Wysham Carol H, Pilon Dominic, Ingham Mike, Lafeuille Marie-Hélène, Emond Bruno, Kamstra Rhiannon, Pfeifer Michael, Lefebvre Patrick
a Rockwood Clinic , Spokane , WA , USA.
b Analysis Group, Inc. , Montréal , Québec , Canada.
Curr Med Res Opin. 2018 Jun;34(6):1125-1133. doi: 10.1080/03007995.2018.1454417. Epub 2018 Mar 27.
To compare achievement of quality goals (HbA1c, weight loss/body mass index [BMI], systolic blood pressure [SBP]), including maintaining HbA1c, between patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with canagliflozin 300 mg (CANA) or a GLP-1 in an actual practice setting.
Adults with T2DM newly initiated on CANA or a GLP-1 were identified from the IQVIA Real-World Data Electronic Medical Records-US database (2012Q2-2016Q1). To account for differences in baseline characteristics, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used. Outcomes were compared using Cox models (hazard ratios [HRs] and 95% confidence intervals [CIs]) and Kaplan-Meier analyses.
CANA (n = 11,435) and GLP-1 (n = 11,582) cohorts had similar attainment of HbA1c < 8.0% (64 mmol/mol) and HbA1c < 9.0% (75 mmol/mol; HbA1c < 8.0%: HR [CI] = 0.98 [0.91-1.06]; HbA1c < 9.0%: HR [CI] = 1.02 [0.93-1.12]), while GLP-1 patients were 10% more likely to achieve HbA1c < 7.0% (53 mmol/mol). CANA and GLP-1 patients were similar in maintaining HbA1c < 7.0%, < 8.0%, or <9.0%, achieving weight loss ≥5% (HR [CI] = 1.05 [0.99-1.12]), achieving BMI <30 kg/m (HR [CI] = 1.11 [0.98-1.27]), and achieving SBP <140 mmHg (HR [CI] = 1.07 [0.98-1.17]). CANA patients were 30% less likely to discontinue treatment, 28% less likely to have a prescription for a new anti-hyperglycemic, and 17-21% less likely to fail to maintain HbA1c < 8.0% or 9.0% or have a prescription for a new anti-hyperglycemic (composite outcome) vs GLP-1. No significant difference was observed for the composite outcome using the HbA1c < 7.0% threshold.
This retrospective study in an actual practice setting showed that CANA patients were generally as likely as GLP-1 patients to achieve HbA1c, weight, and blood pressure thresholds, and to maintain glycemic control while being less likely to discontinue treatment and/or have a new anti-hyperglycemic prescribed.
在实际临床环境中,比较接受300毫克卡格列净(CANA)或胰高血糖素样肽-1(GLP-1)治疗的2型糖尿病(T2DM)患者在实现质量目标(糖化血红蛋白[HbA1c]、体重减轻/体重指数[BMI]、收缩压[SBP])方面的情况,包括维持HbA1c水平。
从IQVIA真实世界数据电子病历-美国数据库(2012年第二季度至2016年第一季度)中识别新开始使用CANA或GLP-1的成年T2DM患者。为了考虑基线特征的差异,采用治疗权重的逆概率法。使用Cox模型(风险比[HRs]和95%置信区间[CIs])和Kaplan-Meier分析比较结果。
CANA组(n = 11435)和GLP-1组(n = 11582)在达到HbA1c < 8.0%(64 mmol/mol)和HbA1c < 9.0%(75 mmol/mol)方面相似(HbA1c < 8.0%:HR[CI] = 0.98[0.91 - 1.06];HbA1c < 9.0%:HR[CI] = 1.02[0.93 - 1.12]),而GLP-1组患者达到HbA1c < 7.0%(53 mmol/mol)的可能性高10%。CANA组和GLP-1组患者在维持HbA1c < 7.0%、< 8.0%或< 9.0%,实现体重减轻≥5%(HR[CI] = 1.05[0.99 - 1.12]),实现BMI < 30 kg/m²(HR[CI] = 1.11[0.98 - 1.27])以及实现SBP < 140 mmHg(HR[CI] = 1.07[0.98 - 1.17])方面相似。与GLP-1组相比,CANA组患者停药的可能性低30%,开具新的抗高血糖药物处方的可能性低28%,未能维持HbA1c < 8.0%或9.0%或开具新的抗高血糖药物处方(复合结局)的可能性低17% - 21%。使用HbA1c < 7.0%阈值时,复合结局未观察到显著差异。
这项在实际临床环境中的回顾性研究表明,CANA组患者在实现HbA1c、体重和血压目标以及维持血糖控制方面与GLP-1组患者总体相似,同时停药和/或开具新的抗高血糖药物处方的可能性较小。