HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Purchase Article View Shopping Cart Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Hirsch, I. B. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Hirsch, I. B. Social Bookmarking                What's this?

Understanding Clinical Research

With the explosion of new oral drugs and insulins to treat diabetes, a recent correspondence to the journal Diabetes Care from David S.H. Bell, MD, was thought-provoking.1 His argument was that placebo-controlled trials to assess new oral therapies are unethical because we now have proven and safe therapies. Dr. Bell reasons that because existing therapies have proven risk-to-benefit ratios, a more appropriate course would be to compare the investigational agent against an existing drug—in other words, an "active placebo."

He argues further that by using inactive placebos, we are exposing study subjects to unnecessary hyperglycemia, even if for relatively short periods of time. Currently, pivotal trials for Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of diabetes agents last 6 months. Does 6 months of hyperglycemia using an inactive placebo contribute to an adverse effect on quality of life and microvascular complications, as Dr. Bell argues?

This topic has concerned me for a long time. Part of the problem is the types of end points we measure. For FDA approval, end points include fasting plasma glucose and HbA_1c levels. As an aside, there has been much controversy and confusion about how to best express these data. Measuring the difference from baseline can be very different from measuring the difference versus placebo, depending on the direction of movement of the placebo group. For example, if drug X lowers HbA_1c concentration by 1% from baseline over the past 6 months, but placebo Y results in a 0.5% HbA_1c increase, the improvement of HbA_1c compared . . . [Full Text of this Article]

REFERENCES

CiteULike    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?