Dataset Information

The association of diabetes and anti-diabetic medications with clinical outcomes in multiple myeloma.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Insulin/insulin-like growth factor-1 signalling may underlie the promoting effect of type 2 diabetes on cancer. This study examined the association of diabetes, including steroid-induced diabetes (SID), and the impact of anti-diabetic medication on clinical outcomes of multiple myeloma (MM).

Methods

A retrospective review was conducted of 1240 MM patients. Overall survival (OS) and MM disease status prior to death were analysed.

Results

Diabetic patients had a significantly shorter OS than non-diabetic patients (median: 65.4 vs 98.7 months). In multivariate analysis, SID was a significant predictor of decreased OS, along with age, comorbidity, MM stage, and cytogenetic abnormalities. Analyzing only the diabetic MM patients, Cox regression showed that metformin predicted an increased OS, whereas use of insulin/analogues predicted a decreased OS. Competing risk analysis showed that DM was associated with increased cumulative incidence of death with progressive MM. Among the diabetics, multivariate regression showed that insulin/analogues were associated with increased, but metformin with decreased death with progressive MM. Potential immortal time bias was evaluated by landmark analyses.

Conclusions

DM, SID in particular, is associated with poor clinical outcomes in MM. Insulin/analogues are associated with poor outcomes, whereas metformin is associated with improved outcomes. No conclusion about causal relationships can be made at this time. Managing hyperglycaemia with non-insulin regimens should be investigated in randomised trials.

SUBMITTER: Wu W

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4119980 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Since the introduction of the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib and the immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) thalidomide and lenalidomide, more patients with multiple myeloma are achieving deep, durable responses and disease control, and are living longer. These improvements have afforded more robust analyses of the relationship between response and survival. Generally, these studies have demonstrated that improvements in the quality of response across all stages of treatment are associated with better disease control and longer survival. Thus, achievement of maximal response should be strongly considered, particularly in the frontline setting, but must also be balanced with tolerability, quality of life and patient preferences. In select patients, achievement of a lesser response may be adequate to prolong survival, and attempts to treat these patients to a deeper response may place them at unnecessary risk without significant benefit. Maintenance therapy has been shown to improve the quality of response and disease control and, in some studies, survival. Studies support maintenance therapy for high-risk patients as a standard of care, and there are emerging data supporting maintenance therapy in standard-risk patients to improve progression-free and possibly overall survival. Multidrug regimens combining a proteasome inhibitor and an IMiD have shown exceptional response outcomes with acceptable increases in toxicity in both the frontline and salvage settings, and are becoming a standard treatment approach. Moving forward, the use of immunophenotypic and molecular response criteria will be essential in better understanding the impact of highly active and continuous treatment regimens across myeloma patient populations. Future translational studies will help to develop antimyeloma agents to their fullest potential. The introduction of novel targeted therapies, including the IMiD pomalidomide and the proteasome inhibitors carfilzomib and ixazomib (MLN9708), will provide greater options to individualize treatment and help patients achieve a clinically meaningful response.

Project description:Poor adherence to anti-diabetic medications contributes to suboptimal glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). A range of interventions have been developed to promote anti-diabetic medication adherence. However, there has been very little focus on the characteristics of these interventions and how effectively they address factors that predict non-adherence. In this systematic review we assessed the characteristics of interventions that aimed to promote adherence to anti-diabetic medications.Using appropriate search terms in Medline, Embase, CINAHL, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts (IPA), PUBmed, and PsychINFO (years 2000-2013), we identified 52 studies which met the inclusion criteria.Forty-nine studies consisted of patient-level interventions, two provider-level interventions, and one consisted of both. Interventions were classified as educational (n = 7), behavioural (n = 3), affective, economic (n = 3) or multifaceted (a combination of the above; n = 40). One study consisted of two interventions. The review found that multifaceted interventions, addressing several non-adherence factors, were comparatively more effective in improving medication adherence and glycaemic target in patients with T2D than single strategies. However, interventions with similar components and those addressing similar non-adherence factors demonstrated mixed results, making it difficult to conclude on effective intervention strategies to promote adherence. Educational strategies have remained the most popular intervention strategy, followed by behavioural, with affective components becoming more common in recent years. Most of the interventions addressed patient-related (n = 35), condition-related (n = 31), and therapy-related (n = 20) factors as defined by the World Health Organization, while fewer addressed health care system (n = 5) and socio-economic-related factors (n = 13).There is a noticeable shift in the literature from using single to multifaceted intervention strategies addressing a range of factors impacting adherence to medications. However, research limitations, such as limited use of standardized methods and tools to measure adherence, lack of individually tailored adherence promoting strategies and variability in the interventions developed, reduce the ability to generalize the findings of the studies reviewed. Furthermore, this review highlights the need to develop multifaceted interventions which can be tailored to the individual patient's needs over the duration of their diabetes management.

Project description:The global prevalence of diabetes is increasing. Medications are a recommended strategy to control hyperglycaemia. However, patient adherence can be variable, impacting health outcomes. A range of interventions for patients with type 2 diabetes have focused on improving treatment adherence. This review evaluates the impact of these interventions on adherence to anti-diabetic medications and focuses on the methods and tools used to measure adherence.Medline, Embase, CINAHL, IPA, PUBmed, and PsychINFO were searched for relevant articles published in 2000-2013, using appropriate search terms.Fifty two studies addressing adherence to anti-diabetic medications in patients with type 2 diabetes met the inclusion criteria and were reviewed. Each study was assessed for research design, method(s) used for measuring medication adherence, and impact of intervention on medication adherence and glycaemic control. Fourteen studies were published in 2000-2009 and 38 in 2010-2013. Twenty two interventions led to improvements in adherence to anti-diabetic medications, while only nine improved both medication adherence and glycaemic control. A single strategy could not be identified which would be guaranteed to improve anti-diabetic medication adherence consistently. Nonetheless, most interventions were successful in influencing one or more of the outcomes assessed, indicating the usefulness of these interventions under certain circumstances. Self-report, particularly the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities questionnaire was the most commonly used tool to assess medication adherence, although other self-report tools were used in more recent studies. Overall, there was a slight increase in the number of studies that employed multiple methods to assess medication adherence in studies conducted after 2008.The diversity of interventions and adherence measurements prevented a meta-analysis of the impact of interventions on adherence to therapy, highlighting the need for more consistency in methods in the area of adherence research. Whilst effective interventions were identified, it is not possible to conclude on an effective intervention that can be generalised to all patients with type 2 diabetes.