ueda2016 symposium -the novelty in assessing the patient’s needs - hanan gawish
TRANSCRIPT
THE NOVELTY IN ASSESSING
THE PATIENT’S NEEDS
Prof Hanan Gawish, MD,PhD
Diabetes and Endocrinology Unit, Mansoura Uni
Chair of the Egyptian Society of Diabetic Foot
Novelty may be said of some very old places, as of
some very old books, that they are destined to be
forever new.
The nearer we approach them…..the more we
study them, the more we have yet to learn.
This is true of many ancient civilization but of no
place it is so true as of ……..Egypt.
Amelia Blanford Edwards
11,140 type 2 diabetics.
Average age is 66 years.
8 years of Diabetes.
32% had diagnosed
CVD.
10% had microvascular
complications
CVD risk factors
[Lipids, BP, smoking or
obesity].
ADVANCEN=11,140
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2560-2572.
Randomized treatment
Intensive
(n=4828)
Standard
(n=4741)
Gliclazide MR
Other Sulfonylureas
92%
0%
0%
59%
Metformin 74% 67%
Thiazolidinediones 17% 11%
Acarbose 19% 13%
Glinides 1% 3%
Insulin 40% 24%
ADVANCEN=11,140
TIGHT GLYCEMIC CONTROL MAINTAINED ON LONG TERM
ADVANCE collaborative group. N Engl J Med 2008; 358:2560-72
COMBINED PRIMARY OUTCOMES
M AJOR MACRO OR MICROVASCULAR EVENT
ADVANCEN=11,140
-10%
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
M AJOR MICROVASCULAR EVENTS
ADVANCEN=11,140
-14%
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
GLICLAZIDE REDUCES MORTALITY
Cardiovascular death 253 289 12% (-4 to 26)
All deaths 498 533 7% (-6 to 17)
Non-cardiovascular death 245 244 0% (-20 to 16)
Number of patients with event
Intensive Standard
(n=5,571) (n=5,569)
Relative risk
reduction (95%CI)
Favors
Intensive
Favors
Standard
Hazard ratio
0.5 1.0 2.0Cardiovascular Mortality
-12%P=0.12
ADVANCEN=11,140
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
New England Journal of Medicine. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2545-2559.
7.5%
6.4%
6.4 in the intensive group Vs. 7.5 in the Standard
ACCORDN=10,251
VADTN=1,791
Duckworth et al, New eng J Med 2008; ahead of print
Metformin (BMI >27)
or Glimepiride (BMI
<27).
Rosiglitazone.
Insulin.
Other oral agents.
8.4%
6.9%
1. N Engl J Med. 358(2008)2545-59
2. N Engl J Med. 360(2009)129-39
ACCORD1 VADT2
Number 10,251 1,791
Primary CVD
endpoint 10% (p=0.16) 13% (p=0.12)
Mortality
(overall) 22% (p=0.04) 6.5% (p=NS)
CV mortality 39% (p=0.02) 25% (p=NS)
Reduction of CV disease risk in type 2 diabetes:
lessons learned from ACCORD and VADT trials
IDF2012
ACCORD
Guidelines asked to assess the cardiac safety for all the new drugs
EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE
SHAPED THE NEW IDF ALGORITHM
Accord ADVANCE VADT
Severe hypoglycemia in intensive arm [% participants with ≥ 1 episodes]
16.2% 2,7% 21.2%
Lowest rates of hypoglycemia
A position statement of ADA, ACC and AHA. Diabetes Care, volume 32; 1, January 2009.
CONTROL Group. Diabetologia. 2009, August 6. Epub ahead of print.
ADVANCE TRIAL: STRICT WEIGHT
NEUTRALITY BELOW 7%
2 tablets
1-NO ACTIVE METABOLITES
1. Gribble FM. Diabetologia. 1999;42:845-848.
2. Gribble FM. Diabetes. 1998;47:1412-1418. 3. Song DK. Br J Pharmacol. 2001;133:193-199.
2-
REVERSIBILITY
1. Gribble FM. Diabetologia. 1999;42:845-848.
2. Gribble FM. Diabetes. 1998;47:1412-1418. 3. Song DK. Br J Pharmacol. 2001;133:193-199.
Why?
3- INSULIN SECRETION
1. Gribble FM. Diabetologia. 1999;42:845-848.
2. Gribble FM. Diabetes. 1998;47:1412-1418. 3. Song DK. Br J Pharmacol. 2001;133:193-199.
Why?
SLOVAK therapeutic algorithm for
management of patients with T2D
(Slovak diabetology society,
June 2015)
NOVELTY AMONG OTHER GROUPS
NOVELTY IN EFFICACY
1.RAPID .
2.REACHING THE TARGET WHATEVER THE BASELINE.
3.SUITABLE FOR MOST OF THE PATIENTS.
4.CONTROL RATE.
5.MAINTAINED CONTROL.
