|
Post by babaoriley on Jun 20, 2018 13:09:52 GMT -5
I would have thought the score would have been more lopsided in our favor. Have I been dreaming too much?
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jun 20, 2018 13:16:34 GMT -5
I would have thought the score would have been more lopsided in our favor. Have I been dreaming too much? I think it is lopsided in our favor, look at the highs and the lows with the RAA, Aspart. looks like to get a six with apart, blood glucoses are swinging like monkeys from tree to tree.
|
|
|
Post by mytakeonit on Jun 20, 2018 14:05:18 GMT -5
peppy said ... The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust
remember leona Helmsley, "The Queen of Mean" she left 20 million to her dog?
I say ... remember my avatar? That was the dog and the doctor was looking to see if any of the $20M was left after he ate it. BAD DOG !!!
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jun 20, 2018 14:09:01 GMT -5
peppy said ... The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust remember leona Helmsley, "The Queen of Mean" she left 20 million to her dog? I say ... remember my avatar? That was the dog and the doctor was looking to see if any of the $20M was left after he ate it. BAD DOG !!! I loved that avatar, I am waiting for you to come up for air. Your friend Pep.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
ADA
Jun 20, 2018 14:36:39 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Jun 20, 2018 14:36:39 GMT -5
I would have thought the score would have been more lopsided in our favor. Have I been dreaming too much? You took the words out of my mouth.
|
|
|
ADA
Jun 20, 2018 14:41:11 GMT -5
Post by peppy on Jun 20, 2018 14:41:11 GMT -5
I would have thought the score would have been more lopsided in our favor. Have I been dreaming too much? I should also say, what is being represented by this chart is " AFFINITY-1, a treat-to-target study in T1D on multiple daily injection therapy, demonstrated one such ultra-short acting insulin, TI (Afrezza®), was non-inferior to SC aspart in A1C reduction" So it is the recap data off the affinity trial. that numerically that will put into %, is my understanding. anyway it isn't the STAT>help me out here, something like if 75 is total, and 28/75 was technosphere and 47/75 were Aspart, what is the reduction? am I in the ball park? 75/100 x 28/x = 37.33% 75/100 x 47/x = 62.666% a 26% difference in severe hypos? Did I somehow hit it?
|
|
|
Post by InvesterSam on Jun 20, 2018 14:55:11 GMT -5
I would have thought the score would have been more lopsided in our favor. Have I been dreaming too much? I should also say, what is being represented by this chart is " AFFINITY-1, a treat-to-target study in T1D on multiple daily injection therapy, demonstrated one such ultra-short acting insulin, TI (Afrezza®), was non-inferior to SC aspart in A1C reduction" So it is the recap data off the affinity trial. that numerically that will put into %, is my understanding. anyway it isn't the STAT>help me out here, something like if 75 is total, and 28/75 was technosphere and 47/75 were Aspart, what is the reduction? am I in the ball park? For subject-wise; 28/129 = 21.7% for TI 47/150 = 31.3% for Aspart (30.7% reduction in TI in number of subject experiencing severe HG events ) For number of event-wise; 59/129 = 0.457 per subject for TI 127/150 = 0.847 per subject for Aspart (46.0% reduction in TI in number of severe HG events per subject) Among subjects with severe HG events; 59/28 = 2.1 events per subject for TI 127/47 = 2.7 events per subject for Aspart (22.0% reduction in TI in number of events per subject) Conclusion: For TI less subject (30.7%) had severe HG event. If they do, TI subjects experience less frequently (22.0%). Overall, total number of severe HG events per subject is 46% less for TI.
|
|
|
ADA
Jun 20, 2018 14:56:57 GMT -5
Post by peppy on Jun 20, 2018 14:56:57 GMT -5
I should also say, what is being represented by this chart is " AFFINITY-1, a treat-to-target study in T1D on multiple daily injection therapy, demonstrated one such ultra-short acting insulin, TI (Afrezza®), was non-inferior to SC aspart in A1C reduction" So it is the recap data off the affinity trial. that numerically that will put into %, is my understanding. anyway it isn't the STAT>help me out here, something like if 75 is total, and 28/75 was technosphere and 47/75 were Aspart, what is the reduction? am I in the ball park? For subject-wise; 28/129 = 21.7% for TI 47/150 = 31.3% for Aspart (30.7% reduction in TI in number of subject experiencing severe HG events ) For number of event-wise; 59/129 = 0.457 per subject for TI 127/150 = 0.847 per subject for Aspart (46.0% reduction in TI in number of severe HG events per subject) I love you thank you.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jun 20, 2018 15:04:29 GMT -5
For subject-wise; 28/129 = 21.7% for TI 47/150 = 31.3% for Aspart (30.7% reduction in TI in number of subject experiencing severe HG events ) For number of event-wise; 59/129 = 0.457 per subject for TI 127/150 = 0.847 per subject for Aspart (46.0% reduction in TI in number of severe HG events per subject)I love you thank you. HALF (rounding) the number of severe hypoglycemic events per subject.
