Suppr超能文献

2 型糖尿病患者基础胰岛素的缓慢滴定和延迟强化。

Slow Titration and Delayed Intensification of Basal Insulin Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

机构信息

1 Novo Nordisk, Plainsboro, New Jersey.

2 QuintilesIMS, Fairfax, Virginia.

出版信息

J Manag Care Spec Pharm. 2018 Apr;24(4):390-400. doi: 10.18553/jmcp.2017.17218. Epub 2017 Nov 16.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Clinical inertia in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) refers to the failure of clinicians to intensify therapy when indicated. Many T2DM patients remain suboptimally controlled after initiating basal insulin.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the prevalence of patients treated with basal insulin but in poor glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c [A1c] ≥ 7%) after initiation and subsequent treatment intensification patterns and glycemic outcomes in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Adults diagnosed with T2DM newly initiating a basal insulin analog (insulin glargine or detemir) from January 2010 to September 2014 were identified in the QuintilesIMS Real-World Data Adjudicated Claims linked to the QuintilesIMS Real-World Data Electronic Medical Records. Patients were previously naive to insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), were persistent on therapy for ≥ 6 months, and had ≥ 12 months of continuous health plan enrollment after initiation. First treatment intensification (increase in basal insulin dose [of ≥ 10%], addition of bolus insulin, GLP-1 RA, or a new oral antidiabetic drug [OAD]) was assessed among patients in poor glycemic control at 6 months after initiation over the available (minimum ≥ 12-month) follow-up. Subsequent glycemic outcomes and treatment intensification were assessed. Kaplan-Meier (KM) analysis evaluated time-to-treatment intensification and time to A1c goal.

RESULTS

Of 427 eligible patients with A1c available at 6 months, 59.3% were male; mean age was 53.9 years; mean follow-up was 29.4 months; and mean dose of the initiated prescription was 29.6 insulin units (U) (median 24U). Six months after initiating basal insulin, 81.0% of patients (n = 346) remained in poor glycemic control, and mean basal insulin dose was 31.0U (median 25U). Most (88.4%; n = 306) of these uncontrolled patients subsequently intensified treatment over the available follow-up. Using KM analysis, these patients intensified treatment in a median of 58 days (range: 17.5 days [GLP-1 RA addition] to 52 days [increase in basal insulin dose]) from the first elevated A1c measurement taken after 6 months, and 72.5% (GLP-1 RA addition) to 91.1% (OAD addition) of patients continued to remain in poor glycemic control at 12 months after intensification. Most patients (66.8%; n = 231/346) first intensified treatment by increasing their basal insulin dose, and mean dose increased to 61.7U (median 38U) at intensification. Six months following basal insulin increase, almost all patients remained on basal insulin therapy and among those with available A1c, 92.1% (140 of 152) were in poor glycemic control. In the subsequent 12 months, only a third (34%) of uncontrolled patients added another antihyperglycemic agent.

CONCLUSIONS

The vast majority of patients remained uncontrolled in the 6 months following basal insulin initiation. Basal insulin up-titration was slow and insufficient in the 6 months after initiation, indicating treatment inertia. Subsequently, most patients failed to achieve glycemic targets despite intensification with basal insulin. This finding suggests a substantial unmet need for effective treatment intensification among T2DM patients treated with basal insulin who remain uncontrolled. Improved provider education and guidelines on appropriate intensification are warranted.

DISCLOSURES

This study was funded by Novo Nordisk. Mocarski, Guerrero, Langer, and Thorsted are employees and shareholders of Novo Nordisk. Yeaw, Divino, and DeKoven are employed by QuintilesIMS, which received remuneration from Novo Nordisk for work on this study. Study concept and design were contributed by Mocarski, DeKoven, Langer, and Thorsted. Yeaw took the lead in data collection, along with Divino and DeKoven. Data interpretation was performed by Yeaw, Divino, DeKoven, and Guerrero. The manuscript was written by Mocarski and Divino and revised by Guerrero, Langer, and Thorsted, along with Yeaw and DeKoven. Some of the data from this study were presented via poster at the AMCP Annual Meeting in March 2017 and at the 53rd EASD Annual Meeting in September 2017.

