Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 4 de 4
Filtrar
Más filtros










Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
2.
Nephrol Dial Transplant ; 37(8): 1461-1471, 2022 07 26.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34383954

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Verinurad is a human uric acid (UA) transporter (URAT1) inhibitor known to decrease serum UA (sUA) levels and that may reduce albuminuria. In a Phase 2a study (NCT03118739), treatment with verinurad + febuxostat lowered urine albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) at 12 weeks by 39% (90% confidence interval 4-62%) among patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus, hyperuricaemia and albuminuria. The Phase 2b, randomized, placebo-controlled Study of verinurAd and alloPurinol in Patients with cHronic kIdney disease and hyperuRicaEmia (SAPPHIRE; NCT03990363) will examine the effect of verinurad + allopurinol on albuminuria and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) slope among patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and hyperuricaemia. METHODS: Adults (≥18 years of age) with CKD, eGFR ≥25 mL/min/1.73 m2, UACR 30-5000 mg/g and sUA ≥6.0 mg/dL will be enrolled. Approximately 725 patients will be randomized 1:1:1:1:1 to 12, 7.5 or 3 mg verinurad + allopurinol, allopurinol or placebo. An 8-week dose-titration period will precede a 12-month treatment period; verinurad dose will be increased to 24 mg at Month 9 in a subset of patients in the 3 mg verinurad + allopurinol arm. The primary efficacy endpoint the is change from baseline in UACR at 6 months. Secondary efficacy endpoints include changes in UACR, eGFR and sUA from baseline at 6 and 12 months. CONCLUSIONS: This study will assess the combined clinical effect of verinurad + allopurinol on kidney function in patients with CKD, hyperuricaemia and albuminuria, and whether this combination confers renoprotection beyond standard-of-care.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Hiperuricemia , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica , Adulto , Albuminuria/complicaciones , Alopurinol/uso terapéutico , Óxido de Aluminio/farmacología , Óxido de Aluminio/uso terapéutico , Ensayos Clínicos Fase II como Asunto , Demografía , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Tasa de Filtración Glomerular , Humanos , Hiperuricemia/tratamiento farmacológico , Hiperuricemia/etiología , Naftalenos , Propionatos , Piridinas , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/complicaciones , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/tratamiento farmacológico
3.
Diabetes Obes Metab ; 20(5): 1140-1147, 2018 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29369493

RESUMEN

AIMS: To evaluate the injection success and user perception of a shield-triggered pen-injector mechanism. METHODS: The trial (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02627287) was an exploratory, two-centre, one-visit, open-label, randomized controlled trial conducted in Germany in 150 injection-experienced individuals with type 1 or type 2 diabetes. Participants self-administered subcutaneous injections of a placebo solution using a prototype shield-triggered pen-injector, DV3316 (Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark), and FlexPen (Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark). Injection success was evaluated on a yes/no basis by the investigator. Participant confidence, leakage of fluid and pain were evaluated after each injection. Pain and device experience were assessed after completion of all injections with each pen-injector. Overall preference was assessed after completion of all injections with both pen-injectors. RESULTS: Injection success was high with both pen-injectors (97.0%, DV3316 vs 99.7%, FlexPen). Participant confidence in dose delivery was similar for the two devices (88% of injections with DV3316 vs 81% with FlexPen were scored as "extremely confident"). The median injection pain score on a visual analogue scale (0-100) was 3 with DV3316 vs 4 with FlexPen after each injection, and 4 with DV3316 vs 5 with FlexPen after all injections with each device. After all injections were completed, 55% of participants reported an overall preference for DV3316 vs 21% for FlexPen. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that injection-experienced individuals can achieve a high injection success rate with a shield-triggered pen-injector, with similar patient confidence and injection pain compared with FlexPen.


Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/tratamiento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Sistemas de Liberación de Medicamentos/instrumentación , Hipoglucemiantes/administración & dosificación , Prioridad del Paciente , Autoadministración/instrumentación , Autoeficacia , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Actitud Frente a la Salud , Sistemas de Liberación de Medicamentos/efectos adversos , Femenino , Alemania , Humanos , Hipoglucemiantes/uso terapéutico , Reacción en el Punto de Inyección/etiología , Reacción en el Punto de Inyección/prevención & control , Inyecciones Subcutáneas , Masculino , Ensayo de Materiales , Persona de Mediana Edad , Dimensión del Dolor , Autoadministración/efectos adversos , Adulto Joven
4.
Diabetes Obes Metab ; 19(2): 208-215, 2017 02.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27709762

RESUMEN

AIM: To evaluate the pharmacological characteristics of faster-acting insulin aspart (faster aspart) compared with insulin aspart (IAsp) during continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, crossover trial, 48 men and women aged 18 to 64 years with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) received faster aspart and IAsp as a 0.15 U/kg bolus dose via CSII, on top of a basal rate (0.02 U/kg/h), in a glucose clamp setting (target 5.5 mmol/L). RESULTS: After a CSII bolus dose, the pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profiles for faster aspart were left-shifted compared with those for IAsp. For faster aspart vs IAsp, the early glucose-lowering effect (area under the curve for glucose infusion rate [GIR]0-30min ) was approximately 2-fold higher (least squares means 24.9 vs 11.4 mg/kg; estimated ratio faster aspart/IAsp 2.18, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.33; 5.04]; P = .002), onset of glucose-lowering effect (time to early 50% of maximum GIR) occurred 11.1 minutes earlier (41.1 vs 52.3 minutes; 95% CI faster aspart - IAsp [-15.4; -6.9]; P<.001), and offset of glucose-lowering effect (time to late 50% of maximum GIR) occurred 24.0 minutes earlier (214.7 vs 238.7 minutes; 95% CI [-38.9; -9.1]; P=.002). Likewise, significantly greater early exposure and significantly earlier onset and offset of exposure were observed for faster aspart vs IAsp. Faster aspart and IAsp were both well tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T1DM using CSII, faster aspart better mimics the endogenous prandial insulin secretion and action than does IAsp. Faster aspart therefore has the potential to provide clinical benefits over current rapid-acting insulins in the insulin pump setting.


Asunto(s)
Glucemia/efectos de los fármacos , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipoglucemiantes/farmacología , Insulina Aspart/farmacología , Sistemas de Infusión de Insulina , Adulto , Área Bajo la Curva , Glucemia/metabolismo , Estudios Cruzados , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/metabolismo , Método Doble Ciego , Femenino , Técnica de Clampeo de la Glucosa , Humanos , Hipoglucemiantes/administración & dosificación , Infusiones Subcutáneas , Insulina Aspart/administración & dosificación , Análisis de los Mínimos Cuadrados , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...