A Pilot Study of Diabetes Management in the Managed Care Setting

Diabetes mellitus represents a disease entity that primary care providers commonly encounter in the outpatient setting. Patient visits encompass a broad range of concerns, from optimizing management of hyperglycemia to the sequelae of chronic disease. The third National Health and Nutrition Exam Survey, (NHANES III) 1988-1994 has reported the prevalence of diabetes mellitus type 2 in the U.S. adult population at 12.3%. The cost of diabetes in 1998, estimated at $77 billion, is a formidable challenge to the health care community and third-party payers. Historically, Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs) have encouraged more preventative tests, procedures, and exams to curtail the development of chronic disease than indemnity plans. The influx of patients of all ages into these capitated plans has spurred such organizations to reconcile cost-conscious initiatives with the expense of chronic disease using treatment algorithms. Aetna U.S. Healthcare (USHC) has developed Healthy OUtlook Programs to manage patients with diabetes using patient education, treatment recommendations, and a U.S. Quality Algorithm (USQA) Diabetes Performance Report for providers. It is not clear whether this program has helped patients with Type 2 diabetes achieve improved glycemic control, receive enhanced screening, and earlier interventions for disease complications compared with indemnity patients. This pilot study seeks to evaluate the effectiveness of managed health care initiatives in improving the quality of care for Type 2 diabetes. In addition, it considers whether differences exist in the care between capitated and indemnity diabetic patients

Changes in symptom burden and quality of life among women with uterine fibroids receiving relugolix combination therapy: A plain language summary

What is this summary about?: This is a summary of findings from two research studies (known as clinical trials). The studies looked at how well a medicine called relugolix combination therapy worked in women with heavy menstrual bleeding (heavy bleeding during a period) with uterine fibroids (noncancerous or benign growths in the uterus). In this analysis of the studies, researchers looked at how patients self-reported their uterine fibroid symptoms before and after taking relugolix combination therapy. Researchers also looked at how patients self-reported the impact of uterine fibroids on their health-related quality of life before and after taking relugolix combination therapy. What were the results?: Women took either relugolix combination therapy or placebo (a pill that contains no medicine) by mouth once daily for 24 weeks. Women completed the Uterine Fibroid Symptom and Quality of Life questionnaire (where "quality of life" refers to the women's health-related quality of life related to uterine fibroids) before, during, and after treatment. The questionnaire let researchers see if the women felt that relugolix combination therapy decreased the burden of uterine fibroid symptoms and improved the women's health-related quality of life related to uterine fibroids. More women said that they felt less distress due to their uterine fibroid symptoms and that their health-related quality of life related to uterine fibroids was better after taking relugolix combination therapy compared with women who took placebo. What do the results mean?: Relugolix combination therapy may lessen distress associated with uterine fibroid symptoms and improve health-related quality of life related to uterine fibroids.</p

Denosumab compared with risedronate in postmenopausal women suboptimally adherent to alendronate therapy: Efficacy and safety results from a randomized open-label study

Denosumab has been shown to reduce new vertebral, nonvertebral, and hip fractures in postmenopausal women with osteoporosis. In subjects who were treatment-naive or previously treated with alendronate, denosumab was associated with greater gains in bone mineral density (BMD) and decreases in bone turnover markers when compared with alendronate-treated subjects. This trial was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of denosumab with risedronate over 12 months in postmenopausal women who transitioned from daily or weekly alendronate treatment and were considered to be suboptimally adherent to therapy. In this randomized, open-label study, postmenopausal women aged ≥55 years received denosumab 60 mg subcutaneously every 6 months or risedronate 150 mg orally every month for 12 months. Endpoints included percentage change from baseline in total hip BMD (primary endpoint), femoral neck, and lumbar spine BMD at month 12, and percentage change from baseline in sCTX-1 at months 1 and 6. Safety was also assessed. A total of 870 subjects were randomized (435, risedronate; 435, denosumab) who had a mean (SD) age of 67.7 (6.9) years, mean (SD) BMD T-scores of -1.6 (0.9), -1.9 (0.7), and -2.2 (1.2) at the total hip, femoral neck, and lumbar spine, respectively, and median sCTX-1 of 0.3 ng/mL at baseline. At month 12, denosumab significantly increased BMD compared with risedronate at the total hip (2.0% vs 0.5%), femoral neck (1.4% vs 0%), and lumbar spine (3.4% vs 1.1%; p<0.0001 at all sites). Denosumab significantly decreased sCTX-1 compared with risedronate at month 1 (median change from baseline of -78% vs -17%; p<0.0001) and month 6 (-61% vs -23%; p<0.0001). Overall and serious adverse events were similar between groups. In postmenopausal women who were suboptimally adherent to alendronate therapy, transitioning to denosumab was well tolerated and more effective than risedronate in increasing BMD and reducing bone turnover

ÁREA DE PRESIDENCIA [Material gráfico]

Forma parte del reportaje fotográfico sobre la inauguración en los años 40 del nuevo edificio institucional del Cabildo de Gran CanariaCopia digital. Madrid : Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte. Subdirección General de Coordinación Bibliotecaria, 201

Keynote Address: How Much We Have Done, How Much We Have to Do

Welcome by Rachel Van Cleave, Dean of Golden Gate University, School of Law. Keynote Address by Bruce Wagman, Esq., Schiff Hardin LLP: How Much We Have Done, How Much We Have to D

Observations following discontinuation of long-term denosumab therapy

Summary Stopping denosumab after 8 years of continued treatment was associated with bone loss during a 1-year observation study in patients who were not prescribed osteoporosis treatment. Bone loss was attenuated in patients who began another osteoporosis therapy. Treatment to prevent bone loss upon stopping denosumab should be considered. Introduction This study aimed to understand osteoporosis management strategies during a 1-year observational follow-up after up to 8 years of denosumab treatment in a phase 2 study. Methods During the observational year, patients received osteoporosis management at the discretion of their physician and returned to the clinic for BMD assessment and completion of an osteoporosis management questionnaire. Incidence of serious adverse events and fractures was collected. Analyses were descriptive. Results Of 138 eligible patients, 82 enrolled in and completed the observation study. Most (65 [79%]) did not receive prescription osteoporosis medication, with “my doctor felt I no longer needed a medication” being the most common reason (23 [35%]). Of the 17 patients who took osteoporosis medications, 8 discontinued therapy during the observation study. In patients treated with denosumab for 8 years (N = 52), BMD decreased during the 1-year observation study (6.7% [lumbar spine], 6.6% [total hip]). Those who took osteoporosis medication during the observation study showed a smaller decline in BMD than those who did not. No new safety concerns were identified. Eight patients (9.8%), all of whom had at least one predisposing risk factor, experienced 17 fractures. This included seven patients who experienced one or more vertebral fractures. Conclusions Consistent with denosumab’s mechanism of action, treatment cessation led to reversal of the drug’s effect on BMD and perhaps fracture risk. For patients who took osteoporosis therapy, bone loss was attenuated. For patients at high fracture risk, switching to another osteoporosis therapy if denosumab is discontinued seems appropriate