Suppr超能文献

艾塞那肽与甘精胰岛素治疗2型糖尿病试验中的患者报告结局

Patient-reported outcomes in a trial of exenatide and insulin glargine for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

作者信息

Secnik Boye Kristina, Matza Louis S, Oglesby Alan, Malley Karen, Kim Sunny, Hayes Risa P, Brodows Robert

机构信息

Eli Lilly and Company, Indianapolis, IN 46285, USA.

出版信息

Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2006 Oct 11;4:80. doi: 10.1186/1477-7525-4-80.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Patient-reported measures can be used to examine whether drug differences other than clinical efficacy have an impact on outcomes that may be important to patients. Although exenatide and insulin glargine appear to have similar efficacy for treatment of type 2 diabetes, there are several differences between the two treatments that could influence outcomes from the patient's perspective. The purpose of the current study was to examine whether the two drugs were comparable as assessed by patient-reported outcomes using data from a clinical trial in which these injectable medications were added to pre-existing oral treatment regimens.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to either twice daily exenatide or once daily insulin glargine during a 26-week international trial. At baseline and endpoint, five patient-reported outcome measures were administered: the Vitality Scale of the SF-36, The Diabetes Symptom Checklist - Revised (DSC-R), the EuroQol EQ-5D, the Treatment Flexibility Scale (TFS), and the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ). Change from baseline to endpoint was analyzed within each treatment group. Group differences were examined with General linear models (GLMs), controlling for country and baseline scores.

RESULTS

A total of 549 patients with type 2 diabetes were enrolled in the trial, and current analyses were conducted with data from the 455 per protocol patients (228 exenatide and 227 insulin glargine). The sample was primarily Caucasian (79.6%), with slightly more men (55.2%) than women, and with a mean age of 58.5 years. Paired t-tests found that both treatment groups demonstrated statistically significant baseline to endpoint change on several of the health outcomes instruments including the DSC-R, DTSQ, and the SF-36 Vitality subscale. GLMs found no statistically significant differences between groups in change on the health outcomes instruments.

CONCLUSION

This analysis found that both exenatide and insulin glargine were associated with significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes when added to oral medications among patients with type 2 diabetes. Despite an additional daily injection and a higher rate of gastrointestinal adverse events, treatment satisfaction in the exenatide group was comparable to that of the glargine group, possibly because of weight reduction observed in patients treated with exenatide.

摘要

背景

患者报告的测量方法可用于检验除临床疗效外的药物差异是否会对患者可能重要的结局产生影响。尽管艾塞那肽和甘精胰岛素在治疗2型糖尿病方面似乎具有相似的疗效,但从患者角度来看,这两种治疗方法存在一些可能影响结局的差异。本研究的目的是使用一项临床试验的数据,通过患者报告的结局来检验这两种药物是否具有可比性,该试验将这些注射用药物添加到现有的口服治疗方案中。

方法

在一项为期26周的国际试验中,患者被随机分为每日两次注射艾塞那肽组或每日一次注射甘精胰岛素组。在基线和终点时,采用了五项患者报告的结局测量指标:SF-36活力量表、修订版糖尿病症状清单(DSC-R)、欧洲五维度健康量表(EQ-5D)、治疗灵活性量表(TFS)和糖尿病治疗满意度问卷(DTSQ)。分析了每个治疗组从基线到终点的变化。使用一般线性模型(GLM)检验组间差异,并对国家和基线分数进行控制。

结果

共有549例2型糖尿病患者参与了该试验,目前的分析使用了455例符合方案患者的数据(228例艾塞那肽组和227例甘精胰岛素组)。样本主要为白种人(79.6%),男性略多于女性(55.2%),平均年龄为58.5岁。配对t检验发现,两个治疗组在包括DSC-R、DTSQ和SF-36活力子量表在内的多项健康结局指标上,从基线到终点均有统计学显著变化。GLM发现,两组在健康结局指标变化方面无统计学显著差异。

结论

该分析发现,对于2型糖尿病患者,在口服药物基础上加用艾塞那肽和甘精胰岛素均与患者报告的结局显著改善相关。尽管艾塞那肽组需要额外每日注射一次且胃肠道不良事件发生率较高,但其治疗满意度与甘精胰岛素组相当,这可能是因为接受艾塞那肽治疗的患者体重减轻。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

3
8
Exenatide.艾塞那肽
Drugs. 2005;65(12):1681-92; discussion 1693-5. doi: 10.2165/00003495-200565120-00008.

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验