RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Multiple clinical studies have described the benefits of probiotic Saccharomyces boulardii (S. boulardii) CNCM I-745 against diarrhoea, but the real-world evidence supporting its use is lacking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate effectiveness of the S. boulardii CNCM I-745 group in a real-world setting. METHODS: This was an electronic medical record (EMR)-based, retrospective, multicentre, comparative study in Indian adult patients presenting with diarrhoea managed between January 2020 and January 2022. Data of patients at the baseline visit, with a follow-up visit within 15 days, and who were administered S. boulardii CNCM I-745 (for the test group) or any other treatment modality excluding probiotics (for the control group) were considered. Effectiveness was evaluated on the basis of number of patients who did not complain of diarrhoea at follow-up. RESULTS: Of 30,385 adult patients with diarrhoea, 270 patients prescribed S. boulardii CNCM I-745 were included, while the control group comprised 1457 patients. The baseline median age of the test group was 47 years (range 19-86 years), while it was 44 years (range 19-100 years) for the control group. The majority of patients in both study groups were females (56.7% in the test and 51.5% in the control group). Median duration between visits was 5 days (range 1-15 days) in both study groups. In all, 77.8% patients (95% CI 72.34-82.59) in the test group did not complain of diarrhoea at follow-up, while the proportion was 15.8% (95% CI 13.95-17.76) in the control group (p < 0.05). Odds ratio (OR) for absence of diarrhoea in the S. boulardii CNCM I-745 group versus the control group was 18.7 (95% CI 13.6-25.7, p < 0.05). For subgroups on concomitant antibiotics, a significant advantage was noted again for the test versus the control group (76.8% versus 18.4%; p < 0.05; OR: 14.7 with 95% CI 8.8-24.4; p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The effect of S. boulardii CNCM I-745 probiotic in controlling diarrhoea was better than anti-diarrhoeal and/or oral rehydration therapy in real-world clinical practice. The effect was similar even with concomitant antibiotic usage.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Real-world Indian studies evaluating effectiveness of dapagliflozin as an add-on to other oral antidiabetic drugs (OAD) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) are scarce. METHODS: An electronic medical record (EMR)-based, retrospective, multicentre study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of dapagliflozin as add-on therapy in adult patients with inadequately controlled DM on metformin with or without other OAD. Baseline characteristics (visit 1: metformin or metformin plus OAD treatment for at least 30 days) and treatment-related outcomes (visit 2: follow-up) considered between 60 and 140 days after adding/switching dapagliflozin [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), body mass index (BMI), systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP)] were analysed. RESULTS: A total of 3616 patients were screened from 478 centres. Most patients had received dapagliflozin (D) + metformin (M) + at least one other OAD [D + M + OAD, n = 2907 (80.4%), 408 followed-up with HbA1c reported], while 709 patients (19.6%, 138 followed-up with HbA1c reported) received dapagliflozin + metformin (D + M). Treatment with dapagliflozin as an add-on therapy resulted in significant change in HbA1c (-1.1 ± 1.44%; p < 0.05 for HbA1c subgroup ≥ 7.5%; -1.6 ± 1.41%; p < 0.05 for HbA1c subgroup ≥ 8%) at visit 2 compared with visit 1. Significant change in body weight (-1.4 ± 3.31 kg; p < 0.05 for HbA1c subgroup ≥ 7.5%; - 1.5 ± 3.22 kg; p < 0.05 for HbA1c subgroup ≥ 8%) was observed at visit 2. Similarly, a significant change in BMI was noted for the HbA1c subgroup ≥ 7.5% (-1.0 ± 8.38 kg/m2). However, the change in BMI in the HbA1c subgroup ≥ 8% was noted to be -1.4 ± 10.4 kg/m2, which was not statistically significant (p = 0.08). In the overall study population, significant change in the SBP (-4.5 ± 14.9 mmHg; p < 0.05 for HbA1c subgroup ≥ 7.5%; -4.5 ± 15.1 mmHg; p < 0.0001 for HbA1c subgroup ≥ 8%) was observed at visit 2 compared with visit 1. On identical lines, significant change in DBP (-1.5 ± 8.94 mmHg; p < 0.05 for HbA1c subgroup ≥ 7.5%; -1.4 ± 8.91 mmHg; p < 0.05 for HbA1c subgroup ≥ 8%) was noted. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin showed significant improvement in glycemic parameter, BMI and BP when added to metformin, with or without other OADs in a real-world scenario.