Metformin and carotid intima media thickness in never smokers with type 1 diabetes: the REMOVAL trial

Aim: To determine whether metformin's effects on carotid artery intima-media thickness (cIMT) in type 1 diabetes differ according to smoking status. Methods: Regression model effect estimates for the effect of metformin versus placebo (double-blind) on carotid IMT were calculated as a subgroup analysis of the REMOVAL trial. Results: In 428 randomized participants (227 never-smokers, 201 ever-smokers), averaged mean carotid IMT progression (per year) was reduced by metformin versus placebo in never-smokers (−0.012 mm, 95% CI −0.021 to −0.002; p = .0137) but not in ever-smokers (0.003 mm, 95% CI −0.008 to 0.014; p = .5767); and similarly in non-current smokers (−0.008 mm, 95% CI −0.015 to −0.00001; p = .0497) but not in current smokers (0.013 mm, 95% CI −0.007 to 0.032; p = .1887). Three-way interaction terms (treatment*time*smoking status) were significant for never versus ever smoking (p = .0373, prespecified) and non-current versus current smoking (p = .0496, exploratory). Averaged maximal carotid IMT progression (per year) was reduced by metformin versus placebo in never-smokers (−0.020 mm, 95% CI −0.034 to −0.006; p = .0067) but not in ever-smokers (−0.006 mm, 95% CI −0.020 to 0.008; p = .4067), although this analysis was not supported by a significant three-way interaction term. Conclusions: This subgroup analysis of the REMOVAL trial provides additional support for a potentially wider role of adjunct metformin therapy in cardiovascular risk management in type 1 diabetes, particularly for individuals who have never smoked cigarettes

Effect of sitagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND: Data are lacking on the long-term effect on cardiovascular events of adding sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, to usual care in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind study, we assigned 14,671 patients to add either sitagliptin or placebo to their existing therapy. Open-label use of antihyperglycemic therapy was encouraged as required, aimed at reaching individually appropriate glycemic targets in all patients. To determine whether sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo, we used a relative risk of 1.3 as the marginal upper boundary. The primary cardiovascular outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: During a median follow-up of 3.0 years, there was a small difference in glycated hemoglobin levels (least-squares mean difference for sitagliptin vs. placebo, -0.29 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.32 to -0.27). Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 839 patients in the sitagliptin group (11.4%; 4.06 per 100 person-years) and 851 patients in the placebo group (11.6%; 4.17 per 100 person-years). Sitagliptin was noninferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome (hazard ratio, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.88 to 1.09; P<0.001). Rates of hospitalization for heart failure did not differ between the two groups (hazard ratio, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.83 to 1.20; P = 0.98). There were no significant between-group differences in rates of acute pancreatitis (P = 0.07) or pancreatic cancer (P = 0.32). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease, adding sitagliptin to usual care did not appear to increase the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events, hospitalization for heart failure, or other adverse events

Considerations for the development of Computer-assisted Language Learning (CALL) teacher training course: a practical experience from a CALL course development in Indonesia

The need for technology training for teachers will keep on growing in line with the development of technology itself. Although technology nowadays is more and more user friendly and may need no specific training on how to use it, teachers need to possess the knowledge that underpins the idea of using it for teaching and learning process. Teachers need to have solid pedagogical knowledge on how to use the technology to deliver contents to their students. Therefore, a technology-training course for teachers is always necessary. This paper presents the partial results of a design based study/research (DBR) on the development of online technology training for teachers with focus on CALL in Indonesia. Questions regarding factors affecting online CALL course and ways to improve the course in terms of training materials, activities, as well as the administration of the training are addressed in the study. Based on the study, some considerations on how to design such technology-training course are proposed. The considerations are ranging from aspects associated with technology competence for teacher standards, constructivism in online learning, adult learning theory, online instructional models, the technology, pedagogy and content knowledge (TPACK) framework and open educational resources (OER). Information regarding those aspects will be useful to assist other CALL teacher training course developers later to inform their decision in the development of the course which is based on a good theoretical understanding as well as highly practical in learning activitie

