Outcomes of Patients with COPD Treated with ICS/LABA Before and After Initiation of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy with Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI)

INTRODUCTION

Triple therapy (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol; FF/UMEC/VI) has been shown to improve symptoms and reduce exacerbations in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and a history of exacerbations. This real-world study compared exacerbation rates and healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) before and after initiation of FF/UMEC/VI in patients with COPD previously treated with inhaled corticosteroid (ICS)/long-acting β2-agonist (LABA).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included commercial and Medicare Advantage with Part D administrative claims data from September 01, 2016, to March 31, 2020, of patients diagnosed with COPD. The index date was the date of the first FF/UMEC/VI claim (September 2017-March 2019). The 12 months prior to index (baseline) were used to assess patient characteristics and outcomes; the 12 months following index (follow-up) were used to assess study outcomes. All patients had ≥ 30 consecutive days' supply of any ICS/LABA dual therapy during the 12 months prior to FF/UMEC/VI initiation. Subgroup analyses included patients with ≥ 30 consecutive days' supply of budesonide/formoterol (BUD/FORM) during baseline. Analyses of patients with ≥ 1 COPD exacerbation during baseline were reported as well.

RESULTS

The overall population included 1449 patients (mean age 70.75 years; 54.18% female), of whom 540 were patients in the BUD/FORM subgroup. Significantly fewer patients experienced any exacerbation during follow-up versus baseline (overall population 53.49% vs 62.59%; p < 0.001; BUD/FORM subgroup 55.00% vs 62.41%; p = 0.004). Effects on exacerbation reduction were more pronounced among patients with ≥ 1 exacerbation during baseline. Lower COPD-related HCRU was observed during the follow-up compared with baseline for both the overall population and the BUD/FORM subgroup.

CONCLUSION

Patients with COPD treated with ICS/LABA during baseline, including patients specifically treated with BUD/FORM and those with a history of ≥ 1 exacerbation, had fewer COPD exacerbations and lower COPD-related HCRU after initiating FF/UMEC/VI.

Real-World Disease Burden and Healthcare Resource Utilization Among Patients with COPD and Asthma Using Triple Therapy (FF/UMEC/VI) in the United States

Purpose

Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) and asthma are associated with chronic inflammation of the respiratory tract; despite some overlap of symptoms, they are considered separate disorders. Triple therapy is recommended for patients with COPD and asthma whose symptoms remain uncontrolled despite dual therapy. There are limited real-world studies evaluating outcomes among patients with COPD and asthma who are receiving inhaled triple therapy. This United States (US)-based real-world study aimed to evaluate clinical and economic outcomes among patients with COPD and asthma receiving single-inhaler triple therapy (fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol [FF/UMEC/VI]).

Patients and Methods

Retrospective pre-post study using claims data from the Optum Clinformatics® database. Patients with COPD and asthma were indexed on the first date of FF/UMEC/VI prescription (1 October 2017-31 March 2019). Each patient acted as their own control. Patients were required to have continuous health plan enrollment for 12 months prior to (pre-treatment) and following (post-treatment) index. Exacerbations, all-cause and COPD-related healthcare resource utilization, and costs were compared before and after FF/UMEC/VI initiation.

Results

Overall, 2743 patients were included (mean age: 71 years; 64% female). Cardiovascular disease was the most prevalent comorbidity during both the pre- and post-treatment periods (90% for both periods). There was a lower proportion of patients with ≥1 COPD exacerbation or ≥1 asthma exacerbation post-treatment versus pre-treatment (51% vs 57%, p<0.0001, and 22% vs 32%, p<0.0001, respectively). Fewer patients had ≥1 all-cause office visit post-treatment versus pre-treatment (99.3% vs 99.7%, p=0.0329); more patients had ≥1 COPD-related office visit post-treatment versus pre-treatment (89.6% vs 87.5%, p=0.0035). Total all-cause healthcare costs were significantly higher post-treatment versus pre-treatment ($72,809 vs $63,734, p<0.0001). The driver of increased costs appeared to be primarily non-COPD-related (COPD-related costs: post-treatment $27,779 vs pre-treatment $25,081, p=0.0062).

Conclusion

FF/UMEC/VI reduced exacerbations among patients with COPD and asthma in a real-world setting in the US.

