The real-world observational prospective study of health outcomes with dulaglutide and liraglutide in type 2 diabetes patients (TROPHIES): resource use and costs of treatment in clinical practice in France, Germany, and Italy.

AIMS: To describe healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and associated costs after initiation of injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) therapy by adult patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the prospective, observational, 24-month TROPHIES study in France, Germany, and Italy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: HCRU data for cost calculations were collected by treating physicians during patient interviews at baseline and follow-up visits approximately 6, 12, 18, and 24 months after GLP-1 RA initiation with once-weekly dulaglutide or once-daily liraglutide. Costs were evaluated from the national healthcare system (third-party payer) perspective and updated to 2018 prices. RESULTS: In total, 2,005 patients were eligible for the HCRU analysis (1,014 dulaglutide; 991 liraglutide). Baseline patient characteristics were generally similar between treatment groups and countries. The largest proportions of patients using ≥2 oral glucose-lowering medications (GLMs) at baseline (42.9-43.4%) and month 24 (44.0-45.1%) and using another injectable GLM at month 24 (15.3-23.2%) were in France. Mean numbers of primary and secondary healthcare contacts during each assessment period were highest in France (range = 4.0-10.7) and Germany (range = 2.9-5.7), respectively. The greatest proportions (≥60%) of mean annualized costs per patient comprised medication costs. Mean annualized HCRU costs per patient varied by treatment cohort and country: the highest levels were in the liraglutide cohort in France (€909) and the dulaglutide cohort in Germany (€883). LIMITATIONS: Limitations included exclusion of patients using insulin at GLP-1 RA initiation and collection of HCRU data by physician, not via patient-completed diaries. CONCLUSIONS: Real-world HCRU and costs associated with the treatment of adults with T2D with two GLP-1 RAs in TROPHIES emphasize the need to avoid generalization with respect to HCRU and costs associated with a particular therapy when estimating the impact of a new treatment in a country-specific setting.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have become frequent treatments of hyperglycemia in type-2 diabetes (T2D). Not all types of clinical study provide information about the cost of these treatments or the effects they might have on use of other medicines and equipment to control T2D or the need for visits to a doctor or nurse and different types of treatment in hospital. This study collected this information during the regular care of adults in France, Germany, or Italy who were prescribed either dulaglutide or liraglutide (both types of GLP-1 RAs) by their family doctor or a specialist in T2D. There were differences in costs and the need for other medicines and medical services between people using either dulaglutide or liraglutide and for people who were using the same GLP-1 RA in each of the three countries. The information from this study could be used to more accurately understand the overall costs and medical care needed when patients use dulaglutide or liraglutide in France, Germany, or Italy.

Utilities for Complications Associated with Type 2 Diabetes: A Review of the Literature.

INTRODUCTION: Utility values are used in health economic modeling analyses of type 2 diabetes (T2D) to quantify the effect of acute and long-term complications on quality of life (QoL). For accurate modeling projections, it is important that the utility values used are up to date, accurate and representative of the simulated model cohort. METHODS: A literature review was performed to identify utility values for health states representing acute and chronic T2D-related complications including cardiovascular complications, stroke, renal disease, ophthalmic complications, neuropathy, diabetic foot, amputation and hypoglycemia. Searches were performed using the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library databases and limited to articles published since 2010. Supplementary searches were performed to identify data published at congresses in 2019-2023. RESULTS: A total of 54 articles were identified that reported utility values for T2D-related complications. The most frequently used elicitation method/instrument was the EQ-5D (n = 42 studies) followed by the Short Form-6 dimensions (n = 6), time tradeoff (n = 5), the Health Utilities Index Mark 2 or Mark 3 (n = 2), 15D (n = 1), visual analog scale (n = 1) and standard gamble (n = 1). Stroke and amputation were consistently associated with the largest decrements in QoL. There is a lack of published data that distinguishes between severity of several complications including renal disease, retinopathy and neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Diabetes-related complications can have a profound impact on QoL; therefore, it is important that these are captured accurately and appropriately in health economic models. Recently published utility values for diabetes-related complications that can be used to inform health economic models are summarized here.

Glycemic Control and Obesity Among People With Type 2 Diabetes in Europe and Australia: A Retrospective Cohort Analysis.

