Durability of Effectiveness Between Users of Once-Weekly Semaglutide and Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitors (DPP-4i) in US Adults with Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Long-term effectiveness and durability of glucose-lowering medications are important considerations in managing type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to compare durability of treatment efficacy of once-weekly (OW) semaglutide for T2D with that of the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) class.

METHODS

This observational cohort study used 2017-2022 data from the Optum® Clinformatics® Data Mart to compare long-term clinical outcomes associated with semaglutide or DPP-4i in US adults with T2D. The primary outcomes were HbA1c at 2-year follow-up, change in HbA1c from baseline, and the odds of achieving HbA1c targets. BMI at 2-year follow-up, change in BMI from baseline, odds of reducing BMI category, and the need for treatment augmentation were exploratory outcomes. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) weighted descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Weighted HbA1c and BMI cohorts included 865 and 642 semaglutide users and 779 and 537 DPP-4i users, respectively. In the weighted HbA1c cohort, semaglutide and DPP-4i users had an average age of 60 years and similar baseline characteristics including HbA1c level and comorbidity status. Two-year follow-up HbA1c with semaglutide was 0.56% lower than with DPP-4i; reduction in HbA1c from baseline was 0.61% greater. Odds of achieving HbA1c level < 7% were 2.16 times greater after covariate adjustment (all, p < 0.001). Semaglutide was associated with 1.03 kg/m2 greater reduction in BMI and 2.27 times greater odds of reducing BMI category vs DPP-4i (p < 0.001). Semaglutide users were less likely to add new glucose-lowering treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; p < 0.001) or initiate insulin (HR 0.49; p < 0.001) vs DPP-4i users.

CONCLUSION

Compared with DPP-4i, semaglutide was associated with lower follow-up HbA1c and BMI, greater reduction in HbA1c and BMI from baseline, and reduced likelihood of requiring treatment augmentation or insulin initiation to manage T2D in US adults, suggesting better durability of semaglutide vs DPP-4i. INFOGRAPHIC.

Semaglutide Once-Weekly Persistence and Adherence Versus Other GLP-1 RAs in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in a US Real-World Setting

INTRODUCTION

The superior efficacy and safety of semaglutide once-weekly (QW), compared with dulaglutide, liraglutide, or exenatide QW, have been demonstrated in the SUSTAIN trials. This study assessed treatment persistence and adherence to semaglutide QW versus dulaglutide, liraglutide, or exenatide QW in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This retrospective, database study used Optum's de-identified Clinformatics® Data Mart Database to identify glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) treatment-naïve adult patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating semaglutide QW, dulaglutide, liraglutide, or exenatide QW between January 1, 2018 and April 30, 2019. Persistence (time remaining on treatment) was assessed with Kaplan-Meier survival estimates and Cox proportional hazard models. Adherence was assessed using proportion of days covered (PDC) and proportion of patients with PDC > 80%.

RESULTS

Of 56,715 patients included, 3279 received semaglutide QW, 27,891 dulaglutide, 17,186 liraglutide, and 8359 exenatide QW. Patients initiating semaglutide QW were younger and with lower percentage of Medicare coverage than patients initiating the comparators. Persistence at 360 days was significantly higher for semaglutide QW (67.0%) versus dulaglutide (56.0%), liraglutide (40.4%), and exenatide QW (35.5%); p < 0.001 for all comparisons. Compared with semaglutide QW, the discontinuation rate was significantly higher for dulaglutide (hazard ratio [HR] 1.22; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13, 1.32; p < 0.001), liraglutide (HR 1.80; 95% CI 1.66, 1.95; p < 0.001), and exenatide QW (HR 2.12; 95% CI 1.96, 2.30; p < 0.001). Adherence to semaglutide QW versus liraglutide at 360 days and to exenatide QW was 39.1% versus 30.0% [p = 0.07] and 27.7% [p = 0.02], respectively. Adherence to dulaglutide at 360 days was numerically higher than semaglutide QW (43.2% versus 39.1%; p = 0.45) but did not reach statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Persistence with semaglutide QW was significantly greater than comparators, while adherence was comparable or greater. Together with earlier results from double-blind clinical studies, these data support semaglutide QW use for treatment of patients with T2D.