AFFINITY-1, a treat-to-target study in T1D on multiple daily injection therapy, demonstrated one such ultra-short acting insulin, TI (Afrezza®), was non-inferior to SC aspart in A1C reduction (Bode et al, Diabetes Care 2015). Consistent with its action profile, a lower rate of HG was observed in TI users overall, particularly in the 2-5 h post-meal interval and in those achieving target A1C<7%.
|
|
|
Post by InvesterSam on Jun 20, 2018 15:47:10 GMT -5
In STAT study, can they divide the standard treatment group into compliant and non-compliant groups and compare head-to-head with TI?
There will always be a non-compliant group, either in TI or standard treatment. When the results from the non-compliant group are removed, the effects usually get better. Some might skip planned/required daily injections then time in range (TIR) would be low as in TI non-compliant.
|
|
|
ADA
Jun 20, 2018 16:18:15 GMT -5
Post by tomtabb on Jun 20, 2018 16:18:15 GMT -5
I should also say, what is being represented by this chart is " AFFINITY-1, a treat-to-target study in T1D on multiple daily injection therapy, demonstrated one such ultra-short acting insulin, TI (Afrezza®), was non-inferior to SC aspart in A1C reduction" So it is the recap data off the affinity trial. that numerically that will put into %, is my understanding. anyway it isn't the STAT>help me out here, something like if 75 is total, and 28/75 was technosphere and 47/75 were Aspart, what is the reduction? am I in the ball park? For subject-wise; 28/129 = 21.7% for TI 47/150 = 31.3% for Aspart (30.7% reduction in TI in number of subject experiencing severe HG events ) For number of event-wise; 59/129 = 0.457 per subject for TI 127/150 = 0.847 per subject for Aspart (46.0% reduction in TI in number of severe HG events per subject) Among subjects with severe HG events; 59/28 = 2.1 events per subject for TI 127/47 = 2.7 events per subject for Aspart (22.0% reduction in TI in number of events per subject) Conclusion: For TI less subject (30.7%) had severe HG event. If they do, TI subjects experience less frequently (22.0%). Overall, total number of severe HG events per subject is 46% less for TI. Why do they end up saying only that it "has the potential to reduce the risk of late post-meal HG"? Can't they claim that it does reduce the risk?
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Jun 20, 2018 17:19:45 GMT -5
peppy said ... The Leona M. and Harry B. Helmsley Charitable Trust remember leona Helmsley, "The Queen of Mean" she left 20 million to her dog? I say ... remember my avatar? That was the dog and the doctor was looking to see if any of the $20M was left after he ate it. BAD DOG !!! The trust has $4 billion in assets last I heard. They give over $50 million a year to diabetes research and are one of the big artificial pancreas funders.
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Jun 20, 2018 17:56:26 GMT -5
HALF (rounding) the number of severe hypoglycemic events per subject.
AFFINITY-1, a treat-to-target study in T1D on multiple daily injection therapy, demonstrated one such ultra-short acting insulin, TI (Afrezza®), was non-inferior to SC aspart in A1C reduction (Bode et al, Diabetes Care 2015). Consistent with its action profile, a lower rate of HG was observed in TI users overall, particularly in the 2-5 h post-meal interval and in those achieving target A1C<7%. Pep, my point is we hear a lot on this board about Afrezza virtually eliminating hypoglycemic events, forgetting about the comparison with any other drug or treatment, I would have thought they number would have been lower. Now, if in this particular trial the foregoing statement of virtually eliminating hypoglycemic events is not applicable, fine. Or if it's due to noncompliance with treatment protocol, fine again. But I thought that if you use Afrezza as directed (or as intended by MannKind), you would get a far smaller percentage of hypoglycemic events. I would be happy for someone to set me straight on this.
|
|
|
Post by babaoriley on Jun 20, 2018 17:57:00 GMT -5
I would have thought the score would have been more lopsided in our favor. Have I been dreaming too much? You took the words out of my mouth. And that leaves a bad taste in mine.
|
|
|
Post by peppy on Jun 20, 2018 18:11:10 GMT -5
HALF (rounding) the number of severe hypoglycemic events per subject.
AFFINITY-1, a treat-to-target study in T1D on multiple daily injection therapy, demonstrated one such ultra-short acting insulin, TI (Afrezza®), was non-inferior to SC aspart in A1C reduction (Bode et al, Diabetes Care 2015). Consistent with its action profile, a lower rate of HG was observed in TI users overall, particularly in the 2-5 h post-meal interval and in those achieving target A1C<7%. Pep, my point is we hear a lot on this board about Afrezza virtually eliminating hypoglycemic events, forgetting about the comparison with any other drug or treatment, I would have thought they number would have been lower. Now, if in this particular trial the foregoing statement of virtually eliminating hypoglycemic events is not applicable, fine. Or if it's due to noncompliance with treatment protocol, fine again. But I thought that if you use Afrezza as directed (or as intended by MannKind), you would get a far smaller percentage of hypoglycemic events. I would be happy for someone to set me straight on this. so this is the old data. Saturday we get to see what the cgm's show, per STAT.
|
|