INTRODUCTION: In people with type 2 diabetes (PwT2D) who also have obesity, efforts targeting weight loss, including lifestyle, medication and surgical interventions, are recommended. The objective of this study was to explore the relationship between glycemic control and obesity among PwT2D in Europe and Australia using recent real-world data and applying consistent methodology across countries. METHODS: Retrospective study utilizing IQVIA electronic medical records (EMR) databases grouped into panels based on specialty of contributing physicians. General practitioner (GP) and endocrinologist/diabetologist (E/D) panels were used in Germany and France, while GP panels were used in Italy, UK and Australia. The Spanish database included all physician specialties. The sample included PwT2D with glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and body mass index (BMI) values measured within 90 days of each other between January 2015 and December 2018 (second record termed the 'index date'). PwT2D had a 1-year baseline period and a recorded HbA1c at the end of the 1-year post-index period. RESULTS: The final sample comprised 194,729 PwT2D. At baseline, across countries/panels, 36.8-58.0% were above HbA1c target (HbA1c ≥ 7%) and 39.4-56.7% had obesity (BMI ≥ 30.0 kg/m2). Mean HbA1c ranged from 6.9 to 7.6% and mean BMI ranged from 29.3-31.6 kg/m2. At baseline, a higher proportion of PwT2D with obesity (40.8-64.2%) were above HbA1c target compared to their counterparts without obesity (32.2-52.4%). A higher proportion of patients with obesity at baseline (38.1-60.6%) had post-index HbA1c above target compared to their counterparts without obesity (30.9-56.0%). In logistic regression, patients with obesity had substantially lower odds of post-index HbA1c below target compared to those without obesity in all countries/panels except for France (E/D), Spain and Australia. CONCLUSIONS: This study presents data on HbA1c and BMI among type 2 diabetes (T2D) populations in Europe and Australia. A notable proportion of PwT2D had obesity and were above HBA1c target. Higher BMI was associated with poorer glycemic control.

Health state utilities associated with weight loss: preferences of people with type 2 diabetes and obesity in Japan.

AIMS: Health state utilities associated with weight change are needed for cost-utility analyses (CUAs) examining the value of treatments for type 2 diabetes and obesity. Previous studies have estimated the utility benefits associated with various amounts of weight reduction in the US and Europe, but preferences for weight change in Asian cultures may differ from these published values. The purpose of this study was to estimate utilities associated with reductions in body weight based on preferences of individuals with type 2 diabetes and obesity in Japan. METHODS: Health state vignettes represented type 2 diabetes with respondents' own current weight and weight reductions of 2.5%, 5%, 7.5%, 10%, 12.5%, 15%, and 20%. Utilities were elicited in time trade-off interviews with a sample of respondents in Japan with type 2 diabetes and body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m2 (the cutoff for obesity in Japan). RESULTS: Analyses were conducted with data from 138 respondents (84.8% male; mean age = 58.0 years; mean BMI = 29.4 kg/m2) from all eight regions of Japan. Utility gains gradually increased with rising percentage of weight reductions ranging from 2.5% to 15%. Weight reductions of 2.5% to 15% resulted in utility increases of 0.013 to 0.048. The health state representing a 20% weight reduction yielded a wide range of preferences (mean utility increase of 0.044). Equations are recommended for estimating utility change based on any percentage of weight reduction (up to 20%) in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes and obesity. LIMITATIONS: This study was conducted in a sample with limited representation of patients with BMI >35 kg/m2 (n = 13) and relatively few women (n = 21). CONCLUSION: Results may be used to provide inputs for CUAs examining the value of treatments that are associated with weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes and obesity in Japan.

An Economic Evaluation of the Relationship Between Glycemic Control and Total Healthcare Costs for Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Retrospective Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Glycemic control is associated with better outcomes among individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This research examines total US all-cause medical costs for adults with T2D with recommended glycemic control (HbA1c < 7%) compared to poor glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 7%). METHODS: The study used administrative claims data linked to HbA1c laboratory test results from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2021 to identify adults with T2D with a recorded HbA1c test. Patients with recommended glycemic control at index date were propensity score matched to patients with poor glycemic control. General linear models and two-part models were used to compare all-cause outpatient, drug, acute care and total costs for 1 year post index date. RESULTS: The study included 59,830 propensity-matched individuals. Results indicate that recommended glycemic control, compared to poor glycemic control, was associated with statistically significantly lower all-cause acute care ($23,868 ± $21,776 vs. $24,352 ± $22,223), drug ($10,277 ± $14,671 vs. $10,540 ± $14,928), and total medical costs ($41,381 ± $42,757 vs. $42,054 ± $43,422) but significantly higher outpatient costs ($7290 ± $12,028 vs. $7026 ± $11,587) (all p < 0.0001). Sensitivity analyses examined results based upon alternative HbA1c thresholds of ≤ 6.5% and < 8%. Results were generally robust to alternative HbA1c thresholds, with higher HbA1c thresholds associated with higher all-cause total costs as well as increased savings for having HbA1c below threshold. CONCLUSIONS: Glycemic control was associated with significantly lower all-cause total, drug, and acute care medical costs. Given the high prevalence of T2D in the USA, our results suggest potential economic benefits associated with glycemic control for healthcare providers.

