The SAGE study: Global observational analysis of glycaemic control, hypoglycaemia and diabetes management in T1DM.

AIMS: To describe glycaemic control and diabetes management in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM), in a real-life global setting. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Study of Adults' GlycEmia (SAGE) was a multinational, multicentre, single visit, noninterventional, cross-sectional study in adult patients with T1DM. Data were collected at a single visit, analysed according to predefined age groups (26-44, 45-64 and ≥65 years) and reported across different regions. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving HbA1c  less than 7.0 % in each age group. Secondary endpoints included incidence of hypoglycaemia, severe hypoglycaemia and severe hyperglycaemia leading to diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) and therapeutic management of T1DM. RESULTS: Of 3903 included participants, 3858 (98.8%) were eligible for the study. Overall, 24.3% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 22.9-25.6) of participants achieved the glycaemic target of HbA1c  less than 7.0 %, with more participants achieving this target in the 26-44 years group (27.6% [95% CI: 25.5-29.8]). Target achievement was highest in Eastern and Western Europe, and lowest in the Middle East. The incidence of hypoglycaemia and of severe hyperglycaemia leading to DKA tended to decrease with age, and varied across regions. Age and regional differences were observed in therapeutic management, including types of device/insulin usage, frequency of insulin dose adjustment and technology usage. CONCLUSIONS: Glycaemic control remains poor in adults with T1DM globally. Several areas of treatment may be optimised to improve outcomes, including supporting patient self-management of insulin therapy, increasing use of technologies such as CGM, and greater provision of healthcare support.

Glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia risk with insulin glargine 300 U/mL and insulin degludec 100 U/mL in older participants in the BRIGHT trial.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus insulin degludec 100 U/mL (IDeg-100) in predefined (

Patient-reported outcomes in adults with type 1 diabetes in global real-world clinical practice: The SAGE study.

AIMS: To conduct a secondary analysis of the SAGE study to evaluate the association between glycaemic control and patient-reported outcomes (PROs), in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1DM) across different age groups and regions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SAGE was a multinational, cross-sectional, observational study in adults with T1DM. Data were collected at a single visit, analysed according to predefined age groups (26-44, 45-64, and ≥65 years), and reported across different regions. PRO questionnaires were applied to assess hypoglycaemia fear (Hypoglycemia Fear Survey-II), diabetes-related distress (Problem Areas In Diabetes questionnaire), insulin treatment satisfaction (Insulin Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire), and diabetes-specific quality of life (QoL; Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of Life). Multivariable analysis was performed to evaluate the relationship between glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) target achievement (<7% and individualised targets) with PRO scores. RESULTS: The PRO scores showed relatively low levels of diabetes-related emotional distress and fear of hypoglycaemia, moderate to high treatment satisfaction, and low diabetes-related impact on QoL. Results were generally comparable across age groups with some regional variability. Achievement of the HbA1c <7% target was associated with less worry about hypoglycaemia, lower diabetes-related emotional distress, higher insulin treatment satisfaction, and higher QoL. Achievement of individualised HbA1c targets was associated with lower diabetes-related emotional distress and higher insulin treatment satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Better glycaemic control was most closely associated with low emotional distress due to diabetes and high patient-reported insulin treatment satisfaction.

Hypoglycaemia risk with insulin glargine 300 U/mL compared with glargine 100 U/mL across different baseline fasting C-peptide levels in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes: A post hoc analysis of the EDITION 3 trial.

The relationship between baseline fasting C-peptide (FCP) and glucose control was examined in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral antihyperglycaemic drugs commencing basal insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) or 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in the absence of sulfonylurea/glinides. Participants with FCP measurement from the EDITION 3 trial (n = 867) were stratified according to baseline FCP (≤0.40, >0.40-1.20, >1.20 nmol/L); 11.0%, 70.9% and 18.1% contributed to each group. Glycaemic control, body weight, insulin dose and hypoglycaemia were determined at 26 weeks. Glycaemic control (HbA1c, FPG) at 26 weeks was similar in each FCP group between insulins. However, end-of-study insulin dose was greater with higher FCP for both insulins. More people with lower baseline FCP experienced hypoglycaemia with both insulins, but with numerically lower incidence for Gla-300 versus Gla-100 across all FCP groups for all definitions (time periods and levels) of hypoglycaemia. This suggests that Gla-300 might be particularly advantageous for people who are at higher risk of hypoglycaemia.

