Dataset Information

Vildagliptin Versus α-Glucosidase Inhibitor as Add-On to Metformin for Type 2 Diabetes: Subgroup Analysis of the China Prospective Diabetes Study.

ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:The effect of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DDP-4) inhibitors versus α-glucosidase inhibitors (AGIs) on the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in a real-world setting is unknown. The aim of this real-world study was to compare the glucose-lowering effect and tolerability of vildagliptin as add-on to metformin monotherapy (VM) and AGI as add-on to metformin monotherapy (AM) in Chinese patients with T2DM. METHODS:This was a subgroup analysis of the China Prospective Diabetes Study, a post-marketing, prospective, observational, real-world study conducted at 52 centers in China. T2DM patients with inadequate glycemic control on metformin monotherapy who received VM or AM were included. The composite primary endpoint was glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] < 7%) after 12 months in the absence of tolerability events (hypoglycemia, weight gain ≥ 3%, or gastrointestinal events leading to treatment discontinuation). Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to balance the two groups. RESULTS:The success rates of the composite endpoint were higher in the VM group (n = 604/159 before/after PSM) than in the AM group (n = 159/157 before/after PSM), but the difference was not statistically significant (before PSM: 53.0 vs. 46.5%, P = 0.148; after PSM: 56.7 vs. 45.9%, P = 0.055). The glycemic control rate and HbA1c reduction were similar between groups at 3, 6, and 12 months. Compared with the AM group, the VM group had lower risks of any tolerability event (relative risk [RR] 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.83, P = 0.006), of any adverse event (AE) (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.41-1.00, P = 0.049), and of any serious AE (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.25-0.81, P = 0.007). CONCLUSION:The results of this real-world study suggest that vildagliptin as add-on to metformin monotherapy had a similar glucose-lowering effect to AGI as add-on to metformin monotherapy, but with better safety.

SUBMITTER: Chen Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6965535 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe efficacy and safety of vildagliptin alone or with metformin is well established by randomized trials, but it is unknown whether it can be extrapolated to the real-world setting in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study aimed to assess the effectiveness and safety of vildagliptin add-on to metformin versus dual oral antidiabetes drug (OAD), non-vildagliptin combination therapies in real-world Chinese patients with T2DM.MethodsThe China Prospective Diabetes Study was a post-marketing, prospective, multicenter, observational, real-world study conducted in 52 centers. Patients inadequately controlled with OAD monotherapy and who initiated vildagliptin add-on to metformin (VM cohort) or two OADs other than vildagliptin (comparator cohort) were included for the present analysis. The composite primary endpoint was glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) < 7% and without tolerability events (hypoglycemia, weight gain ≥ 3%, or discontinuation due to gastrointestinal events) at 12 months. Secondary endpoints included change in HbA1c from baseline, subgroup analysis, and tolerability. Propensity score matching analysis was performed to adjust for baseline covariates imbalance (body mass index (BMI) and HbA1c).ResultsA total of 604 patients received VM and 670 received comparator therapy. Patients who received VM were younger, more obese, and had a higher baseline HbA1c and a shorter duration of T2DM. After propensity score matching, there were 530 patients per cohort. After 12-month treatment, the success rates of the composite primary endpoint were 50.9% and 33.0% in the VM and comparator cohorts, respectively (P < 0.001; odds ratio = 2.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.64-2.70). Furthermore, the success rates of the composite endpoint were higher with VM across geographic area, BMI, and baseline HbA1c subgroups. Fewer tolerability events occurred in the VM cohort versus the comparator cohort (8.3% vs. 16.2%, P < 0.001; relative risk = 0.51, 95% CI 0.36-0.72).ConclusionCompared with dual OAD non-vildagliptin combination therapies, vildagliptin add-on to metformin is effective and safe to achieve glycemic control in Chinese patients with T2DM.FundingNovartis.

Project description:IntroductionVildagliptin and metformin are two well-established oral antidiabetics with a complementary mechanism of action. Two new generic products, vildagliptin and its fixed-drug combination (FDC) with metformin, were tested for bioequivalence versus the approved originator reference products (Galvus® and Eucreas®).MethodsThree randomized studies with two-treatment, two-period, two-sequence crossover design were conducted in healthy adults. One study evaluated vildagliptin 50 mg tablets as single dose under fasting conditions. Vildagliptin-metformin FDC tablet strengths of 50/850 mg and 50/1000 mg were evaluated in separate studies as single dose under fed conditions, given 30 min after a standardized high-fat, high-calorie breakfast following 10 h overnight fasting. Blood samples for analysis were collected until 24 h after dosing in each study period. Bioequivalence between test (T) and reference (R) products required 90% confidence interval (CIs) for the geometric least square (LS) mean T/R ratio to be within 80-125% for the pharmacokinetic parameters, maximum plasma concentration (Cmax), and area under the curve (AUC0-t).ResultsThe 90% CIs of geometric LS means of T/R ratio for Cmax and AUC0-t with vildagliptin tablets of 50 mg were 92.22-103.94% and 99.00-102.66%, respectively; corresponding results with FDC tablets for 50/850 mg tablets were 94.81-115.41% and 95.28-106.00% for vildagliptin and 90.87-101.18% and 90.56-100.09% for metformin; for 50/1000 mg tablets Cmax and AUC0-t were 105.56-122.30% and 98.30-107.55%, respectively, for vildagliptin and 92.14-103.73% and 94.60-101.81%, respectively, for metformin. Other parameters such as AUC0-∞, time to maximum concentration (Tmax), and terminal half-life (t1/2) were comparable between test and reference products. Adverse events (AEs), mainly vomiting, were reported without relevant difference between test and reference products in each study. AEs were generally mild and transient. No severe or serious AEs occurred.ConclusionsThe new generic drug products of vildagliptin and the FDCs of vildagliptin and metformin demonstrated bioequivalence to the approved originator products and are therefore expected to provide similar therapeutic effects.