Physician Perceptions of Dose Escalation for Type 2 Diabetes Medications in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: Medications used to treat type 2 diabetes (T2D) often require dose escalation to optimize effectiveness. Physician and patient perceptions of treatment characteristics of T2D medications have previously been examined, but little is known about perceptions of escalation to the optimal dose for each patient. This study examined physicians' perceptions of dose escalation for medications used to treat T2D. METHODS: Data on dose escalation and other factors influencing decision-making for treatment of T2D were collected via an online survey of endocrinologists and primary care physicians in the USA. RESULTS: The sample included 501 physicians (348 primary care physicians and 153 endocrinologists). Dose escalation was not frequently considered by physicians as a primary factor keeping patients' from reaching treatment goals (mentioned as a factor by only 7.6% of the sample) or a barrier to prescribing T2D medication (16.2%). Factors more likely to keep patients from reaching treatment goals included an unhealthy diet (86.6%) and medication adherence (77.4%). The most common reasons that physicians reported for escalating dose levels were the need for better glycemic control (reported by 89.8% of the sample), ability to decrease the total number of medications by increasing the dose of one medication (39.9%), and the need for the patient to lose weight (39.3%). Data reported by primary care physicians and endocrinologists followed similar patterns. CONCLUSIONS: Although common with T2D treatments, escalating the dose of T2D medication was not perceived by physicians to be a significant barrier to attaining treatment goals or prescribing medication. Multiple factors contribute to the decision to escalate the dose of T2D medication.

In early phases of initiating medication treatment for a patient with type 2 diabetes (T2D), it is common for physicians to increase from a lower initial dose to a higher end dose to maximize treatment benefit. This process is known as dose escalation. The purpose of this study was to examine physicians' perceptions of dose escalation for medications used to treat T2D. An online survey was designed to identify reasons why physicians in the US may choose to escalate or not escalate a dose of medication for T2D. In addition, physicians were asked about factors that keep patients from reaching treatment goals to identify whether the requirement for dose escalation is perceived to be a common barrier to successful treatment. The sample included 501 physicians (348 primary care, 153 endocrinologists). Dose escalation was not frequently considered to be a primary factor keeping patients' from reaching treatment goals or a barrier to prescribing medication for T2D. Dose escalation decisions are complex, driven by a range of factors such as glycemic control medication tolerability, the patient's body mass index, treatment guidelines, comorbidities, characteristics of the patient's entire treatment regimen, and potential cardiovascular benefits.

Improved Glycaemic and Weight Management Are Associated with Better Quality of Life in People with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Tirzepatide.

INTRODUCTION: Limited data are available on the relationship between quality of life (QoL) change and significant degrees of reduction in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and/or weight loss in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). We explored the associations between HbA1c targets and/or weight loss achieved and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in adults with T2D treated with tirzepatide, a first-in-class once weekly glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, using pooled data from SURPASS-1 to -5 Phase 3 clinical trials. METHODS: PROs were assessed using five instruments at baseline and endpoint (Week 40 in SURPASS-1, -2 and -5; Week 52 in SURPASS-3 and -4): Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite Clinical Trials Version; Impact of Weight on Self-Perception (IW-SP) questionnaire; Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living (APPADL); Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change; and EQ-5D-5L. All PROs were assessed in participants receiving pooled doses of tirzepatide (5, 10 or 15 mg) and achieving HbA1c targets of < 5.7%, ≥ 5.7-≤ 6.5% and > 6.5% or achieving ≥ 0-< 5%, ≥ 5-< 10%, ≥ 10-< 15% and ≥ 15% weight loss from baseline at endpoint. The APPADL, IW-SP and EQ visual analogue scores were evaluated in participants achieving each combination of HbA1c target and weight loss. RESULTS: Achievement of lower HbA1c targets or higher body weight percentage losses were each associated with greater improvements in QoL than achievement of higher HbA1c targets or lower body weight percentage losses, respectively. Achievement of lower HbA1c targets in combination with greater weight loss was generally associated with the best QoL ratings. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that HbA1c targets and significant percentage body weight reduction thresholds need to be achieved for people with T2D to help substantially increase their overall health-related QoL. Tirzepatide treatment may allow a high proportion of people with T2D to achieve these targets, enabling improved QoL. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: SURPASS-1: NCT03954834; SURPASS-2: NCT03987919; SURPASS-3: NCT03882970; SURPASS-4: NCT03730662; SURPASS-5: NCT04039503.