NOVELTY AMONG OTHER GROUPS
NOVELTY IN EFFICACY
1.RAPID .
2.REACHING THE TARGET WHATEVER THE BASELINE.
3.SUITABLE FOR MOST OF THE PATIENTS.
4.CONTROL RATE.
5.MAINTAINED CONTROL.
1. DIAGONAL study. Congress of the Federation of the International Danube Symposia on Diabetes Mellitus,2012. Hungary, Budapest. Abstract. Available at
http://fid2012.shp.hu/hpc/web.php?a=fid2012&o=abstracts_8qQs 2. Satoh J et al. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2005;70:291-297.
PATIENTS STARTED WITH GLICLAZIDE 60 MR 1-2 TABLETS.
RAPID GLYCEMIC CONTROL
NOVELTY AMONG OTHER GROUPS
NOVELTY IN EFFICACY
1.RAPID .
2.REACHING THE TARGET WHATEVER THE BASELINE.
3.SUITABLE FOR MOST OF THE PATIENTS.
4.CONTROL RATE.
5.MAINTAINED CONTROL.
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
STRONG REDUCTION WHATEVER THE
HBA1C BASELINE
INITIAL FIXED-DOSE COMBINATION THERAPY
WITH SITA+ MET VS METFORMIN MONO-THERAPY: CHANGE FROM BASELINE IN HBA1CAT WEEK 18
Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 13: 644–652, 2011.
NOVELTY AMONG OTHER GROUPS
NOVELTY IN EFFICACY
1.RAPID .
2.REACHING THE TARGET WHATEVER THE BASELINE.
3.SUITABLE FOR MOST OF THE PATIENTS.
4.CONTROL RATE.
5.MAINTAINED CONTROL.
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
WHATEVER THE BMI
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
WHATEVER THE DURATION OF
DIABETES
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
WHATEVER THE AGE
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
WHATEVER THE BASELINE
TREATMENT
NOVELTY AMONG OTHER GROUPS
NOVELTY IN EFFICACY
1.RAPID .
2.REACHING THE TARGET WHATEVER THE BASELINE.
3.SUITABLE FOR MOST OF THE PATIENTS.
4.CONTROL RATE.
5.MAINTAINED CONTROL.
HIGHEST
% OF PATIENTS CONTROLLED BELOW
7%
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
NOVELTY AMONG OTHER GROUPS
NOVELTY IN EFFICACY
1.RAPID .
2.REACHING THE TARGET WHATEVER THE BASELINE.
3.SUITABLE FOR MOST OF THE PATIENTS.
4.CONTROL RATE.
5.MAINTAINED CONTROL.
Objectives: To evaluate glycaemic durability with (DPP-4)
inhibitors in type 2 diabetes.
Interventions: (sitagliptin, vildagliptin, saxagliptin,
linagliptin and alogliptin).
Inclusion: We screened 12 trials in 14,829 participants.
In conclusion, the analysis of 12 randomized trials with duration
up to 108 weeks suggests that the effect of DPP-4 inhibitors on
HbA1c decreases after the first year of treatment.
Downloaded from bmjopen.bmj.com on June 18, 2014 - Published by group.bmj.com
Maintained CONTROL FOR 5 YEARS IN
ADVANCE
The ADVANCE Collaborative Group. Action in Diabetes and Vascular disease: Preterax and Diamicron MR Controlled Evaluation. IDF Annual Meeting.2009.
EASD,SEPT,2014
THE EARLY START WITH GLICLAZIDE 60
MR DECREASES THE NEED FOR INSULIN.
Gliclazide 60 MR
2 tabs
120 mg
DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1407963
Maintained for 15 years if compared with
other SUs
Satoh J et al. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2005;70:291-297.
2 tabs
120 mg
1. UKPDS Group (33). Lancet. 1998;352:837-853. 2. VADT Investigators. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:129-139. 3. Ismail-Beigi F et al. Lancet. 2010;376:419-
430. 4. ADVANCE Collaborative Group. N Engl J Med. 2008;358:2560-2572. 5. Zoungas S et al. Diabetologia. 2011;54(suppl 1):S23.
ADVANCE TRIAL:
UNIQUE KIDNEY PROTECTION IN ALL THE STAGES
AGENDA
Novelty among other Sulfonylureas
Novelty among other new groups:
Efficacy
CKD Patients
Having long record in the market
AGENDA
Novelty among other Sulfonylureas
Novelty among other new groups:
Efficacy
CKD Patients
Having long record in the market
Cost effectiveness
WHO Model List of Essential Medicines 18th list. Accessed on May 2015
NOVELTY IN COST EFFECTIVENESS
WHOAugust 2015
Criteria for Selection of Essential Medicines: Essential medicines are selected with due regard to disease prevalence, evidence on
efficacy , safety, and comparative cost-effectiveness
Conclusion:Treatment decision should be based on :
• Practice (Results and Durability)
• Evidence ( Efficacy and Safety)
• Cost Effectiveness