1.Does Sarcopenia Increase the Risk for Fresh Vertebral Fragility Fractures?: A Case-Control Study
Ashish ANAND ; Ajoy Prasad SHETTY ; K. R. RENJITH ; Sri Vijay Anand K. S. ; Rishi Mugesh KANNA ; Shanmuganathan RAJASEKARAN
Asian Spine Journal 2020;14(1):17-24
Methods:
Fifty-one consecutive patients with vertebral fragility fractures and matched controls without fractures were evaluated for sarcopenia, T-score, body mass index, and presence of preexisting vertebral fractures. Sarcopenia was diagnosed as total psoas cross-sectional area (TPA) 2 standard deviations below normative value from normal young adults and decreased handgrip strength (26 kg for men and 18 kg for women). Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using the fresh fracture occurrence as the dependent variable.
Results:
Sarcopenia was confirmed in 29.4% and 7.8% of cases and controls (p=0.005), respectively; 56.8% and 13.7% of cases and controls had previous vertebral fractures. Sarcopenia prevalence was greater among those with previous fractures (38% vs. 7.6%; odds ratio, 7.76; p<0.001). TPA was lower among the cases (1,278 mm2 vs. 1,569 mm2 , p=0.001) and those with previous fractures (1,168 mm2 vs. 1,563 mm2 , p<0.001). Handgrip strength was greater among those without previous fractures (19.6 kg vs. 16.3 kg, p=0.05). In multivariate analysis, sarcopenia was not identified as a significant predictor of fresh fractures whereas previous fractures and lower T-score were found to be significant.
Conclusions
Sarcopenia is not an independent risk factor for fresh vertebral fragility fractures in the elderly.
2.A prospective, randomized, open label, single-centre study for assessment of safety and effectiveness of recombinant human insulin 30/70 + insulin glulisine compared to recombinant human insulin NPH + regular in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in the Philippines.
Leilani B MERCADO-ASIS ; Mary Jane TANCHEE-NGO ; Erick S MENDOZA ; Ashish MANE ; Anand VASAM ; Agam SHAH ; Rishi JAIN
Journal of Medicine University of Santo Tomas 2019;3(1):260-269
Background:
The high prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the Philippines has burdened the health care system. Therefore, we compared the
standard of care Insulin 30/70 + Insulin Glulisine
(Arm B) to a traditional insulin regimen NPH Insulin
+ Regular Insulin (Arm A) to test the concept that
both insulin regimens provide comparable effectiveness and safety in real-world practice.
Methods :
This is a ‘proof-of-concept,’ prospective,
randomized, open label pragmatic study of 40
consecutive Filipino T2DM patients from October
2015 to June 2016. The primary endpoint was a
reduction in HbA1c at 12 weeks. The secondary
endpoints were changes in Fasting Plasma Glucose
(FPG), Post Prandial Glucose (PPG), Capillary Blood Sugar (CBS), weight and insulin dose at 12 weeks.
ANCOVA and Fisher’s exact tests were used.
Results :
Patients in treatment arm A showed comparable glycemic control to arm B as measured by
reductions in HbA1c (2.89% vs. 2.67%; P = 0.657),
FPG (65.94 vs. 46.71 mg/dl; P = 0.57), PPG (76.49
vs. 86.96 mg/dl; P = 0.271) and CBS (115.15 vs.
145.95 mg/dl; P = 0.420). Both treatment arms reported similar weight gain (1.92 vs. 1.22 kg), experienced similar incidence of hypoglycemia (7 vs. 6
patients) and adverse events (AE) (8 vs. 8 patients).
Conclusion
The traditional combination of NPH
Insulin + Regular Insulin offers comparable glycemic control and tolerance as the standard of care
without any new safety signals in the Filipino T2DM
population. With a lower price, it can be one of the
strategies to reduce the fi nancial burden of antidiabetic treatment.
Insulin, Isophane
;
Insulin
;
Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2