Limited data exist about the relationship between quality of life (QoL) and changes in clinical measures, for example management of blood sugar levels and weight, in people with type 2 diabetes. We explored the associations between glucose and weight loss targets achieved and QoL outcomes reported by adults treated with tirzepatide, the first glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist approved for the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes, using data from SURPASS-1 to -5 Phase 3 clinical trials.Five questionnaires, developed to evaluate patients' health-related QoL, were completed by patients at the beginning and end of the clinical trials, which was after 40 weeks for SURPASS-1, -2 and -5 and after 52 weeks for SURPASS-3 and -4, or when the person left the trial if this was before the official end. These questionnaires were: EQ-5D-5L (SURPASS-1 to -5); Impact of Weight on Self-Perception questionnaire (SURPASS-1 to -5); Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living (SURPASS-1 to -5); Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire change (SURPASS-2 to -5); and Impact of Weight on Quality of Life­Lite Clinical Trials Version (SURPASS-2 only).Overall, achievement of lower glucose targets or higher percentage of body weight losses were each associated with greater improvements in QoL. Achievement of lower glucose targets in combination with greater weight loss was generally associated with the highest health-related QoL ratings.Tirzepatide treatment may allow a high proportion of people with type 2 diabetes to achieve lower glucose levels and higher weight loss, enabling improved health-related QoL.

Development of a patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure to assess patient perceptions of simplicity and complexity of treatment for type 2 diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Treatments for type 2 diabetes vary widely in their complexity. The simplicity or complexity of a treatment regimen may have an impact on patient preference, treatment adherence, and health outcomes. The purpose of this qualitative study was to develop two draft patient-reported outcome instruments focusing on patients' experience with simplicity and complexity of treatment for type 2 diabetes. METHODS: The instruments were developed in a series of steps: gather information to support development of a concept elicitation interview guide (literature review and expert interviews), concept elicitation interviews with patients (N = 30), cognitive interviews with patients (N = 20), and a translatability assessment. RESULTS: In concept elicitation interviews, patients with type 2 diabetes reported a range of treatment attributes that influence their perceptions of treatment simplicity and complexity, such as injection devices, medication preparation, dose timing, dose frequency, ease of taking the correct dose, flexibility of dose schedule, remembering to take medication, and food requirements. Two draft questionnaires were developed based on the literature review, expert interviews, and concept elicitation interviews with patients. Revisions were made to these draft instruments based on qualitative interviews with patients and translatability assessment. DISCUSSION: The qualitative research conducted in this study supports the content validity of two newly developed instruments, the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (Sim-Q) and the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire-Comparison (Sim-Q-Comp), designed to assess the simplicity and complexity of diabetes treatment from the patient's perspective.

Treatments for type 2 diabetes vary widely in their complexity, and previous research suggests that simpler treatments may have benefits for patients, such as better medication adherence and improved glycemic control. Despite the benefits of treatment simplicity, there are limited options for assessing simplicity of treatment from the patient perspective. This study was designed to develop two patient-reported outcome measures that assess simplicity and complexity of treatment for type 2 diabetes. Thirty patients with type 2 diabetes reported a range of treatment attributes that influence their perceptions of treatment simplicity and complexity. These attributes included injection devices, medication preparation, dose timing, dose frequency, ease of taking the correct dose, flexibility of dose schedule, and food requirements. Two questionnaires were developed based on literature review, expert interviews, and patient interviews (one questionnaire for rating a single treatment, and another questionnaire for comparing two treatments). Revisions were made to the draft instruments based on feedback from 20 additional participants and a translatability assessment. The resulting instruments are called the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (Sim-Q) and Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire-Comparison (Sim-Q-Comp). Future research with more patients is needed to further examine the psychometric properties of the questionnaires.

The Real-World Observational Prospective Study of Health Outcomes with Dulaglutide and Liraglutide in Type 2 Diabetes Patients (TROPHIES): Final patient-reported outcomes at 24 months.

