Pharmacological treatment initiation for type 2 diabetes in Australia: are the guidelines being followed?

Emerging Human Medications in Racing Animals: Analytical and Regulatory Challenges

Positive identification and reporting of therapeutic substances intended for human consumption in race-day equine and canine samples is a controversial topic. While inadvertent environmental exposure is a potential cause for the presence of these substances in race-day samples, intentional use cannot be ruled out given their therapeutic benefits. Pregabalin is widely prescribed in Australia to treat epilepsy, anxiety, and neuropathic pain in humans; however, it is also increasingly used as a recreational drug. Metformin is commonly used to treat type 2 diabetes in humans. Both pregabalin and metformin have no routine use on racing animals and should not be present in race-day samples taken from healthy animals. They are prohibited substances under the Rules of Racing with no established screening limits. Although therapeutic levels for these substances have been established in humans, such information is not available for animals. Pregabalin and metformin are analytically challenging molecules, more so when they are extracted from biological matrices routinely screened for hundreds of other compounds simultaneously. A simple extraction, followed by a targeted Ultra High-Pressure Liquid Chromatography Orbitrap™ Mass Spectrometry method utilising a reverse-phase C18 column, is presented. This method is effective in screening for pregabalin and metformin, in addition to more than 150 other compounds of interest in equine and canine urines. The prevalence of pregabalin and metformin in race-day equine and canine urine samples in Western Australia was monitored using this method over 12 months. More than 4000 urine samples were screened, and four samples were confirmed positive for these substances.

Comparing the Effect of Early Versus Delayed Metformin Treatment on Glycaemic Parameters Among Australian Adults With Incident Diabetes: Evidence Using a National General Practice Database

PURPOSE

To compare the effect of early vs delayed metformin treatment for glycaemic management among patients with incident diabetes.

METHODS

Cohort study using electronic health records of regular patients (1+ visits per year in 3 consecutive years) aged 40+ years with 'incident' diabetes attending Australian general practices (MedicineInsight, 2011-2018). Patients with incident diabetes were defined as those who had a) 12+ months of medical data before the first recording of a diabetes diagnosis AND b) a diagnosis of 'diabetes' recorded at least twice in their electronic medical records or a diagnosis of 'diabetes' recorded only once combined with at least 1 abnormal glycaemic result (i.e., HbA1c ≥6.5%, fasting blood glucose [FBG] ≥7.0 mmol/L, or oral glucose tolerance test ≥11.1mmol/L) in the preceding 3 months. The effect of early (<3 months), timely (3-6 months), or delayed (6-12 months) initiation of metformin treatment vs no metformin treatment within 12 months of diagnosis on HbA1c and FBG levels 3 to 24 months after diagnosis was compared using linear regression and augmented inverse probability weighted models. Patients initially managed with other antidiabetic medications (alone or combined with metformin) were excluded.

FINDINGS

Of 18,856 patients with incident diabetes, 38.8% were prescribed metformin within 3 months, 3.9% between 3 and 6 months, and 6.2% between 6 and 12 months after diagnosis. The untreated group had the lowest baseline parameters (mean HbA1c 6.4%; FBG 6.9mmol/L) and maintained steady levels throughout follow-up. Baseline glycaemic parameters for those on early treatment with metformin (<3 months since diagnosis) were the highest among all groups (mean HbA1c 7.6%; FBG 8.8mmol/L), reaching controlled levels at 3 to 6 months (mean HbA1c 6.5%; FBG 6.9mmol/L) with sustained improvement until the end of follow-up (mean HbA1c 6.4%; FBG 6.9mmol/L at 18-24 months). Patients with timely and delayed treatment also improved their glycaemic parameters after initiating treatment (timely treatment: mean HbA1c 7.3% and FBG 8.3mmol/L at 3-6 months; 6.6% and 6.9mmol/L at 6-12 months; delayed treatment: mean HbA1c 7.2% and FBG 8.4mmol/L at 6-12 months; 6.7% and 7.1mmol/L at 12-18 months). Compared to those not managed with metformin, the corresponding average treatment effect for HbA1c at 18-24 months was +0.04% (95%CI -0.05;0.10) for early, +0.24% (95%CI 0.11;0.37) for timely, and +0.29% (95%CI 0.20;0.39) for delayed treatment.

IMPLICATIONS

Early metformin therapy (<3 months) for patients recently diagnosed with diabetes consistently improved HbA1c and FBG levels in the first 24 months of diagnosis.

