Literature DB >> 32767278

Response to "Letter to the Editor Regarding: Patient Preferences for Glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonist Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Japan: A Discrete Choice Experiment".

Anne B Brooks1, Jakob Langer2, Tommi Tervonen3,4, Mads Peter Hemmingsen5, Kosei Eguchi6, Elizabeth D Bacci7.   

Abstract

Entities:  

Keywords:  GLP-1 receptor agonist; Patient preference study; Treatment; Type 2 diabetes

Year:  2020        PMID: 32767278      PMCID: PMC7509018          DOI: 10.1007/s13300-020-00900-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Diabetes Ther        ISSN: 1869-6961            Impact factor:   2.945


× No keyword cloud information.
Dear Editor, We would like to thank you for the opportunity to respond to the issues raised in the letter related to our publication [1] and to provide details of the methodology to address the concerns. In the letter, the author noted concerns about the cardiovascular (CV) outcome risk reduction value used for the semaglutide 0.50 mg profile. The author also requested clarification and disclosure of the references related to attribute levels. The author is correct that the CV outcome risk reduction for the semaglutide 0.50 mg profile (26% versus placebo) was based on combined data for the 0.50 and 1.0 mg doses reported in the primary publication of SUSTAIN-6 by Marso et al. [2]. This was in accordance with the primary outcome of the study and to support noninferiority and superiority testing. As presented in the appendix of Marso et al., and noted in the letter, CV risk reduction was not significant for either dose independently (23% [p = 0.13] for semaglutide 0.50 mg and 29% [p = 0.06] for semaglutide 1.0 mg) [2], which was expected because the study was not powered or intended to assess the doses separately. By contrast, providing the uncertainty (95% confidence intervals) around the predicted choice probability for the semaglutide 0.50 mg profile versus the dulaglutide 0.75 mg profile would have strengthened our conclusions and might have alleviated the author’s concern. Uncertainty around estimates from patient preference studies should be provided to help interpret results and inform patient-centered benefit–risk assessments [3]. The confidence interval around the predicted choice probability was small (78% [95% confidence interval, 74–82%]), supporting the conclusion that the large majority of participants preferred the semaglutide 0.50 mg profile. To address the concern of the author about using a 26% CV risk reduction for the semaglutide 0.50 mg profile, we conducted an additional sensitivity analysis for the predicted choice probability. Using a 23% CV risk reduction, the predicted choice probability was 76% (95% confidence interval, 71–80%) in favor of the semaglutide 0.50 mg profile, which is close to the original value and supports the robustness and validity of our original conclusion. Additional relevant data have been published since the discrete choice experiment was performed. SUSTAIN-7, a head-to-head randomized clinical trial, showed that hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and body weight were reduced significantly more with semaglutide 0.50 mg than with dulaglutide 0.75 mg [4]. This was confirmed in a network meta-analysis among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Japan [5]. The REWIND study showed that dulaglutide 1.5 mg reduces cardiovascular risk compared to placebo, although this dosage is still not currently approved in Japan. Finally, to address the request for clarification and disclosure of the references related to attribute levels, we provide them as Table 1.
Table 1

Attributes, levels, and sources for the discrete choice experiment

AttributeLevelRepresentsReference
Method of administrationMulti-dose prefilled pen, used with disposable injection needles, with dose adjustment possibleSemaglutide 0.50 mgOzempic® prescribing information at the time of study conduct
Single-dose, disposable prefilled pen, with no dose adjustment possibleDulaglutide 0.75 mgTrulicity® prescribing information at the time of study conduct
HbA1c changeOn average, patients achieve a 1.9% reduction in HbA1c levelSemaglutide 0.50 mgSeino et al. [6]
On average, patients achieve a 1.6% reduction in HbA1c levelIntermediate levelNot applicable
On average, patients achieve a 1.4% reduction in HbA1c levelDulaglutide 0.75 mgMiyagawa et al. [7]
CV risk reduction26% reduction of risk in cardiovascular diseases (heart attack, stroke, death due to cardiovascular diseases)Semaglutide 0.50 mgMarso et al. [2]
No data for the benefit or risk in cardiovascular diseases (heart attack, stroke, death due to cardiovascular diseases)Dulaglutide 0.75 mgNone available
Weight changeOn average, patients have a 2.2 kg weight lossSemaglutide 0.50 mgSeino et al. [6]
On average, patients have a 1.1 kg weight lossIntermediate levelNot applicable
On average, patients do not have any weight lossDulaglutide 0.75 mgMiyagawa et al. [7]
Common side effectsOn average, 1 out of 9 patients will experience transient nauseaSemaglutide 0.50 mgSeino et al. [6]
On average, 1 out of 12 patients will experience transient nauseaIntermediate levelNot applicable
On average, 1 out of 19 patients will experience transient nauseaDulaglutide 0.75 mgMiyagawa et al. [7]
Attributes, levels, and sources for the discrete choice experiment Respectfully, Anne Brooks, BS Jakob Langer, MS Tommi Tervonen, PhD Mads Peter Hemmingsen, MD Kosei Eguchi, MD, PhD Elizabeth Dansie Bacci, PhD
  6 in total

1.  Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  Steven P Marso; Stephen C Bain; Agostino Consoli; Freddy G Eliaschewitz; Esteban Jódar; Lawrence A Leiter; Ildiko Lingvay; Julio Rosenstock; Jochen Seufert; Mark L Warren; Vincent Woo; Oluf Hansen; Anders G Holst; Jonas Pettersson; Tina Vilsbøll
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2016-09-15       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Semaglutide versus dulaglutide once weekly in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 7): a randomised, open-label, phase 3b trial.

Authors:  Richard E Pratley; Vanita R Aroda; Ildiko Lingvay; Jörg Lüdemann; Camilla Andreassen; Andrea Navarria; Adie Viljoen
Journal:  Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol       Date:  2018-02-01       Impact factor: 32.069

3.  Once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide is non-inferior to once-daily liraglutide and superior to placebo in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: a 26-week randomized phase III study.

Authors:  J Miyagawa; M Odawara; T Takamura; N Iwamoto; Y Takita; T Imaoka
Journal:  Diabetes Obes Metab       Date:  2015-08-20       Impact factor: 6.577

4.  Safety and efficacy of semaglutide once weekly vs sitagliptin once daily, both as monotherapy in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes.

Authors:  Yutaka Seino; Yasuo Terauchi; Takeshi Osonoi; Daisuke Yabe; Nobuyuki Abe; Tomoyuki Nishida; Jeppe Zacho; Shizuka Kaneko
Journal:  Diabetes Obes Metab       Date:  2017-10-05       Impact factor: 6.577

5.  A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Semaglutide Once-Weekly with Other GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

Authors:  Neil Webb; Michelle Orme; Michal Witkowski; Rie Nakanishi; Jakob Langer
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2018-03-24       Impact factor: 2.945

6.  Patient Preferences for GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Japan: A Discrete Choice Experiment.

Authors:  Anne Brooks; Jakob Langer; Tommi Tervonen; Mads Peter Hemmingsen; Kosei Eguchi; Elizabeth Dansie Bacci
Journal:  Diabetes Ther       Date:  2019-03-07       Impact factor: 2.945

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.