Dataset Information

Prescription of Sulphonylureas among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Italy: Results from the Retrospective, Observational Multicentre Cross-Sectional SUSCIPE (Sulphonyl_UreaS_Correct_Internal_Prescription_Evaluation) Study.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

Recent guidelines for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) provide evidence supporting limited use of sulphonylureas (SUs), especially in specific risk patient categories, yet data from national registries still suggest their widespread use. The aim of this study was to investigate characteristics of patients with diabetes treated with SUs and quantify the proportion of patients that met the recommendations for use of SUs by recent guidelines and of those presenting characteristics representing an inappropriate prescription risk (IPR).

Methods

A multicenter, retrospective, cross-sectional, observational study in patients with T2DM receiving treatment with SUs (as monotherapy or in combination with another diabetes therapy) was conducted between 2017 and 2018 in 22 outpatient diabetes clinics across Italy. Exclusion criteria were type 1 diabetes, diabetes mellitus secondary to other conditions, and presence of severe/life-threatening diseases.

Results

A total of 510 patients with T2DM (306 men, 204 women; mean age ± standard deviation 69.8 ± 9.3 years) who were receiving treatment with a SU (as monotherapy or in combination therapy) were assessed in the study. Overall, 70.6% [n = 360; 95% confidence interval (CI) 66.4%, 74.5%] were assessed to have an IPR. Of these, approximately half presented one factor for risk of inappropriate prescription, and 27 and 10.6% presented two and three factors, respectively. In terms of factors contributing to the total burden of risk of inappropriate treatment with SUs, 37.5% (95% CI 33.2%, 41.8%) of all patients were obese; 33.3% (95% CI 29.3%, 37.6%)] were aged ≥ 75 years; 18.6% (95% CI 15.3%, 22.3%) had a history of cardiovascular disease; 14.1% (95% CI 11.2%, 17.4%) had chronic renal insufficiency; 1.8% (95% CI 0.8%, 3.3%) had a history of severe hypoglycemia; 1.8% (95% CI 0.8%; 3.3%) had cognitive impairment; and 2.4% (95% CI 1.2%, 4.1%) had a risky occupation.

Conclusions

The results of this study provide evidence of a high rate of inappropriate SU prescription risk among patients with T2DM, especially among those with overweight/obesity, older age, history of cardiovascular disease, and hypoglycemia.

SUBMITTER: Giorda CB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7434823 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundWe compared all-cause mortality, major macrovascular events (MACE) and diabetes-related hospitalizations in T2DM-incident patients newly treated with metformin (MET) versus sulphonylureas (SU) monotherapy and in T2DM-prevalent patients newly treated with MET+SU versus MET+DPP4-inhibitor combination therapy.MethodsWe analysed anonymized data obtained from a German health fund. Patients were included when they had started MET versus SU therapy or MET+SU versus MET+DPP4 therapy between 01/07/2010 and 31/12/2011. Observation started with the first MET/SU prescription or the first prescription of the second agent of a MET+SU/MET+DPP4 combination therapy. Follow-up time lasted until the end of data availability (a minimum of 12 months), death or therapy discontinuation.ResultsIn total, 434,291 T2DM-prevalent and 35,661 T2DM-incident patients were identified. Of the identified T2DM-incident patients, 904/7,874 started SU/MET monotherapy, respectively, with a mean age of 70.1/61.4 years (54.6/50.3 % female; Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) 1.4/2.2; 933/7,350 observed SU/MET patient years). 4,157/1,793 SU+MET/DPP4+MET therapy starters had a mean age of 68.1/62.2 years (53.4/50.8 % female; CCI 2.8/2.6; 4,556/1,752 observed SU+MET/ DPP4+MET patient years). In a propensity score matched (PSM) comparison, the HRs (95 % CIs) associated with SU monotherapy compared to MET monotherapy exposure were 1.4 (0.9-2.3) for mortality, 1.4 (0.9-2.2) for MACE, 4.1 (1.5-10.9) for T2DM hospitalizations and 1.6 (1.2-2.3) for composite event risk. In a multivariable Cox regression model, SU monotherapy was associated with higher mortality (aHR 2.0; 1.5-2.6), higher MACE (aHR 1.3; 1.0-1.7) and higher T2DM hospitalizations (aHR 2.8; 1.8-4.4), which corresponded with a higher composite event risk (aHR 1.8; 1.5-2.1). No significant differences in event rates were observed in the PSM comparison between DPP4+MET/SU+MET combination therapy starters and in the multivariable Cox regression analysis.ConclusionsOur results show that SU monotherapy may be associated with increased mortality, MACE and T2DM hospitalizations, compared to MET monotherapy. When considering SU therapy, the associated cardiovascular risk should also be taken into account.