Similar glycaemic control and less hypoglycaemia during active titration after insulin initiation with glargine 300 units/mL and degludec 100 units/mL: A subanalysis of the BRIGHT study.

AIM: To further investigate glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia in BRIGHT, focusing on the titration period. MATERIALS AND METHODS: BRIGHT was a multicentre, open-label, randomized, active-controlled, two-arm, parallel-group, 24-week study in insulin-naïve patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes initiated on glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) (N = 466) or degludec (IDeg-100) (N = 463). Predefined efficacy and safety outcomes were investigated during the initial 12-week titration period. In addition, patients' characteristics and clinical outcomes were assessed descriptively, stratified by confirmed (≤3.9 mmol/L) hypoglycaemia incidence during the initial titration period. RESULTS: At week 12, HbA1c was comparable between Gla-300 (7.32%) and IDeg-100 (7.23%), with similar least squares (LS) mean reductions from baseline (-1.37% and - 1.39%, respectively; LS mean difference of 0.02; 95% confidence interval: -0.08 to 0.12). Patients who experienced hypoglycaemia during the initial titration period had numerically greater HbA1c reductions by week 12 than patients who did not (-1.46% vs. -1.28%), and higher incidence of anytime (24 hours; 73.3% vs. 35.7%) and nocturnal (00:00-06:00 hours; 30.0% vs. 11.9%) hypoglycaemia between weeks 13-24. CONCLUSIONS: The use of Gla-300 resulted in similar glycaemic control as IDeg-100 during the initial 12-week titration period of the BRIGHT study, when less anytime (24 hours) hypoglycaemia with Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 has been reported. Experiencing hypoglycaemia shortly after initiating Gla-300 or IDeg-100 may be associated with hypoglycaemia incidence in the longer term, potentially impacting glycaemic management.

Differential glycaemic control with basal insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus degludec 100 U/mL according to kidney function in type 2 diabetes: A subanalysis from the BRIGHT trial.

AIMS: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) challenges diabetes management and is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. We examined whether clinical outcomes with insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and insulin degludec 100 U/mL (IDeg-100) are affected by renal function in a prespecified subgroup analysis from the BRIGHT trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: BRIGHT (NCT02738151) was a multicentre, open-label, randomized, active-controlled, two-arm, parallel-group, 24-week study in insulin-naïve uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D). Participants were randomized 1:1 to evening Gla-300 (n = 466) or IDeg-100 (n = 463) and stratified based on baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) for this analysis. RESULTS: Heterogeneity of treatment effect across renal function subgroups was observed (P = .02), reflecting a greater mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction from baseline to week 24 with Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 in the eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 subgroup (least squares mean difference: -0.43% [95% confidence interval: -0.74% to -0.12%]), while there were no differences in hypoglycaemia incidence or rates over 24 weeks in that subgroup. HbA1c reductions were similar between treatments in the other eGFR subgroups. However, heterogeneity was observed for annualized rates of anytime (24 hours) or nocturnal (00:00-05:59 hours) confirmed hypoglycaemia (≤70 mg/dL [≤3.9 mmol/L]) over 24 weeks showing less hypoglycaemia with Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 in the ≥90 mL/min/1.73 m2 . CONCLUSIONS: Kidney function seems to affect the glucose-lowering effects of Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 in insulin-naïve T2D. Greater HbA1c reductions with Gla-300 without increase in hypoglycaemia risk, were observed in patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 .

Nearly a Century of Insulin at Sanofi: Looking Back Over the Decades of Production and Development.