COX2 inhibitor use and type 2 diabetes treatment intensification: A registry-based cohort study

AIM

This study examined the association between cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor (COX2i) use and diabetes progression in people with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We conducted a nation-wide cohort study using an Australian diabetes registry linked to medication dispensing data. We assessed time to diabetes treatment intensification among new users of COX2i compared to mild opioids. Inverse probability of treatment-weighted Cox regression models were used to adjust for age, sex, time since diabetes diagnosis, comorbidities, and socio-economic disadvantage. We conducted several sensitivity analyses, including per-protocol analyses and comparing use of any NSAID to mild opioids.

RESULTS

There were 8,071 new users of COX2i and 7,623 of mild opioids with 4,168 diabetes treatment intensifications over a median follow-up of 1.6 years. Use of COX2i was associated with decreased risk of treatment intensification when compared to mild opioids (HR 0.91, 95 %CI 0.85-0.96). The results were not significant in the per-protocol analyses. Use of any NSAID was associated with a lower risk of treatment intensification compared to mild opioids (HR 0.90, 95 %CI 0.85-0.96).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with COX2i may be associated with a modest decreased risk of diabetes treatment intensification compared to mild opioids. Future clinical studies are required to confirm whether COX2 inhibition has clinically significant benefits for glycaemic control.

Changes in the use of diabetes drugs among community-dwelling people with Alzheimer's disease

Background

Type 2 diabetes is common in persons with Alzheimer’s disease (AD). Management of diabetes in persons with AD is challenging due to changing goals of care and susceptibility to adverse drug events including hypoglycemia. The aim of this study was to investigate the prevalence of diabetes drug use from 5 years before to 5 years after the time of AD diagnosis among persons with and without AD.

Methods

This was a nationwide register-based study of persons with and without AD and diabetes in Finland. We analyzed data from the Medication Use and Alzheimer’s disease (MEDALZ) study that included 70,718 community-dwelling people diagnosed with AD from 2005 to 2011. The study population included 8418 persons with AD and 6666 matched persons without AD who were diagnosed with diabetes 5 years before AD diagnosis (index date). We defined the prevalence of diabetes drug use in three-month evaluation periods from 5 years before until 5 years after the index date.

Results

Nearly all people with diabetes (94% in both cohorts) used one or more diabetes drugs on the index date. The most prevalent drug metformin was used by 60.9% of people with AD and 59.1% of people without AD. The next most prevalent drugs were sulfonylureas and insulin. The prevalence of diabetes drug use was similar in people with and without AD but began to decline 1 year after AD diagnosis in the AD cohort compared to non-AD cohort.

Conclusions

The decline in diabetes drug use after AD diagnosis may be attributed to clinicians and patients seeking to avoid serious adverse drug events including hypoglycemia. In addition, the findings may reflect personalized glycemic control and unintentional weight loss in persons with AD reducing the need for diabetes drugs.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12877-021-02694-w.

Treatment Dynamics in People Who Initiate Metformin or Sulfonylureas for Type 2 Diabetes: A National Cohort Study

Aim: To investigate the incidence of, and factors associated with addition and switching of glucose-lowering medications within 12-months of initiating metformin or a sulfonylurea for type 2 diabetes (T2D). Methods: We identified 109,573 individuals aged 18-99 years who initiated metformin or a sulfonylurea between July 2013 and April 2015 using Australian National Diabetes Service Scheme (NDSS) data linked with national dispensing data. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for factors associated with time to addition to or switch from metformin or sulfonylurea over a 12-months follow-up. Results: Treatment addition or switching occurred in 18% and 4% of individuals who initiated metformin and in 28% and 13% of individuals who initiated sulfonylureas. Median time to addition was 104 days for metformin and 82 days for sulfonylureas. Median time to switching was 63 days for metformin and 52 days for sulfonylureas. Congestive heart failure, nicotine dependence, end stage renal disease and dispensing of systemic corticosteroids were associated with higher likelihood of treatment additions and switching in individuals initiating metformin. Antipsychotic dispensing was associated with a higher likelihood of treatment addition in individuals initiating sulfonylureas. Women initiating metformin were less likely to receive treatment additions but more likely to switch treatment than men. Conclusion: Nearly one quarter of Australians who initiate treatment for T2D with metformin or sulfonylureas switch or receive additional treatment within 12-months, with those who initiate sulfonylureas more likely to switch or receive additional treatment than those who initiate metformin.