ACTG-HIV symptoms changes in patients switched to RPV/FTC/TDF due to previous intolerance to CART. Interim analysis of the PRO-STR study.

INTRODUCTION Tolerability and convenience are crucial aspects for the long-term success of combined antiretroviral therapy (cART). The aim of this study was to investigate the impact in routine clinical practice of switching to the single tablet regimen (STR) RPV/FTC/TDF in patients with intolerance to previous cART, in terms of patients' well-being, assessed by several validated measures. METHODS Prospective, multicenter study. Adult HIV-infected patients with viral load under 1.000 copies/mL while receiving a stable ART for at least the last three months and switched to RPV/FTC/TDF due to intolerance of previous regimen, were included. Analyses were performed by ITT. Presence/magnitude of symptoms (ACTG-HIV Symptom Index), quality of life (EQ-5D, EUROQoL & MOS-HIV), adherence (SMAQ), preference of treatment and perceived ease of medication (ESTAR) through 48 weeks were performed. RESULTS Interim analysis of 125 patients with 16 weeks of follow up was performed. 100 (80%) were male, mean age 46 years. Mean CD4 at baseline was 629.5±307.29 and 123 (98.4%) had viral load <50 copies/mL; 15% were HCV co-infected. Ninety two (73.6%) patients switched from a NNRTI (84.8% from EFV/FTC/TDF) and 33 (26.4%) from a PI/r. The most frequent reasons for switching were psychiatric disorders (51.2%), CNS adverse events (40.8%), gastrointestinal (19.2%) and metabolic disorders (19.2%). At the time of this analysis (week 16), four patients (3.2%) discontinued treatment: one due to adverse events, two virologic failures and one with no data. A total of 104 patients (83.2%) were virologically suppressed (<50 copies/mL). The average degree of discomfort in the ACTG-HIV Symptom Index significantly decreased from baseline (21±15.55) to week 4 (10.89±12.36) & week 16 (10.81±12.62), p<0.001. In all the patients, quality of life tools showed a significant benefit in well-being of the patients (Table 1). Adherence to therapy significantly and progressively increased (SMAQ) from baseline (54.4%) to week 4 (68%), p<0.001 and to week 16 (72.0%), p<0.001. CONCLUSIONS Switching to RPV/FTC/TDF from another ARV regimen due to toxicity, significantly improved the quality of life of HIV-infected patients, both in mental and physical components, and improved adherence to therapy while maintaining a good immune and virological response.

Dapagliflozina

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.

Cost-effectiveness of an exercise intervention program in perimenopausal women: the Fitness League Against MENopause COst (FLAMENCO) randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND The high prevalence of women that do not reach the recommended level of physical activity is worrisome. A sedentary lifestyle has negative consequences on health status and increases health care costs. The main objective of this project is to assess the cost-effectiveness of a primary care-based exercise intervention in perimenopausal women. METHODS/DESIGN The present study is a Randomized Controlled Trial. A total of 150 eligible women will be recruited and randomly assigned to either a 16-week exercise intervention (3 sessions/week), or to usual care (control) group. The primary outcome measure is the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The secondary outcome measures are: i) socio-demographic and clinical information; ii) body composition; iii) dietary patterns; iv) glycaemic and lipid profile; v) physical fitness; vi) physical activity and sedentary behaviour; vii) sleep quality; viii) quality of life, mental health and positive health; ix) menopause symptoms. All outcomes will be assessed at baseline and post intervention. The data will be analysed on an intention-to-treat basis and per protocol. In addition, we will conduct a cost effectiveness analysis from a health system perspective. DISCUSSION The intervention designed is feasible and if it proves to be clinically and cost effective, it can be easily transferred to other similar contexts. Consequently, the findings of this project might help the Health Systems to identify strategies for primary prevention and health promotion as well as to reduce health care requirements and costs. TRIAL REGISTRATION ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02358109 . Date of registration: 05/02/2015.