Dataset Information

Randomized Multicenter Evaluation of Quality of Life and Treatment Satisfaction in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Receiving Once-Weekly Trelagliptin Versus a Daily Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors are an established treatment in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The objective of this study was to investigate differences in quality of life (QOL) and treatment satisfaction among treatment-naïve T2DM patients receiving once-weekly trelagliptin or a daily DPP-4 inhibitor.

Methods

In this multicenter, randomized, open-label, parallel-group, phase IV study conducted in Japan, 218 patients were randomized to trelagliptin 100 mg once weekly or a once- or twice-daily DPP-4 inhibitor for 12 weeks (NCT03014479; JapicCTI-173482). QOL and treatment satisfaction were assessed using the Diabetes Therapy-Related QOL (DTR-QOL) Questionnaire and Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ), respectively. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in DTR-QOL total score at week 12. Secondary endpoints included further analysis of the DTR-QOL and DTSQ components. Other endpoints included glycemic control, treatment adherence, and safety.

Results

The between-group difference in the change from baseline to week 12 in DTR-QOL total score was 2.418 (95% confidence interval - 1.546, 6.382; P = 0.2305). Analysis of the DTR-QOL and DTSQ results by subscales and stratification generally showed a numerical improvement with trelagliptin over daily DPP-4 inhibitors. QOL and treatment satisfaction improved with a reduction in frequency of concurrent and study drug dosing. Treatment adherence was > 97% for both groups. The effect of trelagliptin on glycemic control was similar to that seen with daily DPP-4 inhibitors. Trelagliptin and daily DPP-4 inhibitors were well-tolerated and demonstrated similar safety profiles.

Conclusions

Once-weekly trelagliptin 100 mg administered for 12 weeks resulted in a numerically, but not statistically, greater improvement in QOL and treatment satisfaction versus daily DPP-4 inhibitors. The decision to administer once-weekly or daily DPP-4 inhibitor treatment is likely to depend on patient preferences and the treatment policies of physicians.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03014479) and JAPIC (JapicCTI-173482).

Funding

Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd.

SUBMITTER: Ishii H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6612345 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionOnce-weekly semaglutide 1 mg is a novel glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes that has demonstrated significantly greater reductions in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight than the GLP-1 RA once-daily liraglutide 1.2 mg in the SUSTAIN 10 trial. The present analysis aimed to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg versus once-daily liraglutide 1.2 mg from a UK healthcare payer perspective.MethodsLong-term outcomes were projected using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9.0), with baseline characteristics and treatment effects sourced from SUSTAIN 10. Patients were assumed to initiate treatment with GLP-1 RAs and continue treatment until HbA1c exceeded 7.5%, at which point GLP-1 RAs were discontinued and basal insulin was initiated. Pharmacy costs and costs of complications were measured in 2018 pounds sterling (GBP), with future costs and outcomes discounted at 3.5% per annum. Utilities were taken from published sources.ResultsIn the base-case analysis, once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg was associated with an increase in discounted life expectancy of 0.21 years and discounted quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.30 quality-adjusted life-years, compared with once-daily liraglutide 1.2 mg. Clinical benefits were achieved at reduced costs, with lifetime cost savings of GBP 140 per patient with semaglutide versus liraglutide, owing to a reduction in diabetes-related complications, in particular cardiovascular disease (mean cost saving of GBP 279 per patient). Therefore, once-weekly semaglutide 1 mg was dominant compared with once-daily liraglutide 1.2 mg. The results of the sensitivity analyses were similar, demonstrating the robustness of the base-case analysis.ConclusionsOnce-weekly semaglutide 1 mg is a cost-effective treatment option versus once-daily liraglutide 1.2 mg, based on the SUSTAIN 10 trial, from a UK healthcare payer perspective.