Does a patient-managed insulin intensification strategy with insulin glargine and insulin glulisine provide similar glycemic control as a physician-managed strategy? Results of the START (Self-Titration With Apidra to Reach Target) Study: a randomized noninferiority trial.

OBJECTIVE Diabetes self-management is universally regarded as a foundation of diabetes care. We determined whether comparable glycemic control could be achieved by self-titration versus physician titration of a once-daily bolus insulin dose in patients with type 2 diabetes who are unable to achieve optimal glycemia control with a basal insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients with type 2 diabetes, an HbA1c level >7% (53 mmol/mol), and either nocturnal hypoglycemia episodes or an insufficient basal insulin glargine level (with or without oral agents) to achieve a fasting plasma glucose level ≤6 mmol/L (108 mg/dL) were studied. Participants all had bolus insulin glulisine added at breakfast and were allocated to either algorithm-guided patient self-titration or physician titration. The primary outcome was an HbA1c level ≤7% (53 mmol/mol) without severe hypoglycemia. RESULTS After a mean (SD) follow-up of 159.4 days (36.2 days), 28.4% of participants in the self-titration arm vs. 21.2% in the physician titration arm achieved an HbA1c level of ≤7% (53 mmol/mol) without severe hypoglycemia (between-group absolute difference 7.2%; 95% CI -3.2 to 17.7). The lower end of this 95% confidence interval was within the predetermined noninferiority boundary of -5% (P noninferiority = 0.011). CONCLUSIONS In stable patients with type 2 diabetes who are receiving doses of basal insulin glargine who require bolus insulin, a simple bolus insulin patient-managed titration algorithm is as effective as a physician-managed algorithm.

A practice-based research network focused on comparative effectiveness research in type 2 diabetes management.

PURPOSE: To establish a real-world research platform focused on comparative effectiveness research and health care decision making in diabetes care in order to obtain a detailed understanding of individualized patient management in primary care. METHODS: Diabetes FORWARD (Foundation of Real-World Assessment and Research in Diabetes) is a North American research platform being organized to conduct longitudinal, noninterventional investigations of an anticipated 10,000 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Recruitment will be stratified to reflect typical (primarily primary care) clinical T2DM populations. Streamlined data collection relying on electronic medical records (retrospective) and periodic surveys (prospective) will reduce the burden of study participation and, therefore, enhance enrollment by busy primary care and endocrinology practices. Physician data will include baseline demographic and practice information. Patient data will include demographics, T2DM characteristics and treatment, resource utilization information, and patient-reported outcomes. Responses can be tracked within the observation window in near-real time, allowing immediate, noninterventional reaction at the point of nonresponse. EXPECTED OUTCOMES: Diabetes FORWARD is expected to provide important real-world data describing how actual clinical T2DM management differs across sites, settings, and clinicians, and its impact on glycemic control, treatment adherence and persistence, and clinical outcomes. These data will also help to identify the effect of diabetes management on the onset and progression of retinopathy, neuropathy, nephropathy, and cardiovascular disease at 6-month intervals. CONCLUSION: To our knowledge, Diabetes FORWARD is the first diabetes-focused, practice-based research network in the United States and Canada. The current study will provide robust data that should reflect typical management of T2DM in clinical practice in North America.

Comparison of azithromycin and metronidazole in a quadruple-therapy regimen for Helicobacter pylori eradication in dyspepsia.

BACKGROUND/AIM: Helicobacter pylori (H pylori) plays an important role in the pathogenesis of chronic gastritis, peptic ulcer disease, and gastric neoplasms . Therefore, it is necessary to select an effective regimen for H pylori eradication . The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of two quadruple-therapy regimens-one with azithromycin and the other with metronidazole-for H pylori eradication in patients with dyspepsia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this double-blind randomized clinical trial conducted in Rasoule-Akram Hospital in 2006, we included 60 patients (aged 15-70 years) who had dyspepsia and H pylori infection as diagnosed by upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and rapid urease test. Patients were randomly assigned to receive a quadruple-therapy regimen for 2 weeks: 1) the MAO-B group (n = 30) received metronidazole 500 mg b.i.d, amoxicillin 1g b.i.d, omeprazole 20 mg b.i.d, and bismuth 240 mg b.i.d and 2) the AAO-B group (n = 30) received azithromycin 500 mg once daily for 1 week and amoxicillin 1g b.i.d, omeprazole 20 mg b.i.d, and bismuth 240 mg b.i.d for 2 weeks). H pylori eradication was assessed by the rapid urease test (RUT) 2 months after the cessation of treatment . RESULTS: H pylori was eradicated in 68% and 69% of patients in the MAO-B and AAO-B groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in H pylori eradication rates between the two groups (P = 0.939). CONCLUSION: No significant difference exists between the two quadruple-therapy regimens that were tested.

Comparison of topical paromomycin sulfate (twice/day) with intralesional meglumine antimoniate for the treatment of cutaneous leishmaniasis caused by L. major.

This is an open study to compare the cure rate of cutaneous leishmaniasis caused by L. major and treated with either paromomycin sulfate or intralesional injection of meglumine antimoniate. Sixty parasitologically proven cases with 1-3 lesions were included and divided randomly into two equal groups; one group received 1 ml of meglumine antimonate intradermally every other day for 20 days, the other group received the ointment containing 15% parmomycin sulfate in urea twice daily for 20 days. The patients were clinically evaluated at 1 and 6 weeks after treatment was completed. The results of clinical evaluation at 1 week after treatment completed showed a cure rate of 18 out of 27 (66%) in the meglumine antimonate injected group and 20 out of 29 (68%) in the paromomycin sulfate treated group. The chi square test was used to compare the cure rate between the two groups and showed no significant difference (p = 0.85).