STAR 3 randomized controlled trial to compare sensor-augmented insulin pump therapy with multiple daily injections in the treatment of type 1 diabetes: research design, methods, and baseline characteristics of enrolled subjects.

BACKGROUND: Sensor-augmented pump therapy (SAPT) integrates real-time continuous glucose monitoring (RT-CGM) with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) and offers an alternative to multiple daily injections (MDI). Previous studies provide evidence that SAPT may improve clinical outcomes among people with type 1 diabetes. Sensor-Augmented Pump Therapy for A1c Reduction (STAR) 3 is a multicenter randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of SAPT to that of MDI in subjects with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: Subjects were randomized to either continue with MDI or transition to SAPT for 1 year. Subjects in the MDI cohort were allowed to transition to SAPT for 6 months after completion of the study. SAPT subjects who completed the study were also allowed to continue for 6 months. The primary end point was the difference between treatment groups in change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) percentage from baseline to 1 year of treatment. Secondary end points included percentage of subjects with HbA1c < or =7% and without severe hypoglycemia, as well as area under the curve of time spent in normal glycemic ranges. Tertiary end points include percentage of subjects with HbA1c < or =7%, key safety end points, user satisfaction, and responses on standardized assessments. RESULTS: A total of 495 subjects were enrolled, and the baseline characteristics similar between the SAPT and MDI groups. Study completion is anticipated in June 2010. CONCLUSIONS: Results of this randomized controlled trial should help establish whether an integrated RT-CGM and CSII system benefits patients with type 1 diabetes more than MDI.

Scientific writing: a randomized controlled trial comparing standard and on-line instruction.

BACKGROUND: Writing plays a central role in the communication of scientific ideas and is therefore a key aspect in researcher education, ultimately determining the success and long-term sustainability of their careers. Despite the growing popularity of e-learning, we are not aware of any existing study comparing on-line vs. traditional classroom-based methods for teaching scientific writing. METHODS: Forty eight participants from a medical, nursing and physiotherapy background from US and Brazil were randomly assigned to two groups (n = 24 per group): An on-line writing workshop group (on-line group), in which participants used virtual communication, google docs and standard writing templates, and a standard writing guidance training (standard group) where participants received standard instruction without the aid of virtual communication and writing templates. Two outcomes, manuscript quality was assessed using the scores obtained in Six subgroup analysis scale as the primary outcome measure, and satisfaction scores with Likert scale were evaluated. To control for observer variability, inter-observer reliability was assessed using Fleiss's kappa. A post-hoc analysis comparing rates of communication between mentors and participants was performed. Nonparametric tests were used to assess intervention efficacy. RESULTS: Excellent inter-observer reliability among three reviewers was found, with an Intraclass Correlation Coefficient (ICC) agreement = 0.931882 and ICC consistency = 0.932485. On-line group had better overall manuscript quality (p = 0.0017, SSQSavg score 75.3 +/- 14.21, ranging from 37 to 94) compared to the standard group (47.27 +/- 14.64, ranging from 20 to 72). Participant satisfaction was higher in the on-line group (4.3 +/- 0.73) compared to the standard group (3.09 +/- 1.11) (p = 0.001). The standard group also had fewer communication events compared to the on-line group (0.91 +/- 0.81 vs. 2.05 +/- 1.23; p = 0.0219). CONCLUSION: Our protocol for on-line scientific writing instruction is better than standard face-to-face instruction in terms of writing quality and student satisfaction. Future studies should evaluate the protocol efficacy in larger longitudinal cohorts involving participants from different languages.

