Search

Introduction: China has the world's largest diabetes epidemic and has been facing a serious shortage of primary care providers for chronic diseases including diabetes. To help primary care physicians follow guidelines and mitigate the workload in primary care communities in China, we developed a guideline-based decision tree. This study aimed to validate it at 3 months with real-world data. Methods: The decision tree was developed based on the 2017 Chinese Type 2 Diabetes (T2DM) guideline and 2018 guideline for primary care. It was validated with the data from two registry studies: the NEW2D and ORBIT studies. Patients' data were divided into two groups: the compliance and non-compliance group, depending on whether the physician's prescription was consistent with the decision tree or not. The primary outcome was the difference of change in HbA1c from baseline to 3 months between the two groups. The secondary outcomes included the difference in the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c < 7% at 3 months between the two groups, the incidence of self-reported hypoglycemia at 3 months, and the proportion of patients (baseline HbA1c ≥ 7%) with a HbA1c reduction ≥ 0.3%. The statistical analysis was performed using linear or logistic regression with inverse probability of treatment weighting with adjustments of confounding factors. Results: There was a 0.9% reduction of HbA1c in the compliance group and a 0.8% reduction in the non-compliance group (P < 0.001); 61.1% of the participants in the compliance group and 44.3% of the participants in the non-compliance group achieved a HbA1c level < 7% at 3 months (P < 0.001). The hypoglycemic events occurred in 7.1% of patients in the compliance group vs. 9.4% in the non-compliance group (P < 0.001). Conclusion: The decision tree can help physicians to treat their patients so that they achieve their glycemic targets with fewer hypoglycemic risks. (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov NCT01525693 & NCT01859598). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Simultaneous administration of acetylsalicylic acid (ASA) and clopidogrel has demonstrated efficacy in the treatment of acute coronary syndrome. Clopidogrel + ASA in a fixed-dose combination (FDC) provides a pharmaceutical option to enhance adherence to the coadministration of dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT). Herein, we evaluate the bioequivalence of enteric ASA and clopidogrel in an FDC compared with simultaneous administration of the individual formulations., Methods: This study is a randomized, single-center, open-label, three-sequence, three-period, two-treatment, crossover study conducted in healthy Chinese male and female subjects under fed conditions. Subjects were randomized to receive, in each period, a single dose of (1) a combination tablet containing 75-mg clopidogrel and 100-mg enteric ASA (test formulation) or (2) coadministration of one 75-mg clopidogrel tablet and one 100-mg enteric-coated ASA tablet (reference formulations) under fed conditions. Plasma samples were analyzed for ASA, salicylic acid, clopidogrel, and the clopidogrel metabolite SR26334. For ASA, the reference-scaled average bioequivalence (RSABE) analysis was conducted for C max of ASA because within-subject standard deviation (SD W ) was ≥ 0.294 for log-transformed C max ., Results: The point estimate (test/reference geometric mean ratio) was between 0.80 and 1.25, and the upper one-sided 95% confidence interval (CI) for the scaled average bioequivalence metric was ≤ 0 (-0.08). AUC of ASA as SD W was < 0.294 for log-transformed AUC last and AUC. Estimates of 90% CIs for log-transformed AUC last and AUC ratios were within the bioequivalence range of 0.80 to 1.25 (0.98-1.08 and 1.00-1.10, respectively). For clopidogrel, the 90% CIs for the ratios comparing log-transformed C max , AUC last , and AUC ratios of clopidogrel following administration of test versus reference formulation were calculated using the ABE method and were well within the acceptable range of 0.80 to 1.25 (1.02-1.12, 0.92-0.99, and 0.92-0.98, respectively)., Conclusion: FDC of ASA and clopidogrel was bioequivalent to the simultaneous administration of the individual formulations in healthy Chinese subjects under fed conditions., Trial Registration: CTR20190376.