摘要

背景

2 型糖尿病(T2DM)的临床惰性是指临床医生在需要时未能加强治疗。许多 T2DM 患者在起始基础胰岛素后仍未得到最佳控制。

目的

在真实环境中,检测起始基础胰岛素后血糖控制仍不佳(糖化血红蛋白 [A1c]≥7%)的患者比例,以及随后的治疗强化模式和血糖结果。

方法

从 2010 年 1 月至 2014 年 9 月,从 QuintilesIMS 真实世界数据经审核理赔链接到 QuintilesIMS 真实世界数据电子病历中确定了新起始基础胰岛素类似物(甘精胰岛素或地特胰岛素)的成年人 T2DM 患者。患者以前未使用过胰岛素和胰高血糖素样肽-1 受体激动剂(GLP-1RA),在起始治疗后≥6 个月持续治疗,并且在起始后有≥12 个月的连续健康计划参保。在起始后可用(至少 12 个月)的随访中,评估起始后 6 个月时血糖控制不佳的患者(A1c≥7%)的首次治疗强化(基础胰岛素剂量增加[≥10%]、添加餐时胰岛素、GLP-1RA 或新的口服抗糖尿病药物[OAD])情况。评估随后的血糖结果和治疗强化情况。Kaplan-Meier(KM)分析评估了治疗强化时间和 A1c 达标时间。

结果

在有 6 个月 A1c 数据的 427 名合格患者中,59.3%为男性;平均年龄为 53.9 岁;平均随访时间为 29.4 个月;起始处方的平均剂量为 29.6 个胰岛素单位(U)(中位数 24U)。起始基础胰岛素后 6 个月时,81.0%的患者(n=346)血糖控制仍不佳,平均基础胰岛素剂量为 31.0U(中位数 25U)。这些未得到控制的患者中,大多数(88.4%;n=306)在可用的随访中随后强化了治疗。使用 KM 分析,这些患者在起始后首次测量的 A1c 升高后中位数 58 天(范围:17.5 天[GLP-1RA 加用]至 52 天[基础胰岛素剂量增加])内开始强化治疗,在强化治疗后 12 个月时,72.5%(GLP-1RA 加用)至 91.1%(OAD 加用)的患者继续血糖控制不佳。大多数患者(66.8%;n=231/346)首先通过增加基础胰岛素剂量来强化治疗,强化时平均剂量增加至 61.7U(中位数 38U)。基础胰岛素增加后 6 个月,几乎所有患者仍继续使用基础胰岛素治疗,在有 A1c 数据的患者中,92.1%(140/152)血糖控制不佳。在随后的 12 个月中,只有三分之一(34%)的未控制患者添加了另一种抗高血糖药物。

结论

在起始基础胰岛素后 6 个月内,绝大多数患者血糖控制仍不佳。起始后 6 个月内基础胰岛素剂量增加缓慢且不足,表明存在治疗惰性。随后,尽管强化了基础胰岛素治疗,大多数患者仍未达到血糖目标。这一发现表明,在血糖控制不佳的基础胰岛素治疗的 T2DM 患者中,需要有效的治疗强化,但这种需求尚未得到满足。需要加强对提供者的教育和适当强化治疗的指南。

披露

本研究由诺和诺德资助。Mocarski、Guerrero、Langer 和 Thorsted 是 Novo Nordisk 的员工和股东。Yeaw、Divino 和 DeKoven 受雇于 QuintilesIMS,他们因这项研究从 Novo Nordisk 获得报酬。研究概念和设计由 Mocarski、DeKoven、Langer 和 Thorsted 提出。Yeaw 与 Divino 和 DeKoven 一起主导数据收集。数据解释由 Yeaw、Divino、DeKoven 和 Guerrero 完成。Mocarski 和 Divino 撰写了手稿,并由 Guerrero、Langer 和 Thorsted 与 Yeaw 和 DeKoven 一起进行了修订。本研究的部分数据在 2017 年 3 月的 AMCP 年度会议和 2017 年 9 月的第 53 届 EASD 年度会议上以海报形式展示。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

2
8. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment.8. 血糖治疗的药理学方法。
Diabetes Care. 2017 Jan;40(Suppl 1):S64-S74. doi: 10.2337/dc17-S011.
3
6. Glycemic Targets.6. 血糖目标。
Diabetes Care. 2017 Jan;40(Suppl 1):S48-S56. doi: 10.2337/dc17-S009.
4
2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes.2. 糖尿病的分类与诊断。
Diabetes Care. 2017 Jan;40(Suppl 1):S11-S24. doi: 10.2337/dc17-S005.

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