Project description:IntroductionA post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was conducted to confirm the long-term risk-benefit profile of sitagliptin administered to Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) under real-world conditions.MethodsThis prospective, multicentre, open-label PMS collected data from 3326 patients receiving sitagliptin according to the approved indication during the case registration period (July 2010-June 2012; observation period, 3 years). Safety was assessed via collection of data on adverse drug reactions (ADRs), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and cardiovascular events whereas efficacy was assessed via changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c).ResultsIn 3265 patients evaluated for safety, 270 ADRs occurred in 207 (6.3%) patients overall. Metabolism and nutrition disorders were the most common class of ADRs, occurring in 58 patients overall (53 non-serious, 5 serious) with hypoglycaemia (17 patients, 0.52%) the most common ADR. In patients with eGFR > 90 mL/min/1.73 m2 at baseline (mean ± SD, 106.42 ± 18.11 mL/min/1.73 m2, n = 584), eGFR declined by 11.83 ± 17.53 mL/min/1.73 m2 (P < 0.0001; n = 360) over the observation period whereas eGFR appeared to be relatively maintained in patients with lower baseline eGFR levels. Cardiovascular events were infrequent [occurring in 4 of 84 (4.76%) patients at high cardiovascular risk] with no distinct features in this Japanese population and the cumulative incidence [8.42% (3.12-21.70) at 36 months; n = 32] was similar to that noted in previous studies involving sitagliptin. In patients evaluated for efficacy, the overall change in HbA1c from baseline to final evaluation was mean ± SD - 0.68 ± 1.34% (P < 0.0001, n = 2070). Reductions in HbA1c tended to be greater in younger patients and patients with higher body mass index (BMI) and HbA1c values at the start of administration.ConclusionLong-term sitagliptin administration in the routine clinical practice setting is associated with good efficacy, including as monotherapy, with no additional safety concerns.

Project description:BackgroundOlder adults are often excluded from clinical trials. Decision making for administration of statins to older patients with diabetes mellitus (DM) is under debate, particularly in frail older patients with comorbidity and high mortality risk. We tested the hypothesis that statin treatment in older patients with DM was differentially effective across strata of mortality risk assessed by the Multidimensional Prognostic Index (MPI), based on information collected with the Standardized Multidimensional Assessment Schedule for Adults and Aged Persons (SVaMA).MethodsIn this retrospective observational study, we estimated the mortality risk in 1712 community-dwelling subjects with DM ? 65 years who underwent a SVaMA evaluation to establish accessibility to homecare services/nursing home admission from 2005 to 2013 in the Padova Health District, Italy. Mild (MPI-SVaMA-1), moderate (MPI-SVaMA-2), and high (MPI-SVaMA-3) risk of mortality at baseline and propensity score-adjusted hazard ratios (HR) of three-year mortality were calculated according to statin treatment.ResultsHigher MPI-SVaMA scores were associated with lower rates of statin treatment (MPI-SVaMA-1 = 39% vs MPI-SVaMA-2 = 36% vs MPI-SVaMA-3 = 24.9%. p<0.001) and higher three-year mortality (MPI-SVaMA-1 = 12.9% vs MPI-SVaMA-2 = 24% vs MPI-SVaMA-3 = 34.4%, p<0.001). After adjustment for propensity score quintiles, statin treatment was significantly associated with lower three-year mortality irrespective of MPI-SVaMA group (interaction test p = 0.303). HRs [95% confidence interval (CI)] were 0.19 (0.14-0.27), 0.28 (0.21-0.36), and 0.26 (0.20-0.34) in the MPI-SVaMA-1, MPI-SVaMA-2, and MPI-SVaMA-3 groups, respectively. Subgroup analyses showed that statin treatment was also beneficial irrespective of age. HRs (95% CI) were 0.21 (0.15-0.31), 0.26 (0.20-0.33), and 0.26 (0.20-0.35) among patients aged 65-74, 75-84, and ? 85 years, respectively (interaction test p=0.812).ConclusionsStatin treatment was significantly associated with reduced three-year mortality independently of age and multidimensional impairment in community-dwelling frail older patients with DM.