47 resultados para Diet Therapy
Resumo:
INTRODUCTION Chronic low-grade inflammation and immune activation may persist in HIV patients despite effective antiretroviral therapy (ART). These abnormalities are associated with increased oxidative stress (OS). Bilirubin (BR) may have a beneficial role in counteracting OS. Atazanavir (ATV) inhibits UGT1A1, thus increasing unconjugated BR levels, a distinctive feature of this drug. We compared changes in OS markers in HIV patients on ATV/r versus efavirenz (EFV)-based first-line therapies. MATERIALS AND METHODS Cohort of the Spanish Research Network (CoRIS) is a multicentre, open, prospective cohort of HIV-infected patients naïve to ART at entry and linked to a biobank. We identified hepatitis C virus/hepatitis B virus (HCV/HBV) negative patients who started first-line ART with either ATV/r or EFV, had a baseline biobank sample and a follow-up sample after at least nine months of ART while maintaining initial regimen and being virologically suppressed. Lipoprotein-associated Phospholipase A2 (Lp-PLA2), Myeloperoxidase (MPO) and Oxidized LDL (OxLDL) were measured in paired samples. Marker values at one year were interpolated from available data. Multiple imputations using chained equations were used to deal with missing values. Change in the OS markers was modelled using multiple linear regressions adjusting for baseline marker values and baseline confounders. Correlations between continuous variables were explored using Pearson's correlation tests. RESULTS 145 patients (97 EFV; 48 ATV/r) were studied. Mean (SD) baseline values for OS markers in EFV and ATV/r groups were: Lp-PLA2 [142.2 (72.8) and 150.1 (92.8) ng/mL], MPO [74.3 (48.2) and 93.9 (64.3) µg/L] and OxLDL [76.3 (52.3) and 82.2 (54.4) µg/L]. After adjustment for baseline variables patients on ATV/r had a significant decrease in Lp-PLA2 (estimated difference -16.3 [CI 95%: -31.4, -1.25; p=0.03]) and a significantly lower increase in OxLDL (estimated difference -21.8 [-38.0, -5.6; p<0.01] relative to those on EFV, whereas no differences in MPO were found. Adjusted changes in BR were significantly higher for the ATV/r group (estimated difference 1.33 [1.03, 1.52; p<0.01]). Changes in BR and changes in OS markers were significantly correlated. CONCLUSIONS In virologically suppressed patients on stable ART, OS was lower in ATV/r-based regimens compared to EFV. We hypothesize these changes could be in part attributable to increased BR plasma levels.
Resumo:
Dapagliflozin is a new oral antidiabetic agent whose mechanism of action increases renal glucose excretion, independently of insulin secretion or insulin action. The efficacy of dapagliflozin is dependent on renal function. The use of dapagliflozin has been licensed to improve glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus as: - monotherapy when diet and exercise alone do not provide adequate glycaemic control in patients for whom the use of metformin is considered inappropriate due to intolerance. - Add-on combination therapy with other glucose-lowering agents including insulin, when these, together with diet and exercise, do not provide adequate glycaemic control. Funding has been restricted to the use of dapagliflozin, prior approval, as dual therapy in combination with metformin. This report aims to assess the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, rate the added therapeutic value of dapagliflozin in type 2 diabetes mellitus and identify its current place in therapy. A systematic literature search was carried out, for the purpose of this evaluation, using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane and IDIS databases as well as other secondary sources of evidence-based medicine, therapeutic bulletins and national and international drug agencies. Following the critical reading and analysis of the selected articles, a summary is made out of the scientific evidence available, using Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) criteria. Only one randomised clinical trial, out of the ten trials found, was considered to be a suitable comparison (versus a dual therapy in combination with the sulfonylurea glipizide in patients inadequately controlled with metformin, diet and exercise). No trials have evaluated variables of relevance to patients, except for safety variables. The main efficacy variable in the trials was the change from baseline in HbA1c, except for a study which evaluated the change from baseline in total body weight as main variable. Baseline characteristics of the patients enrolled in the trials significantly differ from those of the population with diabetes in our society which tend to be of an older age and have a longer history of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The major limitation of dapagliflozin derives from its mechanism of action, since its efficacy decreases as renal function declines. The use of dapagliflozin is not recommended in patients with moderate to severe renal impairment ((CrCl<60ml/min or GFG <60 ml/min/1.73 m2) nor in elderly patients, in which a decrease in renal function can be expected. The assessment of safety includes the incidence and rate of discontinuations due to adverse events, episodes of hypoglycaemia, signs or symptoms of genital and urinary tract infections, dehydration, hypovolaemia and hypotension. Further pharmacoepidemiological studies are to be carried out to clarify the long-term effects of dapagliflozin on renal function and the potential effect in the development of breast and bladder tumours. Dapagliflozin as monotherapy has not been evaluated against adequate comparators (sulfonylureas, pioglitazone, gliptins). In combination therapy with metformin, the efficacy of dapagliflozin was shown to be non-inferior to glipizide plus metformin, resulting in a mean reduction of 0.52% in HbA1c, with a difference of 0.00 among both groups (95% CI: -0.11 a 0.11). There are no comparative data against other second-line treatment options. As shown in the studies, the overall incidence of adverse events with dapagliflozin as monotherapy (21.5%) was similar to that observed with placebo, and greater to that observed with metformin (15.4%). Hypoglycaemia of any type was the adverse event more frequently reported. The incidence of severe hypoglycaemic events observed in most of the studies was low. The overall incidence of adverse events observed in the study that compared dapagliflozin+metformin against glipizide+metformin was similar for both groups (27%) and incidence of hypoglycaemic events with dapagliflozin (3.5%) was significantly lower to that observed with glipizide (40.8%). Reductions of body weight of about 2 to 3 kg and a slight decrease in blood pressure (1 to 5 mmHg) have been observed in all studies in the groups treated with dapagliflozin together with diet and exercise. Dosing scheme (every 24 hours) is similar to other oral antidiabetic agents and its cost is similar to that for gliptines and higher to that for sulfonylureas or generic pioglitazone. Funding has been limited to the use of dapagliflozin as dual therapy regimen in combination with metformin as an option for patients with contraindication or intolerance to sulfonylureas, such a those experiencing frequent hypoglycaemic events, weight loss associated risks, as long as they are under 75 years of age and have no moderate to severe renal impairment. In the light of the above, we consider dapagliflozin means no therapeutic innovation in the therapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus over other therapeutic alternatives available.