Real-World Study of Single-Inhaler Triple Therapy with Fluticasone Furoate/Umeclidinium/Vilanterol on Asthma Control in the US

Purpose

Real-world asthma control data among patients initiating fluticasone furoate/umeclidinium/vilanterol (FF/UMEC/VI) are limited. This study assessed rescue medication use and asthma-related exacerbations in patients with asthma before and after initiating single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI using administrative claims data.

Patients and Methods

This retrospective, pre-post cohort study analyzed data from the IQVIA PharMetrics Plus database (September 18, 2016‒March 31, 2020). Patients aged ≥18 years that had ≥1 dispensing of single-inhaler FF/UMEC/VI 100/62.5/25 mcg (first dispensing = index date), ≥12 months of continuous health insurance enrollment prior to (pre-treatment) and following (post-treatment) FF/UMEC/VI initiation and ≥1 diagnosis of asthma during the pre-treatment period or on the index date were included. The primary endpoint was the number of oral corticosteroid (OCS) dispensings per patient per year during pre- and post-treatment periods. Secondary endpoints included asthma-related exacerbation rates and short-acting β2-agonist (SABA) use. Comparisons between pre- and post-treatment periods were made using risk and rate ratios.

Results

Overall, 890 patients with asthma initiating treatment with FF/UMEC/VI were included. The most recently dispensed controller medications prior to FF/UMEC/VI initiation were inhaled corticosteroids/long-acting β2-agonists (33.5%) and leukotriene modifiers (33.0%). Patients had a 29% reduction in the number of OCS dispensings (rate ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.71 [0.65, 0.77], P < 0.001) during post-treatment versus pre-treatment, with a 23% reduction in the proportion of patients with ≥1 OCS dispensing post-treatment (risk ratio [95% CI]: 0.77 [0.73, 0.82], P < 0.001). Significant reductions in rates (rate ratio [95% CI]) of asthma-related exacerbations (0.59 [0.52, 0.67], P < 0.001) and SABA use (0.80 [0.74, 0.86], P < 0.001) were also observed.

Conclusion

In this real-world study, patients with asthma had significantly lower OCS use, asthma-related exacerbations, and SABA use following treatment initiation with FF/UMEC/VI compared with their pre-treatment period. These results suggest better asthma control following initiation of FF/UMEC/VI in a routine clinical practice setting.

Glycemic and Economic Outcomes in Elderly Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Initiating Dulaglutide Versus Basal Insulin in a Real-World Setting in the United States: The DISPEL-Advance Study

INTRODUCTION

Treatments like glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists carry low hypoglycemia risk and are recommended for elderly patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), while some routine treatments, like insulin, increase hypoglycemia risk. The DISPEL-Advance (Dulaglutide vs Basal InSulin in Injection Naïve Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Effectiveness in ReaL World) study compared glycemic outcomes, healthcare resource utilization, and costs in elderly patients with T2D who initiated treatment with dulaglutide versus those initiating treatment with basal insulin.

METHODS

This observational, retrospective cohort study used data from the Optum Research Database. Medicare Advantage patients (≥ 65 years) with T2D were assigned to dulaglutide or basal insulin cohorts based on pharmacy claims and propensity score matched on demographic and baseline characteristics. Change in HbA1c, 12-months follow-up HbA1c, and follow-up all-cause and diabetes-related healthcare resource utilization and costs were compared.

RESULTS

Propensity score matching yielded well-balanced cohorts with 1891 patients each (mean age: dulaglutide, 72.09 years; basal insulin, 72.56 years). The dulaglutide cohort had significantly greater mean HbA1c reduction from baseline to follow-up than basal insulin cohort (- 0.95% vs - 0.69%; p < 0.001). The dulaglutide cohort had significantly lower mean all-cause and diabetes-related medical costs (all-cause: $8306 vs $12,176; diabetes-related: $4681 vs $7582 respectively; p < 0.001) and lower mean all-cause total costs ($18,646 vs $20,972, respectively; p = 0.007) than basal insulin cohort. The dulaglutide cohort had significantly lower all-cause and diabetes-related total costs per 1% change in HbA1c than basal insulin cohort (all-cause: $19,729 vs $30,334; diabetes-related: $12,842 vs $17,288, respectively; p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Elderly patients with T2D initiating dulaglutide had greater HbA1c reduction, lower mean all-cause medical and total costs, lower diabetes-related medical costs, and lower total all-cause and diabetes-related costs per 1% change in HbA1c than patients initiating basal insulin. Future studies assessing medications that do not increase hypoglycemia risk could help inform therapeutic strategies in elderly patients.