Managing the multifaceted nature of type 2 diabetes using once-weekly injectable GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

As a highly prevalent chronic condition associated with complications and high mortality rates, it is important for pharmacists to have a comprehensive understanding of the impact of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and available treatment options. The use of injectable glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) is recommended as an effective and convenient treatment regimen for improving glycaemic control in individuals with T2D, with a good safety profile; however, the wider extent of its potential benefits often are unknown to clinical pharmacists. The objective of this article is to provide an overview of the impact of T2D on individuals and to discuss the multifaceted role of once-weekly (QW) GLP-1 RAs in addressing these challenges.

METHODS

This is a narrative review of the published literature regarding the use of injectable GLP-1 RAs in managing health complications in people with T2D.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Recent findings reveal additional benefits of GLP-1 RAs in managing T2D complications, including atherosclerotic cardiovascular (CV) disease, retinopathy, neuropathy, and nephropathy. Dulaglutide and semaglutide have been shown to provide additional CV benefit in patients at high risk of CV events compared with standard of care/placebo and may offer renal protection in patients with chronic kidney disease. Cost-effectiveness studies, taking into consideration these different complications, have shown that QW GLP-1 RAs were cost-effective compared with other therapies. GLP-1 RAs may also help to improve overall health-related quality of life, reducing the risk of depression and 'diabetes distress', and limiting the risk of hypoglycaemia.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

From the literature, this appears to be the first review of the evidence supporting the multifaceted role of QW GLP-1 RAs in T2D, with particular emphasis on their use in comorbid conditions, as well as associated potential financial and well-being benefits. The results suggest that QW GLP-1 RAs may be an attractive treatment option for improving glycaemic control in T2D, especially in individuals with (or at risk of) additional comorbidities or health complications.

Safety and tolerability of once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists in type 2 diabetes

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

In recent years, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) including once-weekly (QW) formulations have been incorporated into type 2 diabetes (T2D) clinical guidelines, making it essential that pharmacists and healthcare professionals (HCPs) have a clear understanding of their safety profiles. Currently, three QW GLP-1 RAs are approved and marketed in the United States for the treatment of T2D: dulaglutide, exenatide extended-release and semaglutide. This review provides pharmacists and HCPs with collated data related to potential safety and tolerability issues when patients use QW GLP-1 RAs, enabling patient education and treatment optimization.

METHODS

This is a narrative review comparing the safety and tolerability of the three QW GLP-1 RAs, using data from Phase 3 clinical trials. Extracted safety data included gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs), hypoglycaemia, injection-site reactions, pancreatitis, neoplasms, gallbladder events, and diabetic retinopathy (DR) and/or its complications (DRCs).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 30 trials were identified for inclusion; eight were head-to-head trials involving another GLP-1 RA; of these, six compared GLP-1 RAs with different dosing regimens (QW vs once-daily or twice-daily), and two were direct QW vs QW GLP-1 RA comparisons. The most commonly reported AEs were GI events (notably nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea), but there was variation between the three QW drugs. These were generally mild-to-moderate in severity and transient. Risk of hypoglycaemia, injection-site reactions, pancreatitis, neoplasms and gallbladder events was generally low across the GLP-1 RAs investigated. Overall rates of DR or DRC were low across the trials. Only in one trial (SUSTAIN 6) there were significantly more DRC events reported in patients treated with QW semaglutide (3.0%) compared with placebo (1.8%). This was likely due to the rapid improvement in glucose control in patients with pre-existing DR enrolled within that trial.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

This review puts the latest clinical data from the marketed QW GLP-1 RAs into context with results from older Phase 3 trials, to enable pharmacists and HCPs to make informed treatment decisions. Each of the three QW GLP-1 RAs has their own safety profile, which should be considered when choosing the optimal treatment for patients.

The Societal Value of Broader Access to Antiobesity Medications

OBJECTIVE

Obesity and its complications place an enormous burden on society. Yet antiobesity medications (AOM) are prescribed to only 2% of the eligible population, even though few individuals can sustain weight loss using other strategies alone. This study estimated the societal value of greater access to AOM.

