|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 20, 2019 19:24:40 GMT -5
According to the press release "Participants were randomized to receive One Drop + Afrezza, or One Drop + their current injectable bolus insulin" Both groups used OneDrop, and Afrezza or injectable mealtime insulin. Yes? That is correct. |
|
|
|
Post by goyocafe on Feb 20, 2019 19:38:31 GMT -5
A1C dropped 0.93 using Afrezza versus patients injectable mealtime insulin? No. T2 insulin using patients using Afrezza and One Drop dropped their A1c by 0.93. Patients not using Afrezza also dropped their A1c, but those numbers have not been given yet. I guess the full results presented at the ATTD have those numbers in them. What we do know is that in an earlier trial using their existing treatments T1 patients using One Drop reduced their A1c by 0.9, and T2 patients by 1.3. Critically though the T2 patients were on a variety of treatments and not insulin as in the newest trial so they may have been easier to coach. Meaning it is not really fair to Afrezza to compare that 1.3 reduction with the new 0.93 reduction. I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest that if the “comparator arm” of this study previously achieved a 1.3 reduction in A1C, then the absolute result being reported (-.93) yielded a 2.23 reduction in A1C, but since the newest number for the comparator arm hasn’t been revealed, and we’re using data from a previous One Drop study, that final relative difference will be something else. The fact remains, the absolute difference, however, was -.93. marketingexperiments.com/digital-analytics/absolute-versus-relative-difference |
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Feb 20, 2019 20:16:16 GMT -5
A1C dropped 0.93 using Afrezza versus patients injectable mealtime insulin? No. T2 insulin using patients using Afrezza and One Drop dropped their A1c by 0.93. Patients not using Afrezza also dropped their A1c, but those numbers have not been given yet. I guess the full results presented at the ATTD have those numbers in them. What we do know is that in an earlier trial using their existing treatments T1 patients using One Drop reduced their A1c by 0.9, and T2 patients by 1.3. Critically though the T2 patients were on a variety of treatments and not insulin as in the newest trial so they may have been easier to coach. Meaning it is not really fair to Afrezza to compare that 1.3 reduction with the new 0.93 reduction. Aged - actually its yes. A1C dropped 0.93 using Afrezza versus patients using injectable mealtime insulin - that is true.
RAA patients that were coached achieved some A1c benefit. Dr. Kendall in the PR called the difference in the RAA group and afrezza group significant. Specifically - "glycemic control were significantly improved compared to injected insulin in meal-challenge tests in patients with type 2 diabetes" We will find out tomorrow the actual numbers but significant sounds pretty damn good to me.
Maybe its time to tell your Endo you would like to give it a try. Whats the last excuse?
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 20, 2019 20:33:20 GMT -5
No. T2 insulin using patients using Afrezza and One Drop dropped their A1c by 0.93. Patients not using Afrezza also dropped their A1c, but those numbers have not been given yet. I guess the full results presented at the ATTD have those numbers in them. What we do know is that in an earlier trial using their existing treatments T1 patients using One Drop reduced their A1c by 0.9, and T2 patients by 1.3. Critically though the T2 patients were on a variety of treatments and not insulin as in the newest trial so they may have been easier to coach. Meaning it is not really fair to Afrezza to compare that 1.3 reduction with the new 0.93 reduction. I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest that if the “comparator arm” of this study previously achieved a 1.3 reduction in A1C, then the absolute result being reported (-.93) yielded a 2.23 reduction in A1C, but since the newest number for the comparator arm hasn’t been revealed, and we’re using data from a previous One Drop study, that final relative difference will be something else. The fact remains, the absolute difference, however, was -.93. marketingexperiments.com/digital-analytics/absolute-versus-relative-differenceYou are correct, without the comparator arm data this result is meaningless, we really need that data. The issue is that previously One Drop had achieved an average reduction of 1.3 for T2 which means people would be worse off moving from their current treatment to Afrezza and only getting a 0.93 reduction. This is going to be a problem for the idea of moving with established T2 to insulin early in the cycle (arguably if they did it before diabetes was well established they would get better results). |
|
|
|
Post by longliner on Feb 20, 2019 20:39:12 GMT -5
I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest that if the “comparator arm” of this study previously achieved a 1.3 reduction in A1C, then the absolute result being reported (-.93) yielded a 2.23 reduction in A1C, but since the newest number for the comparator arm hasn’t been revealed, and we’re using data from a previous One Drop study, that final relative difference will be something else. The fact remains, the absolute difference, however, was -.93. marketingexperiments.com/digital-analytics/absolute-versus-relative-differenceYou are correct, without the comparator arm data this result is meaningless, we really need that data. The issue is that previously One Drop had achieved an average reduction of 1.3 for T2 which means people would be worse off moving from their current treatment to Afrezza and only getting a 0.93 reduction. This is going to be a problem for the idea of moving with established T2 to insulin early in the cycle (arguably if they did it before diabetes was well established they would get better results). Soon we shall see, let's hope the data falls in favor of diabetics and longs.  |
|
|
|
Post by goyocafe on Feb 20, 2019 20:40:44 GMT -5
I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest that if the “comparator arm” of this study previously achieved a 1.3 reduction in A1C, then the absolute result being reported (-.93) yielded a 2.23 reduction in A1C, but since the newest number for the comparator arm hasn’t been revealed, and we’re using data from a previous One Drop study, that final relative difference will be something else. The fact remains, the absolute difference, however, was -.93. marketingexperiments.com/digital-analytics/absolute-versus-relative-differenceYou are correct, without the comparator arm data this result is meaningless, we really need that data. The issue is that previously One Drop had achieved an average reduction of 1.3 for T2 which means people would be worse off moving from their current treatment to Afrezza and only getting a 0.93 reduction. This is going to be a problem for the idea of moving with established T2 to insulin early in the cycle (arguably if they did it before diabetes was well established they would get better results). I get the impression that Mannkind hasn’t released the study results on their own for reasons of fully vetting the data. But the .93 reduction in absolute terms suggests to me they know the comparator arm numbers. Otherwise how could they determine the absolute number. From my understanding, another way of phrasing the number is that the Afrezza arm reduced A1C .93 more than the comparator arm, whatever that number is. That, or I’m not grasping the definition of “relative” and “absolute “. “Absolute difference gives you the real number difference between treatments For the sake of example, we’ll use a simple A/B split test (control and a single treatment) for a hypothetical landing page test and some dummy data to interpret. We ran our test and here are our results. The treatment outperformed the control by an absolute difference of 0.4% and a relative difference of 16.1%.” marketingexperiments.com/digital-analytics/absolute-versus-relative-difference |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 20, 2019 20:42:07 GMT -5
No. T2 insulin using patients using Afrezza and One Drop dropped their A1c by 0.93. Patients not using Afrezza also dropped their A1c, but those numbers have not been given yet. I guess the full results presented at the ATTD have those numbers in them. What we do know is that in an earlier trial using their existing treatments T1 patients using One Drop reduced their A1c by 0.9, and T2 patients by 1.3. Critically though the T2 patients were on a variety of treatments and not insulin as in the newest trial so they may have been easier to coach. Meaning it is not really fair to Afrezza to compare that 1.3 reduction with the new 0.93 reduction. Aged - actually its yes. A1C dropped 0.93 using Afrezza versus patients using injectable mealtime insulin - that is true.
RAA patients that were coached achieved some A1c benefit. Dr. Kendall in the PR called the difference in the RAA group and afrezza group significant. Specifically - "glycemic control were significantly improved compared to injected insulin in meal-challenge tests in patients with type 2 diabetes" We will find out tomorrow the actual numbers but significant sounds pretty damn good to me.
Maybe its time to tell your Endo you would like to give it a try. Whats the last excuse?
Same excuse as always - I get good results with my current insulin, and my insurer does not cover Afrezza. Sort of related... There don't seem to be free samples like the other insulins. When I wanted to try Tresiba (I think I am going to switch from Toujeo, I get better results) they could just give me a pen to try - no prescription or insurance hassles. I wonder how much opportunity gets missed there? Change is a really big deal so you want to make it as comfortable as possible to do both for the patient and the clinic. There is a reason the other insulin makers give away free samples. |
|
|
|
Post by sayhey24 on Feb 20, 2019 20:59:32 GMT -5
Aged - try this www.insulinsavings.com I hear up in NYC everyone is so rich they didn't want Amamzon there so $120 a month to reduce your A1c by a point seems money well spent. There is a reason other insulin vendors give away free samples, they are not as good as afrezza. Nothing in life is free. Pay now or pay later. |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 20, 2019 21:04:32 GMT -5
You are correct, without the comparator arm data this result is meaningless, we really need that data. The issue is that previously One Drop had achieved an average reduction of 1.3 for T2 which means people would be worse off moving from their current treatment to Afrezza and only getting a 0.93 reduction. This is going to be a problem for the idea of moving with established T2 to insulin early in the cycle (arguably if they did it before diabetes was well established they would get better results). I get the impression that Mannkind hasn’t released the study results on their own for reasons of fully vetting the data. But the .93 reduction in absolute terms suggests to me they know the comparator arm numbers. Otherwise how could they determine the absolute number. From my understanding, another way of phrasing the number is that the Afrezza arm reduced A1C .93 more than the comparator arm, whatever that number is. That, or I’m not grasping the definition of “relative” and “absolute “. I suspect that we are in the same position as with STAT, Mannkind don't own the results so can't control the release. I am certain they know the comparator results becasuse internally they will have seen the read out. I think you will find that the 0.93 reduction is from the average A1c of the Afrezza arm at the start to the A1c of the Afrezza arm at the end of the trial. I am pretty certain it's unrelated to the comparator arm. The absolute reduction just means the A1c was reduced by 0.93. In the earlier trial the absolute reduction of 1.3 meant the A1c of 8.3% dropped to 7.0% (the PR for that trial is here). They are talking about absolute reduction to distinguish between that and a percentage reduction (it was a 15.6% drop). For A1c people tend to want to know the actual (absolute) drop rather than the percentage drop in trials. |
|
|
|
Post by sportsrancho on Feb 20, 2019 21:21:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 20, 2019 21:29:43 GMT -5
Aged - try this www.insulinsavings.com I hear up in NYC everyone is so rich they didn't want Amazon there so $120 a month to reduce your A1c by a point seems money well spent. There is a reason other insulin vendors give away free samples, they are not as good as afrezza. Nothing in life is free. Pay now or pay later.https://onedrop.today/blogs/press-releases/one-drop-reports-glycemic-improvement-among-people-with-type-2-diabetes-using-one-drop-mobile-app Unfortunately I would need two boxes so that's $240 per month, or $720 per quarter. Right now I pay $65 per quarter so that's an extra $2,600 per year - I will pass on that. I don't believe in my case it would reduce my A1c by a point because my A1c is already well controlled and my TIR is usually over 80% so gains for me would be very marginal. If my numbers were worse then I would be a lot more interested, but $2,600 a year is still a lot. |
|
|
|
Post by longliner on Feb 20, 2019 21:37:59 GMT -5
Aged - try this www.insulinsavings.com I hear up in NYC everyone is so rich they didn't want Amazon there so $120 a month to reduce your A1c by a point seems money well spent. There is a reason other insulin vendors give away free samples, they are not as good as afrezza. Nothing in life is free. Pay now or pay later.https://onedrop.today/blogs/press-releases/one-drop-reports-glycemic-improvement-among-people-with-type-2-diabetes-using-one-drop-mobile-app Unfortunately I would need two boxes so that's $240 per month, or $720 per quarter. Right now I pay $65 per quarter so that's an extra $2,600 per year - I will pass on that. I don't believe in my case it would reduce my A1c by a point because my A1c is already well controlled and my TIR is usually over 80% so gains for me would be very marginal. If my numbers were worse then I would be a lot more interested, but $2,600 a year is still a lot. I would think if you contacted MC, and let him know who you were on Proboards, he would provide it for free.  |
|
|
|
Post by ltta on Feb 20, 2019 21:41:37 GMT -5
Unfortunately I would need two boxes so that's $240 per month, or $720 per quarter. Right now I pay $65 per quarter so that's an extra $2,600 per year - I will pass on that. I don't believe in my case it would reduce my A1c by a point because my A1c is already well controlled and my TIR is usually over 80% so gains for me would be very marginal. If my numbers were worse then I would be a lot more interested, but $2,600 a year is still a lot. I would think if you contacted MC, and let him know who you were on Proboards, he would provide it for free. I believe there were free samples many moons ago, and if Aged wanted them he/she would have found a source. |
|
|
|
Post by longliner on Feb 20, 2019 21:42:51 GMT -5
I would think if you contacted MC, and let him know who you were on Proboards, he would provide it for free. I believe there where free samples many moons ago, and if Aged wanted them he/she would have found a source. Yeah, just trying to help |
|
|
|
Post by agedhippie on Feb 20, 2019 21:46:28 GMT -5
Aged - you seem to be working very hard tonight to spin the results. There is no need to spin. Here is what Dr. Kendall said - "glycemic control were significantly improved compared to injected insulin in meal-challenge tests in patients with type 2 diabetes" What is significant 0.5, maybe more, we will find out tomorrow.
Bottom line - switch from RAA to afrezza, get a little coaching and get almost a 1% drop in your A1c.
Or if you are T1 stay on RAA, get a little coaching and get an almost identical result to Afrezza users. The mixed treatment T2 pool got a better than 1% drop with their current treatment and coaching. However I don't think Dr Kendall is talking about the One Drop trial. That looks like the first talk and I am really interested to see more details on that. |
|