The Burden and Impacts of Mealtime Insulin from the Perspective of People with Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

While there have been continued advances in insulin treatment for diabetes since the discovery of insulin 100 years ago, some unmet needs still remain, including those related to mealtime insulin (MTI). The objective of this study was to explore the impacts related to MTI and the relative burden of the impacts on people with diabetes.

METHODS

This study was conducted across two phases, namely, a qualitative and quantitative phase. People with type 1 and 2 diabetes using MTI in the USA and UK were recruited for the study. The qualitative phase involved 30 interviews to explore the impacts associated with MTI. Based on the results of the qualitative phase, a list of impacts was developed to evaluate the importance of MTI impacts using best-worst scaling.

RESULTS

A total of 30 participants completed interviews, and 336 completed the quantitative phase. Participants described a range of impacts associated with MTI, including psychological (72.0%), social (63.0%), work/school (53.8%), and sleep (51.7%). Impacts for the quantitative phase were categorized under the following domains: diabetes distress, diabetes management, work productivity, and social. The three most burdensome impacts were related to diabetes distress, but the diabetes management domain contributed more than diabetes distress to the relative burden. There were minor differences in the relative importance of impacts by diabetes type, diabetes duration, and experience with continuous glucose monitoring.

CONCLUSION

This study confirms that people with diabetes using MTI still have an array of unmet needs, including those related to the management of their diabetes and the emotional distress of having diabetes. These findings may be useful for healthcare provider (HCP)-patient interactions to ensure HCPs are allowing patients an opportunity to discuss their experiences with MTI.

The Association Between Sustained HbA1c Control and Long-Term Complications Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Study

INTRODUCTION

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) represents a rising burden in the US and worldwide, with the condition shown to be associated with relatively large human and economic costs. Part of the reason for such high costs associated with T2D is that the condition is often accompanied by additional health-related complications. The goal of this research is to examine the association between glycemic control and diabetes-related complications for individuals with T2D.

METHODS

The Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart (CDM) database from 2007 to 2020 was used to identify adults with T2D. Individuals were classified as having sustained glycemic control (all hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] < 7%) or poor glycemic control (all HbA1c ≥ 7%) over the 5-year post-period, and diabetes-related complications were identified based upon the Diabetes Complications Severity Index. Multivariable analyses examined the association between sustained glycemic control and diagnosis of a diabetes-related complication in the post-period.

RESULTS

Maintaining HbA1c < 7% over the 5-year post-period, compared to maintaining HbA1c ≥ 7%, was associated with reduced odds of the diabetes-related complications of cardiovascular disease (odds ratio [OR] = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.94), metabolic disease (OR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.22-0.600), neuropathy (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.84), nephropathy (OR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.94), and peripheral vascular disease (OR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.33-0.83). There was no statistically significant association between sustained glycemic control and cerebrovascular disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Sustained glycemic control was found to be associated with significant reductions in the odds of being diagnosed with diabetes-related complications over a 5-year post-period.

Understanding the impact of five major determinants of health (genetics, biology, behavior, psychology, society/environment) on type 2 diabetes in U.S. Hispanic/Latino families: Mil Familias - a cohort study

BACKGROUND

In the United States (U.S.), the prevalence of both diagnosed and undiagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D) is nearly twice as high among Mexican-origin Hispanic/Latino adults compared to non-Hispanic Whites. Rates of diabetes-related complications, e.g., acute stroke and end-stage renal disease, are also higher among Hispanic/Latino adults compared to their non-Hispanic/Latino White counterparts. Beyond genetic and biological factors, it is now recognized that sociocultural influences are also important factors in determining risk for T2D and the associated complications. These influences include ethnicity, acculturation, residence, education, and economic status. The primary objective of this study is to determine the influence of the 5 major determinants of human health (genetics, biology, behavior, psychology, society/environment) on the burden of T2D for Latino families. To achieve this objective, Mil Familias (www.milfamilias.sansum.org/) is establishing an observational cohort of 1000 Latino families, with at least one family member living with T2D.

