English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Having lived through a pandemic and witnessed how regulatory approval processes can evolve rapidly; it is lamentable how we continue to rely on symptoms/signs and nerve conduction as primary endpoints for clinical trials in DPN. Small (Aδ and C) fibers are key to the genesis of pain, regulate skin blood flow, and play an integral role in the development of diabetic foot ulceration but continue to be ignored. This article challenges the rationale for the FDA insisting on symptoms/signs and nerve conduction as primary endpoints for clinical trials in DPN. Quantitative sensory testing, intraepidermal nerve fiber density, and especially corneal confocal microscopy remain an after-thought, demoted at best to exploratory secondary endpoints in clinical trials of diabetic neuropathy. If pharma are to be given a fighting chance to secure approval for a new therapy for diabetic neuropathy, the FDA needs to reassess the evidence rather than rely on ‘opinion’ for the most suitable endpoint(s) in clinical trials of diabetic neuropathy.

Where Art Thou O treatment for diabetic neuropathy: the sequel