Efficacy and Safety of Treatment with Quadruple Oral Hypoglycemic Agents in Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Multi-Center, Retrospective, Observational Study

Disease burden and symptom management in type 2 diabetic patients: A phenomenological study

AIM

This study was conducted to address the experiences of diabetic patients from a psychosocial perspective, examine the burden of disease, and determine their practices for symptom management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this study, a phenomenological research design, a qualitative research design, was used. The study included 20 diabetic patients. Individual and face-to-face interviews were performed, and Colaizzi's phenomenological analysis method was used to analyze the data.

RESULTS

As a result of the data analysis, four categories (challenges with care and treatment, coping with the disease, effects, and healthy life behaviors) and eleven main themes (knowledge, application, symptoms, support resources, spiritual coping methods, physical coping methods, physical effects, spiritual effects, social effects, physical practices, and psychological practices) emerged.

CONCLUSION

It was concluded that the disease burden of diabetic patients is intense and that the participants of the study were not effective in coping with the disease through symptom management and found spirituality important in coping.

Estimating Type 2 Diabetes Prevalence: A Model of Drug Consumption Data

Observational, cross-sectional prevalence studies are costly and time-consuming. The development of indirect methods estimating prevalence used to obtain faster, less-expensive, and more robust results would be an advantage for several healthcare applications. This study aimed to use the drug dispensing data from community pharmacies to estimate the prevalence of Type 2 Diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the Portuguese population. A cross-sectional study was conducted using a database of dispensed medicines with an indication for Diabetes mellitus in 2018 and 2021, stratified by geographic region. The methodology was based on a sequential method of acquiring prevalence estimates obtained through exposure to medicines using the daily doses defined per thousand inhabitants per day and adjusted to the rate of adherence to therapy, prescription patterns, and concomitance of antidiabetic drugs. The estimated overall T2DM prevalence in 2018 was 13.9%, and it was 14.2% for 2021. The results show the increased consumption of antidiabetic drugs, with fixed-dose combination antidiabetics and new antidiabetics being particularly important in 2021. This work allowed for the development of a model to obtain the estimated prevalence of T2DM based on drug consumption, using a simple, fast, and robust method that is in line with the available evidence. However, with the recent expanding indications for new antidiabetics, the inclusion of further data in the model needs to be studied.

Efficacy and safety of enavogliflozin versus dapagliflozin added to metformin plus gemigliptin treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes: A double-blind, randomized, comparator-active study: ENHANCE-D study

AIMS

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of enavogliflozin, a novel sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, versus dapagliflozin in Korean patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled with metformin and gemigliptin.

METHODS

In this multicenter, double-blind, randomized study, patients with inadequate response to metformin (≥ 1000 mg/day) plus gemigliptin (50 mg/day) were randomized to receive enavogliflozin 0.3 mg/day (n = 134) or dapagliflozin 10 mg/day (n = 136) in addition to the metformin plus gemigliptin therapy. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24.

RESULTS

Both treatments significantly reduced HbA1c at week 24 (-0.92% in enavogliflozin group, -0.86% in dapagliflozin group). The enavogliflozin and dapagliflozin groups did not differ in terms of changes in HbA1c (between-group difference: -0.06%, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.19, 0.06) and fasting plasma glucose (between-group difference: -3.49 mg/dl [-8.08;1.10]). An increase in urine glucose-creatinine ratio was significantly greater in the enavogliflozin group than in the dapagliflozin group (60.2 g/g versus 43.5 g/g, P < 0.0001). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between the groups (21.64% versus 23.53%).

CONCLUSIONS

Enavogliflozin, added to metformin plus gemigliptin, was well tolerated and as effective as dapagliflozin in the treatment of patients with T2DM.

A double-blind, Randomized controlled trial on glucose-lowering EFfects and safety of adding 0.25 or 0.5 mg lobeglitazone in type 2 diabetes patients with INadequate control on metformin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor therapy: REFIND study

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of adding low-dose lobeglitazone (0.25 mg/day) or standard-dose lobeglitazone (0.5 mg/day) to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with inadequate glucose control on metformin and dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP4) inhibitor therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this phase 4, multicentre, double-blind, randomized controlled, non-inferiority trial, patients with T2DM insufficiently controlled by metformin and DPP4 inhibitor combination therapy were randomized to receive either low-dose or standard-dose lobeglitazone. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of low-dose lobeglitazone in terms of glycaemic control, expressed as the difference in mean glycated haemoglobin levels at week 24 relative to baseline values and compared with standard-dose lobeglitazone, using 0.5% non-inferiority margin.