METHODS

Specially trained, bilingual Latino/a community health workers (Especialistas) recruit participant families and conduct research activities. Each individual family member will contribute data annually on over 100 different variables relating to their genetics, biology, psychology, behavior, and society/environment, creating a Latino-focused biobank ("Living Information Bank"). This observational cohort study is cross-sectional and longitudinal. Participants are divided into 4 groups: adults age ≥ 18 years with and without T2D, and children age ≥ 7 and < 18 years with and without T2D. Study activities take place through encounters between families and their Especialista. Encounters include screening/enrollment, informed consent, health promotion assessment, laboratory tests, questionnaires, physical activity monitoring, and reflection.

DISCUSSION

By creating and providing the framework for the Cohort Establishment study, we intend to inform new approaches regarding equity and excellence in diabetes research and care. We will examine the complex set of factors that contribute to the burden of diabetes in Latino families and assess if cardio-metabolic disease risks go beyond the traditional biological and genetic factors. Breaking the code on the interplay of cardio-metabolic risk factors may help not only this fast growing segment of the U.S. population, but also other high-risk populations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Study retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03830840), 2/5/2019 (enrollment began 2/1/2019).

Development of the influence, motivation, and patient activation in diabetes (IMPACT-D™) measure

AIMS

We sought to create a new research and clinical instrument -the Influence and Motivation for Patient ACTivation in Diabetes care (IMPACT-D™) - to measure the degree to which patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) value health and believe they can influence it.

METHODS

Candidate items were generated via a literature review, expert opinion, and qualitative interviews and focus groups with T2DM patients in Chicago, IL and Chapel Hill, NC. Psychometric testing guided by item response theory was conducted among an online panel of 500 English-speaking adults with T2DM. Differential item functioning analyses evaluated item performance across key participant characteristics. To determine construct validity, IMPACT-D™ scores were compared to other general measures of personality and patient activation. A second study among 300 patients recruited from two internal medicine clinics further assessed associations between the IMPACT-D™ and health outcomes. Cognitive interviews confirmed patient understanding of IMPACT-D™ items and instructions.

RESULTS

Exploratory factor analyses revealed a single-factor solution that included 6 items. The IMPACT-D™ demonstrated adequate reliability (α = 0.72) and moderate construct validity with patient activation (r = 0.51, p < 0.001) and personality-conscientiousness subscales (r = 0.29, p < 0.001). Higher scores on the IMPACT-D™ were associated with better physical health (r = 0.17, p = 0.003) and lower severity of depressive (r = -0.35, p < 0.001) and anxiety (r = -0.28, p < 0.001) symptoms. There were no significant differences by blood pressure (r = -0.0021, p = 0.9) or haemoglobin A1c (r = -0.069p = 0.2).

CONCLUSIONS

The IMPACT-D holds potential for use in both clinical care and research applications. Future studies should evaluate how to best operationalize its use for both settings.

Development of the Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) and Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ)

BACKGROUND

Previous research has examined patient perceptions of insulin injection devices. However, injectable medications other than insulin are increasingly used to treat type 2 diabetes, including GLP-1 receptor agonists. No patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments have been developed taking into account the experiences of patients using newer injection devices, which are often different from devices used for insulin. Therefore, the purpose of this qualitative study was to develop two draft PRO instruments focusing on patients' experiences with these newer injection devices (one instrument assessing perceptions of a single injection device, and another assessing preferences between two devices).

METHODS

Questionnaire development proceeded in six steps: literature review, interviews with six device experts, concept elicitation interviews with patients (N = 32), preliminary translatability assessment, cognitive interviews with patients (N = 20), and final translatability assessment.

RESULTS

Literature review and expert interviews were conducted to inform a concept elicitation interview guide. In concept elicitation in the US, UK, and Germany, patients with type 2 diabetes reported a range of injection features that influenced their perceptions of non-insulin injection devices (e.g., requirements for preparation of the medication/device, issues related to the needle, ease-of-use, portability). Two draft "item pools" were developed based on the literature review, expert interviews, and concept elicitation results. In cognitive interviews, patients recommended minor revisions and indicated that the draft instruments were generally clear, comprehensible, and relevant to their experience with non-insulin injectable medication. The instruments were refined based on the cognitive interviews and translatability assessment, resulting in two questionnaires.

CONCLUSIONS

The various steps of qualitative research support the content validity of these new PRO instruments, which are the first developed specifically to assess perceptions of non-insulin injection delivery systems. Despite some overlap with insulin-focused questionnaires, the new instruments are distinct from previous instruments (omitting content that would not be relevant to patients receiving non-insulin injectable treatment, while including content that is not included in the insulin focused instruments). This qualitative research yielded two draft questionnaires that are grounded in patient perceptions and ready for psychometric validation studies with larger samples of patients with type 2 diabetes.

Psychometric evaluation of the Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) and Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ)

BACKGROUND

Previous research has examined patient perceptions of insulin injection devices. However, a range of injectable medications other than insulin are now used to treat type 2 diabetes. No patient-reported outcome (PRO) instruments have been developed taking into account the perceptions of patients using newer injection devices, which are often different from those used in the past. Therefore, the primary purpose of this study was to evaluate a new PRO instrument focusing on patients' experiences with injection devices, including those used for newer treatments such as GLP-1 receptor agonists.

METHODS

Patients with T2D treated with non-insulin injectable medications were recruited via advertisements and six clinical sites in the US. All participants completed the draft Diabetes Injection Device - Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) and additional measures administered for validity assessment. Participants who had experience with two non-insulin injection devices also completed the draft Diabetes Injection Device - Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ). Analyses focused on item reduction (item performance, exploratory factor analysis), reliability, and validity.

RESULTS

One hundred fourty two patients (mean age = 63.0y; 56.3% female) participated. Item reduction yielded a 10-item version of the DID-EQ, including a 7-item Device Characteristics subscale and three global items assessing satisfaction, ease of use, and convenience of the injection device. The DID-EQ demonstrated good internal consistency reliability (Cronbach's alpha of Device Characteristics subscale = 0.80) and 7-day test-retest reliability (ICCs: 0.92 for Device Characteristics subscale; 0.65 to 0.91 for the three global items). Construct validity was demonstrated via correlations with previously validated instruments (e.g., correlations with the DTSQ treatment satisfaction subscale ranged from 0.56 to 0.60, all p < 0.0001; correlations with the TRIM-D Device ranged from 0.63 to 0.77, all p < 0.0001). Descriptive analyses of the DID-PQ were conducted with a subset of 27 participants who were able to use it to compare two devices.

CONCLUSIONS

This psychometric evaluation supports the reliability and validity of the DID-EQ, while providing initial information on the performance of the DID-PQ. These brief questionnaires complement measures of treatment efficacy and provide a more thorough picture of patients' experiences with non-insulin injectable treatments for type 2 diabetes.

Patient perceptions of injection devices used with dulaglutide and liraglutide for treatment of type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Liraglutide and dulaglutide have demonstrated similar glycemic efficacy and safety. However, they differ in treatment administration and injection devices. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare patient perceptions of the injection devices used with liraglutide and dulaglutide.

METHODS

Patients with type 2 diabetes treated with liraglutide or dulaglutide were recruited from across the US. Patients completed the Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) to rate their current injection device. Patients who had experience with both treatments also completed the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ) to report preferences between the two devices. ANCOVAs were conducted to compare DID-EQ scores between dulaglutide and liraglutide patients, while controlling for covariates. Descriptive statistics are presented for preferences reported on the DID-PQ.

RESULTS

A total of 404 patients were recruited from 49 states (mean age = 60.7 years; 54.0% female; 204 liraglutide; 200 dulaglutide). Mean DID-EQ item scores for both treatments were high, ranging from 3.48 to 3.90 on a 4 point scale. ANCOVAs found significantly higher scores for dulaglutide than liraglutide on DID-EQ global items assessing ease of use (3.82 vs. 3.73, p = .040) and convenience (3.79 vs. 3.66, p = .004). Among the 58 patients who had used both devices, more patients reported a preference for the dulaglutide device than the liraglutide device on every item of the DID-PQ.

CONCLUSIONS

High DID-EQ scores indicate positive perceptions of both the liraglutide and dulaglutide injection devices. The dulaglutide device was associated with slightly higher scores for ease of use and convenience than the liraglutide device.

Evaluating preferences for profiles of GLP-1 receptor agonists among injection-naïve type 2 diabetes patients in the UK

OBJECTIVE

To use a discrete choice experiment (DCE) to evaluate preferences for the actual treatment features and overall profiles of two injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (dulaglutide and liraglutide) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the UK.

METHODS

In-person interviews were conducted in the UK to administer a DCE to patients with self-reported T2DM, naïve to treatment with injectable medications. The DCE examined six attributes of T2DM treatment each described by two levels: "dosing frequency," "hemoglobin A1c change," "weight change," "type of delivery system," "frequency of nausea," and "frequency of hypoglycemia." Part-worth utilities were estimated using random effects logit models and were used to calculate relative importance (RI) values for each attribute. A chi-square test was used to determine differences in preferences for dulaglutide versus liraglutide profiles.

