Preference for Type 2 Diabetes Therapies in the United States: A Discrete Choice Experiment.
Discrete choice experiment
Patient preference
Therapy
Type 2 diabetes (T2D)
Journal
Advances in therapy
ISSN: 1865-8652
Titre abrégé: Adv Ther
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8611864
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2022
09 2022
Historique:
received:
17
12
2021
accepted:
05
05
2022
pubmed:
8
7
2022
medline:
27
8
2022
entrez:
7
7
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic condition associated with substantial clinical and economic burden. As multiple therapeutic options are available, patient preferences on treatment characteristics are key in T2DM therapeutic decision-making. This study aimed to determine the preferences of US patients with T2DM for therapies recommended for first pharmacologic intensification after metformin. As part of a discrete choice experiment, an online survey was designed using literature review and qualitative interview findings. Eligibility was met by US patients with T2DM who were aged 18 years or older with an HbA Eligible patients (n = 500) had a mean HbA Patients with T2DM in the USA are significantly more likely to prefer oral or injectable semaglutide-like profiles over those of key comparators from the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor, and thiazolidinedione classes.
Identifiants
pubmed: 35797004
doi: 10.1007/s12325-022-02181-7
pii: 10.1007/s12325-022-02181-7
pmc: PMC9402769
doi:
Substances chimiques
Dipeptidyl-Peptidase IV Inhibitors
0
Hypoglycemic Agents
0
Glucagon-Like Peptides
62340-29-8
Metformin
9100L32L2N
Sitagliptin Phosphate
TS63EW8X6F
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Pagination
4114-4130Informations de copyright
© 2022. The Author(s).
Références
American Diabetes Association. Classification and diagnosis of diabetes: standards of medical care in diabetes—2018. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(Supplement 1):S13–27.
doi: 10.2337/dc18-S002
Ali SN, Dang-Tan T, Valentine WJ, Hansen BB. Evaluation of the clinical and economic burden of poor glycemic control associated with therapeutic inertia in patients with type 2 diabetes in the United States. Adv Ther. 2020;37(2):869–82.
pubmed: 31925649
pmcid: 7004420
doi: 10.1007/s12325-019-01199-8
Centers for Disease Control and Prevenetion. National Diabetes Statistics Report 2020: estimates of diabetes and its burden in the United States. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/pdfs/data/statistics/national-diabetes-statisticsreport.pdf . Accessed 5 July 2022.
American Diabetes Association. Pharmacologic approaches to glycemic treatment: standards of medical care in diabetes—2018. Diabetes Care. 2018;41(Supplement 1):S73–85.
doi: 10.2337/dc18-S008
Nauck MA, Quast DR, Wefers J, Meier JJ. GLP-1 receptor agonists in the treatment of type 2 diabetes – state-of-the-art. Mol Metab. 2020;46:101102.
pubmed: 33068776
pmcid: 8085572
doi: 10.1016/j.molmet.2020.101102
Khunti S, Davies MJ, Khunti K. Clinical inertia in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus: a focused literature review. Br J Diabetes. 2015;15(2):65–9.
doi: 10.15277/bjdvd.2015.019
Brooks A, Langer J, Tervonen T, Hemmingsen MP, Eguchi K, Bacci ED. Patient preferences for GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Japan: a discrete choice experiment. Diabetes Ther. 2019;10(2):735–49.
pubmed: 30847838
pmcid: 6437254
doi: 10.1007/s13300-019-0591-9
Qin L, Chen S, Flood E, et al. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment attributes important to injection-experienced patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a preference study in Germany and the United Kingdom. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8(2):335–53.
pubmed: 28236271
pmcid: 5380499
doi: 10.1007/s13300-017-0237-8
Qin L, Chen S, Flood E, et al. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment attributes important to injection-naive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a multinational preference study. Diabetes Ther. 2017;8(2):321–34.
pubmed: 28155131
pmcid: 5380493
doi: 10.1007/s13300-017-0230-2
Hauber AB, Nguyen H, Posner J, Kalsekar I, Ruggles J. A discrete-choice experiment to quantify patient preferences for frequency of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist injections in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016;32(2):251–62.
