Dataset Information

Health care provider experience with canagliflozin in real-world clinical practice: favorability, treatment patterns, and patient outcomes.

ABSTRACT: This study describes how health care providers approach canagliflozin for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the real world.An Internet-based questionnaire was completed by 101 endocrinologists, 101 primary care physicians, and 100 nurse practitioners/physician assistants (NP/PAs). Health care providers were required to have experience prescribing or managing patients using canagliflozin to be included in the study. Health care providers compared canagliflozin with other T2DM medication classes on clinical characteristics, costs, and patient satisfaction. Confidence in canagliflozin was also measured. Health care providers reported their canagliflozin prescribing experience and good candidate characteristics for treatment. Finally, providers reported on patient outcomes among those receiving canagliflozin. All variables were compared across provider type.Health care providers reported higher favorability for canagliflozin for blood pressure and body weight compared with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and higher favorability for effect on blood pressure, body weight, treatment satisfaction, and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) compared with sulfonylureas (SUs), with differences observed for effect on blood pressure. Health care providers reported being very/extremely confident (55%-74%) with canagliflozin as a second-to fourth-line treatment. The top 3 characteristics reported by the providers, in terms of describing a good candidate for canagliflozin, include those concerned about their weight, insurance coverage/affordability, and avoiding injectable treatments. Finally, providers reported often/always observing patients' lowering or controlling HbA1c (82%-88%) and improvement in overall quality of life (QoL; 50%-53%) with canagliflozin treatment. No differences were observed across provider type for confidence, good candidate characteristics, or patient outcomes.Health care providers reported favorable experiences with canagliflozin and witnessed improvements in patients' clinical outcomes and QoL.

SUBMITTER: Bolge SC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5491699 | biostudies-other | 2017

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Despite the availability of various osteoporosis treatments, adherence remains suboptimal. One contributing factor may be patient experience with therapy. This US, multicenter, combined retrospective chart review and patient questionnaire study included postmenopausal women at high risk for fracture and is the first study to describe real-world patient experience with abaloparatide (ABL) injection. Eight geographically diverse secondary care sites in the United States participated (n = 193). Mean ± SD age was 67.4 ±8.62 years. Most patients (86%) were satisfied with the ABL regimen, especially with ease of preparation (82%), ease of storage (87%), and storage convenience (89%), an attribute 83% of the patients thought was important. The majority of patients reported complete satisfaction with the ABL regimen allowing for their ability to conduct daily activities (85%) and convenience to fit into their daily schedule (84%). All reported taking ABL as directed, by injection in the lower abdomen, and 83% of patients reported medium or high adherence. Patients were satisfied with the needle size (76% completely satisfied), and 93% reported never deliberately missing a dose. Although injecting medication (18%) and higher out-of-pocket costs (17%) were deemed the most bothersome attributes, the majority (69%) noted their healthcare team understands how osteoporosis impacts their lives. In multivariable analyses, ease of preparation (OR = 2.62; 95% CI, 1.01-6.81; p = 0.048) and fracture history (OR = 1.72; 95% CI, 1.03-2.86; p = 0.037) were significantly associated with overall satisfaction. Ease of preparation was a predictor of higher satisfaction with treatment convenience (coefficient = 13.60; 95% CI, 8.08-19.12; p = 0.00). Remembering to take the medication was a significant predictor of self-reported adherence (OR = 16.66; 95% CI, 3.30-84.24; p = 0.001). In conclusion, the majority of patients were satisfied with ABL and found it convenient/easy to prepare and store. High self-reported adherence may be associated with positive patient experience including ease of use and adequate support from healthcare providers. © 2020 The Authors. JBMR Plus published by Wiley Periodicals LLC. on behalf of American Society for Bone and Mineral Research.

Project description:BACKGROUND & AIMS:Low rates of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) surveillance are primarily due to provider-related process failures. However, few studies have evaluated primary care provider (PCP) practice patterns, attitudes, and barriers to HCC surveillance at academic tertiary care referral centers. METHODS:We conducted a web-based survey of PCPs at 2 tertiary care referral centers (133 providers) from June 2017 through December 2017. The survey was adapted from pretested surveys and included questions about practice patterns, attitudes, and barriers to HCC surveillance. We used the Fisher exact and Mann-Whitney rank-sum tests to identify factors associated with adherence to HCC surveillance recommendations, for categoric and continuous variables, respectively. RESULTS:We obtained a provider-level response rate of 75% and clinic-level response rate of 100% (133 providers). Whereas most PCPs performed HCC surveillance themselves, one-third deferred surveillance to subspecialists and referred patients to a hepatology clinic. Providers believed the combination of ultrasound and ?-fetoprotein analysis to be highly effective for early stage tumor detection and reported using the combination for assessment of most patients. However, PCPs were more likely to use computed tomography- or magnetic resonance imaging-based surveillance for patients with nonalcoholic steatohepatitis or decompensated cirrhosis. Most providers believed HCC surveillance to be efficacious for early tumor detection and increasing survival. However, they desired increased high-quality evidence to characterize screening benefits and harms. Providers expressed notable misconceptions about HCC surveillance, including the role for measurement of liver enzyme levels in HCC surveillance and cost effectiveness of surveillance in patients without cirrhosis. They also reported barriers, including not being up to date on HCC surveillance recommendations, limited time in the clinic, and competing clinical concerns. CONCLUSIONS:In a web-based survey, PCPs reported misconceptions and barriers to HCC surveillance. This indicates the need for interventions, including provider education, to improve HCC surveillance effectiveness in clinical practice.

Project description:BackgroundThe application of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) represents a breakthrough in the current landscape for the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC), but the real-world outcome is limited. This study aimed to investigate the treatment options and efficacy evaluation of first-line, second-line, and subsequent-line immunotherapy in routine practice.MethodsA retrospective analysis of ES-SCLC patients treated with ICIs was conducted between May 2016 and September 2021. Objective response rate, disease control rate, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival were assessed between groups to explore the value of ICIs at different treatment time periods. PFS1 and PFS2 were defined as the duration from initial therapy to disease progression or death in first-line or second-line treatment.ResultsNinety-six patients with ES-SCLC were included. PFS1 was prolonged in patients treated with first-line ICIs-combined therapy (median PFS1 7.20 months vs. 5.30 months, hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.36-087, p = 0.0085). For patients who progressed after first-line ICIs treatment (N = 22), PFS1 + PFS2 was longer in the second-line ICIs continuation group with no significant difference (median PFS1 + PFS2 11.27 months vs. 7.20 months, HR 0.45, 95% CI 0.14-1.51, p = 0.19). For patients who experienced a progression event after first-line chemotherapy (N = 50), PFS2 and PFS1 + PFS2 were prolonged in patients who accepted second-line ICIs-combined therapy without significant difference (median PFS2 4.00 months vs. 2.43 months, HR 0.59, 95% CI 0.33-1.05, p = 0.070; median PFS1 + PFS2 11.30 months vs. 8.70 months, HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.29-0.98, p = 0.056).ConclusionFirst-line ICIs plus chemotherapy should be applied in the clinical practice of ES-SCLC. If patients did not receive ICIs plus chemotherapy in first-line treatment, therapies that include ICIs in second-line treatment should be considered.

Dataset Information

Health care provider experience with canagliflozin in real-world clinical practice: favorability, treatment patterns, and patient outcomes.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets