In the unrelenting race to strive to dominate type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) care better, this review paper sets out on a significant discovery trip across recent advancements in treatment and the blooming era of artificial intelligence (AI) utilities. Given the considerable global burden of T2DM, innovative therapeutic approaches to improve patient outcomes remain a public health priority. This review first provides an in-depth analysis of the current state of therapy, from novel pharmacotherapy to lifestyle interventions and new treatment methods. At the same time, the rapidly increasing role of AI in diabetes care is woven into the story, mainly targeting how insulin therapy can be modified and personalized through algorithms and predictive modelling. It leaves a deep review of their pre-existing synergies, which helps understand how collaborative opportunities will unlock the future of T2DM care. This critical role is shown by integrating recent therapeutic advances and AI with overall showcasing better screening, diagnosis, and therapeutics decision-making to outcome prediction in T2DM. The review emphasizes how AI applications in insulin therapy have transformative potential in diabetes care. These person-centred approaches to T2DM management, which are more effective and personalized than some traditional strategies, only work because of the often-hidden synergies between AI algorithms in areas such as diagnostic criteria, predictive methods, and familiar classification tools for subgroups with relevant aspects/predictors on prognosis or treatment responsiveness.

Purpose: In patients diagnosed with diabetes mellitus (DM) before the age of 12 months, there is an increasing recognition of diabetes caused by single-gene mutations, also known as monogenic diabetes of infancy or neonatal DM (NDM). This study aimed to classify patients at Alexandria University Children’s Hospital (AUCH) diagnosed with infantile-onset DM into type 1 DM (T1DM) or NDM and to detect differences in molecular characteristics of NDM patients at our center in comparison to other countries. Methods: This retrospective/prospective observational study was conducted on 39 patients diagnosed with infantile-onset DM (age of onset ≤1 year) at AUCH from January 2003 to November 2020. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to age at the onset of DM: ≤6 months and >6–12 months. Molecular testing was done in patients diagnosed with DM at ≤6 months and those with negative autoantibodies. Results: Twelve patients were diagnosed with DM at age ≤6 months and 27 patients were diagnosed between 6–12 months. Seventeen patients (43.6%) had T1DM, whereas 9 patients (23.1%) had genetically confirmed NDM, including 3 harboring novel mutations. The most common genetic causes of NDM were EIF2AK3 mutations (n=3), followed by KCNJ11 (n=2) and ABCC8 (n=2). Other mutations included SLC19A2 (n=1) and INS (n=1). Three patients with potassium ATP channel mutations were transferred from insulin to sulfonylurea treatment. Conclusion It is essential to identify patients with NDM clinically and confirm the diagnosis by molecular testing to distinguish them from T1DM as it helps in refining their management, predicting prognosis, and guiding genetic counseling.

Introduction: Snakebite is an important medical emergency. Antivenoms remain the only proven treatment for snake envenoming. However, the use of antivenom is associated with hypersensitivity reactions. The aims of this study were to determine the prevalence and types of hypersensitivity reactions and types and outcomes of pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments for antivenom reactions among snakebite patients that received antivenoms. Methods: This was a 4-year cross-sectional study of snakebite patients from January 2013 to December 2016 in Hospital Sultanah Nur Zahirah (HSNZ), Terengganu. Data was extracted from the Pharmacy Record on the usage of antivenom and patients of snakebites treated with antivenom were identified. Data of patients were then obtained from the electronic medical records.’ Demographic details, clinical features and characteristics of antivenom reactions of patients were recorded in standardized data collection forms and analyzed using chi-square or MannWhitney U tests. Results: Of the 44 patients who received antivenom, 24 (54.5%) developed hypersensitivity reaction. All patients developed reaction early. No patient developed delayed (serum-sickness) reaction. Of the 24 patients, 14 (58.3%) had moderate to severe hypersensitivity reaction and 9 (37.5%) patients had mild reactions. Only one (4.2%) patient presented with bradycardia. Conclusion: The prevalence of early hypersensitivity reaction to snake antivenom in HSNZ was relatively high. Healthcare providers should be aware of the appropriate method of preparing and administering antivenom, and the management for acute hypersensitivity reactions. This will optimize the management of snakebite and ensure patient safety