pubmed: 26549576
doi: 10.1185/03007995.2015.1117433
Gelhorn HL, Poon JL, Davies EW, Paczkowski R, Curtis SE, Boye KS. Evaluating preferences for profiles of GLP-1 receptor agonists among injection-naive type 2 diabetes patients in the UK. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2015;9:1611–22.
pubmed: 26635470
pmcid: 4646588
doi: 10.2147/PPA.S90842
Gelhorn HL, Bacci ED, Poon JL, Boye KS, Suzuki S, Babineaux SM. Evaluating preferences for profiles of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists among injection-naive type 2 diabetes patients in Japan. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2016;10:1337–48.
pubmed: 27524889
pmcid: 4966566
doi: 10.2147/PPA.S109289
Polster M, Zanutto E, McDonald S, Conner C, Hammer M. A comparison of preferences for two GLP-1 products—liraglutide and exenatide—for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. J Med Econ. 2010;13(4):655–61.
pubmed: 21034377
doi: 10.3111/13696998.2010.529377
Igarashi A, Hansen BB, Langer J, et al. Preference for oral and injectable GLP-1 RA therapy profiles in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: a discrete choice experiment. Adv Ther. 2020;36:1–18.
Scheen AJ. Reduction in HbA1c with SGLT2 inhibitors vs. DPP-4 inhibitors as add-ons to metformin monotherapy according to baseline HbA1c: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Diabetes Metab. 2020;46(3):186–96.
pubmed: 32007623
doi: 10.1016/j.diabet.2020.01.002
Qian D, Zhang T, Zheng P, et al. Comparison of oral antidiabetic drugs as add-on treatments in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on metformin: a network meta-analysis. Diabetes Ther. 2018;9(5):1945–58.
pubmed: 30121726
pmcid: 6167280
doi: 10.1007/s13300-018-0482-5
Pearson S, Kietsiriroje N, Ajjan RA. Oral semaglutide in the management of type 2 diabetes: a report on the evidence to date. Diabetes Metab Syndr Obes Targets Ther. 2019;12:2515.
doi: 10.2147/DMSO.S229802
Nuhoho S, Gupta J, Hansen BB, Fletcher-Louis M, Dang-Tan T, Paine A. Orally administered semaglutide versus GLP-1 RAs in patients with type 2 diabetes previously receiving 1–2 oral antidiabetics: systematic review and network meta-analysis. Diabetes Ther. 2019;10(6):2183–99.
pubmed: 31599391
pmcid: 6848399
doi: 10.1007/s13300-019-00706-y
Li Z, Zhang Y, Quan X, et al. Efficacy and acceptability of glycemic control of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists among type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2016;11(5): e0154206.
pubmed: 27158818
pmcid: 4861281
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0154206
Kanters S, Wilkinson L, Vrazic H, et al. Comparative efficacy of once-weekly semaglutide versus SGLT-2 inhibitors in patients inadequately controlled with one to two oral antidiabetic drugs: a systematic literature review and network meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 2019;9(7): e023458.
pubmed: 31340953
pmcid: 6661926
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-023458
Kamalinia S, Josse RG, Donio PJ, Leduc L, Shah BR, Tobe SW. Risk of any hypoglycaemia with newer antihyperglycaemic agents in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endocrinol Diabetes Metab. 2020;3(1): e00100.
pubmed: 31922027
doi: 10.1002/edm2.100
Fei Y, Tsoi M-F, Cheung BMY. Cardiovascular outcomes in trials of new antidiabetic drug classes: a network meta-analysis. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2019;18(1):1–13.
doi: 10.1186/s12933-019-0916-z
Sherifali D, Nerenberg K, Pullenayegum E, Cheng JE, Gerstein HC. The effect of oral antidiabetic agents on A1C levels: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Diabetes Care. 2010;33(8):1859–64.
pubmed: 20484130
pmcid: 2909079
doi: 10.2337/dc09-1727
Zinman B, Wanner C, Lachin JM, et al. Empagliflozin, cardiovascular outcomes, and mortality in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(22):2117–28.
pubmed: 26378978
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1504720
Erdmann E, Charbonnel B, Wilcox R. Thiazolidinediones and cardiovascular risk—a question of balance. Curr Cardiol Rev. 2009;5(3):155–65.
pubmed: 20676274
pmcid: 2822138
doi: 10.2174/157340309788970333
Green JB, Bethel MA, Armstrong PW, et al. Effect of sitagliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(3):232–42.
pubmed: 26052984
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1501352
Rosenstock J, Allison D, Birkenfeld AL, et al. Effect of additional oral semaglutide vs sitagliptin on glycated hemoglobin in adults with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with metformin alone or with sulfonylurea: the PIONEER 3 randomized clinical trial. J Am Med Assoc. 2019;321(15):1466–80.
doi: 10.1001/jama.2019.2942
Rodbard HW, Rosenstock J, Canani LH, et al. Oral semaglutide versus empagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on metformin: the PIONEER 2 trial. Diabetes Care. 2019;42(12):2272–81.
pubmed: 31530666
doi: 10.2337/dc19-0883
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Defining adult overweight and obesity 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/obesity/adult/defining.html . Accessed 17 Sept 2020.
American Diabetes Association. 6. Glycemic targets: standards of medical care in diabetes—2020. Diabetes Care. 2020;43(Supplement 1):S66–76.
doi: 10.2337/dc20-S006
Yabe D, Nakamura J, Kaneto H, et al. Safety and efficacy of oral semaglutide versus dulaglutide in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (PIONEER 10): an open-label, randomised, active-controlled, phase 3a trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2020;8(5):P392-406.
doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(20)30074-7
Yamada Y, Katagiri H, Hamamoto Y, et al. Dose-response, efficacy, and safety of oral semaglutide monotherapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (PIONEER 9): a 52-week, phase 2/3a, randomised, controlled trial. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2020;8(5):P377–91.
doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(20)30075-9
Thieu VT, Robinson S, Kennedy-Martin T, Boye KS, Garcia-Perez LE. Patient preferences for glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor-agonist treatment attributes. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2019;13:561–76.
pubmed: 31114170
pmcid: 6483112
doi: 10.2147/PPA.S187907
Pfannkuche A, Alhajjar A, Ming A, Walter I, Piehler C, Mertens PR. Prevalence and risk factors of diabetic peripheral neuropathy in a diabetics cohort: Register initiative “diabetes and nerves.” Endocr Metab Sci. 2020;1(1–2): 100053.
doi: 10.1016/j.endmts.2020.100053
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Coexisting conditions and complications 2020. https://www.cdc.gov/diabetes/data/statistics-report/coexisting-conditions-complications.html . Accessed 5 July 2022.
Einarson TR, Acs A, Ludwig C, Panton UH. Prevalence of cardiovascular disease in type 2 diabetes: a systematic literature review of scientific evidence from across the world in 2007–2017. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2018;17(1):1–19.
doi: 10.1186/s12933-018-0728-6
Husain M, Bain SC, Jeppesen OK, et al. Semaglutide (SUSTAIN and PIONEER) reduces cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes across varying cardiovascular risk. Diabetes Obes Metab. 2020;22(3):442–51.
pubmed: 31903692
pmcid: 7064975
doi: 10.1111/dom.13955
Bridges JF, Hauber AB, Marshall D, et al. Conjoint analysis applications in health—a checklist: a report of the ISPOR Good Research Practices for Conjoint Analysis Task Force. Value Health. 2011;14(4):403–13.
pubmed: 21669364
doi: 10.1016/j.jval.2010.11.013
Jendle J, Torffvit O, Ridderstrale M, Lammert M, Ericsson A, Bogelund M. Willingness to pay for health improvements associated with anti-diabetes treatments for people with type 2 diabetes. Curr Med Res Opin. 2010;26(4):917–23.
pubmed: 20163195
doi: 10.1185/03007991003657867