Geographic Variation in Rosiglitazone Use Surrounding FDA Warnings in the Department of Veterans Affairs

Changes in diabetes medication regimens and glycemic control in adolescents and young adults with youth-onset type 2 diabetes: The SEARCH for diabetes in youth study

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to describe recent medication patterns and changes in medication patterns and glycemic control in adolescents and young adults with incident type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

Using data from the SEARCH for Diabetes in Youth Study, we conducted a cross-sectional analysis of treatments for adolescents and young adults with incident T2D in 2 periods (2002-2005 vs 2008/2012), and a longitudinal analysis of medications and glycemic control for a subset with baseline and follow-up visits. Comparisons were performed using χ2 , Fisher's exact, or ANOVA.

RESULTS

Of 646 individuals in the cross-sectional analysis, a majority in each period received metformin (64.9% vs 70.4%) and/or insulin (38.1% vs 38.4%), while fewer used sulfonylureas (5.6% vs 3.6%) with non-significant changes over time. There was a significant reduction in thiazolidinedione use (5.0% vs 2.0%, P < .05). In the longitudinal analysis, 322 participants were followed for 7 years, on average. Baseline metformin users had a lower A1C (6.4% [46.7 mmol/mol]) compared to insulin (8.4% [68.2 mmol/mol], P < .001) or insulin plus any oral diabetes medication (ODM) users (7.7% [60.4 mmol/mol], P < .001). Among baseline metformin users (n = 138), 29.7% reported metformin at follow-up, with the remainder adding (19.6%) or switching to insulin (8.0%), ODM (15.9%), or lifestyle only (26.8%). Of those receiving insulin (±ODM) (n = 129), 76% reported insulin use at follow-up. Overall, 35% were at A1C goal (<7.0%, 53 mmol/mol) at follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Youth-onset T2D is still largely being treated with metformin and/or insulin. The majority treated were not at American Diabetes Association (ADA)-recommended goal 7 years after diagnosis.

Effects of a primary care intervention to improve the quality of zolpidem prescriptions in elderly patients

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to measure the impact of an intervention on the prescription habits of general practitioners (GPs) in order to improve the quality of zolpidem prescriptions in patients aged 75 or older.

METHODS

A prospective multicentric non-randomized trial was performed in the Metropolitan Granada Primary Healthcare Area (Andalusian Public Healthcare Service, Spain), which serves a total population of approximately 675,000 inhabitants. All health centers volunteering to participate in the trial were included. The intervention consisted of training sessions, individualized feedback, clinical information, and financial incentives. A daily dose over 5 mg was considered non-safe. Reduction in non-safe prescriptions of zolpidem in the elderly population became a quality prescribing indicator in a pay-for-performance scheme.

RESULTS

Statistically significant differences versus baseline were found between the intervention and control groups in mean zolpidem prescription prevalence (28.5 vs. 37.5‰, respectively; p = 0.008) and mean non-safe zolpidem prescription prevalence (16.5 vs. 34.2‰, respectively; p < 0.001). At the end of the study period, the total number of non-safe prescriptions was 1309, 35% lower versus baseline, with a significant difference of p < 0.001; the number in the intervention (510 vs. 1118; p < 0.001) and control (799 vs. 893; p = 0.0064) groups was also significantly lower, with a significantly greater percentage reduction in the intervention group (54.4 vs. 10.5%, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

The quality prescribing indicator in our area was improved by the intervention developed. Further studies that include an intervention group of GPs who receive no financial incentive are required to evaluate the relative importance of an economic reward in achieving this improvement.

Novel Therapeutics for Diabetes: Uptake, Usage Trends, and Comparative Effectiveness

The number of available therapies for treating type 2 diabetes has grown considerably in recent years. This growth has been fueled by availability of newer medications, whose benefits and risks have not been fully established. In this study, we review and synthesize the existing literature on the uptake, efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of novel antidiabetic agents. Specifically, we focus on three drug classes that were introduced in the market recently: thiazolidinediones (TZDs), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists. Not surprisingly, we find that the usage trends reflect the efficacy and safety profile of these novel drugs. The use of TZDs increased initially but decreased after a black-box warning was issued for rosiglitazone in 2007 that highlighted the cardiovascular risks associated with using the drug. Conversely, DPP-4 inhibitors and GLP-1 receptor agonists gained market shares due to their efficacy in glycemic control as an add-on treatment to metformin. DPP-4 inhibitors were the most commonly prescribed agents among the three novel drug classes, likely because they are relatively less expensive, have better safety profile, are administered orally, and are weight neutral. Sitagliptin was the most preferred DPP-4 inhibitor. The level of evidence on the comparative effectiveness, safety, and cost implications of using novel antidiabetic agents remains low and further studies with long-term follow-ups are needed.