Suppr超能文献

理解 GLP-1RA 和 DPP-4 治疗药物在 2 型糖尿病患者中的随机对照试验疗效与真实世界应用效果之间的差距。

Understanding the Gap Between Efficacy in Randomized Controlled Trials and Effectiveness in Real-World Use of GLP-1 RA and DPP-4 Therapies in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.

机构信息

Analysis Group, Menlo Park, CA.

Analysis Group, Menlo Park, CA

出版信息

Diabetes Care. 2017 Nov;40(11):1469-1478. doi: 10.2337/dc16-2725. Epub 2017 Aug 11.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to estimate and explain the gap between clinical efficacy and real-world (RW) effectiveness of type 2 diabetes medications.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This mixed-methods quasi-experimental study used retrospective claims (Optum/Humedica) to compare the change in HbA of RW patients with type 2 diabetes 12 months after starting a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) or dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitor with published findings from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating these drugs. Selected RW patients were similar to RCT patients, and regression analysis was used in the RW data to adjust for differences between poorly adherent and adherent patients to explain why RCT and RW findings may differ.

RESULTS

RW patients initiating a GLP-1 RA ( = 221) or a DPP-4 ( = 652) experienced smaller reductions in HbA (GLP-1 RA: -0.52% [-6 mmol/mol], DPP-4: -0.51% [-6 mmol/mol])than reported in RCTs (-1.30% [-14 mmol/mol] from seven GLP-1 RA RCTs, = 2,600; -0.68% [-8 mmol/mol] from four DPP-4 RCTs, = 1,889). Baseline HbA, additional medications, and adherence were significant explanatory factors in the RW HbA change. Modeled estimates of RCT efficacy (-1.04% GLP-1 RA [-12 mmol/mol], -0.69% DPP-4 [-8 mmol/mol]) were within the RCTs' reported range (GLP-1 RA: -0.84% to -1.60% [-9 to -18 mmol/mol], DPP-4: -0.47% to -0.90% [-5 to -10 mmol/mol]). Poor medication adherence accounted for approximately three-fourths of the gap between RW and expected RCT results (gap = 0.51% [6 mmol/mol] GLP-1 RA; 0.18% [3 mmol/mol] DPP-4).

CONCLUSIONS

Poor medication adherence is primarily why RW effectiveness is significantly less than RCT efficacy, suggesting an urgent need to effectively address adherence among patients with type 2 diabetes.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在评估并解释 2 型糖尿病药物的临床疗效与真实世界(RW)疗效之间的差距。

研究设计和方法

本混合方法准实验研究使用回顾性索赔数据(Optum/Humedica),比较接受胰高血糖素样肽 1 受体激动剂(GLP-1RA)或二肽基肽酶 4(DPP-4)抑制剂治疗的 12 个月后,RW 患者的 HbA 变化与评估这些药物的随机对照试验(RCT)的发现。选择的 RW 患者与 RCT 患者相似,并且在 RW 数据中使用回归分析来调整不依从和依从患者之间的差异,以解释为什么 RCT 和 RW 的发现可能不同。

结果

起始 GLP-1RA(n=221)或 DPP-4(n=652)的 RW 患者的 HbA 降低幅度较小(GLP-1RA:-0.52%[-6mmol/mol],DPP-4:-0.51%[-6mmol/mol]),低于 RCT 中的报道(来自 7 项 GLP-1RA RCT,n=2600;-0.68%[-8mmol/mol]来自 4 项 DPP-4 RCT,n=1889)。基线 HbA、附加药物和依从性是 RW HbA 变化的重要解释因素。RCT 疗效的模型估计值(GLP-1RA:-1.04%[-12mmol/mol],DPP-4:-0.69%[-8mmol/mol])在 RCT 报告范围内(GLP-1RA:-0.84%至-1.60%[-9 至-18mmol/mol],DPP-4:-0.47%至-0.90%[-5 至-10mmol/mol])。药物依从性差约占 RW 和预期 RCT 结果之间差距的四分之三(差距=0.51%[6mmol/mol]GLP-1RA;0.18%[3mmol/mol]DPP-4)。

结论

药物依从性差是 RW 疗效明显低于 RCT 疗效的主要原因,这表明迫切需要有效解决 2 型糖尿病患者的依从性问题。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验