Project description:IntroductionTo assess the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin as add-on therapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), inadequately controlled on stable long-acting, intermediate-acting, or pre-mixed insulin, with or without concomitant metformin.MethodsIn this 12-week placebo-controlled study, patients were randomized to receive either vildagliptin 50 mg twice daily (bid) or placebo treatment in a 1:1 ratio. The primary endpoint was change in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to 12-week endpoint. Secondary endpoints included proportion of patients achieving pre-defined HbA1c targets of ≤6.5%, <7.0%, and HbA1c <7.0% in patients with baseline HbA1c ≤8.0% and change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) after 12 weeks of treatment. Regular monitoring was performed to record any treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events or hypoglycemic episodes.ResultsOf the 156 patients randomized, 96.8% completed the study (vildagliptin, n = 76; placebo, n = 75). Patient demographics and clinical characteristics were comparable between the groups at baseline. Addition of vildagliptin resulted in statistically significant reductions in HbA1c after 12 weeks (-1.01 ± 0.06%), with a between-treatment difference of -0.91 ± 0.09% (p < 0.001). FPG levels reduced from baseline to 12 weeks in the vildagliptin group (-1.2 ± 0.2 mmol/L), with a between-treatment difference of -1.2 ± 0.3 mmol/L which was significant (p < 0.001). The proportion of patients achieving HbA1c targets was higher with vildagliptin treatment for all pre-defined responder rate categories. The overall incidence of AEs was comparable between groups (vildagliptin, 46.2% vs. placebo, 43.6%). The overall incidence of hypoglycemic events was low and all events were self-treatable without using drug therapy. No severe hypoglycemic events were reported.ConclusionTreatment with vildagliptin 50 mg bid as add-on to insulin with or without metformin resulted in statistically significant reductions in HbA1c in Japanese patients with T2DM. Overall, vildagliptin was well tolerated with a safety profile similar to that of placebo in this patient population. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier, NCT02002221 FUNDING: Novartis Pharma K.K.

Project description:IntroductionENDURE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00856284), a multicenter, double-blind, active-controlled study of 2639 patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), found that metformin in combination with alogliptin (12.5 and 25 mg doses), when compared to standard add-on therapy (sulfonylurea, SU), exerted sustained antihyperglycemic effects over 2 years. This economic analysis of ENDURE aimed to quantify the relationship between increased glycemic durability and cost-effectiveness of alogliptin in the UK clinical setting, and communicate its sustained glycemic benefit in economic terms.MethodsUsing baseline characteristics and treatment effects from the ENDURE trial population, between-group cost-effectiveness analyses compared the combined use of metformin and alogliptin (MET + ALO12.5/25) in patients with inadequately controlled T2DM, as an alternative to metformin and SU (MET + SU). In scenario analyses, an intragroup cost-effectiveness analysis compared MET + ALO12.5/25 with MET + SU; a between-group cost-effectiveness analysis also compared MET + ALO12.5/25 versus MET + SU within a subpopulation of patients who achieved HbA1c control (<7.5%) at 2 years on study drug.ResultsCompared with baseline profiles of patients, combination therapies with alogliptin or SU were associated with improvements in length and quality of life and were cost-effective at established norms. Despite increased drug acquisition costs, alogliptin at 12.5 mg and 25 mg doses resulted in greater predicted lifetime quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gains with associated incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) of £10,959/QALY and £7217/QALY compared to SU, respectively.ConclusionThe ENDURE trial and the present cost-effectiveness analysis found that the glycemic durability of alogliptin therapy was associated with improved long-term patient outcomes, QALY gains, and ICERs that were cost-effective when evaluated against standard threshold values. Alogliptin therefore represents a cost-effective treatment alternative to SU as add-on therapy to metformin in patients with poorly managed T2DM.FundingTakeda Development Centre Europe Ltd.

Dataset Information

Vildagliptin Versus α-Glucosidase Inhibitor as Add-On to Metformin for Type 2 Diabetes: Subgroup Analysis of the China Prospective Diabetes Study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets