An initiative of the Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (formerly the Center for the Advancement of Pharmaceutical Education) (CAPE), the CAPE Educational Outcomes are intended to be the target toward which the evolving pharmacy curriculum should be aimed. Their development was guided by an advisory panel composed of educators and practitioners nominated for participation by practitioner organizations. CAPE 2013 represents the fourth iteration of the Educational Outcomes, preceded by CAPE 1992, CAPE 1998 and CAPE 2004 respectively. The CAPE 2013 Educational Outcomes were released at the AACP July 2013 Annual meeting and have been revised to include 4 broad domains, 15 subdomains, and example learning objectives.

Abbreviations MedDRA Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities NPH Neutral protamine HagedornTo the Editor: We have reported a randomised, long-term safety study comparing the effects of using the insulin analogue glargine (A21Gly,B31Arg,B32Arg human insulin) versus human neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin for 5 years in the management of type 2 diabetes [1]. The study, in which 1017 patients were randomised and treated, was designed to assess ocular complications of diabetes: there was no excess of such effects with insulin glargine compared with NPH insulin treatment and there was a similar slow progression of diabetic retinopathy with both types of insulin. Because of recent concerns about postulated neoplastic effects of insulins [2-5], we report here additional information from our study that bears on this question. In total, the mean cumulative exposure in our study was more than 4 years (1,524 days in the insulin glargine group and 1,522 days in the NPH insulin group), with more than 70% of patients exposed to more than 4 years of treatment (76% and 71%, respectively) ( Table 1).The baseline demographics and diabetes status were similar between the two treatment groups (insulin glargine vs NPH insulin): diabetes duration (10.7 vs 10.8 years),

The effect of metformin treatment on various aspects of carbohydrate and lipoprotein metabolism has been defined in 12 patients with non-insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (NIDDM). Patients were studied before and after approximately 4 mo of metformin therapy. Treatment was initiated with a single dose of 500 mg/day, increased at weekly intervals, and maintained at a final dose of 2.5 g/day (given at divided intervals) for the last 3 mo of the treatment program. Results demonstrated that both fasting and postprandial glucose concentrations were significantly lower after metformin administration, with the greatest change seen after meals. As a result, the total incremental plasma glucose response above basal measured from 0800 to 1600 after metformin was less than 25% of that seen initially. The improvement in ambient plasma glucose concentration in association with metformin occurred despite a modest but statistically significant decrease in circulating plasma insulin concentration. In addition, insulin-stimulated glucose uptake measured during hyperinsulinemic clamp studies was similar before and after metformin treatment. Furthermore, changes in insulin binding and insulin internalization by isolated monocytes did not correlate with the improvement in glycemic control. Thus, the ability of metformin to lower plasma glucose concentration in NIDDM does not appear to be secondary to an improvement in insulin action. Finally, metformin treatment was associated with a significant (P less than 0.01) decrease in plasma triglyceride concentration and an increase in plasma high-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentration. These results indicate that metformin treatment of patients with NIDDM led to an improvement in both glycemic control and lipoprotein metabolism.

Aims/hypothesis This long-term study was designed to further characterise the retinal safety profile of insulin glargine and human neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods An open-label, 5 year, randomised (1:1), multicentre, stratified, parallel-group study conducted in the USA and Canada enrolled individuals with type 2 diabetes and either no or non-proliferative retinopathy (less than severe; Early Treatment Diabetic Retinopathy Study [ETDRS] level less than 53 in both eyes) who were treated with oral hypoglycaemic agents (OHAs) alone, insulin alone or OHAs with insulin for ≥3 months prior to study entry and a baseline HbA 1c level of 6.0-12.0%. Patients were randomised by the investigator according to the centralised interactive voice response system to receive twice-daily NPH insulin (n=509) or once-daily basal insulin glargine (n=515). The investigator was not blinded to the treatment group to which each participant had been assigned. The main objective of this study was to compare the progression of diabetic retinopathy between treatment groups by analysing the percentage of patients with three or more step progression in the ETDRS retinopathy patientlevel severity scale after treatment with either basal insulin. Masked, centralised grading of seven-field stereoscopic fundus photographs was used.

No abstract