Almost a century ago, the first insulin was produced by Banting, Best, MacLeod and Collip in Toronto, thereby enabling life-saving treatment for people with diabetes. Since then, there have been many advancements in insulin production and development of new insulin analogues. In this article, we reflect on the rich heritage of Sanofi and its predecessor, Hoechst, in insulin production and development, from being one of the first companies to produce insulin in Europe in 1923, to modern-day insulin analogues and integrated care solutions at present-day Sanofi.

Comparable glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia in adults with type 2 diabetes after initiating insulin glargine 300 units/mL or insulin degludec: The DELIVER Naïve D real-world study.

AIM: To compare glycaemic control, hypoglycaemia and treatment discontinuation of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) and insulin degludec (IDeg) in a real-world study of insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: DELIVER Naive D was a retrospective observational study that used electronic medical record data from the IBM Watson Health Explorys database. Insulin-naïve adults with T2D who started Gla-300 or IDeg between March 2015 and September 2017 were identified. Patients were active in the system for ≥12 months before and ≥6 months after starting Gla-300 or IDeg and had HbA1c measurements during 6-month baseline and 3- to 6-month follow-up. Outcomes were compared among 1:1 propensity score-matched cohorts. RESULTS: In the matched cohorts (n = 638 each), the mean age was 59 years, approximately 53% were male, and mean HbA1c was 9.67% (82 mmol/mol). Mean (SD) HbA1c decreases were comparable in the Gla-300 and IDeg cohorts (-1.67% [2.22] and -1.58% [2.20]; P = 0.51), as were HbA1c target attainment [<7% (53 mmol/mol): 23.8% and 27.4%; P = 0.20; <8% (64 mmol/mol): 55.0% and 57.1%; P = 0.63] and treatment discontinuation (29.2% and 32.6%; P = 0.14). Overall and inpatient/emergency department-associated hypoglycaemia incidences and event rates were similar in both cohorts using fixed 6-month or variable on-treatment follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Among real-world insulin-naïve adults with T2D, initiation of Gla-300 or IDeg resulted in comparable improvements in glycaemic control and similar rates of hypoglycaemia. These real-world data complement and confirm a randomized trial and other real-world studies.

Clinical outcomes in real-world patients with type 2 diabetes switching from first- to second-generation basal insulin analogues: Comparative effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec in the DELIVER D+ cohort study.

AIMS: To compare clinical outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) switching from insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100) or insulin detemir (IDet) to insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) or insulin degludec (IDeg). MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, observational study of electronic medical records for Gla-300/IDeg adult switchers (March 1, 2015 to January 31, 2017) with active records for 12-month baseline (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] used a 6-month baseline period) and 6-month follow-up periods. Gla-300 and IDeg switchers were propensity score-matched using baseline demographic and clinical characteristics. Outcomes were HbA1c change and goal attainment (among patients with HbA1c captured at follow-up), and hypoglycaemia with fixed follow-up (intention-to-treat [ITT]; 6 months) and variable follow-up (on-treatment [OT]; to discontinuation or 6 months). RESULTS: Each matched cohort comprised 1592 patients. The mean decrease in HbA1c and HbA1c goal (<7.0% [53 mmol/mol] and <8.0% [64 mmol/mol]) attainment rates were similar for Gla-300 (n = 742) and IDeg (n = 727) switchers. Using fixed follow-up (ITT method), hypoglycaemia incidence decreased significantly from baseline with Gla-300 (all hypoglycaemia: 15.6% to 12.7%; P = .006; hypoglycaemia associated with inpatient/emergency department [ED] encounter: 5.3% to 3.5%; P = .007), but not with IDeg. After adjusting for baseline hypoglycaemia, no significant differences in hypoglycaemia incidence and event rate were found at follow-up (ITT) for Gla-300 vs IDeg. Using variable follow-up (OT), hypoglycaemia incidence was similar in both groups, but Gla-300 switchers had a lower inpatient/ED hypoglycaemia event rate at follow-up (adjusted rate ratio 0.56; P = .016). CONCLUSIONS: In a real-world setting, switching from Gla-100 or IDet to Gla-300 or IDeg was associated with similar improvements in glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia in adult patients with T2D.

