Introduction: The TROPHIES observational study enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) initiating their first injectable treatment with the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) dulaglutide or liraglutide. This manuscript focuses on the study design, baseline characteristics of the enrolled population, and factors associated with GLP-1 RA choice. Methods: TROPHIES is a prospective, observational, 24-month study conducted in France, Germany, and Italy. Inclusion criteria include adult patients with T2DM, naïve to injectable antihyperglycemic treatments, initiating dulaglutide or liraglutide per routine clinical practice. The primary outcome is the duration of treatment on dulaglutide or liraglutide without a significant treatment change.Results: The analysis included 2181 patients (dulaglutide, 1130; liraglutide, 1051) (cutoff date May 15, 2019). The population was 56% male with mean [standard deviation (SD)] patient characteristics at baseline as follows: age, 59.2 (11.0) years; body mass index (BMI), 33.9 (6.6) kg/m 2 ; T2DM duration, 8.5 (6.9) years; and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), 8.2 (1.3)%. Between-cohort demographic and clinical characteristics were balanced. The mean (SD) HbA1c and BMI values for French, German, and Italian patients were, respectively, 8.6 (1.4)%, 8.2 (1.4)%, 8.0 (0.8)%; 33.3 (6.1) kg/m 2 , 36.0 (7.2) kg/m 2 , and 32.6 (5.9) kg/m 2 . Conclusion: This study analysis at baseline provides an opportunity to evaluate betweencountry differences in baseline HbA1c, weight, macrovascular complications, and factors
Introduction:The TROPHIES observational study enrolled patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) initiating their first injectable treatment with the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) dulaglutide or liraglutide. This manuscript focuses on the study design, baseline characteristics of the enrolled population, and factors associated with GLP-1 RA choice. Methods: TROPHIES is a prospective, observational, 24-month study conducted in France, Germany, and Italy. Inclusion criteria include adult patients with T2DM, naı ¨ve to injectable antihyperglycemic treatments, initiating dulaglutide or liraglutide per routine clinical practice. The primary outcome is the duration of treatment on dulaglutide or liraglutide without a significant treatment change.Results: The analysis included 2181 patients (dulaglutide, 1130; liraglutide, 1051) (cutoff date May 15, 2019). The population was 56% male with mean [standard deviation (SD)] patient characteristics at baseline as follows: age, 59.2 (11.0) years; body mass index (BMI), 33.9 (6.6) kg/m 2 ; T2DM duration, 8.5 (6.9) years; and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), 8.2 (1.3)%. Between-cohort demographic and clinical characteristics were balanced. The mean (SD) HbA1c and BMI values for French, German, and Italian patients were, respectively, 8.6 (1.4)%, 8.2 (1.4)%, 8.0 (0.8)%; 33.3 (6.1) kg/m 2 , 36.0 (7.2) kg/m 2 , and 32.6 (5.9) kg/m 2 . Conclusion: This study analysis at baseline provides an opportunity to evaluate betweencountry differences in baseline HbA1c, weight, macrovascular complications, and factors L.-E. Garcı ´a-Pe ´rez (&)
Aims: Insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity are challenged in achieving body weight stability or reduction, in addition to glycaemic control. Post-hoc analyses of body weight and insulin dose data from the AWARD-4 trial involved comparison of treatment with once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg (N = 295) or 0.75 mg (N = 293) and treatment with daily insulin glargine (N = 296), each with prandial insulin lispro (± metformin).Materials and methods: Changes in weight and in the proportion of patients without weight gain or with weight loss of at least 3%, 5% or 10% or composites of HbA1c less than 7% without weight gain and weight loss of at least 3% after 52 weeks were compared between the dulaglutide (either dose) groups and the insulin glargine group, overall and by baseline BMI (<30, 30-<35, ≥35 kg/m 2 ), using analysis of covariance and logistic regression, including interaction terms. Results:The following parameters were statistically significant (P < 0.01) in favour of the dulaglutide-treated groups, at lower mean total daily insulin doses, vs the insulin glargine group.The achieved targets were more pronounced with dulaglutide 1.5 mg than with insulin glargine: LSM weight change difference, −3.23 kg; proportion of patients without weight gain, 49.0% vs 19.0%; proportion of patients with weight loss ≥3%, 21.7% vs 5.7% or with weight loss ≥5%, 10.5% vs 2.4%; proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% without weight gain, 26.2% vs 7.9%;proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% and weight loss ≥3%, 11.9% vs 1.4%, respectively. Treatment effect for these parameters was not significantly different across BMI categories.Conclusions: Larger proportions of patients in late-stage T2D needing treatment intensification achieved glycemic control without weight gain or with weight loss at lower insulin doses with once-weekly dulaglutide plus daily prandial insulin than with a basal-bolus insulin regimen, overall and across all three BMI subgroups.
Introduction: Although patient-reported outcome (PRO) measures provide important information beyond clinical data, studies that assess the PROs of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients initiating injectable glucose-lowering medications in routine clinical practice are limited. We describe the perspectives of patients based on a diversified panel of generic and disease-specific PRO measures at the time of enrollment (baseline) in the TROPHIES study. Methods: TROPHIES is a 24-month prospective observational study performed in France, Germany, and Italy in patients with T2DM who initiated their first injectable glucose-lowering medication with once-weekly dulaglutide or once-daily liraglutide. To better understand the perspectives of these patients regarding their overall health, treatment satisfaction, and quality of life and work, the patients' responses to the following questionnaires were collected at baseline before they initiated treatment with dulaglutide or liraglutide:
Aims: To describe clinical characteristics, treatment patterns and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) persistence in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating their first GLP-1 RA. Materials and Methods: A real-world analysis of adults with T2D initiating GLP-1 RA therapy between 2007 and June 2020 from the multicentre Diabetes Prospective Follow-Up (DPV) Registry, stratified by antidiabetes therapy at the time of GLP-1 RA initiation: oral antidiabetic drugs (OAD), insulin ± OAD or lifestyle modification (LM). GLP-1 RA treatment persistence in individuals with ≥12 months follow-up was determined by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Results: Overall, 15 111 individuals with T2D initiating GLP-1 RA therapy (55% men) were identified; median [interquartile range (IQR)] age [58.7 (50.6-66.7) years], diabetes duration [8.5 (3.6-14.7) years], glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c; 8.2 (7.1-9.8)%]. Median (95% confidence interval) GLP-1 RA persistence in eligible individuals (n = 5189) was 11 (10-12) months; OAD 12 (11-14) months (n = 2453); insulin ± OAD 11 (9-12) months (n = 2204); and LM 7 (5-9) months (n = 532). Median treatment persistence tended to increase from 2007-2012 to 2017-2020. Median (IQR) HbA1c decreased from baseline [8.2 (7.1-9.8)%] to discontinuation [7.5 (6.6-8.7)%],with a greater decrease observed in individuals with persistence >12 months versus ≤12 months. Individuals who discontinued GLP-1 RA therapy predominantly switched to insulin (if not already using) or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Conclusion:Real-world registry data revealed improved outcomes with longer median GLP-1 RA persistence; 50% of patients overall achieved HbA1c <7% at 12 months. Persistence was highest with baseline OAD and/or insulin, and tended to increase over the period 2007-2020.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.