Bruce A Perkins1, Julio Rosenstock2, Jay S Skyler3, Lori M Laffel4, David Z Cherney5, Chantal Mathieu6, Christianne Pang7, Richard Wood7, Ona Kinduryte8, Jyothis T George8, Jan Marquard8, Nima Soleymanlou9. 1. Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, Mount Sinai Hospital, and Division of Endocrinology and Metabolism, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada bruce.perkins@sinaihealthsystem.ca nima.soleymanlou@boehringer-ingelheim.com. 2. Dallas Diabetes Research Center at Medical City, Dallas, TX. 3. Diabetes Research Institute, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, FL. 4. Joslin Diabetes Center, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 5. Division of Nephrology, Toronto General Hospital, University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada. 6. Clinical and Experimental Endocrinology, University Hospital Leuven, Leuven, Belgium. 7. dQ&A, San Francisco, CA. 8. Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH, Ingelheim, Germany. 9. Boehringer Ingelheim (Canada) Ltd./Ltée, Burlington, Canada bruce.perkins@sinaihealthsystem.ca nima.soleymanlou@boehringer-ingelheim.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: While sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitor (SGLTi) therapy has been evaluated in type 1 diabetes (T1D) trials, patient reactions to benefits and risks are unknown. Using established methodology, we evaluated patient preferences for different adjunct-to-insulin therapy options in T1D. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: An online survey, completed by 701 respondents with T1D (231 U.S., 242 Canada, and 228 Germany), used conjoint analysis to present six hypothetical, masked, pairwise drug profile choices composed of different benefit-risk attributes and effect ranges. Data used in analyses were derived from actual phase 3 trials of a low-dose SGLTi (comparable to oral empagliflozin 2.5 mg q.d.), a high-dose SGLTi (comparable to oral sotagliflozin 400 mg q.d.), and an available adjunct-to-insulin therapy (comparable to subcutaneous pramlintide 60 μg t.i.d.). RESULTS: Conjoint analysis identified diabetic ketoacidosis risk as most important to patients (23% relative score; z test, P < 0.05); ranked second were HbA1c reduction (14%), risk of severe hypoglycemia (13%), oral versus injectable treatment (12%), and risk of genital infection (12%). Next was risk of nausea (11%), followed by weight reduction (8%) and the risk of diarrhea (7%). A low-dose SGLTi drug profile was identified by conjoint analysis as the top patient preference (83% of participants; z test, P < 0.05) versus high-dose SGLTi (8%) or pramlintide (9%). Separate from conjoint analysis, when respondents were asked to choose their preferred adjunct-to-insulin therapy (masked to drug name/dose), 69%, 17%, 6%, and 9% of respondents chose low-dose SGLTi, high-dose SGLTi, pramlintide, and insulin therapy alone, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose SGLTi profile was the favored adjunct-to-insulin therapy by persons with T1D.
OBJECTIVE: While sodium-glucose cotransporter inhibitor (SGLTi) therapy has been evaluated in type 1 diabetes (T1D) trials, patient reactions to benefits and risks are unknown. Using established methodology, we evaluated patient preferences for different adjunct-to-insulin therapy options in T1D. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: An online survey, completed by 701 respondents with T1D (231 U.S., 242 Canada, and 228 Germany), used conjoint analysis to present six hypothetical, masked, pairwise drug profile choices composed of different benefit-risk attributes and effect ranges. Data used in analyses were derived from actual phase 3 trials of a low-dose SGLTi (comparable to oral empagliflozin 2.5 mg q.d.), a high-dose SGLTi (comparable to oral sotagliflozin 400 mg q.d.), and an available adjunct-to-insulin therapy (comparable to subcutaneous pramlintide 60 μg t.i.d.). RESULTS: Conjoint analysis identified diabetic ketoacidosis risk as most important to patients (23% relative score; z test, P < 0.05); ranked second were HbA1c reduction (14%), risk of severe hypoglycemia (13%), oral versus injectable treatment (12%), and risk of genital infection (12%). Next was risk of nausea (11%), followed by weight reduction (8%) and the risk of diarrhea (7%). A low-dose SGLTi drug profile was identified by conjoint analysis as the top patient preference (83% of participants; z test, P < 0.05) versus high-dose SGLTi (8%) or pramlintide (9%). Separate from conjoint analysis, when respondents were asked to choose their preferred adjunct-to-insulin therapy (masked to drug name/dose), 69%, 17%, 6%, and 9% of respondents chose low-dose SGLTi, high-dose SGLTi, pramlintide, and insulin therapy alone, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose SGLTi profile was the favored adjunct-to-insulin therapy by persons with T1D.
Authors: Kellee M Miller; Nicole C Foster; Roy W Beck; Richard M Bergenstal; Stephanie N DuBose; Linda A DiMeglio; David M Maahs; William V Tamborlane Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2015-06 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Paresh Dandona; Chantal Mathieu; Moshe Phillip; Lars Hansen; Steven C Griffen; Diethelm Tschöpe; Fredrik Thorén; John Xu; Anna Maria Langkilde Journal: Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol Date: 2017-09-14 Impact factor: 32.069
Authors: David Z I Cherney; Bruce A Perkins; Nima Soleymanlou; Maria Maione; Vesta Lai; Alana Lee; Nora M Fagan; Hans J Woerle; Odd Erik Johansen; Uli C Broedl; Maximilian von Eynatten Journal: Circulation Date: 2013-12-13 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Bernard Zinman; Christoph Wanner; John M Lachin; David Fitchett; Erich Bluhmki; Stefan Hantel; Michaela Mattheus; Theresa Devins; Odd Erik Johansen; Hans J Woerle; Uli C Broedl; Silvio E Inzucchi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2015-09-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: R E Ratner; R Dickey; M Fineman; D G Maggs; L Shen; S A Strobel; C Weyer; O G Kolterman Journal: Diabet Med Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 4.359
Authors: John B Buse; Satish K Garg; Julio Rosenstock; Timothy S Bailey; Phillip Banks; Bruce W Bode; Thomas Danne; Jake A Kushner; Wendy S Lane; Pablo Lapuerta; Darren K McGuire; Anne L Peters; John Reed; Sangeeta Sawhney; Paul Strumph Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2018-06-24 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Sarah K Lyons; Julia M Hermann; Kellee M Miller; Sabine E Hofer; Nicole C Foster; Birgit M Rami-Merhar; Grazia Aleppo; Jochen Seufert; Linda A DiMeglio; Thomas Danne; David M Maahs; Reinhard W Holl Journal: Diabetes Care Date: 2017-08-02 Impact factor: 19.112
Authors: Hongyan Liu; Vikas S Sridhar; Bruce A Perkins; Julio Rosenstock; David Z I Cherney Journal: Curr Diab Rep Date: 2022-05-28 Impact factor: 4.810