Impact of insulin sensitivity, beta-cell function and glycaemic control on initiation of second-line glucose-lowering treatment in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes

Dispensation Patterns of Glucose-Lowering Drugs in Newly Diagnosed Type 2 Diabetes: Routine Data Analysis of Insurance Claims in Germany

AIMS

To describe dispensation patterns of glucose-lowering drugs in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes in Germany.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Based on claims data from four statutory health insurances (German Pharmacoepidemiological Research Database,>25 million insurants), all individuals with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes were identified. Eligible patients had a first diagnosis for type 2 diabetes between January 2012 and December 2016. We analyzed the dispensation patterns of first-line glucose-lowering therapies initiated in the year after diabetes diagnosis and patterns of second-line therapies dispensed one year after first-line treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 356,647 individuals with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes were included (average age [SD]: 63.5 [13.4] years; 49.3% males). Of the 31.6% of individuals who were pharmacologically treated in the year after diagnosis, metformin monotherapy was most frequently dispensed (73.1%), followed by dual therapy of metformin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4is) (6.4%), and monotherapy with DPP-4is (2.9%). From 2012 through 2016, sulfonylurea dispensations were reduced by more than 50%. Dispensations for combination therapies with DPP-4is increased up to 10.6%. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors contributed to 2% of all treatments. After a median of 5 months, 20.0% of individuals on pharmacological therapy initiated second-line glucose-lowering treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Data from German statutory health insurances (2012 to 2016) showed that most individuals with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes were dispensed metformin monotherapy in line with diabetes care guidelines. A substantial decrease in the use of sulfonylureas was observed after the introduction of DPP-4i and GLP-1 receptor agonists.

Failure of monotherapy in clinical practice in patients with type 2 diabetes: The Korean National Diabetes Program

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

We investigated the failure of monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in real practice settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The Korean National Diabetes Program was a prospective, multicenter observational cohort study of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Korea. Of the 3,950 patients enrolled in the study, we studied 998 who were continuously maintained on monotherapy for at least 90 days at six participating centers. To balance the baseline characteristics of patients in each group, we used propensity matching at a 1:1 ratio (metformin vs sulfonylureas) and 4:1 ratio (metformin vs meglitinides and metformin vs alpha-glucosidase inhibitors [aGIs]). The hazard ratios (HRs) of treatments (compared with metformin) were determined by Cox's proportional hazards regression modeling.

RESULTS

The median follow-up time was 56 months, and monotherapy failed in 45% of all patients. The annual incidences of failure were 15.6%, 21.3%, 27% and 9.6% in the metformin, sulfonylurea, meglitinide and aGI groups. Compared with metformin, sulfonylureas and meglitinides were associated with higher risks of monotherapy failure (HR 1.39, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.08-1.80; HR 1.92, 95% CI 1.13-3.27), and aGIs with risks similar to that of metformin (HR 0.80, 95% CI 0.44-1.45). When analyzed by failure type, sulfonylureas, meglitinides and aGIs were associated with a higher risk of a switch to other agents (HR 4.43, 95% CI 2.14-9.17; HR 18.80, 95% CI 6.21-56.93; HR 4.25, 95% CI 1.49-12.13), and aGIs with a lower risk of prescription of add-on second agents (HR 0.16, 95% CI 0.04-0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin was associated with a lower failure risk than were sulfonylureas and meglitinides, but a comparable aGI failure rate.