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Coexisting hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and dyslipidemia (triple disease) can lead to greater risk of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. The present study sought to comprehend the prevalence, demographic traits, clinical traits, and treatment patterns in Indian patients with these coexisting conditions. METHODS: An electronic medical record (EMR)-based, retrospective, multicenter, cross-sectional study was conducted, and data were collected for patients who were diagnosed with coexistent hypertension, T2DM, and dyslipidemia. Baseline patient variables evaluated were the percentage of patients with triple comorbidity, demographic characteristics, diagnostic laboratory parameters, and treatment pattern details. RESULTS: Data from 4793 centers (clinics) were included, with a total of 6,722,173 patients. Of these, 427,835 (6.36%) patients were found to have coexistent hypertension, T2DM, and dyslipidemia. Most of the patients belonged to the 40-64 year age group (62.10%) and were males (57.00%), while 27.40% patients had a body mass index (BMI) within normal limits, 43.30% patients were pre-obese, and 20.90% patients were class 1 obese. Further, 3402 patients (0.80%) had a recorded history of smoking. Mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) for the patients included in the study was 8.35 ± 1.96 g%. Mean systolic blood pressure (SBP) was 138.81 ± 19.59 mm Hg, while mean diastolic blood pressure (DBP) was 82.17 ± 10.35 mm Hg; 27.60% cases had SBP < 130 mm Hg, while 28.37% cases had DBP < 80 mm Hg. The mean low-density lipoprotein (LDL), total cholesterol, and high-density lipoprotein (HDL) in mg/dl were 98.38 ± 40.39, 174.75 ± 46.73, and 44.5 ± 10.05, respectively. Of the enrolled cases, 55.64% had serum LDL below 100 mg/dl, 72.03% cases had serum cholesterol below 200 mg/dl, and 44.15% males and 71.77% females had serum HDL below the normal prescribed range. The most common monotherapy used for managing hypertension was angiotensin receptor blockers (ARB) (24.80%), followed by beta-blockers (24.30%). The most common combinations administered for management of hypertension were antihypertensives with diuretics (14.30%), followed by ARB plus calcium channel blockers (CCB) (13.30%). For dyslipidemia, the majority of patients (56.60%) received lipid-lowering medication in combination with drugs for other comorbidities. The most common antidiabetic agents prescribed were biguanides (74.60%). CONCLUSIONS: Coexistence of triple disease is not uncommon in the Indian population, with middle-aged patients diagnosed as pre-obese and obese being affected more commonly and receiving treatment for the same. The present study highlights that, though there are medications against the three chronic conditions, the rate of uncontrolled cases of hypertension, T2DM, and dyslipidemia remains high. Coexistence of triple disease increases the risk of cardiovascular and renal complications, which need to be closely monitored and effectively treated.
RESUMO
Objectives This prospective study assessed the effectiveness and patient satisfaction of four-week omeprazole therapy in acid peptic disease (APD). Methods This was an observational, post-marketing, real-world evidence, patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures study. Patients visiting the five study sites across India with symptoms of APD, and who were prescribed oral omeprazole (20/40 mg per day) for at least four weeks were enrolled after obtaining informed consent. Study assessments included frequency and severity of symptoms and overall satisfaction reported by the patients using the Patient Assessment of Gastrointestinal Disorder Symptom Severity Index (PAGI-SYM) questionnaire. The satisfaction with therapy was reported by the patients using the Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire for Medication (TSQM) questionnaire. Both PAGI-SYM and TSQM were reported by patients on days 14 and 28. Omeprazole safety was assessed based on the adverse events reported by the patients. Results A total of 96 (62 males and 34 females) patients were included in the study, of which 38.54% had significant findings related to APD at baseline. The proportion of patients with symptoms reduced to 16.67% on day 14 and 8.33% on day 28 with omeprazole therapy. The PAGI-SYM total scores at baseline were 41.32 (15.487), which reduced to 20.86 (11.620) on day 14 (p < 0.0001), and to 8.93 (8.361) on day 28 (p < 0.0001). Significant reductions were also seen in individual symptom scores. The TSQM total scores increased to 36.67 (range: 13 to 63) on day 28 from 34.69 (range: 12 to 58) on day 14. Improvement in scores for all domains of TSQM (effectiveness, convenience, and global satisfaction) was seen on day 28. Improvement in reflux symptoms was reported by 46.74% and 68.48% of patients on day 14 and day 28, respectively. Four (4.17%) patients reported adverse events, which were of mild severity and were unrelated to omeprazole. Conclusions Omeprazole provides significant improvement in PAGI-SYM and TSQM questionnaires on day 14 and day 28. Patients reported the omeprazole-based therapy as effective, convenient, and satisfactory. Omeprazole therapy is safe and effective for the treatment of APD and shows good improvement in APD in patients suffering from duodenal ulcers, gastric ulcers, and reflux oesophagitis.