University of Leicester
Browse

Treatment patterns and associated factors in 14 668 people with type 2 diabetes initiating a second-line therapy: Results from the global DISCOVER study programme.

Download (1001.88 kB)
journal contribution
posted on 2019-09-02, 08:45 authored by A Nicolucci, B Charbonnel, MB Gomes, K Khunti, M Kosiborod, MV Shestakova, I Shimomura, H Watada, H Chen, J Cid-Ruzafa, P Fenici, N Hammar, F Surmont, F Tang, S Pocock
AIM: To evaluate treatment data from DISCOVER (NCT02322762 and NCT02226822), a global, prospective, observational study programme of patients with type 2 diabetes initiating a second-line glucose-lowering therapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data were collected using a standardized case report form. First- and second-line treatments were assessed in 14 668 patients from 37 countries across six regions. Among patients prescribed first-line metformin monotherapy, Firth logistic regression models were used to assess factors associated with second-line treatment choices. RESULTS: The most common first-line therapies were metformin monotherapy (57.9%) and combinations of metformin with a sulphonylurea (14.6%). The most common second-line therapies were combinations of metformin with other agents (72.2%), including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors (25.1%) or sulphonylureas (21.3%). Among patients prescribed first-line metformin monotherapy, the most common second-line therapies were combinations of metformin with a DPP-4 inhibitor [32.8%; across-region range (ARR): 2.4%-51.3%] or a sulphonylurea (30.0%; ARR: 18.3%-63.6%); only a few patients received combinations of metformin with sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (6.7%; ARR: 0.0%-10.8%) or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (1.9%; ARR: 0.1%-4.5%). Both clinical and non-medical factors were associated with choice of second-line therapy after metformin monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Fewer patients than expected received metformin monotherapy at first line, and the use of newer therapies at second line was uncommon in some regions of the world. Patients' socioeconomic status was associated with treatment patterns, suggesting that therapy choices are influenced by cost and access.

Funding

The DISCOVER study programme is funded by AstraZeneca. DISCOVER is a non‐interventional study programme and no drugs were supplied or funded. A team of AstraZeneca employees contributed to the design of the study. All authors had full access to the data. H. C., P. F. and F. S. are employees of AstraZeneca; they contributed to the analysis and interpretation of the data, and to the development of the manuscript. The corresponding author had final responsibility for the decision to submit the manuscript. All statistical analyses were funded by AstraZeneca and conducted independently of the study sponsor, by the statistical group at Saint Luke's Mid America Heart Institute, Kansas City, Missouri.

History

Citation

Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism, 2019

Author affiliation

/Organisation/COLLEGE OF LIFE SCIENCES/School of Medicine/Diabetes Research Centre

Version

  • VoR (Version of Record)

Published in

Diabetes

Publisher

Wiley

eissn

1463-1326

Acceptance date

2019-07-04

Copyright date

2019

Available date

2019-09-02

Publisher version

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/dom.13830

Notes

Data underlying the findings described in this manuscript may be obtained in accordance with AstraZeneca's data sharing policy described at https://astrazenecagrouptrials.pharmacm.com/ST/Submission/Disclosure.

Language

en

Usage metrics

    University of Leicester Publications

    Categories

    No categories selected

    Exports

    RefWorks
    BibTeX
    Ref. manager
    Endnote
    DataCite
    NLM
    DC