The management of type 2 diabetes with fixed‐ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus basal‐bolus therapy (insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart): a short‐term cost‐effectiveness analysis in the UK setting

Aim: To evaluate the cost‐effectiveness of IDegLira versus basal‐bolus therapy (BBT) with insulin glargine U100 plus up to 4 times daily insulin aspart for the management of type 2 diabetes in the UK. Methods: A Microsoft Excel model was used to evaluate the cost‐utility of IDegLira versus BBT over a 1‐year time horizon. Clinical input data were taken from the treat‐to‐target DUAL VII trial, conducted in patients unable to achieve adequate glycaemic control (HbA1c <7.0%) with basal insulin, with IDegLira associated with lower rates of hypoglycaemia and reduced body mass index (BMI) in comparison with BBT, with similar HbA1c reductions. Costs (expressed in GBP) and event‐related disutilities were taken from published sources. Extensive sensitivity analyses were performed. Results: IDegLira was associated with an improvement of 0.05 quality‐adjusted life years (QALYs) versus BBT, due to reductions in non‐severe hypoglycaemic episodes and BMI with IDegLira. Costs were higher with IDegLira by GBP 303 per patient, leading to an incremental cost‐effectiveness ratio (ICER) of GBP 5924 per QALY gained for IDegLira versus BBT. ICERs remained below GBP 20 000 per QALY gained across a range of sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: IDegLira is a cost‐effective alternative to BBT with insulin glargine U100 plus insulin aspart, providing equivalent glycaemic control with a simpler treatment regimen for patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin in the UK

What is the evidence for interactions between filaggrin null mutations and environmental exposures in the aetiology of atopic dermatitis? A systematic review

Background Epidemiological studies indicate that gene–environment interactions play a role in atopic dermatitis (AD). Objectives To review the evidence for gene–environment interactions in AD aetiology, focusing on filaggrin (FLG) loss-of-function mutations. Methods A systematic search from inception to September 2018 in Embase, MEDLINE and BIOSIS was performed. Search terms included all synonyms for AD and filaggrin/FLG; any genetic or epidemiological study design using any statistical methods were included. Quality assessment using criteria modified from guidance (ROBINS-I and Human Genome Epidemiology Network) for nonrandomized and genetic studies was completed, including consideration of power. Heterogeneity of study design and analyses precluded the use of meta-analysis. Results Of 1817 papers identified, 12 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria required and performed formal interaction testing. There was some evidence for FLG–environment interactions in six of the studies (P-value for interaction ≤ 005), including early-life cat ownership, older siblings, water hardness, phthalate exposure, higher urinary phthalate metabolite levels (which all increased AD risk additional to FLG null genotype) and prolonged breastfeeding (which decreased AD risk in the context of FLG null genotype). Major limitations of published studies were the low numbers of individuals (ranging from five to 94) with AD and FLG loss-of-function mutations and exposure to specific environmental factors, and variation in exposure definitions. Conclusions Evidence on FLG–environment interactions in AD aetiology is limited. However, many of the studies lacked large enough sample sizes to assess these interactions fully. Further research is needed with larger sample sizes and clearly defined exposure assessment

What is the evidence for interactions between filaggrin null mutations and environmental exposures in the aetiology of atopic dermatitis? A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Epidemiological studies indicate that gene-environment interactions play a role in atopic dermatitis (AD). OBJECTIVES: To review the evidence for gene-environment interactions in AD aetiology, focusing on filaggrin (FLG) loss-of-function mutations. METHODS: A systematic search from inception to September 2018 in Embase, MEDLINE and BIOSIS was performed. Search terms included all synonyms for AD and filaggrin/FLG; any genetic or epidemiological study design using any statistical methods were included. Quality assessment using criteria modified from guidance (ROBINS-I and Human Genome Epidemiology Network) for nonrandomized and genetic studies was completed, including consideration of power. Heterogeneity of study design and analyses precluded the use of meta-analysis. RESULTS: Of 1817 papers identified, 12 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria required and performed formal interaction testing. There was some evidence for FLG-environment interactions in six of the studies (P-value for interaction ≤ 0·05), including early-life cat ownership, older siblings, water hardness, phthalate exposure, higher urinary phthalate metabolite levels (which all increased AD risk additional to FLG null genotype) and prolonged breastfeeding (which decreased AD risk in the context of FLG null genotype). Major limitations of published studies were the low numbers of individuals (ranging from five to 94) with AD and FLG loss-of-function mutations and exposure to specific environmental factors, and variation in exposure definitions. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence on FLG-environment interactions in AD aetiology is limited. However, many of the studies lacked large enough sample sizes to assess these interactions fully. Further research is needed with larger sample sizes and clearly defined exposure assessment. Linked Comment: Park and Seo. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:411

What is the evidence for interactions between filaggrin null mutations and environmental exposures in the aetiology of atopic dermatitis? A systematic review

Background Epidemiological studies indicate that gene–environment interactions play a role in atopic dermatitis (AD). Objectives To review the evidence for gene–environment interactions in AD aetiology, focusing on filaggrin (FLG) loss-of-function mutations. Methods A systematic search from inception to September 2018 in Embase, MEDLINE and BIOSIS was performed. Search terms included all synonyms for AD and filaggrin/FLG; any genetic or epidemiological study design using any statistical methods were included. Quality assessment using criteria modified from guidance (ROBINS-I and Human Genome Epidemiology Network) for nonrandomized and genetic studies was completed, including consideration of power. Heterogeneity of study design and analyses precluded the use of meta-analysis. Results Of 1817 papers identified, 12 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria required and performed formal interaction testing. There was some evidence for FLG–environment interactions in six of the studies (P-value for interaction ≤ 005), including early-life cat ownership, older siblings, water hardness, phthalate exposure, higher urinary phthalate metabolite levels (which all increased AD risk additional to FLG null genotype) and prolonged breastfeeding (which decreased AD risk in the context of FLG null genotype). Major limitations of published studies were the low numbers of individuals (ranging from five to 94) with AD and FLG loss-of-function mutations and exposure to specific environmental factors, and variation in exposure definitions. Conclusions Evidence on FLG–environment interactions in AD aetiology is limited. However, many of the studies lacked large enough sample sizes to assess these interactions fully. Further research is needed with larger sample sizes and clearly defined exposure assessment