Reduced risk of hypoglycemia with once-daily glargine versus twice-daily NPH and number needed to harm with NPH to demonstrate the risk of one additional hypoglycemic event in type 2 diabetes: Evidence from a long-term controlled trial.

AIMS: This analysis evaluated HbA1c-adjusted hypoglycemia risk with glargine versus neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) over a 5-year study in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Clinical significance was assessed using number needed to harm (NNH) to demonstrate the risk of one additional patient experiencing at least one hypoglycemic event. METHODS: Individual patient-level data for symptomatic documented hypoglycemia and HbA1c values from a 5-year randomized study comparing once-daily glargine (n=513) with twice-daily NPH (n=504) were analyzed. Symptomatic hypoglycemia was categorized according to concurrent self-monitoring blood glucose levels and need for assistance. Hypoglycemic events per patient-year as a function of HbA1c were fitted by negative binomial regression using treatment and HbA1c at endpoint as independent variables. An estimate of NNH was derived from logistic regression models. RESULTS: The cumulative number of symptomatic hypoglycemia events was consistently lower with glargine compared with NPH over 5years. Compared with twice-daily NPH, once-daily glargine treatment resulted in significantly lower adjusted odds ratios (OR) for all daytime hypoglycemia (OR 0.74; p=0.030) and any severe event (OR 0.64; p=0.035), representing a 26% and 36% reduction in the odds of daytime and severe hypoglycemia, respectively. Our model predicts that, if 25 patients were treated with NPH instead of glargine, then one additional patient would experience at least one severe hypoglycemic event. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis of long-term insulin treatment confirms findings from short-term studies and demonstrates that glargine provides sustained, clinically meaningful reductions in risk of hypoglycemia compared with NPH in patients with T2DM.

Quality assurance in non-interventional studies.

Nowadays, drug research and surveillance after authorisation becomes more and more important for several reasons. Non-interventional studies (NIS) investigate various aspects of drug use including efficacy and safety under real life conditions. Such kind of health services research should be on a high scientific, methodological and organisational level. Therefore accompanying measures to improve or to keep the quality are highly recommended. The aim of quality management is: first to avoid bias of results by using an appropriate study design and an adequate data analysis, second to assure authenticity, completeness and validity of the data and third to identify and resolve deficiencies at an early stage. Basic principles are laid down in corresponding guidelines and recommendations of authorities, institutes and societies. Various guidelines for good epidemiological practice (GEP) were published by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and international and regional societies for epidemiology. In addition in Germany the Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices (BfArM) together with the Paul Ehrlich Institute (PEI) and the German Association of Research-Based Pharmaceutical Companies (VFA) have published respectively recommendations dealing with quality aspects of non-interventional observational studies. Key points are the advanced publishing of information about the project, developing of a study plan/protocol containing the scientific objectives, a sample size justification and a description of the planned analyses and the publishing of a summary of the results timely after completion of the study. The quality of the data can be improved by using standardized case report forms (CRF) and the CRF should be reviewed and tested before start of study by some participants. A source data verification (SDV) should be performed in randomly selected centres - in between 2% and 5% of the centres depending on the number of participating centres. Before start of statistical analysis a statistical analysis plan (SAP) should be created. The use of standardized tables and figures is highly recommended. The basis of the report writing should be the STROBE-statement "Strengthening the Reporting of Observational studies in Epidemiology Initiative" containing a checklist of 22 points to be covered in the report. The development of own standard operating procedures (SOP) describing the processes during planning, conduct and evaluation of a non-interventional study as well as the quality management and the regular training of all involved people is also highly recommended. All accompanying measures to improve or to keep the quality of the NIS should not violate the concept of non-intervention.

Pharmacokinetics of articaine hydrochloride in tumescent local anesthesia for liposuction.

The aim of the investigation was to assess the pharmacokinetic characteristics and safety of articaine HCl used in tumescent local anesthesia for liposuction. Maximum plasma concentrations of articaine HCl were observed from 136 to 264 ng/mL, on average, from 1.2 to 4.3 hours after the start of infiltration, depending on the area of liposuction. The average extent of absorption ranged from 827 to 2203 ng*h/mL. Average maximum plasma concentrations of articainic acid ranged from 1719 to 7292 ng/mL. The high articainic acid concentrations at 1 hour after the start of infiltration indicate that articaine HCl was hydrolyzed rapidly by esterases in tissue and plasma. Although up to 38.2 mg/kg body weight articaine HCl was applied, no cardiac side effects or symptoms of central nervous intoxication occurred. Articaine HCl provided a safe and sufficient analgesia for tumescent liposuction.