RESUMO
OBJECTIVES: To prospectively study the effectiveness and safety of clobazam as an add-on therapy in patients with epilepsy whose seizures are not adequately controlled with antiseizure medicine (ASM) monotherapy. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, observational study at 28 neurology outpatient clinics in India from June 2017 to October 2019. Consecutive patients with epilepsy (older than 3â¯years) with inadequate seizure control with ASM monotherapy were initiated on clobazam. Patients were followed up at 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12â¯months. Seizure control and adverse events were assessed through personal interviews and seizure diaries. RESULTS: Out of 475 eligible patients, data of 429 patients (men: 65.5%) were evaluated (46 excluded due to protocol deviations). The median age was 25 (range, 3-80â¯years) years and the median duration of epilepsy was 3 (0.1-30) years. The majority of patients had focal epilepsy (55.0%) and genetic generalized epilepsy (40.1%). The one-year follow-up was completed by 380 (88.5%) patients. At one-year follow-up, 317 (83.4%; Nâ¯=â¯380) patients in the study remained seizure free. These 317 patients who were seizure free at 12â¯months comprised 73.9% of the evaluable population (Nâ¯=â¯429). In 98.8% of patients, the primary reason for adding clobazam was inadequate control of seizures with treatment. During one-year follow-up, a total of 113 (22.6%) patients experienced at least one adverse event which included 103 (20.6%) patients who experienced 386 episodes of seizures. CONCLUSION: The study provides preliminary evidence that clobazam is effective and well-tolerated as add-on therapy for a period of one year among patients with epilepsy inadequately stabilized with monotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CTRI/2017/12/010906.
Assuntos
Anticonvulsivantes , Epilepsia , Adulto , Anticonvulsivantes/efeitos adversos , Benzodiazepinas , Clobazam/uso terapêutico , Epilepsia/induzido quimicamente , Epilepsia/tratamento farmacológico , Humanos , Masculino , Estudos Prospectivos , Convulsões/induzido quimicamente , Convulsões/tratamento farmacológicoRESUMO
Decentralized clinical trials (DCTs) are gaining momentum in clinical research as these studies can be executed remotely through telemedicine and mobile/local health-care providers. The COVID-19 pandemic has further accelerated advances and adoption in this area. In the past few years, there has been significant development and growth in the use of remote data that are electronically transmitted from a clinical trial (CT) participant, from outside the clinical setting, to a data repository. Such data may include laboratory data, safety data, or outcome measures reported by the participant, the clinician or the observer. Similarly, wearable health monitoring devices are being increasingly used in health-care and CT settings. Digital biomarkers, which can support continuous measurement of physiologic parameters outside the physical confines of the clinical environment, are also creating new and improved opportunities for patient care and biomedical research, enabling remote monitoring and DCTs. There are several benefits to using remote data capture, wearables, and digital biomarkers in clinical health-care research; however, several questions and challenges still need to be addressed. In an effort to understand the adoption of these technologies in DCTs, and the challenges therein, the authors of this workstream conducted an online survey of clinical research stakeholders across India and reviewed 80 responses. The review article summarizes the key findings from this online survey.
RESUMO
INTRODUCTION: There are limited data on the real-world management of diabetes in the Indian population. In this 2-year analysis of the LANDMARC study, the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and related complications were assessed. METHOD: This multicenter, observational, prospective study included adults aged ≥25 to ≤60 years diagnosed with T2DM (duration ≥2 years at enrollment) and controlled/uncontrolled on ≥2 anti-diabetic agents. This interim analysis at 2 years reports the status of glycaemic control, diabetic complications, cardiovascular (CV) risks and therapy, pan-India including metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities. RESULTS: Of the 6234 evaluable patients, 5318 patients completed 2 years in the study. Microvascular complications were observed in 17.6% of patients (1096/6234); macrovascular complications were observed in 3.1% of patients (195/6234). Higher number of microvascular complications were noted in patients from non-metropolitan than in metropolitan cities (p < .0001). In 2 years, an improvement of 0.6% from baseline (8.1%) in mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) was noted; 20.8% of patients met optimum glycaemic control (HbA1c < 7%). Hypertension (2679/3438, 77.9%) and dyslipidaemia (1776/3438, 51.7%) were the predominant CV risk factors in 2 years. The number of patients taking oral anti-diabetic drugs in combination with insulin increased in 2 years (baseline: 1498/6234 [24.0%] vs. 2 years: 1917/5763 [33.3%]). While biguanides and sulfonylureas were the most commonly prescribed, there was an evident increase in the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibitors (baseline: 3049/6234, 48.9% vs. 2 years: 3526/5763, 61.2%). CONCLUSION: This longitudinal study represents the control of T2DM, its management and development of complications in Indian population. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CTRI/2017/05/008452.