METHODS

By using a well-established simulation model (The Health Economics Medical Innovation Simulation), the societal value of AOM for the cohort of Americans aged ≥ 25 years in 2019 was quantified. Four scenarios with differential uptake among the eligible population (15% and 30%) were modeled, with efficacy from current and next-generation AOM. Societal value was measured as monetized quality of life, productivity gains, and savings in medical spending, subtracting the costs of AOM.

RESULTS

For the 217 million Americans aged ≥ 25 years, AOM generated $1.2 trillion in lifetime societal value under a conservative scenario (15% annual uptake using currently available AOM). The introduction of next-generation AOM increased societal value to $1.9 to $2.5 trillion, depending on uptake. Finally, societal value was higher for younger individuals and Black and Hispanic individuals compared with White individuals.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that AOM provide substantial gains to patients and society. Policies promoting broader clinical access to and use of AOM warrant consideration to reach national goals to reduce obesity.

Injectable Antihyperglycemics: A Systematic Review and Critical Analysis of the Literature on Adherence, Persistence, and Health Outcomes

INTRODUCTION

Improving real-world medication adherence to injectable antihyperglycemics in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a clinical challenge. Quantification of the level of adherence required to achieve a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in glycemic control would assist in meeting this goal. The study objective was to review the literature regarding the relationships of medication adherence and persistence with health outcomes in adult T2DM patients using injectable antihyperglycemics.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted using electronic databases to identify publications over the last decade. Publications were screened against established eligibility criteria. Study data were extracted, evaluated, and used to identify strengths, limitations, and gaps in current evidence.

RESULTS

Eligibility criteria were met by 38 studies, and this report analyzed 34 studies related to glycemic control (n = 25), healthcare resource use (n = 9), and healthcare costs (n = 14). Eight of these studies examined adherence to glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA), including 1 study regarding adherence to GLP-1 RA or to insulin, and 1 study investigating a GLP-1 RA/insulin combination; the remaining studies involved insulin. Studies used a broad range of measures to classify adherence and persistence, and most measures were unable to reliably evaluate the complexities of patient behavior over time. Better adherence to injectable antihyperglycemic medications was generally found to be associated with improved glycemic control, although no studies attempted to identify a MCID. Although higher diabetes-related pharmacy and total healthcare costs were reported for adherent or persistent patients, these patients tended to have lower diabetes-related and all-cause medical costs.

CONCLUSION

Results of this review confirmed the effectiveness of injectable antihyperglycemic medications for glycemic control, suggesting that there are clinical and financial consequences to nonadherence. Although attempts were made to quantify the effects of nonadherence, the interpretation of study results was limited by the lack of a MCID and inadequate study design.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk, Inc., Plainsboro Township, NJ, USA. Plain language summary available for this article.

Treatment patterns and clinical characteristics of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus according to body mass index: findings from an electronic medical records database

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated relationships between glycaemic control, body mass index (BMI), comorbidities and pharmacological treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of Quintiles electronic medical records research data (study period 1 October 2013-30 September 2014). Eligibility included age ≥18 years, T2D diagnosis, and at least one available BMI measurement.

RESULTS

The study included 626 386 patients (mean age, 63.8 year; 51.3% female; 78.5% white; 62.6%, BMI ≥30 kg/m2). A1c data were available for 414 266 patients. The proportion of patients with good glycaemic control (A1c ≤6.5) decreased as BMI category increased, ranging from 40.1% of patients with BMI <30% to 30.1% of patients with BMI ≥40. The proportions of patients with poor glycaemic control (A1c >8% and A1c ≥9%) increased with increasing BMI category. Oral antidiabetic drugs (OAD) were the most frequently used (54.4% of patients with A1c values). Among patients using insulin-based therapy, 50% had an A1c ≥8% and 29% had an A1c ≥9% regardless of concomitant OAD or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist use. Among patients using three or more OADs, 34.3% and 16.1% had A1c values ≥8% and ≥9%, respectively. There was no common trend observed for changes in the proportion of patients with T2D-related comorbidities according to BMI category. The most notable trend was a 7.6% net increase in the percentage of patients with hypertension from BMI <30 to BMI ≥40.

CONCLUSIONS

This large dataset provides evidence that roughly one out of four patients with T2D is not well controlled, and the prevalence of poor glycaemic control increases as BMI increases.