Comparison of adherence and persistence among adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiating saxagliptin or linagliptin

Adherence to Oral Antidiabetic Drugs in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Poor adherence to oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) can lead to therapy failure and risk of complications. The aim of this study was to produce an adherence proportion to OADs and estimate the association between good adherence and good glycemic control in patients with T2D. We searched in MEDLINE, Scopus, and CENTRAL databases to find observational studies on therapeutic adherence in OAD users. We calculated the proportion of adherent patients to the total number of participants for each study and pooled study-specific adherence proportions using random effect models with Freeman-Tukey transformation. We also calculated the odds ratio (OR) of having good glycemic control and good adherence and pooled study-specific OR with the generic inverse variance method. A total of 156 studies (10,041,928 patients) were included in the systematic review and meta-analysis. The pooled proportion of adherent patients was 54% (95% confidence interval, CI: 51-58%). We observed a significant association between good glycemic control and good adherence (OR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.17-1.51). This study demonstrated that adherence to OADs in patients with T2D is sub-optimal. Improving therapeutic adherence through health-promoting programs and prescription of personalized therapies could be an effective strategy to reduce the risk of complications.

Healthcare costs among adults with type 2 diabetes initiating saxagliptin or linagliptin: a US-based claims analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare healthcare costs of adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) after initiation of saxagliptin or linagliptin, two antidiabetic medications in the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor medication class.

METHODS

Patients with T2D who were at least 18 years old and initiated saxagliptin or linagliptin (index date) between 1 June 2011 and 30 June 2014 were identified in the MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases. All-cause healthcare costs and diabetes-related costs (T2D diagnosis on a medical claim and/or an antidiabetic medication claim) were measured in the 1 year follow-up period. Saxagliptin and linagliptin initiators were matched using propensity score methods. Cost ratios (CRs) and predicted costs were estimated from generalized linear models and recycled predictions.

RESULTS

There were 34,560 saxagliptin initiators and 18,175 linagliptin initiators identified (mean ages 57 and 59; 55% and 56% male, respectively). Before matching, saxagliptin initiators had significantly lower all-cause total healthcare costs than linagliptin initiators (mean = $15,335 [SD $28,923] vs. mean = $20,069 [SD $48,541], p < .001) and significantly lower diabetes-related total healthcare costs (mean = $6109 [SD $13,851] vs. mean = $7393 [SD $26,041], p < .001). In matched analyses (n = 16,069 per cohort), saxagliptin initiators had lower all-cause follow-up costs than linagliptin initiators (CR = 0.953, 95% CI = 0.932-0.974, p < .001; predicted costs = $17,211 vs. $18,068). There was no significant difference in diabetes-related total costs after matching; however, diabetes-related medical costs were significantly lower for saxagliptin initiators (CR = 0.959, 95% CI = 0.927-0.993, p = 0.017; predicted costs = $3989 vs. $4159).

CONCLUSIONS

Adult patients with T2D initiating treatment with saxagliptin had lower total all-cause healthcare costs and diabetes-related medical costs over 1 year compared with patients initiating treatment with linagliptin.