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Adulto , Humanos , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos Prospectivos , Hemoglobinas Glicadas , Estudos Longitudinais , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêuticoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: LANDMARC (CTRI/2017/05/008452), a prospective, observational real-world study, evaluated the occurrence of diabetes complications, glycemic control and treatment patterns in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) from pan-India regions over a period of 3 years. METHODS: Participants with T2DM (≥25 to ≤60 years old at diagnosis, diabetes duration ≥2 years at the time of enrollment, with/without glycemic control and on ≥2 antidiabetic therapies) were included. The proportion of participants with macrovascular and microvascular complications, glycemic control and time to treatment adaptation over 36 months were assessed. RESULTS: Of the 6234 participants enrolled, 5273 completed 3 years follow-up. At the end of 3-years, 205 (3.3%) and 1121 (18.0%) participants reported macrovascular and microvascular complications, respectively. Nonfatal myocardial infarction (40.0%) and neuropathy (82.0%) were the most common complications. At baseline and 3-years, 25.1% (1119/4466) and 36.6% (1356/3700) of participants had HbA1c <7%, respectively. At 3-years, population with macrovascular and microvascular complications had higher proportion of participants with uncontrolled glycemia (78.2% [79/101] and 70.3% [463/659], respectively) than those without complications (61.6% [1839/2985]). Over 3-years, majority (67.7%-73.9%) of the participants were taking only OADs (biguanides [92.2%], sulfonylureas [77.2%] and DPP-IV inhibitors [62.4%]). Addition of insulin was preferred in participants who were only on OADs at baseline, and insulin use gradually increased from 25.5% to 36.7% at the end of 3 years. CONCLUSION: These 3-year trends highlight the burden of uncontrolled glycemia and cumulative diabetes-related complications, emphasizing the importance of optimizing diabetes management in India.
Assuntos
Complicações do Diabetes , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Glicemia , Complicações do Diabetes/epidemiologia , Complicações do Diabetes/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Hemoglobinas Glicadas , Insulina/uso terapêutico , Estudos Prospectivos , AdultoRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Longitudinal data on management and progression of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in India are scarce. LANDMARC (CTRI/2017/05/008452), first-of-its-kind, pan-India, prospective, observational study aimed to evaluate real-world patterns and management of T2DM over 3 years. METHODS: Adults (≥25 to ≤60 years old at T2DM diagnosis; diabetes duration ≥2 years at enrolment; controlled/uncontrolled on ≥2 anti-diabetic agents) were enrolled. The first-year trends for glycaemic control, therapy and diabetic complications, including those from metropolitan and non-metropolitan cities are reported here. RESULTS: Of 6236 enrolled participants, 5654 completed 1 year in the study. Although the overall mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) improved by 0.5% (baseline: 8.1%) at 1 year, only 20% of the participants achieved HbA1c <7%. Participants from metropolitan and non- metropolitan cities showed similar decrease in glycaemic levels (mean change in HbA1c: -0.5% vs. -0.5%; p = .8613). Among diabetic complications, neuropathy was the predominant complication (815/6236, 13.1% participants). Microvascular complications (neuropathy, nephropathy and retinopathy) were significantly (p < .0001) higher in non-metropolitan than metropolitan cities. Hypertension (2623/6236, 78.2%) and dyslipidaemia (1696/6236, 50.6%) continued to be the most commonly reported cardiovascular risks at 1 year. After 1 year, majority of the participants were taking only oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs) (baseline: 4642/6236 [74.4%]; 1 year: 4045/6013 [67.3%]), while the proportion of those taking insulin along with OADs increased (baseline: 1498/6236 [24.0%] vs. 1 year: 1844/6013 [30.7%]). Biguanides and sulfonylureas were the most used OADs. The highest increase in use was seen for dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibitors (baseline: 3047/6236 [48.9%]; 1 year: 3529/6013 [58.7%]). Improvement in all glycaemic parameters was significantly (p < .0001) higher in the insulin vs. the insulin-naïve subgroups; in the insulin-naïve subgroup, no statistical difference was noted in those who received >3 vs. ≤3 OADs. CONCLUSIONS: First-year trends of the LANDMARC study offer insights into real-world disease progression, suggesting the need for controlling risk factors and timely treatment intensification in people with T2DM.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Adulto , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Hemoglobinas Glicadas , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Estudos Longitudinais , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
INTRODUCTION: Longitudinal data on progression, complications, and management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) across India are scarce. LANDMARC (CTRI/2017/05/008452), the first pan-India, longitudinal, prospective, observational study, aims to understand the management and real-world outcomes of T2DM over 3 years. METHODS: Adults (≥25 to ≤60 years old at T2DM diagnosis; diabetes duration ≥2 years at enrollment; controlled/uncontrolled on ≥2 anti-diabetic agents) were enrolled. Baseline characteristics were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Of the 6279 recruited participants, 6236 were eligible for baseline assessment (56.6% [n/N = 3528/6236] men; mean ± SD age: 52.1 ± 9.2 years, diabetes duration: 8.6 ± 5.6 years). mean ± SD HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, and postprandial glucose values were 64 ± 17 mmol/mol (8.1 ± 1.6%), 142.8 ± 50.4 mg/dl, and 205.7 ± 72.3 mg/dl, respectively. Only 25.1% (n/N = 1122/6236) participants had controlled glycemia (HbA1c < 53 mmol/mol, <7%). Macrovascular and microvascular complications were prevalent in 2.3% (n/N = 145/6236) and 14.5% (n/N = 902/6236) participants, respectively. Among those with complications, non-fatal myocardial infarction (n/N = 74/145, 51.0%) and neuropathy (n/N = 737/902, 81.7%) were the most reported macrovascular and microvascular complication, respectively. Hypertension (n/N = 2566/3281, 78.2%) and dyslipidemia (n/N = 1635/3281, 49.8%) were the most reported cardiovascular risks. Majority (74.5%; n/N = 4643/6236) were taking oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs) only, while 24.4% (n/N = 1522/6236) participants were taking OADs+insulin. Biguanides (n/N = 5796/6236, 92.9%) and sulfonylureas (n/N = 4757/6236, 76.3%) were the most reported OADs. Basal (n/N = 837/6236, 13.4%) and premix (n/N = 684/6236, 11.0%) insulins were the most reported insulins. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline data from LANDMARC help understand the clinical/medical profile of study participants and underscore the extent of suboptimal glycemic control and prevalence of associated complications in a vast majority of Indians with T2DM.
Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Adulto , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicações , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Hemoglobinas Glicadas , Humanos , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Estudos Longitudinais , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos ProspectivosRESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the real-world management practices of subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) in India. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was conducted between 7 March 2016 and 15 May 2016 in India as part of the seventh wave (2016) of the International Diabetes Management Practices Study (IDMPS). Adult subjects with T1DM or T2DM visiting physicians during a 2-week recruitment period were included. RESULTS: A total of 55 physicians included 539 subjects who met eligibility criteria. Of 495 subjects with T2DM, 303 were treated with oral glucose lowering drugs (OGLDs) only, 158 were treated with OGLD + insulin, and 27 received insulin only. Among 44 subjects with T1DM receiving insulin, 13 (29.5%) were also treated with OGLD therapy. The most commonly used insulin regimens were basal alone (69/184; 37.5%) and premixed alone (63/184; 34.2%) in subjects with T2DM, and basal + prandial insulin (24/44; 54.5%) in subjects with T1DM. Proportions of subjects achieving glycemic targets were low [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) <7%: T1DM = 7.3% (3/44), T2DM = 25.2% (106/495); as targeted by the treating physician: T1DM = 31.8% (14/44), T2DM = 32.1% (59/185); global target: T1DM = 4.8% (2/42) and T2DM = 1.7% (8/482)]. In subjects with T2DM, HbA1c <7% was noted in 11/22 subjects receiving insulin only and 76/260 receiving only OGLDs. Lack of experience in self-managing insulin dosing, poor diabetes education and failure to titrate insulin dosages were the main reasons for non-achievement of glycemic targets. CONCLUSION: Timely insulinization, education and empowerment of people with diabetes may help improve glycemic control in India.
RESUMO
OBJECTIVE: To assess the prevalence of high central aortic pressure (CAP) in Indian patients with uncontrolled essential hypertension while on anti-hypertensive monotherapy. Also, to determine correlation between brachial blood pressure (BBP) and CAP, and ascertain if it is impacted by anti-hypertensive drug class and patients' age. METHODS: In this real-world, observational, prospective study, patients (30-70 years) with uncontrolled BBP (systolic BP [SBP] ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP [DBP] ≥90 mmHg) were enrolled. Treatment was adjusted at Visit 1 (baseline), based on BBP and at treating physicians' discretion. Primary endpoint was proportion of patients with uncontrolled central aortic SBP (>125 mmHg) at baseline. Secondary endpoints were comparison of BBP and CAP across drugs classes and age groups at baseline and Visit 2 (End-of-study, â¼8 weeks post-baseline), and proportion of patients with uncontrolled central SBP at end-of-study. RESULTS: Of 2030 patients screened, 1949 patients reported at baseline and 1740 patients completed end-of-study visit. Central SBP was >125 mmHg for 84.3% patients at baseline, and 48% patients at end-of-study. Interestingly, at end-of-study, 6.6% patients still had uncontrolled brachial SBP and controlled central SBP, while 13.6% patients had uncontrolled central SBP and controlled brachial SBP. At both visits, brachial SBP and central SBP showed positive correlation across most drug classes and age groups. At baseline, ACE inhibitors showed better efficacy than other drug classes. At end-of-study, BP control was better with fixed-dose combinations, though free-drug combinations were more frequently prescribed. CONCLUSION: Measurement of CAP along with BBP can be vital in management of hypertension. CTRI REGISTRATION NUMBER: CTRI/2015/10/006302.