Division of Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts2Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.
Division of Pharmacoepidemiology, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts.
JAMA Intern Med. 2014 Dec;174(12):1955-62. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2014.5294.
Although many classes of oral glucose-lowering medications have been approved for use, little comparative effectiveness evidence exists to guide initial selection of therapy for diabetes mellitus.
To determine the effect of initial oral glucose-lowering agent class on subsequent need for treatment intensification and 4 short-term adverse clinical events.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was a retrospective cohort study of patients who were fully insured members of Aetna (a large national health insurer) who had been prescribed an oral glucose-lowering medication from July 1, 2009, through June 30, 2013. Individuals newly prescribed an oral glucose-lowering agent who filled a second prescription for a medication in the same class and with a dosage at or above the World Health Organization's defined daily dose within 90 days of the end-of-day's supply of the first prescription were studied. Individuals with interim prescriptions for other oral glucose-lowering medications were excluded.
Initiation of treatment with metformin, a sulfonylurea, a thiazolidinedione, or a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor.
Time to addition of a second oral agent or insulin, each component separately, hypoglycemia, other diabetes-related emergency department visits, and cardiovascular events.
A total of 15 516 patients met the inclusion criteria, of whom 8964 (57.8%) started therapy with metformin. In unadjusted analyses, use of medications other than metformin was significantly associated with an increased risk of adding a second oral agent only, insulin only, and a second agent or insulin (P < .001 for all). In propensity score and multivariable-adjusted Cox proportional hazards models, initiation of therapy with sulfonylureas (hazard ratio [HR], 1.68; 95% CI, 1.57-1.79), thiazolidinediones (HR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.43-1.80), and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (HR, 1.62; 95% CI, 1.47-1.79) was associated with an increased hazard of intensification. Alternatives to metformin were not associated with a reduced risk of hypoglycemia, emergency department visits, or cardiovascular events.
Despite guidelines, only 57.8% of individuals began diabetes treatment with metformin. Beginning treatment with metformin was associated with reduced subsequent treatment intensification, without differences in rates of hypoglycemia or other adverse clinical events. These findings have significant implications for quality of life and medication costs.
尽管已经批准了许多类口服降血糖药物用于临床,但几乎没有比较有效性证据可以指导糖尿病初始治疗药物的选择。
评估初始口服降糖药类别对后续治疗强化以及 4 种短期不良临床事件的影响。
设计、设置和参与者:这是一项回顾性队列研究,研究对象为 Aetna(一家大型全国性健康保险公司)的完全参保者,他们在 2009 年 7 月 1 日至 2013 年 6 月 30 日期间被处方了一种口服降糖药物。本研究纳入了新处方口服降糖药物且在第一份处方用药结束当天的 90 天内,第二次处方药物与第一次处方药物同属一类,且日剂量等于或高于世界卫生组织规定的日剂量的患者。中途处方其他口服降糖药物的患者被排除在外。
开始使用二甲双胍、磺酰脲类、噻唑烷二酮类或二肽基肽酶-4 抑制剂治疗。
添加第二种口服药物或胰岛素的时间,每种药物分别进行分析,低血糖、其他与糖尿病相关的急诊就诊和心血管事件。
共有 15516 名患者符合纳入标准,其中 8964 名(57.8%)患者开始使用二甲双胍治疗。在未校正分析中,除二甲双胍以外的药物治疗与仅添加第二种口服药物、仅添加胰岛素以及添加第二种药物或胰岛素的风险显著增加相关(所有 P 值均<.001)。在倾向评分和多变量调整的 Cox 比例风险模型中,磺酰脲类(风险比 [HR],1.68;95%CI,1.57-1.79)、噻唑烷二酮类(HR,1.61;95%CI,1.43-1.80)和二肽基肽酶-4 抑制剂(HR,1.62;95%CI,1.47-1.79)起始治疗与强化治疗风险增加相关。二甲双胍以外的药物治疗与低血糖、急诊就诊或心血管事件风险降低无关。
尽管有指南指导,但只有 57.8%的患者开始使用二甲双胍治疗糖尿病。开始使用二甲双胍治疗与随后治疗强化减少相关,且低血糖或其他不良临床事件发生率无差异。这些发现对生活质量和药物成本具有重要意义。