Background: Menopausal status can increase the risk of cardiocerebrovascular diseases (CCVDs) in women with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Regular exercise is well-known to reduce this risk. This study explored the impact of exercise on CCVD and mortality in women with T2DM according to their menopausal status. Methods: A total of 32,477 premenopausal and 53,690 postmenopausal Korean women with T2DM aged 40 to 60 years from a national health examination cohort (2009 to 2018) were included. We evaluated risks for stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and mortality based on exercise intensity. Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were performed to obtain the adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) and 95% confidence interval. Results: Exercise reduced stroke, MI, and mortality risks in women with T2DM, regardless of menopausal status. The highest effects of aHR compared to the sedentary group were 0.68 for stroke, 0.66 for MI, and 0.81 for mortality. Postmenopausal women experienced significant MI risk reductions at most exercise intensities, with the greatest reduction in the ≥1,500 metabolic equivalent of task score group unlike premenopausal women. However, stroke and mortality risk reductions in postmenopausal women were less pronounced compared to premenopausal women. Conclusion Exercise reduces CCVD risk in women with T2DM across menopausal status. Postmenopausal women with T2DM had more benefits from exercise on MI but fewer benefits on stroke and mortality than premenopausal women. In premenopausal women with T2DM, exercise was not associated with a lower MI risk.

Background: The prevalence of diabetes mellitus and early-onset dementia (EOD), defined as dementia diagnosed at an age <65 years, is increasing worldwide, with significant socioeconomic implications. We investigated the association between diabetes, prediabetes, and EOD, focusing on the influence of diabetes duration on EOD risk. Methods: Using the Korean National Health Insurance Service database, we analyzed data from 1,979,509 patients aged 40–60 years who underwent health checkups in 2009. Patients were categorized into five groups: normal, impaired fasting glucose (IFG), newly diagnosed diabetes, diabetes duration <5 years, and diabetes duration ≥5 years. Cox proportional hazard models were used to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) for EOD after adjusting for demographic and clinical covariates. Results: During the observation period (mean 7.75 years), 8,921 patients with EOD were identified. The diabetes group demonstrated a significantly higher incidence of EOD compared to the normal group (aHR, 1.334; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.226 to 1.451). EOD risk increased with longer diabetes duration, with the highest risk observed in patients with diabetes ≥5 years (aHR, 1.543; 95% CI, 1.368 to 1.741). No significant difference was observed between the IFG and normal groups (aHR, 0.989; 95% CI, 0.938 to 1.043). Additionally, the hypertension group exhibited a significantly higher incidence of EOD compared to the non-hypertension group (aHR, 1.364; 95% CI, 1.291 to 1.442). Conclusion Diabetes is independently associated with increased risk of EOD, and this risk increases with longer diabetes duration. This association remained significant regardless of the presence and duration of hypertension.

Background: The novel sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor enavogliflozin effectively lowers glycosylated hemoglobin levels and body weights without the increased risk of serious adverse events; however, the long-term clinical benefits of enavogliflozin in terms of cardiovascular and renal outcomes have not been investigated. Methods: This study is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, pragmatic, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Eligible participants are adults (aged ≥19 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who have a history of, or are at risk of, cardiovascular disease. A total of 2,862 participants will be randomly assigned to receive either enavogliflozin or other SGLT2 inhibitors with proven cardiorenal benefits, such as dapagliflozin or empagliflozin. The primary endpoint is the time to the first occurrence of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular or renal events (Clinical Research Information Service registration number: KCT0009243). Conclusion This trial will determine whether enavogliflozin is non-inferior to dapagliflozin or empagliflozin in terms of cardiorenal outcomes in patients with T2DM and cardiovascular risk factors. This study will elucidate the role of enavogliflozin in preventing vascular complications in patients with T2DM.

Background: The novel sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor enavogliflozin effectively lowers glycosylated hemoglobin levels and body weights without the increased risk of serious adverse events; however, the long-term clinical benefits of enavogliflozin in terms of cardiovascular and renal outcomes have not been investigated. Methods: This study is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, pragmatic, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Eligible participants are adults (aged ≥19 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who have a history of, or are at risk of, cardiovascular disease. A total of 2,862 participants will be randomly assigned to receive either enavogliflozin or other SGLT2 inhibitors with proven cardiorenal benefits, such as dapagliflozin or empagliflozin. The primary endpoint is the time to the first occurrence of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular or renal events (Clinical Research Information Service registration number: KCT0009243). Conclusion This trial will determine whether enavogliflozin is non-inferior to dapagliflozin or empagliflozin in terms of cardiorenal outcomes in patients with T2DM and cardiovascular risk factors. This study will elucidate the role of enavogliflozin in preventing vascular complications in patients with T2DM.

