Are concomitant treatments confounding factors in randomized controlled trials on intensive blood-glucose control in type 2 diabetes? a systematic review

International audienceBackgroundOpen-label, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are subject to observer bias. If patient management is conducted without blinding, a difference between groups may be explained by other factors than study treatment. One factor may come from taking concomitant treatments with an efficacy on the studied outcomes. In type 2 diabetes, some antihypertensive or lipid-lowering drugs are effective against diabetic complications. We wanted to determine if these concomitant treatments were correctly reported in articles of RCTs on type 2 diabetes and if they might have influenced the outcome.MethodsWe performed a systematic review using Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Library (from January 1950 to July 2010). Open-label RCTs assessing the effectiveness of intensive blood-glucose control in type 2 diabetes were included. We chose five therapeutic classes with proven efficacy against diabetes complications: angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor antagonists (AIIRAs), fibrates, statins, and aspirin. Differences between concomitant treatments were considered statistically significant when p ResultsA total of eight open-label RCTs were included, but only three (37.5%) of them published concomitant treatments. In two studies (ACCORD and ADVANCE), a statistically significant difference was observed between the two groups for aspirin (p = 0.02) and ACEIs (p = 0.02).ConclusionsFew concomitant treatments were published in this sample of open-label RCTs. We cannot completely eliminate an observer bias for these studies. This bias probably influenced the results to an extent that has yet to be determined

PP270—Computational modeling of dravet syndrome

e102 Volume 35 Number 8S clorazepate (20mg 2× /d), and pregabalin (100 mg 3× /d). Because of resurgence of severe anxio-depressive symptoms, without any change of the treatment, the patient was readmitted 2 months later. Despite increasing the dose of clomipramine up to 225 mg/d, there was no clinical improvement, and the patient finally attempted to her life by abusing drugs. She then improved after 2 weeks on clomipramine IV (50 mg/d). Compliance was estimated good and no pharmacokinetic interactions with the rest of the treatment were found. C and DC plasma levels were measured, and CYP2D6/CYP2C19 genotype analyzed. Results: The plasma levels of C and DC are given in the Table below. Measures were done at the steady state and at trough concentration for IV treatment and 10 hours after the last dose for oral treatment

Effect of intensive glucose lowering treatment on all cause mortality, cardiovascular death, and microvascular events in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

Objective To determine all cause mortality and deaths from cardiovascular events related to intensive glucose lowering treatment in people with type 2 diabetes

Experimental designs for small randomised clinical trials: An algorithm for choice

Background: Small clinical trials are necessary when there are difficulties in recruiting enough patients for conventional frequentist statistical analyses to provide an appropriate answer. These trials are often necessary for the study of rare diseases as well as specific study populations e.g. children. It has been estimated that there are between 6,000 and 8,000 rare diseases that cover a broad range of diseases and patients. In the European Union these diseases affect up to 30 million people, with about 50% of those affected being children. Therapies for treating these rare diseases need their efficacy and safety evaluated but due to the small number of potential trial participants, a standard randomised controlled trial is ofte

Detailed plan for the COMET WP3 initial research activity - list of research projects and goals, participants and timing

Detailed plan for the COMET Work Package (WP) 3

A positioning pillow to improve lumbar puncture success rate in paediatric haematology-oncology patients: a randomized controlled trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Lumbar punctures (LPs) are common in children with cancer. Although pain management during the lumbar puncture has been well standardized, dealing with stress and anxiety is not well addressed yet. Our objective was to evaluate the potential improvement of the LP success rate using a positioning pillow, to ensure maximum lumbar flexion, and allow paravertebral muscles to relax, in children who are awake, with either conscious sedation or no sedation.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Children aged 2–18 years undergoing LP were randomly assigned to a positioning pillow or no intervention. The primary outcome was the rate of success, i.e. achieving the LP (sampling or injection) at the first attempt, without bleeding (RBC < 50/mm³). The secondary outcomes included: the child's pain, assessed by a self-administered visual analogical scales (VAS) for children over 6 years of age; the parents' and caregivers' perception of the child's pain; the satisfaction of the children, the parents, the caregivers and the physician. The child's cooperation and the occurrence of post-LP syndrome were also evaluated.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>124 children (62 in each group) were included. The LP pillow tended to increase the success rate of LPs (67% vs. 57%, p = 0.23), and decreased the post-LP syndromes (15% vs. 24%, p = 0.17) but the differences were not statistically significant. In children over 6-year of age (n = 72), the rate of success was significantly higher in the pillow group (58.5% vs. 41.5%, p = 0.031), with a tendency to feel less pain (median VAS 25 vs. 15 mm, p = 0.39) and being more satisfied (84.4% vs. 75.0%, p = 0.34).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Overall results do not demonstrate a benefit in using this pillow for lumbar punctures. This study results also suggest a benefit in the sub group of children over 6-year of age; this result needs confirmation.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>The trial was registered with Clinical Trials.gov (number NCT00775112).</p

Staphylococcus aureus infective endocarditis versus bacteremia strains: Subtle genetic differences at stake

AbstractInfective endocarditis (IE)(1) is a severe condition complicating 10–25% of Staphylococcus aureus bacteremia. Although host-related IE risk factors have been identified, the involvement of bacterial features in IE complication is still unclear. We characterized strictly defined IE and bacteremia isolates and searched for discriminant features. S. aureus isolates causing community-acquired, definite native-valve IE (n=72) and bacteremia (n=54) were collected prospectively as part of a French multicenter cohort. Phenotypic traits previously reported or hypothesized to be involved in staphylococcal IE pathogenesis were tested. In parallel, the genotypic profiles of all isolates, obtained by microarray, were analyzed by discriminant analysis of principal components (DAPC)(2). No significant difference was observed between IE and bacteremia strains, regarding either phenotypic or genotypic univariate analyses. However, the multivariate statistical tool DAPC, applied on microarray data, segregated IE and bacteremia isolates: IE isolates were correctly reassigned as such in 80.6% of the cases (C-statistic 0.83, P<0.001). The performance of this model was confirmed with an independent French collection IE and bacteremia isolates (78.8% reassignment, C-statistic 0.65, P<0.01). Finally, a simple linear discriminant function based on a subset of 8 genetic markers retained valuable performance both in study collection (86.1%, P<0.001) and in the independent validation collection (81.8%, P<0.01). We here show that community-acquired IE and bacteremia S. aureus isolates are genetically distinct based on subtle combinations of genetic markers. This finding provides the proof of concept that bacterial characteristics may contribute to the occurrence of IE in patients with S. aureus bacteremia

Reappraisal of Metformin Efficacy in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis of Randomised Controlled Trials

Catherine Cornu and colleagues performed a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of metformin efficacy on cardiovascular morbidity or mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes and showed that although metformin is considered the gold standard, its benefit/risk ratio remains uncertain