The steep rise of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and associated complications go along with mounting evidence of clinically important sex and gender differences. T2DM is more frequently diagnosed at lower age and body mass index in men; however, the most prominent risk factor, which is obesity, is more common in women. Generally, large sex-ratio differences across countries are observed. Diversities in biology, culture, lifestyle, environment, and socioeconomic status impact differences between males and females in predisposition, development, and clinical presentation. Genetic effects and epigenetic mechanisms, nutritional factors and sedentary lifestyle affect risk and complications differently in both sexes. Furthermore, sex hormones have a great impact on energy metabolism, body composition, vascular function, and inflammatory responses. Thus, endocrine imbalances relate to unfavorable cardiometabolic traits, observable in women with androgen excess or men with hypogonadism. Both biological and psychosocial factors are responsible for sex and gender differences in diabetes risk and outcome. Overall, psychosocial stress appears to have greater impact on women rather than on men. In addition, women have greater increases of cardiovascular risk, myocardial infarction, and stroke mortality than men, compared with nondiabetic subjects. However, when dialysis therapy is initiated, mortality is comparable in both males and females. Diabetes appears to attenuate the protective effect of the female sex in the development of cardiac diseases and nephropathy. Endocrine and behavioral factors are involved in gender inequalities and affect the outcome. More research regarding sex-dimorphic pathophysiological mechanisms of T2DM and its complications could contribute to more personalized diabetes care in the future and would thus promote more awareness in terms of sex- and gender-specific risk factors.

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus is increasing in both sexes, but men are usually diagnosed at a younger age and lower body fat mass than women. Worldwide, an estimated 17.7 million more men than women have diabetes mellitus. Women appear to bear a greater risk factor burden at the time of their type 2 diabetes diagnosis, especially obesity. Moreover, psychosocial stress might play a more prominent role in diabetes risk in women. Across their lifespan, women experience greater hormone fluctuations and body changes due to reproductive factors than men. Pregnancies can unmask pre-existing metabolic abnormalities, resulting in the diagnosis of gestational diabetes, which appears to be the most prominent risk factor for progression to type 2 diabetes in women. Additionally, menopause increases women’s cardiometabolic risk profile. Due to the progressive rise in obesity, there is a global increase in women with pregestational type 2 diabetes, often with inadequate preconceptual care. There are differences between men and women regarding type 2 diabetes and other cardiovascular risk factors with respect to comorbidities, the manifestation of complications and the initiation of and adherence to therapy. Women with type 2 diabetes show greater relative risk of CVD and mortality than men. Moreover, young women with type 2 diabetes are currently less likely than men to receive the treatment and CVD risk reduction recommended by guidelines. Current medical recommendations do not provide information on sex-specific or gender-sensitive prevention strategies and management. Thus, more research on sex differences, including the underlying mechanisms, is necessary to increase the evidence in the future. Nonetheless, intensified efforts to screen for glucose metabolism disorders and other cardiovascular risk factors, as well as the early establishment of prophylactic measures and aggressive risk management strategies, are still required for both men and women at increased risk of type 2 diabetes. In this narrative review we aim to summarise sex-specific clinical features and differences between women and men with type 2 diabetes into risk factors, screening, diagnosis, complications and treatment. Graphical abstract

In the vast majority of cardiovascular diseases (CVDs), there are well-described differences between women and men in epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical manifestations, effects of therapy, and outcomes.^1–3 These differences arise on one hand from biological differences among women and men, which are called sex differences. They are due to differences in gene expression from the sex chromosomes and subsequent differences in sexual hormones leading to differences in gene expression and function in the CV system, e.g. in vascular function and NO signalling, in myocardial remodelling under stress, or metabolism of drugs by sex-specific cytochrome expression. Sex differences are frequently reproducible in animal models. In contrast, gender differences are unique to the human. They arise from sociocultural processes, such as different behaviours of women and men; exposure to specific influences of the environment; different forms of nutrition, lifestyle, or stress; or attitudes towards treatments and prevention. These are equally important for CVDs. Both sex and gender (S&G) influence human development (Figure 1). Since it is almost impossible to distinguish properly between effects of S&G in the medical field, the EUGenMed writing group decided to discuss both of them together and to use the term S&G for all medical relevant differences between women and men in the present review.

A consensus meeting was held in Vienna on September 8–9, 2013, to discuss diagnostic and therapeutic challenges surrounding development of diabetes mellitus after transplantation. The International Expert Panel comprised 24 transplant nephrologists, surgeons, diabetologists and clinical scientists, which met with the aim to review previous guidelines in light of emerging clinical data and research. Recommendations from the consensus discussions are provided in this article. Although the meeting was kidney‐centric, reflecting the expertise present, these recommendations are likely to be relevant to other solid organ transplant recipients. Our recommendations include: terminology revision from new‐onset diabetes after transplantation to posttransplantation diabetes mellitus (PTDM), exclusion of transient posttransplant hyperglycemia from PTDM diagnosis, expansion of screening strategies (incorporating postprandial glucose and HbA1c) and opinion‐based guidance regarding pharmacological therapy in light of recent clinical evidence. Future research in the field was discussed with the aim of establishing collaborative working groups to address unresolved questions. These recommendations are opinion‐based and intended to serve as a template for planned guidelines update, based on systematic and graded literature review, on the diagnosis and management of PTDM.

Whether treatment of gestational diabetes before 20 weeks' gestation improves maternal and infant health is unclear. We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, women between 4 weeks' and 19 weeks 6 days' gestation who had a risk factor for hyperglycemia and a diagnosis of gestational diabetes (World Health Organization 2013 criteria) to receive immediate treatment for gestational diabetes or deferred or no treatment, depending on the results of a repeat oral glucose-tolerance test [OGTT] at 24 to 28 weeks' gestation (control). The trial included three primary outcomes: a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes (birth at <37 weeks' gestation, birth trauma, birth weight of ≥4500 g, respiratory distress, phototherapy, stillbirth or neonatal death, or shoulder dystocia), pregnancy-related hypertension (preeclampsia, eclampsia, or gestational hypertension), and neonatal lean body mass. A total of 802 women underwent randomization; 406 were assigned to the immediate-treatment group and 396 to the control group; follow-up data were available for 793 women (98.9%). An initial OGTT was performed at a mean (±SD) gestation of 15.6±2.5 weeks. An adverse neonatal outcome event occurred in 94 of 378 women (24.9%) in the immediate-treatment group and in 113 of 370 women (30.5%) in the control group (adjusted risk difference, -5.6 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -10.1 to -1.2). Pregnancy-related hypertension occurred in 40 of 378 women (10.6%) in the immediate-treatment group and in 37 of 372 women (9.9%) in the control group (adjusted risk difference, 0.7 percentage points; 95% CI, -1.6 to 2.9). The mean neonatal lean body mass was 2.86 g in the immediate-treatment group and 2.91 g in the control group (adjusted mean difference, -0.04 g; 95% CI, -0.09 to 0.02). No between-group differences were observed with respect to serious adverse events associated with screening and treatment. Immediate treatment of gestational diabetes before 20 weeks' gestation led to a modestly lower incidence of a composite of adverse neonatal outcomes than no immediate treatment; no material differences were observed for pregnancy-related hypertension or neonatal lean body mass. (Funded by the National Health and Medical Research Council and others; TOBOGM Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry number, ACTRN12616000924459.).