Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 5 de 5
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Patient ; 11(4): 377-389, 2018 08.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29322308

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Insulin analog glargine (GLA) has been available as one of the therapeutic options for patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus to enhance glycemic control. Studies have shown that a decrease in the frequency of hypoglycemic episodes improves the quality of life (QoL) of diabetic patients. However, there are appreciable acquisition cost differences between different insulins. Consequently, there is a need to assess their impact on QoL to provide future guidance to health authorities. METHOD: A systematic review of multiple databases including Medline, LILACS, Cochrane, and EMBASE databases with several combinations of agreed terms involving randomized controlled trials and cohorts, as well as manual searches and gray literature, was undertaken. The primary outcome measure was a change in QoL. The quality of the studies and the risk of bias was also assessed. RESULTS: Eight studies were eventually included in the systematic review out of 634 publications. Eight different QoL instruments were used (two generic, two mixed, and four specific), in which the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) was the most used. The systematic review did not consistently show any significant difference overall in QoL scores, whether as part of subsets or combined into a single score, with the use of GLA versus neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin. Only in patient satisfaction measured by DTSQ was a better result consistently seen with GLA versus NPH insulin, but not using the Well-being Inquiry for Diabetics (WED) scale. However, none of the cohort studies scored a maximum on the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for quality, and they generally were of moderate quality with bias in the studies. CONCLUSION: There was no consistent difference in QoL or patient-reported outcomes when the findings from the eight studies were collated. In view of this, we believe the current price differential between GLA and NPH insulin in Brazil cannot be justified by these findings.


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Insulina Glargina/uso terapêutico , Insulina Isófana/uso terapêutico , Qualidade de Vida , Glicemia , Brasil , Análise Custo-Benefício , Hemoglobinas Glicadas , Humanos , Hipoglicemia/induzido quimicamente , Hipoglicemiantes/efeitos adversos , Hipoglicemiantes/economia , Insulina Glargina/efeitos adversos , Insulina Glargina/economia , Insulina Isófana/efeitos adversos , Insulina Isófana/economia , Satisfação do Paciente
2.
J Comp Eff Res ; 6(6): 519-527, 2017 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28960085

RESUMO

AIM: Published studies have challenged the cost-effectiveness of insulin glargine versus neutral protamine hagedorn (NPH) insulins in Brazil with limited evidence of increased effectiveness despite considerably higher acquisition costs. However, still a controversy. Consequently, there is a need to address this. MATERIALS & METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of Type I diabetes patients receiving insulin glargine in Brazil following NPH insulin who met the criteria. RESULTS: 580 patients were enrolled. HbA1c varied from 8.80 ± 1.98% in NPH insulin users to 8.54 ± 1.88% after insulin glargine for 6 months, which is not clinically significant. Frequency of glycemic control varied from 22.6% with NPH insulin to 26.2% with insulin glargine. No statistically significant difference was observed between controlled and still uncontrolled groups for all analyzed factors including type and frequency of insulin use and carbohydrate counting. CONCLUSION: Limited differences between NPH insulins and insulin analogs in routine clinical care do not justify an appreciable cost difference.


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/tratamento farmacológico , Hipoglicemiantes/uso terapêutico , Insulina Glargina/uso terapêutico , Adulto , Glicemia/metabolismo , Brasil , Análise Custo-Benefício , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/sangue , Feminino , Hemoglobinas Glicadas/metabolismo , Humanos , Insulina Isófana/uso terapêutico , Estudos Longitudinais , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Retrospectivos , Resultado do Tratamento , Adulto Jovem
3.
Diabetes Ther ; 7(2): 241-58, 2016 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27048292

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: The use of insulin analogs for the treatment of type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) is widespread; however, the therapeutic benefits still require further evaluation given their higher costs. The objective of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of analog insulin glargine compared to recombinant DNA (rDNA) insulin in patients with T1DM in observational studies, building on previous reviews of randomized controlled trials comparing neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin and insulin glargine. METHODS: A systematic review with a meta-analysis was performed. The review included cohort studies and registries available on PubMed, LILACS, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), as well as manual and gray literature searches. The meta-analysis was conducted in Review Manager 5.3 software. The primary outcomes were glycated hemoglobin (Hb1Ac), weight gain, and hypoglycemia. Methodological quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa scale. RESULTS: Out of 796 publications, 11 studies were finally included. The meta-analysis favored insulin glargine in HbA1c outcomes (adult patients) and hypoglycemic episodes (P < 0.05), but without reaching glycemic control (Hb1Ac to approximately 7%). The methodological quality of the studies was moderate, noting that 45% of studies were funded by pharmaceutical companies. CONCLUSION: Given the high heterogeneity of the studies, the discrete value presented by the estimated effect on effectiveness and safety, potential conflicts of interest of the studies, and the appreciable higher cost of insulin glargine, there is still no support for recommending first-line therapy with analogs. The role of analogs in the treatment of T1DM could be better determined by further observational studies of good methodological quality to assess their long-term effectiveness and safety, as well as their cost-effectiveness.

4.
Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol ; 9(5): 739-46, 2016.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26873164

RESUMO

UNLABELLED: Quality of life (QoL) characteristics are important in patients with diabetes mellitus (DM 1 and 2). AIM: Evaluate QoL and DM-associated factors among diabetic patients. METHODS: Patients attending a University Hospital were interviewed about their sociodemographic, clinical and QoL characteristics, with QoL measured via the EQ-5D. Descriptive analysis, correlation, linear regression, univariate and multivariate analysis were performed. RESULTS: 346 patients took part, comprising 67% women, 59% with DM2, and 32% DM1. DM 1 patients had a mean QoL score of 0.7369, with retinopathy, depression, dyslipidemia and a serious hypoglycemic crisis significantly reducing QoL. Patients with DM type 2 had a mean QoL score of 0.6582, with hypertension, neuropathy, depression, cancer and dyslipidemia significantly reducing QoL. Reduced QoL also correlated with a lack of physical exercise. Males with both DM1 and 2 had a better QoL than females. CONCLUSION: Need for better disease monitoring and control combined with effective activities to improve self-care, reduce complications and improve patients' QoL.


Assuntos
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/terapia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/terapia , Qualidade de Vida , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Brasil/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/epidemiologia , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiologia , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA