Initial response of young people with thyrotoxicosis to block and replace or dose titration thionamide

\ua9 2022 The authors Published by Bioscientifica Ltd.Objective: Patients with thyrotoxicosis are treated with anti-thyroid drug (ATD) using block and replace (BR) or a smaller, titrated dose of ATD (dose titration, DT). Design: A multi-centre, phase III, open-label trial of newly diagnosed paediatric thyrotoxicosis patients randomised to BR/DT. We compared the biochemical response to BR/DT in the first 6 months of therapy. Methods: Patients commenced 0.75 mg/kg carbimazole (CBZ) daily with randomisation to BR/DT. We examined baseline patient characteristics, CBZ dose, time to serum thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH)/free thyroxine (FT4) normalisation and BMI Z-score change. Results: There were 80 patients (baseline) and 78 patients (61 female) at 6 months. Mean CBZ dose was 0.9 mg/kg/day (BR) and 0.5 mg/kg/day (DT). There was no difference in time to non-suppressed TSH concentration; 16 of 39 patients (BR) and 11 of 39 (DT) had suppressed TSH at 6 months. Patients with suppressed TSH had higher mean baseline FT4 levels (72.7 vs 51.7 pmol/L; 95% CI for difference 1.73, 31.7; P = 0.029). Time to normalise FT4 levels was reduced in DT (log-rank test, P = 0.049) with 50% attaining normal FT4 at 28 days (95% CI 25, 32) vs 35 days in BR (95% CI 28, 58). Mean BMI Z-score increased from 0.10 to 0.81 at 6 months (95% CI for difference 0.57, 0.86; P < 0.001) and was greatest in patients with higher baseline FT4 concentrations. Conclusions: DT-treated patients normalised FT4 concentrations more quickly than BR. Overall, 94% of patients have normal FT4 levels after 6 months, but 33% still have TSH suppression. Excessive weight gain occurs with both BR and DT therapy

How well do services for young people with long term conditions deliver features proposed to improve transition?

BACKGROUND: For young people with long-term conditions, transition from child to adult-oriented health services is a critical period which, if not managed well, may lead to poor outcomes. There are features of transition services which guidance and research suggest improve outcomes. We studied nine such features, calling them \u27proposed beneficial features\u27: age-banded clinic; meet adult team before transfer; promotion of health self-efficacy; written transition plan; appropriate parent involvement; key worker; coordinated team; holistic life-skills training; transition manager for clinical team. We aimed to describe the extent to which service providers offer these nine features, and to compare this with young people\u27s reported experience of them. METHODS: A longitudinal, mixed methods study followed 374 young people as their care moved from child to adult health services. Participants had type 1 diabetes, cerebral palsy or autism spectrum disorder with additional mental health difficulties. Data are reported from the first two visits, one year apart. RESULTS: Three hundred four (81.3%) of the young people took part in the second visit (128 with diabetes, 91 with autism, 85 with cerebral palsy). Overall, the nine proposed beneficial features of transition services were poorly provided. Fewer than half of services stated they provided an age-banded clinic, written transition plan, transition manager for clinical team, a protocol for promotion of health self-efficacy, or holistic life-skills training. To varying degrees, young people reported that they had not experienced the features which services said they provided. For instance, the agreement for written transition plan, holistic life-skills training and key worker, was 30, 43 and 49% respectively. Agreement was better for appropriate parent involvement, age-banded clinic, promotion of health self-efficacy and coordinated team at 77, 77, 80 and 69% respectively. Variation in the meaning of the features as experienced by young people and families was evident from qualitative interviews and observations. CONCLUSIONS: UK services provide only some of the nine proposed beneficial features for supporting healthcare transition of young people with long term conditions. Observational studies or trials which examine the influence of features of transition services on outcomes should ensure that the experiences of young people and families are captured, and not rely on service specifications

Development of Insulin Detemir/Insulin Aspart Cross-Reacting Antibodies Following Treatment with Insulin Detemir: 104-week Study in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes Aged 2–16 Years

BACKGROUND: To study the long-term development (104 weeks) of insulin antibodies during treatment with insulin detemir (IDet) and insulin aspart (IAsp) in children with type 1 diabetes aged 2–16 years. METHODS: A 52-week, two-arm, randomized trial comparing IDet and neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin, both in combination with IAsp, was followed by a one-arm, 52-week extension trial of the IDet + IAsp arm. The present analysis was conducted in children who completed the randomized trial and entered into the extension trial. RESULTS: Of the 177 children randomized to IDet treatment, 146 entered the extension trial. IDet–IAsp cross-reacting antibodies peaked within the first 39 weeks of treatment before gradually declining. A similar pattern was seen for IDet-specific and IAsp-specific antibodies. At end of trial (EOT), no correlation was observed between the level of IDet-specific or IAsp-specific antibodies or IDet–IAsp cross-reacting antibodies and either glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) or basal insulin dose. Mean HbA1c was stable during the treatment period, with a slight increase over time from 8.41% (68.4 mmol/mol) at baseline to 8.74% (72 mmol/mol) at EOT. Mean IDet dose increased from 0.43 U/kg at baseline to 0.66 U/kg at EOT. Mean IAsp dose increased from 0.46 U/kg to 0.51 U/kg at EOT. CONCLUSION: Although treatment with IDet and IAsp is associated with development of specific and cross-reacting antibodies, no correlation between insulin antibodies and basal insulin dose or HbA1c was found. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk A/S. ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT00435019 and NCT00623194. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13300-016-0196-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users