to evaluate healing, safety, and amputation outcomes, patients with advanced DFUs treated with cryopreserved umbilical cord were monitored for a year in the Marston et al. study [<span>5</span>]. Limit","PeriodicalId":189,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Diabetes","volume":"17 11","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.7,"publicationDate":"2025-11-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/1753-0407.70165","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"145443047","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}