Evaluation of preference for a novel durable insulin pen with memory function among patients with diabetes and health care professionals

Gerhard Klausmann,1 Irene Hramiak,2 Marianne Qvist,3 Kristian Handberg Mikkelsen,3 Xiaohui Guo4 1Internal Medicine Diabetology Practice, Aschaffenburg, Germany; 2Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, St Joseph&#39;s Healthcare, London, Ontario, Canada; 3Novo Nordisk A/S, Soeborg, Denmark; 4Department of Endocrinology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing, People&#39;s Republic of China Background: Improving adherence to insulin treatment for better glycemic control remains a challenge in the management of diabetes. New technological aids are required to help support adherence. This study evaluated preference for the NovoPen&reg; 5 (NP5), a durable insulin pen with memory function, compared with the HumaPen Luxura&reg; (HPL) among patients with diabetes and health care professionals. Methods: This crossover, multicenter usability study included insulin pen-experienced patients with diabetes and health care professionals treating patients with diabetes in Canada, China, and Germany. Participants evaluated NP5 and HPL in a randomized order by performing handling tasks in a usability test related to everyday use during a face-to-face interview. Tasks, pens, and preferences were assessed by completing a questionnaire comprised of rating and open-ended questions relating to confidence in everyday diabetes management. Results: Overall, 300 patients with diabetes and 150 health care professionals participated in the study. Significantly more participants preferred NP5 (81%) to HPL (18%) (P < 0.001). Also, 82% of patients with diabetes had more confidence in NP5 for managing their daily injections versus 11% with HPL (P < 0.001), and 7% had no preference. Memory function was most helpful in giving patients with diabetes confidence about when they last injected (63%), how much insulin they last injected (62%) and improving diabetes management (55%). Participants gave higher ratings to NP5 than to HPL on all parameters relating to performing an injection (ease of handling, satisfaction when using the pen, convenience of using the pen day-to-day, quality of the pen, and the extent to which the pen meets their needs; P < 0.05 for all comparisons). Conclusion: NP5 was preferred to HPL by most participants. Significantly more patients with diabetes had more confidence for managing daily insulin injections when using NP5, the pen with a memory function. Keywords: diabetes, durable insulin pen, memory function, confidence, usability, patient preferenc

Metformin and carotid intima-media thickness in never-smokers with type 1 diabetes: The REMOVAL trial

Aim: To determine whether metformin's effects on carotid artery intima-media thickness (cIMT) in type 1 diabetes differ according to smoking status. Methods: Regression model effect estimates for the effect of metformin versus placebo (double-blind) on carotid IMT were calculated as a subgroup analysis of the REMOVAL trial. Results: In 428 randomized participants (227 never-smokers, 201 ever-smokers), averaged mean carotid IMT progression (per year) was reduced by metformin versus placebo in never-smokers (−0.012 mm, 95% CI −0.021 to −0.002; p = .0137) but not in ever-smokers (0.003 mm, 95% CI −0.008 to 0.014; p = .5767); and similarly in non-current smokers (−0.008 mm, 95% CI −0.015 to −0.00001; p = .0497) but not in current smokers (0.013 mm, 95% CI −0.007 to 0.032; p = .1887). Three-way interaction terms (treatment*time*smoking status) were significant for never versus ever smoking (p = .0373, prespecified) and non-current versus current smoking (p = .0496, exploratory). Averaged maximal carotid IMT progression (per year) was reduced by metformin versus placebo in never-smokers (−0.020 mm, 95% CI −0.034 to −0.006; p = .0067) but not in ever-smokers (−0.006 mm, 95% CI −0.020 to 0.008; p = .4067), although this analysis was not supported by a significant three-way interaction term. Conclusions: This subgroup analysis of the REMOVAL trial provides additional support for a potentially wider role of adjunct metformin therapy in cardiovascular risk management in type 1 diabetes, particularly for individuals who have never smoked cigarettes