Correction to: InRange: Comparison of the Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analogues Glargine 300 U/mL and Degludec 100 U/mL in Persons with Type 1 Diabetes Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Study Design.

In the original publication, the timing of baseline CGM assessment was incorrectly stated.

Correction to: InRange: Comparison of the Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analogues Glargine 300 U/mL and Degludec 100 U/mL in Persons with Type 1 Diabetes Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Study Design.

In the original publication, the timing of baseline CGM assessment was incorrectly stated in the text in two instances; it is correct in Fig. 1.

InRange: Comparison of the Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analogues Glargine 300 U/mL and Degludec 100 U/mL in Persons with Type 1 Diabetes Using Continuous Glucose Monitoring-Study Design.

INTRODUCTION: Suboptimal glycaemic control among people with type 1 diabetes (T1D) is known to lead to long-term micro- and macrovascular complications and, unfortunately, it is still prevalent even in the most affluent societies. Although glycated haemoglobin monitoring is considered to be the gold standard for assessing glycaemic control, such monitoring is unable to reliably measure acute glycaemic excursions. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glucose control and reduce the incidence of hypoglycaemia, and also allow a more complete assessment of overall glycaemic control and hyper- and hypoglycaemic excursions. The use of CGM has led to time-in-range, which is the time that a patient is within the glycaemic range of 70 to 180 mg/dL, to be adopted as a treatment target. To date, only limited data comparing the second-generation insulins glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and degludec 100 U/mL (IDeg-100) in people with T1D are available, and there is no CGM literature on comparisons of the use of CGM results to assess primary, secondary and tertiary endpoints. The aim of the InRange study was to address this unmet need. METHODS: InRange is a multicentre, randomised, active-controlled, parallel-group, 12-week, open-label, phase 4, comparative study. Adults with T1D will be randomised to receive once-daily Gla-300 or IDeg-100 by subcutaneous injection in the morning. Following an 8-week titration period, CGM data will be collected over 20 consecutive days. PLANNED OUTCOMES: The primary objective is to demonstrate that Gla-300 is noninferior to IDeg-100 in terms of glycaemic control [time-in-range ≥ 70 to ≤ 180 mg/dL (≥ 3.9 to ≤ 10 mmol/L)] and variability, as assessed using CGM, in adults with T1D. The results are expected to help confirm the utility of CGM in clinical practice in this population and provide insight into its application as an outcome measure in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT04075513.

Real-world outcomes of treatment with insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus standard-of-care in people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Objective: To compare real-world outcomes with newer (insulin glargine 300 U/mL; Gla-300) versus standard of care (SoC) basal insulins (BIs) in the REACH (insulin-naïve; NCT02967224) and REGAIN (basal insulin-treated; NCT02967211) studies in participants with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in Europe and Brazil.Methods: In these open-label, parallel-group, pragmatic studies, patients (HbA1c > 7.0%) were randomized to Gla-300 or SoC BI for a 6-month treatment period (to demonstrate non-inferiority of Gla-300 vs SoC BIs for HbA1c change [non-inferiority margin 0.3%]) and a 6-month extension period (continuing with their assigned treatment). Insulin titration/other medication changes were at investigator/patient discretion post-randomization.Results: Overall, 703 patients were randomized to treatment in REACH (Gla-300, n = 352; SoC, n = 351) and 609 (Gla-300, n = 305, SoC, n = 304) in REGAIN. The primary outcome, non-inferiority of Gla-300 versus SoC for HbA1c change from baseline to month 6, was met in REACH (least squares [LS] mean difference 0.12% [95% CI -0.046 to 0.281]) but not REGAIN (LS mean difference 0.17% [0.015-0.329]); no between-treatment difference in HbA1c change was shown after 12 months in either study. BI dose increased minimally from baseline to 12 months in REACH (Gla-300, +0.17 U/kg; SoC, +0.15 U/kg) and REGAIN (Gla-300, +0.11 U/kg; SoC, +0.07 U/kg). Hypoglycemia incidence was low and similar between treatment arms in both studies.Conclusions: In both REACH and REGAIN, no differences in glycemic control or hypoglycemia outcomes with Gla-300 versus SoC BIs were seen over 12 months. However, the suboptimal insulin titration in REACH and REGAIN limits comparisons of outcomes between treatment arms and suggests that more titration instruction/support may be required for patients to fully derive the benefits from newer basal insulin formulations.

