Improved treatment satisfaction with once-weekly insulin icodec compared with once-daily basal insulin in individuals with type 2 diabetes: An analysis of patient-reported outcomes and participant interviews from ONWARDS 2 and 5 and a physician survey from ONWARDS 1.

The ONWARDS phase 3a clinical trials evaluated once-weekly insulin icodec (icodec) versus once-daily basal insulin in type 2 diabetes. This analysis investigated the treatment-related experiences of participants from ONWARDS 5 and 2, and physicians from ONWARDS 1. Patient-reported outcomes were only collected during ONWARDS 5 (icodec with a dosing guide app vs. once-daily basal analogues) and 2 (icodec vs. once-daily insulin degludec). ONWARDS 1 (icodec vs. once-daily insulin glargine U100) physicians' treatment preferences and satisfaction were obtained via an online survey. In ONWARDS 5 and 2, there was a statistically significantly greater increase in total treatment satisfaction from baseline to end of treatment for icodec/icodec with app versus once-daily comparators, mostly driven by participants' willingness to continue and recommend treatment. In ONWARDS 2, 93.7 % of icodec users preferred once-weekly over once-daily basal insulin, mainly owing to less frequent injections and ease of use. ONWARDS 1 physicians reported greater satisfaction with once-weekly than with once-daily basal insulin and were more likely to recommend once-weekly injections. These results demonstrate improved treatment satisfaction with, and strong preferences for, once-weekly versus once-daily basal insulin. Treatment convenience and willingness to continue and recommend once-weekly basal insulin treatment were highlighted. ONWARDS 1: NCT04460885; ONWARDS 2: NCT04770532; ONWARDS 5: NCT04760626.

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier B.V.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

Declaration of competing interests The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: [WP has acted as a consultant for Abbott Diabetes, Bigfoot, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Embecta, Insulet, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and Vertex, and has received research support from Abbott Diabetes and Dexcom. MB, LC and AMD are employees and shareholders of Novo Nordisk A/S. MD has acted as consultant, advisory board member and speaker for Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi, an advisory board member for Pfizer and Zealand Pharma, and a speaker and advisory board member for AstraZeneca. She has received grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi-Aventis. EF has acted as a speaker for AstraZeneca, Bioton, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Krka, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and Zentiva. MK has received honoraria for speaker’s bureau or advisory board attendance from Abbott Diabetes Care, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi, and has also participated in randomised controlled trials funded by AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Novo Nordisk. AP-T performs research and serves as an adviser on behalf of their employer for Abbott, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi; there has been no direct or indirect transfer of funds. RG reports research fees paid to his institution by AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi, and lecture honoraria and consulting fees from Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi].