RESUMEN
Background@#The high prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the Philippines has burdened the health care system. Therefore, we compared the standard of care Insulin 30/70 + Insulin Glulisine (Arm B) to a traditional insulin regimen NPH Insulin + Regular Insulin (Arm A) to test the concept that both insulin regimens provide comparable effectiveness and safety in real-world practice.@*Methods @#This is a ‘proof-of-concept,’ prospective, randomized, open label pragmatic study of 40 consecutive Filipino T2DM patients from October 2015 to June 2016. The primary endpoint was a reduction in HbA1c at 12 weeks. The secondary endpoints were changes in Fasting Plasma Glucose (FPG), Post Prandial Glucose (PPG), Capillary Blood Sugar (CBS), weight and insulin dose at 12 weeks. ANCOVA and Fisher’s exact tests were used.@*Results @#Patients in treatment arm A showed comparable glycemic control to arm B as measured by reductions in HbA1c (2.89% vs. 2.67%; P = 0.657), FPG (65.94 vs. 46.71 mg/dl; P = 0.57), PPG (76.49 vs. 86.96 mg/dl; P = 0.271) and CBS (115.15 vs. 145.95 mg/dl; P = 0.420). Both treatment arms reported similar weight gain (1.92 vs. 1.22 kg), experienced similar incidence of hypoglycemia (7 vs. 6 patients) and adverse events (AE) (8 vs. 8 patients).@*Conclusion @#The traditional combination of NPH Insulin + Regular Insulin offers comparable glycemic control and tolerance as the standard of care without any new safety signals in the Filipino T2DM population. With a lower price, it can be one of the strategies to reduce the fi nancial burden of antidiabetic treatment.
Asunto(s)
Insulina Isófana , Insulina , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2RESUMEN
Acne vulgaris is one of the most common chronic inflammatory skin disorders among adolescents and young adults. It is associated with substantial morbidity and, rarely, with mortality. The exact worldwide incidence and prevalence are currently unknown. Current challenges involve improving understanding of the underlying pathophysiology of acne vulgaris and developing a practical treatment consensus. Expert panel discussions were held in 2013 and 2014 among a group of scientists and clinicians from the Omani and United Arab Emirate Dermatology Societies to ascertain the current optimal management of acne vulgaris, identify clinically relevant end-points and construct suitable methodology for future clinical trial designs. This article reviews the discussions of these sessions and recent literature on this topic