Predictive Modeling of Hypoglycemia Risk with Basal Insulin Use in Type 2 Diabetes: Use of Machine Learning in the LIGHTNING Study.

INTRODUCTION: Hypoglycemia remains a global burden and a limiting factor in the glycemic management of people with diabetes using basal insulins or oral antihyperglycemic drugs. Hypoglycemia data gleaned from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have limited generalizability, as the strict RCT methodology and inclusion criteria do not fully reflect the real-world clinical picture. Therefore, real-world evidence, gathered from sources including electronic health records (EHR), is increasingly recognized as an important adjunct to RCTs. AIMS AND METHODS: The LIGHTNING study applied advanced analytical methods, including machine learning (ML), to EHR data. The study aimed to predict hypoglycemic event rates in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) receiving different basal insulin treatments to identify potential subgroups of patients who are at lower risk of hypoglycemia when treated with one basal insulin compared with another and to predict hypoglycemia-related cost savings in these subgroups. Here we provide an overview of the objectives, study design and methods, and validation approaches used in the LIGHTNING study. CONCLUSION: It is hoped that results of the LIGHTNING study will help facilitate real-world clinical decision-making in addition to providing a clinically relevant predictive model of hypoglycemia risk. FUNDING: Sanofi.

Rates of Hypoglycemia Predicted in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes on Insulin Glargine 300 U/ml Versus First- and Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analogs: The Real-World LIGHTNING Study.

INTRODUCTION: The LIGHTNING study applied conventional and advanced analytic approaches to model, predict, and compare hypoglycemia rates of people with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) on insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) with those on first-generation (insulin glargine 100 U/ml [Gla-100]; insulin detemir [IDet]) or second-generation (insulin degludec [IDeg]) basal-insulin (BI) analogs, utilizing a large real-world database. METHODS: Data were collected between 1 January 2007 and 31 March 2017 from the Optum Humedica US electronic health records [EHR] database. Patient-treatments, the period during which a patient used a specific BI, were analyzed for patients who switched from a prior BI or those who newly initiated BI therapy. Data were analyzed using two approaches: propensity score matching (PSM) and a predictive modeling approach using machine learning. RESULTS: A total of 831,456 patients with T2DM receiving BI were included from the EHR data set. Following selection, 198,198 patient-treatments were available for predictive modeling. The analysis showed that rates of severe hypoglycemia (using a modified definition) were approximately 50% lower with Gla-300 than with Gla-100 or IDet in insulin-naïve individuals, and 30% lower versus IDet in BI switchers (all p < 0.05). Similar rates of severe hypoglycemia were predicted for Gla-300 and IDeg, regardless of prior insulin experience. Similar results to those observed in the overall cohorts were seen in analyses across subgroups at a particularly high risk of hypoglycemia. PSM (performed on 157,573 patient-treatments) revealed comparable reductions in HbA1c with Gla-300 versus first- and second-generation BI analogs, alongside lower rates of severe hypoglycemia with Gla-300 versus first-generation BI analogs (p < 0.05) and similar rates versus IDeg in insulin-naïve and BI-switcher cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: Based on real-world data, predicted rates of severe hypoglycemia with Gla-300 tended to be lower versus first-generation BI analogs and similar versus IDeg in a wide spectrum of patients with T2DM. FUNDING: Sanofi, Paris, France.

Postpartum adiponectin concentration, insulin resistance and metabolic abnormalities among women with pregnancy-induced disturbances.