RESULTS

A total of 243 participants [mean age: 60.5 (standard deviation 10.9) years; 76.1% male; mean body mass index: 29.8 (standard deviation 5.4) kg/m(2)] completed the study. RI values for the attributes in rank order were: "dosing frequency" (41.6%), "type of delivery system" (35.5%), "frequency of nausea" (10.4%), "weight change" (5.9%), "hemoglobin A1c change" (3.6%), and "frequency of hypoglycemia" (3.0%). Significantly more participants preferred the dulaglutide profile (83.1%) compared with the liraglutide profile (16.9%; P<0.0001).

CONCLUSION

This study elicited patients' preferences for attributes and levels representing the actual characteristics of two specific glucagon-like peptide-1 medications. In this context, dosing frequency and type of delivery system were most important, accounting for over 75% of the RI. While previous studies have identified efficacy as highly important in T2DM medication decisions, this study suggests that when differences in efficacy between medications are small, other treatment features (eg, dosing frequency and delivery system) are of much greater importance to patients.

Estimated glomerular filtration rate progression in UK primary care patients with type 2 diabetes and diabetic kidney disease: a retrospective cohort study

AIMS

To examine the rates of diabetic kidney disease (DKD) progression and associated factors, we undertook a study of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in a historical cohort of UK primary care patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and associated DKD from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink.

METHODS

Our eligible population were patients with definitive T2DM from a recorded diagnostic code with either a diagnosis of chronic kidney disease (CKD) or renal function test values and renal abnormalities consistent with a CKD diagnosis, identified between 1 October 2006 and 31 December 2011. Only patients with albuminuria results reported in mg/l were used for the longitudinal statistical analyses of the eGFR rate of change using multilevel models.

RESULTS

We identified 111,030 patients with T2DM. Among them 58.6% (95% confidence interval (CI): 58.3-58.9) had CKD and 37.2% (95% CI: 36.9-37.5%) had presumed DKD at baseline. Only 19.4% of patients had urinary albumin test results expressed as mg/l in the year prior to index date. Almost two-thirds (63.8%) of patients with T2DM and presumed DKD received prescriptions for angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors or angiotensin type 1 receptor blockers (ARB) or both. Time-dependent variables that predict subsequent eGFR decline include increased albuminuria, time from index date and older age.

CONCLUSION

Only a minority of diabetic patients with DKD had quantitative albuminuria assessments. The relatively low proportion of DKD patients with ACEi or ARB prescriptions suggests a gap between healthcare practice and available scientific evidence during the study period. Increased albuminuria and older age were the most consistent predictors of subsequent eGFR decline.

Is the current standard of care leading to cost-effective outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes requiring insulin? A long-term health economic analysis for the UK

AIMS

The aim of the analysis was to investigate whether insulin intensification, based on the use of intensive insulin regimens as recommended by the current standard of care in routine clinical practice, would be cost-effective for patients with type 2 diabetes in the UK.

METHODS

Clinical data were derived from a retrospective analysis of 3185 patients with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin in The Health Improvement Network (THIN) general practice database. In total, 48% (614 patients) intensified insulin therapy, defined by adding bolus or premix insulin to a basal regimen, which was associated with a reduction in HbA1c and an increase in body mass index. Projections of clinical outcomes and costs (2011 GBP) over patients' lifetimes were made using a recently validated type 2 diabetes model.

RESULTS

Immediate insulin intensification was associated with improvements in life expectancy, quality-adjusted life expectancy and time to onset of complications versus no intensification or delaying intensification by 2, 4, 6, or 8 years. Direct costs were higher with the insulin intensification strategy (due to the acquisition costs of insulin). Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios for insulin intensification were GBP 32,560, GBP 35,187, GBP 40,006, GBP 48,187 and GBP 55,431 per QALY gained versus delaying intensification 2, 4, 6 and 8 years, and no intensification, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Although associated with improved clinical outcomes, insulin intensification as practiced in the UK has a relatively high cost per QALY and may not lead to cost-effective outcomes for patients with type 2 diabetes as currently defined by UK cost-effectiveness thresholds.

