HoJin Shin1,2, Sebastian Schneeweiss3, Robert J Glynn3, Elisabetta Patorno3. 1. Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA hos739@mail.harvard.edu. 2. Department of Epidemiology, Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, Boston, MA. 3. Division of Pharmacoepidemiology and Pharmacoeconomics, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated recent use trends and predictors of first-line antidiabetes treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using two large U.S. health insurance databases (Clinformatics and Medicare), we identified adult patients with type 2 diabetes who initiated antidiabetes treatment from 2013 through 2019. Quarterly trends in use of first-line antidiabetes treatment were plotted overall and stratified by cardiovascular disease (CVD). Multinomial logistic regressions were fit to estimate predictors of first-line antidiabetes treatment, using metformin, the recommended first-line treatment for type 2 diabetes, as the common referent. RESULTS: Metformin was the most frequently initiated medication, used by 80.6% of Medicare beneficiaries and 83.1% of commercially insured patients. Sulfonylureas were used by 8.7% (Medicare) and 4.7% (commercial). Both populations had low use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i, 0.8% [Medicare] and 1.7% [commercial]) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1Ra; 1.0% [Medicare] and 3.5% [commercial]), with increasing trends over time (P < 0.01). Initiators of antidiabetes drugs with established cardiovascular benefits (SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA) were more likely to be younger and had prevalent CVD or higher socioeconomic status compared with initiators of metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Among adult patients with type 2 diabetes, metformin was by far the most frequent first-line treatment. While the use of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA was low from 2013 through 2019, it increased among patients with CVD.
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated recent use trends and predictors of first-line antidiabetes treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using two large U.S. health insurance databases (Clinformatics and Medicare), we identified adult patients with type 2 diabetes who initiated antidiabetes treatment from 2013 through 2019. Quarterly trends in use of first-line antidiabetes treatment were plotted overall and stratified by cardiovascular disease (CVD). Multinomial logistic regressions were fit to estimate predictors of first-line antidiabetes treatment, using metformin, the recommended first-line treatment for type 2 diabetes, as the common referent. RESULTS: Metformin was the most frequently initiated medication, used by 80.6% of Medicare beneficiaries and 83.1% of commercially insured patients. Sulfonylureas were used by 8.7% (Medicare) and 4.7% (commercial). Both populations had low use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i, 0.8% [Medicare] and 1.7% [commercial]) and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1Ra; 1.0% [Medicare] and 3.5% [commercial]), with increasing trends over time (P < 0.01). Initiators of antidiabetes drugs with established cardiovascular benefits (SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA) were more likely to be younger and had prevalent CVD or higher socioeconomic status compared with initiators of metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Among adult patients with type 2 diabetes, metformin was by far the most frequent first-line treatment. While the use of SGLT-2i and GLP-1RA was low from 2013 through 2019, it increased among patients with CVD.
Authors: Muthiah Vaduganathan; Vasanth Sathiyakumar; Avinainder Singh; Cian P McCarthy; Arman Qamar; James L Januzzi; Benjamin M Scirica; Javed Butler; Christopher P Cannon; Deepak L Bhatt Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2018-12-25 Impact factor: 24.094
Authors: Stephen D Wiviott; Itamar Raz; Marc P Bonaca; Ofri Mosenzon; Eri T Kato; Avivit Cahn; Michael G Silverman; Thomas A Zelniker; Julia F Kuder; Sabina A Murphy; Deepak L Bhatt; Lawrence A Leiter; Darren K McGuire; John P H Wilding; Christian T Ruff; Ingrid A M Gause-Nilsson; Martin Fredriksson; Peter A Johansson; Anna-Maria Langkilde; Marc S Sabatine Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2018-11-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Srikanth Yandrapalli; George Jolly; Adam Horblitt; Abdallah Sanaani; Wilbert S Aronow Journal: Postgrad Med Date: 2017-07-27 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Alessandra Saldanha de Mattos Matheus; Lucianne Righeti Monteiro Tannus; Roberta Arnoldi Cobas; Catia C Sousa Palma; Carlos Antonio Negrato; Marilia de Brito Gomes Journal: Int J Hypertens Date: 2013-03-04 Impact factor: 2.420
Authors: HoJin Shin; Sebastian Schneeweiss; Robert J Glynn; Elisabetta Patorno Journal: Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf Date: 2022-01-17 Impact factor: 2.890
Authors: Lauren A Eberly; Lin Yang; Utibe R Essien; Nwamaka D Eneanya; Howard M Julien; Jing Luo; Ashwin S Nathan; Sameed Ahmed M Khatana; Elias J Dayoub; Alexander C Fanaroff; Jay Giri; Peter W Groeneveld; Srinath Adusumalli Journal: JAMA Health Forum Date: 2021-12-17
Authors: Filipe Ferrari; Rafael S Scheffel; Vítor M Martins; Raul D Santos; Ricardo Stein Journal: Am J Cardiovasc Drugs Date: 2021-12-27 Impact factor: 3.283