The authors compared postpartum adiponectin levels among women with prior pregnancy-induced disturbances and assessed their association with homeostasis model assessment for insulin resistance (HOMA-IR), the metabolic syndrome (MS), and the Framingham risk score (FRS). Women delivering in 1998 through 2001 and who had gestational diabetes mellitus (n=22), gestational hypertension (n=32), or preeclampsia (n=34) were examined 1 to 2 years after delivery and were grouped-matched to controls (n=29) by age and prepregnancy body mass index. HOMA-IR was increased, adiponectin values were decreased, and there was a higher MS prevalence in women with prior gestational diabetes mellitus (all P<.05). Adiponectin levels were inversely related to HOMA-IR (r=-0.45; P<.0001) and FRS (r=-0.25; P=.007), and a significant trend for decreasing adiponectin values with increased number of MS components was noted (P trend <.0001). Adiponectin concentration remained a significant correlate of FRS and MS irrespective of pregnancy history; a concentration <10.5 microg/mL provided the optimal cutoff to distinguish those with or without MS. Thus, a lower postpartum adiponectin concentration identifies women at increased cardiovascular risk regardless of pregnancy history.

More Similarities Than Differences Testing Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL Versus Insulin Degludec 100 Units/mL in Insulin-Naive Type 2 Diabetes: The Randomized Head-to-Head BRIGHT Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) versus insulin degludec 100 units/mL (IDeg-100) in this first head-to-head randomized controlled trial. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: BRIGHT (NCT02738151) was a multicenter, open-label, active-controlled, two-arm, parallel-group, 24-week, noninferiority study in insulin-naive patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. Participants were randomized 1:1 to evening dosing with Gla-300 (N = 466) or IDeg-100 (N = 463), titrated to fasting self-monitored plasma glucose of 80-100 mg/dL. The primary end point was HbA1c change from baseline to week 24. Safety end points included incidence and event rates of hypoglycemia. RESULTS: At week 24, HbA1c improved similarly from baseline values of 8.7% (72 mmol/mol) in the Gla-300 group and 8.6% (70 mmol/mol) in the IDeg-100 group to 7.0% (53 mmol/mol)-least squares mean difference -0.05% (95% CI -0.15 to 0.05) (-0.6 mmol/mol [-1.7 to 0.6])-demonstrating noninferiority of Gla-300 versus IDeg-100 (P < 0.0001). Hypoglycemia incidence and event rates over 24 weeks were comparable with both insulins, whereas during the active titration period (0-12 weeks) the incidence and rate of anytime (24-h) confirmed hypoglycemia (≤70 and <54 mg/dL) were lower with Gla-300. Both insulins were properly titrated and exhibited no specific safety concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Gla-300 and IDeg-100 provided similar glycemic control improvements with relatively low hypoglycemia risk. Hypoglycemia incidence and rates were comparable with both insulins during the full study period but lower in favor of Gla-300 during the titration period. The choice between these longer-acting basal insulins may be determined by factors such as access and cost, alongside clinical considerations.

Degarelix Versus Goserelin Plus Bicalutamide in the Short-Term Relief of Lower Urinary Tract Symptoms in Prostate Cancer Patients: Results of a Pooled Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In patients with prostate cancer (PCa), prostate enlargement may give rise to lower urinary tract symptoms (LUTS); many patients suffer from moderate-to-severe symptoms. We compare the efficacy of degarelix and goserelin plus bicalutamide in improving LUTS in PCa patients. METHODS: Data were pooled from three Phase 3, randomized clinical trials of once-monthly treatment for 12 weeks with degarelix (240/80 mg; n = 289) or goserelin (3.6 mg) plus bicalutamide (50 mg; n = 174) for initial flare protection. LUTS at weeks 4, 8, and 12 were compared to baseline. Clinically relevant LUTS relief was a ≥3-point International Prostate Symptom Score (IPSS) decrease. Adverse events were assessed throughout the trials. RESULTS: Patients receiving degarelix had significantly greater decreases in IPSS vs. goserelin at week 12 (adjusted difference: -1.24; 95% CI -2.33 to -0.14, P = 0.03). Clinically relevant LUTS relief with degarelix was especially pronounced in patients with moderate-to-severe LUTS (baseline IPSS ≥13) (odds ratio; OR 2.31; 95% CI 1.19-4.47, P = 0.01) and advanced PCa (OR 2.36; 95% CI 1.10-5.04, P = 0.03). A twofold higher OR for early (week 4) LUTS relief was seen with degarelix vs. goserelin (OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.14-3.60, P = 0.02). No difference in total prostate volume or urinary tract infection-related adverse events (2%) was seen between treatment groups. CONCLUSION: An early, significant and clinically more pronounced improvement of LUTS, especially in patients with moderate-to-severe LUTS or advanced PCa, was seen with degarelix vs. goserelin plus bicalutamide.