Utility values in diabetic kidney disease: a literature review

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the published literature on utilities for health states associated with diabetic kidney disease (DKD), including end-stage renal disease (ESRD).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A literature review was conducted (MEDLINE, MEDLINE in process, EMBASE, NHS EED, HEED, CEA Registry, EconLit, RePEc, and HTA) to identify relevant articles published between January 2000 and July 2013. Results were assessed for relevance by two reviewers in line with the study protocol.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

For eligible studies, data extracted included patient population, health states, methods used to elicit utility values, and the source of the preference values.

RESULTS

Twelve studies satisfied the inclusion criteria. They reported various utility and/or disutility scores for different DKD health states using a range of patient populations, utility approaches, and sources of preference values. The most common study country was the USA. Most of the studies collected data at one time point, but two had a longitudinal design. Three different utility instruments - EuroQoL (EQ-5D), Quality of Well-Being Scale (QWB), and 15-dimensional (15D) - were used to elicit utilities indirectly. The Time Trade-Off (TTO) approach was used in one study; another undertook a meta-analysis of published utility studies. Utilities were identified for different health states including DKD, ESRD-no dialysis, ESRD-dialysis, and transplant. One study reported utilities for patients by type of transplant. There was variation in values for the same health state between studies, and none of the studies reported utilities for the different stages of DKD. In the studies that undertook a comparison, utility values for those with DKD were generally found to be lower than those without DKD.

CONCLUSIONS

This literature review highlights that at present utility scores (or disutility penalties) exist for relatively few health states in DKD. Further studies are needed to produce accurate and comprehensive utility scores that differentiate between different DKD health states.

Field testing the ENSEMBLE Minimum Dataset: performance of an instrument to address heterogeneity of treatment effects

AIM

To assess the ability of ENterprising SElective Multi-instrument BLend for hEterogeneity analysis (ENSEMBLE) Minimum Dataset instrument dimensions to discriminate among subgroups of patients expected to have differential outcomes.

MATERIALS & METHODS

Patients with Type 2 diabetes, knee osteoarthritis, ischemic heart disease or heart failure completed a survey designed to represent three dimensions (health, personality and behavior). Health-related outcomes and utilization were investigated using claims data. Discriminant validity and associations between the dimensions and outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 2625 patients completed the survey. The dimensions discriminated 50-100% of the outcome levels across disease cohorts; behavior dimension scores did not differ significantly among the healthcare utilization level subgroups in any disease cohort.

CONCLUSION

ENSEMBLE Minimum Dataset dimensions discriminated health-related outcome levels among patients with varied diseases.

Comprehensive review of factors implicated in the heterogeneity of response in depression

BACKGROUND

Heterogeneity in overall response and outcomes to pharmacological treatment has been reported in several depression studies but with few sources that integrate these results. The goal of this study was to review the literature and attempt to identify nongenetic factors potentially predictive of overall response to depression treatments.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the literature from the last 10 years was performed using three key databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane). All relevant studies that met the inclusion criteria were selected and scored for their levels of evidence using the NICE scoring method. A subjective assessment of the strength of evidence for each factor was performed using predefined criteria.

RESULTS

Our broad search yielded 76 articles relevant to treatment heterogeneity. Sociodemographic factors, disease characteristics, and comorbidities were the most heavily researched areas. Some of the factors associated with more favorable overall response include being married, other social support, and low levels of baseline depressive symptoms. Evidence relating to baseline disease severity as a factor predictive of antidepressant response was particularly convincing among the factors reviewed. The presence of comorbid anxiety and pain contributed to worse antidepressant treatment outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Several factors either predictive of or associated with overall response to antidepressant treatment have been identified. Inclusion of factors predictive of response in the design of future trials may help tailor treatments to depression patients presenting to the average clinical practice, resulting in improved outcomes.

A comprehensive review of predictive and prognostic composite factors implicated in the heterogeneity of treatment response and outcome across disease areas

AIM

To assess and present the current body of evidence regarding composite measures associated with differential treatment response or outcome as a result of patient heterogeneity and to evaluate their consistency across disease areas.

METHODS

A comprehensive review of the literature from the last 10 years was performed using three databases (PubMed, Embase and Cochrane). All articles that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were selected, abstracted and assessed using the NICE level-of-evidence criteria.

RESULTS

Forty-nine studies were identified in the data abstraction. Approximately one-third focused on existing composite measures, and the rest investigated emerging composite factors. The majority of studies targeted patients with cancer, cardiovascular disease or psychological disorders. As a whole, the composite measures were found to be disease-specific, but some composite elements, including age, gender, comorbidities and health status, showed consistency across disease areas. To complement these findings, common individual factors found in five previous independent disease-specific literature assessments were also summarised, including age, gender, treatment adherence and satisfaction, healthcare resource utilisation and health status.

CONCLUSIONS

Composite measures can play an important role in characterising heterogeneity of treatment response and outcome in patients suffering from various medical conditions. These measures can help clinicians to better distinguish between patients with high likelihood to respond well to treatment and patients with minimal chances of positive therapeutic outcomes. Herein, the individual factors identified can be used to develop novel predictive or prognostic composite measures that can be applicable across disease areas. Reflecting these cross-disease measures in clinical and public health decisions has the distinctive appeal to enable targeted treatment for patients suffering from multiple medical conditions, which may ultimately yield significant gains in individual outcomes, population health and cost-effective resource allocation.

Review of treatment response in rheumatoid arthritis: assessment of heterogeneity

OBJECTIVE

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic, systemic, progressive, inflammatory disorder. The primary goals of treatment in RA are to reduce the signs and symptoms of disease, prevent progression of joint damage and improve patients' physical function. Patients with different sociodemographic characteristics, varying degrees of severity of illness, and comorbidities tend to exhibit differential response to treatment. The purpose of this review was to identify a broad set of factors that are associated with and/or predictive of RA treatment response and determine those that warrant further research.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A comprehensive review of the literature from the last 10 years was performed using three key databases (PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane). All relevant articles that met the inclusion/exclusion criteria were selected and scored for their levels of evidence using the National Institute of Clinical Excellence (NICE) scoring method. Data on study design, interventions and treatment outcomes were abstracted using a structured abstraction table.

RESULTS

A total of 30 articles were included in the review and data abstraction. Besides gender, baseline clinical variables such as C-reactive protein level, erythrocyte sedimentation rate, measures of disease activity, and Health Assessment Questionnaire scores (based on five patient-centered dimensions) were consistently associated with treatment response over time.

CONCLUSIONS

This comprehensive literature review identified several factors associated with treatment response which might be valuable to include as relevant measures in future studies of RA treatment. Inclusion of these factors, particularly those in the clinical and sociodemographic domains, in the design of future trials will further the understanding that ultimately may help clinicians deliver targeted treatment to community practice RA patients, thus resulting in improved patient outcomes.

A review of treatment response in type 2 diabetes: assessing the role of patient heterogeneity

The response to treatment for type 2 diabetes typically varies among individuals within a study population. This variation is known as heterogeneity of treatment response. We conducted a comprehensive literature review to identify factors that account for heterogeneity of treatment response in patients treated for type 2 diabetes. Three databases (PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library) were searched for articles published in the last 10 years describing investigations of factors associated with treatment response and outcomes among people with type 2 diabetes receiving pharmacological treatment. Of the 43 articles extracted and summarized, 35 (81%) discussed clinical factors, 31 (72%) described sociodemographic factors and 17 (40%) reported on comorbidity or behavioural factors. Clinical factors identified included baseline glycated hemoglobin A1c or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels, insulin response or sensitivity, C-peptide, body composition, adipose tissue proteins, lipid profile, plasma albumin levels and duration of disease or insulin treatment. Other factors identified included age, sex, race, socioeconomic status and comorbidities. This review identified the following research gaps: use of multiple definitions for response, few patient-reported measures and lack of evidence regarding whether factors were associated with treatment response for only specific medications or across pharmacological therapies. Furthermore, identification of factors associated with type 2 diabetes treatment response was generally a secondary objective in the research reviewed. Understanding which patient subgroups are more likely to respond to treatment and identifying factors associated with response may result in targeted treatment decisions and alter the interpretation of efficacy or effectiveness of results. In conclusion, accounting for these factors in clinical trials and when making clinical treatment decisions may improve therapy selection and individual patient outcomes.

A formal total synthesis of dysidiolide

[structure] A formal total synthesis of the natural product dysidiolide is described. Starting from a Diels-Alder reaction between an enoate and a Rawal diene, the cyclohexenone 4 was synthesized. A subsequent stereospecific methyl cuprate addition established the desired trans configuration in the cyclohexane 3. Wacker oxidation of the pentenyl side chain to the diketone 17 followed by an intramolecular aldol condensation led to the bicyclic enone 2, a key intermediate in a recently reported synthesis of dysidiolide.