Real-world evaluation of glycemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with canagliflozin versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors

Current Medical Research and Opinion

Volumn 32, Issue 6, 2016, Pages 1087-1096

  Thayer, Sarah ^a   Chow, Wing ^b   Korrer, Stephanie ^a   Aguilar, Richard ^c  

^a OPTUM   (United States)

^b JANSSEN RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT   (United States)

^c Diabetes Nation LLC   (United States)

Author keywords

Canagliflozin; Diabetes; DPP 4; HbA1c; Inhibitors; Type 2

Indexed keywords

ALOGLIPTIN; CANAGLIFLOZIN; DIPEPTIDYL PEPTIDASE IV INHIBITOR; HEMOGLOBIN A1C; LINAGLIPTIN; SAXAGLIPTIN; SITAGLIPTIN; ANTIDIABETIC AGENT; GLUCOSE BLOOD LEVEL; GLYCOSYLATED HEMOGLOBIN;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CLINICAL EVALUATION; COHORT ANALYSIS; COMPARATIVE EFFECTIVENESS; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG EFFECT; DRUG EFFICACY; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; GLYCEMIC CONTROL; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MEDICARE; MIDDLE AGED; NON INSULIN DEPENDENT DIABETES MELLITUS; OBSERVATIONAL STUDY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; AGED; BLOOD; CASE CONTROL STUDY; COMPARATIVE STUDY; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; FACTUAL DATABASE; GLUCOSE BLOOD LEVEL; UNITED STATES;

ADULT; AGED; BLOOD GLUCOSE; CANAGLIFLOZIN; CASE-CONTROL STUDIES; COHORT STUDIES; DATABASES, FACTUAL; DIABETES MELLITUS, TYPE 2; DIPEPTIDYL-PEPTIDASE IV INHIBITORS; FEMALE; HEMOGLOBIN A, GLYCOSYLATED; HUMANS; HYPOGLYCEMIC AGENTS; MALE; MEDICARE PART C; MIDDLE AGED; SITAGLIPTIN PHOSPHATE; UNITED STATES;

EID: 84961199624     PISSN: 03007995     EISSN: 14734877     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1185/03007995.2016.1159954     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Ali MK, Bullard KM, Saaddine JB, et al. Achievement of goals in U.S. diabetes care, 1999–2010. N Engl J Med 2013;368:1613-24
2. Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc. Prescribing Information: Invokana. Titusville, NJ, USA: Janssen Pharmaceuticals Inc., March 2015
3. Stenlöf K, Cefalu WT, Kim KA, et al. Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin monotherapy in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with diet and exercise. Diabetes Obes Metab 2013;15:372-82
4. Bode B, Stenlöf K, Sullivan D, et al. Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin treatment in older subjects with type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial. Hosp Pract (1995) 2013;41:72-84
5. Cefalu WT, Leiter LA, Yoon K-H, et al. Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin versus glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin (CANTATA-SU): 52 week results from a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2013;382:941-50
6. Forst T, Guthrie R, Goldenberg R, et al. Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin over 52 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes on background metformin and pioglitazone. Diabetes Obes Metab 2014;16:467-77
7. Lavalle-González F, Januszewicz A, Davidson J, et al. Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin compared with placebo and sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes on background metformin monotherapy: a randomised trial. Diabetologia 2013;56:2582-92
8. Schernthaner G, Gross JL, Rosenstock J, et al. Canagliflozin compared with sitagliptin for patients with type 2 diabetes who do not have adequate glycemic control with metformin plus sulfonylurea. Diabetes Care 2013;36:2508-15
9. Godinho R, Mega C, Teixeira-de-Lemos E, et al. The place of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes therapeutics: a ‘me too’ or ‘the special one’ antidiabetic class? J Diabetes Res. 2015;2015:806979
10. Grabner M, Peng X, Germakis C, Bae J. Demographic and clinical profiles of type 2 diabetes mellitus patients initiating canagliflozin versus DPP-4 inhibitors in a large U.S. managed care population. J Manag Care Spect Pharm 2015;21:1204-12
11. Rosenbaum PR, Rubin DB. The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects. Biometrika 1983;70:41-55
12. Quan H, Sundararajan V, Halfon P, et al. Coding algorithms for defining comorbidities in ICD-9-CM and ICD-10 administrative data. Med Care 2005;43:1130-9
13. Young BA, Lin E, Von Korff M, et al. Diabetes complications severity index and risk of mortality, hospitalization, and healthcare utilization. Am J Manag Care 2008;14:15-23
14. Chang HY, Weiner JP, Richards TM, et al. Validating the adapted Diabetes Complications Severity Index in claims data. Am J Manag Care 2012;18:721-6
15. Rubin DB. Using propensity scores to help design observational studies: application to the tobacco litigation. Health Serv Outcomes Res Methodol 2001;2:169-88
16. Bailey RA, Damaraju CV, Martin SC, et al. Attainment of diabetesrelated quality measures with canagliflozin versus sitagliptin. Am J Manag Care 2014;20:S16-24
17. Inzucchi SE, Zinman B, Wanner C, et al. SGLT-2 inhibitors and cardiovascular risk: Proposed pathways and review of ongoing outcome trial. Diab Vasc Dis Res 2015;12:90-100
18. Stratton IM, Adler AI, Neil AW, et al. Association of glycaemia with macrovascular and microvascular complication of type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 35): prospective observational study. BMJ 2000;321:405-12
19. De Berardis G, Pellegrini F, Franciosi M, et al. Quality of diabetes care predicts the development of cardiovascular events: results of the QuED study. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis 2008;18:57-65
20. Ektare, VU, Lopez JMS, Martin SC, et al. Cost efficiency of canagliflozin versus sitagliptin for type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Manag Care 2014;20(Suppl 10):S204-15
21. Buysman EK, Chow W, Henk HJ, et al. Characteristics and outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with canagliflozin: a real-world analysis. BMC Endocr Disord 2015;15:67
22. Xie L, Zhou S, Pinsky BW, et al. Impact of initiating insulin glargine disposable pen versus vial/syringe on real-world glycemic outcomes and persistence among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in a large managed care plan: a claims database analysis. Diabetes Technol Ther 2014;16:567-75