The providing resources to enhance African American patients' readiness to make decisions about kidney disease (PREPARED) study: protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Living related kidney transplantation (LRT) is underutilized, particularly among African Americans. The effectiveness of informational and financial interventions to enhance informed decision-making among African Americans with end stage renal disease (ESRD) and improve rates of LRT is unknown. METHODS/DESIGN: We report the protocol of the Providing Resources to Enhance African American Patients' Readiness to Make Decisions about Kidney Disease (PREPARED) Study, a two-phase study utilizing qualitative and quantitative research methods to design and test the effectiveness of informational (focused on shared decision-making) and financial interventions to overcome barriers to pursuit of LRT among African American patients and their families. Study Phase I involved the evidence-based development of informational materials as well as a financial intervention to enhance African American patients' and families' proficiency in shared decision-making regarding LRT. In Study Phase 2, we are currently conducting a randomized controlled trial in which patients with new-onset ESRD receive 1) usual dialysis care by their nephrologists, 2) the informational intervention (educational video and handbook), or 3) the informational intervention in addition to the option of participating in a live kidney donor financial assistance program. The primary outcome of the randomized controlled trial will include patients' self-reported rates of consideration of LRT (including family discussions of LRT, patient-physician discussions of LRT, and identification of a LRT donor). DISCUSSION: Results from the PREPARED study will provide needed evidence on ways to enhance the decision to pursue LRT among African American patients with ESRD.

Weight loss intervention for young adults using mobile technology: design and rationale of a randomized controlled trial - Cell Phone Intervention for You (CITY).

BACKGROUND: The obesity epidemic has spread to young adults, leading to significant public health implications later in adulthood. Intervention in early adulthood may be an effective public health strategy for reducing the long-term health impact of the epidemic. Few weight loss trials have been conducted in young adults. It is unclear what weight loss strategies are beneficial in this population. PURPOSE: To describe the design and rationale of the NHLBI-sponsored Cell Phone Intervention for You (CITY) study, which is a single center, randomized three-arm trial that compares the impact on weight loss of 1) a behavioral intervention that is delivered almost entirely via cell phone technology (Cell Phone group); and 2) a behavioral intervention delivered mainly through monthly personal coaching calls enhanced by self-monitoring via cell phone (Personal Coaching group), each compared to 3) a usual care, advice-only control condition. METHODS: A total of 365 community-dwelling overweight/obese adults aged 18-35 years were randomized to receive one of these three interventions for 24 months in parallel group design. Study personnel assessing outcomes were blinded to group assignment. The primary outcome is weight change at 24 [corrected] months. We hypothesize that each active intervention will cause more weight loss than the usual care condition. Study completion is anticipated in 2014. CONCLUSIONS: If effective, implementation of the CITY interventions could mitigate the alarming rates of obesity in young adults through promotion of weight loss. ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01092364.

Colchicine effectiveness in symptom and inflammation modification in knee osteoarthritis (COLKOA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite the high prevalence and global impact of knee osteoarthritis (KOA), current treatments are palliative. No disease modifying anti-osteoarthritic drug (DMOAD) has been approved. We recently demonstrated significant involvement of uric acid and activation of the innate immune response in osteoarthritis (OA) pathology and progression, suggesting that traditional gout therapy may be beneficial for OA. We therefore assess colchicine, an existing commercially available agent for gout, for a new therapeutic application in KOA. METHODS/DESIGN: COLKOA is a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized trial comparing a 16-week treatment with standard daily dose oral colchicine to placebo for KOA. A total of 120 participants with symptomatic KOA will be recruited from a single center in Singapore. The primary end point is 30% improvement in total Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score at week 16. Secondary end points include improvement in pain, physical function, and quality of life and change in serum, urine and synovial fluid biomarkers of cartilage metabolism and inflammation. A magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) substudy will be conducted in 20 participants to evaluate change in synovitis. Logistic regression will be used to compare changes between groups in an intention-to-treat analysis. DISCUSSION: The COLKOA trial is designed to evaluate whether commercially available colchicine is effective for improving signs and symptoms of KOA, and reducing synovial fluid, serum and urine inflammatory and biochemical joint degradation biomarkers. These biomarkers should provide insights into the underlying mechanism of therapeutic response. This trial will potentially provide data to support a new treatment option for KOA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The trial has been registered at clinicaltrials.gov as NCT02176460 . Date of registration: 26 June 2014.