Diabetes mellitus (DM) underscores a rising epidemic orchestrating critical socio-economic burden on countries globally. Different treatment options for the management of DM are evolving rapidly because the usual methods of treatment have not completely tackled the primary causes of the disease and are laden with critical adverse effects. Thus, this narrative review explores different treatment regimens in DM management and the associated challenges. A literature search for published articles on recent advances in DM management was completed with search engines including Web of Science, Pubmed/Medline, Scopus, using keywords such as DM, management of DM, and gene therapy. Our findings indicate that substantial progress has been made in DM management with promising results using different treatment regimens, including nanotechnology, gene therapy, stem cell, medical nutrition therapy, and lifestyle modification. However, a lot of challenges have been encountered using these techniques, including their optimization to ensure optimal glycemic, lipid, and blood pressure modulation to minimize complications, improvement of patients’ compliance to lifestyle and pharmacologic interventions, safety, ethical issues, as well as an effective delivery system among others. In conclusion, lifestyle management alongside pharmacological approaches and the optimization of these techniques is critical for an effective and safe clinical treatment plan.

There is a myriad of diseases that plague the world ranging from infectious, cancer and other chronic diseases with varying interventions. However, the dynamism of causative agents of infectious diseases and incessant mutations accompanying other forms of chronic diseases like cancer, have worsened the treatment outcomes. These factors often lead to treatment failure via different drug resistance mechanisms. More so, the cost of developing newer drugs is huge. This underscores the need for a paradigm shift in the drug delivery approach in order to achieve desired treatment outcomes. There is intensified research in nanomedicine, which has shown promises in improving the therapeutic outcome of drugs at preclinical stages with increased efficacy and reduced toxicity. Regardless of the huge benefits of nanotechnology in drug delivery, challenges such as regulatory approval, scalability, cost implication and potential toxicity must be addressed via streamlining of regulatory hurdles and increased research funding. In conclusion, the idea of nanotechnology in drug delivery holds immense promise for optimizing therapeutic outcomes. This work presents opportunities to revolutionize treatment strategies, providing expert opinions on translating the huge amount of research in nanomedicine into clinical benefits for patients with resistant infections and cancer.

Traditional medicine intervention has been used in rheumatoid arthritis (RA) treatment due to limitations of conventional drugs. This study aimed at evaluating the anti-arthritic potentials of ethanol and aqueous extracts of stem bark of Cleistopholis patens (SBCP) in complete Freund's adjuvant (CFA) induced rheumatoid arthritis in rats. Rheumatoid arthritis was induced in groups 2 to 9 by intradermal injection of 0.1 mlkg-1 chicken type II collagen in CFA into the left hind paw of the rats. Group 1 served as normal control. Group 2 (negative control) received 5 mlkg-1 body weight normal saline while group 3 (positive control) received 10 mg/kg body weight standard drug (indomethacin). Groups 4 to 9 received varied doses of the extracts. After 10 days of RA induction, rats were treated with ethanol and aqueous extracts of SBCP orally at a dose of 400, 600 and 800 mgkg-1 for 21 days. The paw size, body weight changes, inflammatory parameters, lipid peroxidation maker and malondialdehyde (MDA) were assessed. Rheumatoid arthritis induction caused marked (p < 0.05) increase in paw size, inflammatory makers and MDA while significant (p < 0.05) reduction was observed in body weight relative to normal control. Treatment with extracts analogous to indomethacin markedly (p < 0.05) decreased the paw size and caused weight gain while the altered inflammatory parameters and MDA were reversed relative to negative control. The findings suggest that the extracts of SBCP have good antiarthritic potentials comparable to indomethacin and hence could be used in rheumatoid arthritis management.

Background: Mounting evidence indicates that Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a public health challenge globally, and its occurrence is anticipated to surge in the forthcoming years. Dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 (DPP‐4) serves as a target for its treatment, with its inhibitors effectively preserving the levels of glucose‐dependent insulinotropic peptide and glucagon‐like peptide 1(GLP‐1). This review presents an overview of the therapeutic possibilities of six frequently employed DPP‐4 inhibitors (DPP‐4is) (Sitagliptin, saxagliptin, vildagliptin, linagliptin, alogliptin and teneligliptin) in managing T2DM, focussing on their characteristics, mechanism of action, advantages and side effects in comparison with alternative oral antidiabetic drugs as well as the possibility of using in silico method in advancing its timely and cost‐effective production. Methods: A literature search was conducted using the major search engines such as PubMed/Medline, Scopus, and Google Scholar, etc. employing terms like ‘Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), DPP‐4 inhibitors, and Dipeptidyl peptidase‐4’, etc. to identify relevant studies. Results: Our findings indicate that DPP‐4is stimulate secretion of insulin and suppress secretion of glucagon by elevating endogenous GLP‐1 concentrations without an intrinsic hypoglycaemia risk. Although these agents share a common mechanism of action, their considerable structural heterogeneity may lead to distinct pharmacological characteristics. Literature shows that DPP‐4is have a promising safety profile in comparison with other oral antidiabetic medications, however, certain safety aspects require additional exploration. Different DPP‐4is have demonstrated comparable safety and tolerability, whether used alone or in combination with other antidiabetic medications. Besides, it has been shown that in silico method could be employed in development of DPP‐4is. Further research is necessary to ascertain whether differences among DPP‐4 inhibitors might influence the occurrence of specific adverse effects. Conclusion: DPP‐4 inhibitors remain effective and well‐tolerated options for managing T2DM.