Quantifying observational evidence for risk of fatal and nonfatal cardiovascular disease following androgen deprivation therapy for prostate cancer: a meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Whether androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for men with prostate cancer (PCa) increases the risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) remains controversial. Pooled analyses using data from randomised controlled trials suggest no increased risk of fatal CVD following ADT, but no pooled analyses exist for observational studies. OBJECTIVE: To perform a meta-analysis using observational data on ADT and risk of CVD events in men with PCa. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed and Embase were searched using predefined inclusion criteria to perform meta-analyses on associations between types of ADT and nonfatal and fatal CVD outcomes using information from observational studies. Random effects meta-analyses were conducted to estimate relative risks (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total of eight observational studies were identified studying at least one type of ADT and a nonfatal or fatal CVD outcome. The RR for risk of any type of nonfatal CVD was 1.38 (95% CI, 1.29-1.48) for men with PCa on gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, compared with men not treated with ADT. When analysing nonfatal ischemic heart disease only, the RR was 1.39 (95% CI, 1.26-1.54). The associations between GnRH agonists and nonfatal or fatal myocardial infarction or stroke were even stronger: RR: 1.57 (95% CI, 1.26-1.94) and RR: 1.51 (95% CI, 1.24-1.84), respectively. The results for other types of ADT in relation to the risk of any nonfatal CVD were RR: 1.44 (95% CI, 1.28-1.62) for orchiectomy and RR: 1.21 (95% CI, 1.07-1.367) for antiandrogens. CONCLUSIONS: Observational data show a consistent positive association between ADT and the risk of CVD. This finding supports the need for future randomised trials of PCa patients that include older patients and men with multiple comorbidities to better reflect the general population. PATIENT SUMMARY: We investigated all the available data from observational studies on hormonal treatment for prostate cancer and its possible cardiovascular adverse effects. We found consistent evidence that this treatment may increase the risk of cardiovascular disease.

Heterogeneous effect of gestational weight gain on birth weight: quantile regression analysis from a population-based screening.

PURPOSE: Classical regression models might give an incomplete picture of the associations between predictors and outcomes. We investigated associations between gestational weight gain (GWG) and birth weight along the entire birth weight distribution with quantile regression and estimated effects of hypothetical prevention strategies. METHODS: The GWG-birth weight association was analyzed using quantile and classical regression models on data from a population-based gestational diabetes screening (n = 4760) at the Szent Imre Teaching Hospital in Budapest, Hungary (2002-2005). Birth weight distributions were modeled based on hypothetical GWG changes. RESULTS: At a body mass index of 20 kg/m(2), a 1-kg difference in GWG was associated with a 14.2 g (95% confidence interval, 10.0-20.9) higher birth weight at the fifth percentile of the birth weight distribution and a 29.0 g (21.3-35.6) higher birth weight at the 95th percentile. The coefficient from linear regression was 20.7 (17.5-24.0). Estimates differed modestly between the two regressions at a body mass index of 30 kg/m(2). A population-wide 2-kg decrease in GWG would rather affect the risk of macrosomia (-1.8%) than that of low birth weight (+0.4%). In contrast, a 3-kg decrease in GWG among overweight and obese women would lower macrosomia more modestly (-0.8%). CONCLUSIONS: A population-wide lowering of GWG would lead to greater improvements in the right tail of the birth weight distribution.