RESULTS

At week 24, the mean glycated haemoglobin levels were 6.87 ± 0.54% and 6.68 ± 0.46% in low-dose and standard-dose lobeglitazone groups, respectively (p = .031). The between-group difference was 0.18% (95% confidence interval 0.017-0.345), showing non-inferiority of the low-dose lobeglitazone. Mean body weight changes were significantly greater in the standard-dose group (1.36 ± 2.23 kg) than in the low-dose group (0.50 ± 1.85 kg) at week 24. The changes in HOMA-IR, lipid profile and liver enzyme levels showed no significant difference between the groups. Overall treatment-emergent adverse events (including weight gain, oedema and hypoglycaemia) occurred more frequently in the standard-dose group.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding low-dose lobeglitazone to metformin and DPP4 inhibitor combination resulted in a non-inferior glucose-lowering outcome and fewer adverse events compared with standard-dose lobeglitazone. Therefore, low-dose lobeglitazone might be one option for individualized strategy in patients with T2DM.

Effectiveness and safety of teneligliptin added to patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by oral triple combination therapy: A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, and placebo-controlled study

AIM

To investigate the effectiveness and safety of teneligliptin over placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled by triple therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This trial was a prospective, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. The 12-week double-blind period was followed by a 12-week, open-label clinical trial. One hundred patients with T2D who failed to achieve the glycaemic target (7.1% ≤ HbA1c ≤ 9.0%) with conventional triple oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) of metformin, sulphonylurea, and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor were assigned randomly 1:1 into teneligliptin and placebo-teneligliptin groups. The primary endpoint was mean change in HbA1c level from baseline in each group at 12 weeks.

RESULTS

For a total of 99 patients (n = 51 for the teneligliptin group, and n = 48 for the placebo-teneligliptin group), the mean age and duration of diabetes were 60.7 and 13.6 years, respectively, and HbA1c was 7.8% at baseline. At 12 weeks, the teneligliptin group achieved a significant reduction in HbA1c from baseline (-0.9% ± 0.6%, P < .001), with an intergroup difference of -0.75% compared with the placebo group (95% CI [-0.99%, -0.51%], P < .001). At the end of the 24-week treatment period, both groups showed significant reductions in HbA1c level from baseline (placebo-teneligliptin group, -0.8% ± 0.6% [P < .001], teneligliptin group, -0.9% ± 0.6% [P < .001]), without significant intergroup difference (-0.17%, 95% CI [-0.41%, 0.07%], P = .156). There was no significant difference between the groups in the rate of adverse events (placebo-teneligliptin group, n = 3 [6.3%]; teneligliptin group, n = 11 [11.1%]; P = .550), and the safety profiles were favourable in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The current study shows that teneligliptin could be a valid option as a fourth OAD for the treatment of patients with T2D inadequately controlled with a triple combination of OADs.

Treatment Patterns of Type 2 Diabetes Assessed Using a Common Data Model Based on Electronic Health Records of 2000-2019

BACKGROUND

Real-world data analysis is useful for identifying treatment patterns. Understanding drug prescription patterns of type 2 diabetes mellitus may facilitate diabetes management. We aimed to analyze treatment patterns of type 2 diabetes mellitus using Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model based on electronic health records.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study employed electronic health records of patients who visited Jeonbuk National University Hospital in Korea during January 2000-December 2019. Data were transformed into the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership Common Data Model and analyzed using R version 4.0.3 and ATLAS ver. 2.7.6. Prescription frequency for each anti-diabetic drug, combination therapy pattern, and prescription pattern according to age, renal function, and glycated hemoglobin were analyzed.

RESULTS

The number of adults treated for type 2 diabetes mellitus increased from 1,867 (2.0%) in 2000 to 9,972 (5.9%) in 2019. In the early 2000s, sulfonylurea was most commonly prescribed (73%), and in the recent years, metformin has been most commonly prescribed (64%). Prescription rates for DPP4 and SGLT2 inhibitors have increased gradually over the past few years. Monotherapy prescription rates decreased, whereas triple and quadruple combination prescription rates increased steadily. Different drug prescription patterns according to age, renal function, and glycated hemoglobin were observed. The proportion of patients with HbA1c ≤ 7% increased from 31.1% in 2000 to 45.6% in 2019, but that of patients visiting the emergency room for severe hypoglycemia did not change over time.

CONCLUSION

Medication utilization patterns have changed significantly over the past 20 years with an increase in the use of newer drugs and a shift to combination therapies. In addition, various prescription patterns were demonstrated according to the patient characteristics in actual practice. Although glycemic control has improved, the proportion within the target is still low, underscoring the need to improve diabetes management.