Background: The novel sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor enavogliflozin effectively lowers glycosylated hemoglobin levels and body weights without the increased risk of serious adverse events; however, the long-term clinical benefits of enavogliflozin in terms of cardiovascular and renal outcomes have not been investigated. Methods: This study is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, pragmatic, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Eligible participants are adults (aged ≥19 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who have a history of, or are at risk of, cardiovascular disease. A total of 2,862 participants will be randomly assigned to receive either enavogliflozin or other SGLT2 inhibitors with proven cardiorenal benefits, such as dapagliflozin or empagliflozin. The primary endpoint is the time to the first occurrence of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular or renal events (Clinical Research Information Service registration number: KCT0009243). Conclusion This trial will determine whether enavogliflozin is non-inferior to dapagliflozin or empagliflozin in terms of cardiorenal outcomes in patients with T2DM and cardiovascular risk factors. This study will elucidate the role of enavogliflozin in preventing vascular complications in patients with T2DM.

Background: The novel sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor enavogliflozin effectively lowers glycosylated hemoglobin levels and body weights without the increased risk of serious adverse events; however, the long-term clinical benefits of enavogliflozin in terms of cardiovascular and renal outcomes have not been investigated. Methods: This study is an investigator-initiated, multicenter, randomized, pragmatic, open-label, active-controlled, non-inferiority trial. Eligible participants are adults (aged ≥19 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who have a history of, or are at risk of, cardiovascular disease. A total of 2,862 participants will be randomly assigned to receive either enavogliflozin or other SGLT2 inhibitors with proven cardiorenal benefits, such as dapagliflozin or empagliflozin. The primary endpoint is the time to the first occurrence of a composite of major adverse cardiovascular or renal events (Clinical Research Information Service registration number: KCT0009243). Conclusion This trial will determine whether enavogliflozin is non-inferior to dapagliflozin or empagliflozin in terms of cardiorenal outcomes in patients with T2DM and cardiovascular risk factors. This study will elucidate the role of enavogliflozin in preventing vascular complications in patients with T2DM.

Background: To investigate the impact of alcohol consumption on all-cause and cancer mortalities in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: This nationwide cohort study included Korean patients with T2D aged >20 years from a national health exams cohort (2009 to 2012). Participants were categorized based on alcohol consumption: non, mild (<30 g/day), and heavy drinkers (≥30 g/day). Primary outcomes were all-cause and cancer mortality rates. Cox proportional hazard regression analyses were used to calculate adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs) with a 95% confidence interval (CI) with adjustments for age, sex, body mass index, smoking, exercise, comorbidities, diabetes duration, and medications. Results: Among 2,642,359 participants (median follow-up, 7.8 years), 57.2%, 32.7%, and 10.1% were non, mild, and heavy drinkers, respectively. Compared to non-drinkers, mild alcohol consumption was associated with reduced all-cause mortality (aHR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.80 to 0.82) and cancer mortality (aHR, 0.88; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.89), while heavy drinking increased both all-cause (aHR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.04 to 1.07) and cancer mortalities (aHR, 1.09; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.11). Subgroup analyses revealed variations: in chronic kidney disease and older age groups, heavy drinkers showed lower risk of all-cause mortality compared to non-drinkers. Regarding cancer mortality, younger and middle-aged groups showed protective effects of alcohol even for heavy drinkers, while females showed linear association between alcohol consumption and cancer mortality. Conclusion This study indicates a J-shaped relationship between alcohol consumption and all-cause and cancer mortality risk in patients with T2D, with variations across subgroups. These findings suggest the need for personalized recommendations considering individual risk factors.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.

Since the role of the liver in metabolic dysfunction, including type 2 diabetes mellitus, was demonstrated, studies on non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and metabolic dysfunction-associated fatty liver disease (MAFLD) have shown associations between fatty liver disease and other metabolic diseases. Unlike the exclusionary diagnostic criteria of NAFLD, MAFLD diagnosis is based on the presence of metabolic dysregulation in fatty liver disease. Renaming NAFLD as MAFLD also introduced simpler diagnostic criteria. In 2023, a new nomenclature, steatotic liver disease (SLD), was proposed. Similar to MAFLD, SLD diagnosis is based on the presence of hepatic steatosis with at least one cardiometabolic dysfunction. SLD is categorized into metabolic dysfunction-associated steatotic liver disease (MASLD), metabolic dysfunction and alcohol-related/-associated liver disease, alcoholrelated liver disease, specific etiology SLD, and cryptogenic SLD. The term MASLD has been adopted by a number of leading national and international societies due to its concise diagnostic criteria, exclusion of other concomitant liver diseases, and lack of stigmatizing terms. This article reviews the diagnostic criteria, clinical relevance, and differences among NAFLD, MAFLD, and MASLD from a diabetologist’s perspective and provides a rationale for adopting SLD/MASLD in the Fatty Liver Research Group of the Korean Diabetes Association.