AIM: To report health-related patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating their first injectable glucose-lowering medication (GLM) with two commonly prescribed glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) from the prospective, observational TROPHIES study (The Real-World Observational Prospective Study of Health Outcomes with Dulaglutide and Liraglutide in Type 2 Diabetes Patients). MATERIALS AND METHODS: TROPHIES was a two-cohort, 24-month study conducted in France, Germany and Italy. Adults with a T2D diagnosis, naïve to injectable treatment for T2D and prescribed dulaglutide or liraglutide as their first injectable GLM, were eligible for inclusion. Study objectives included describing the following PROs associated with the treatment of T2D with GLP-1RAs: health-related quality of life; impact of weight on self-perception; life and work productivity; and patient satisfaction with treatment and injection device. Additional analyses formally compared PRO measures between the treatment cohorts. RESULTS: Overall, improvements from baseline in PRO scores were observed among people who started dulaglutide or liraglutide. A more pronounced trend of improvement was observed in the dulaglutide cohort for changes from baseline in treatment satisfaction and impact of weight on self-perception, supported by statistically significant differences between treatment cohorts in additional comparative analyses at 12, 18 and 24 months. More positive patient perceptions of the injection device were observed with dulaglutide than with liraglutide. CONCLUSIONS: Improvements in PROs observed in TROPHIES, which were more evident with dulaglutide than liraglutide, reflect a relevant clinical benefit. From the patients' perspective, satisfaction, and confidence in continuing treatment with GLP-1RAs is likely to contribute to long-term treatment persistence.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in People with Type 2 Diabetes Receiving Tirzepatide in the SURPASS Clinical Trial Programme.

INTRODUCTION: Tirzepatide, a novel glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, is approved for glycaemic control for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The SURPASS-1 to -5 clinical trials assessed the efficacy of once weekly tirzepatide (5, 10 and 15 mg) versus placebo or active comparators (semaglutide 1 mg, insulin degludec and insulin glargine) in T2D. We evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) that measured overall quality of life (QoL), treatment satisfaction and weight-related attributes across the five SURPASS studies. METHODS: PRO instruments utilised at baseline and primary timepoint (40 weeks for SURPASS-1, -2 and -5; 52 weeks for SURPASS-3 and -4) or early termination visit were EQ-5D-5L (SURPASS-1 to -5); Impact of Weight on Self-Perceptions (SURPASS-1 to -5); Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living (SURPASS-1 to -5); Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (SURPASS-2 to -5); and Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite Clinical Trials Version (SURPASS-2 only). RESULTS: Across all five studies at week 40/52, tirzepatide improved patients' QoL measured by general health and weight-related PROs over the comparator. Generally, higher doses of tirzepatide resulted in greater increases in PRO scores. CONCLUSION: Overall, tirzepatide produced significant health and weight-related QoL improvements versus comparators in the five SURPASS studies. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: SURPASS-1: NCT03954834; SURPASS-2: NCT03987919; SURPASS-3: NCT03882970; SURPASS-4: NCT03730662; SURPASS-5: NCT04039503.

Tirzepatide is the first glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist approved for the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes. The SURPASS-1 to -5 clinical trials evaluated the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide (5, 10 and 15 mg) compared with placebo or active comparators (including semaglutide 1 mg and basal insulins) in people with type 2 diabetes. We evaluated other outcomes reported by patients that measured overall quality of life, treatment satisfaction and weight-related attributes across the five SURPASS studies.Five validated questionnaires were completed by patients at the beginning and end of the clinical trials, which was after 40 weeks for SURPASS-1, -2 and -5 and after 52 weeks for SURPASS-3 and -4, or when the person left the trial if this was before the official end. These questionnaires were EQ-5D-5L (SURPASS-1 to -5); Impact of Weight on Self-Perceptions (SURPASS-1 to -5); Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living (SURPASS-1 to -5); Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (SURPASS-2 to -5); and Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite Clinical Trials Version (SURPASS-2 only).Across all five studies, treatment with tirzepatide resulted in greater improvements in people's quality of life at the end of the study compared with placebo or treatment with the comparators. Generally, higher doses of tirzepatide resulted in greater increases in questionnaire scores than lower doses of tirzepatide.Overall, tirzepatide 5, 10 or 15 mg treatment resulted in significant health- and weight-related quality of life improvements versus comparators in the five SURPASS studies.

Development of a Patient-Reported Outcome (PRO) Measure to Assess Emotional Impact of Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Patients receiving treatment for type 2 diabetes (T2D) may experience an emotional impact associated with treatment-related changes. A patient-reported outcome (PRO) measure assessing both positive and negative emotional impact of medication treatment for T2D is needed to better understand the patient experience of treatment. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore the emotional impact of treatment for T2D and support the development of a questionnaire to assess the emotional impact of treatment for T2D. METHODS: Exit interviews were conducted with patients with T2D participating in the SURPASS-2 and SURPASS-3 trials for tirzepatide. The exit interviews included a concept elicitation section focusing on the emotional impact of their study treatment. Results were used to develop two questionnaires that were evaluated in cognitive interviews with patients with T2D. RESULTS: The concept elicitation interviews included 28 patients (mean age 57.6 years; 64.3% female). Most patients reported positive changes in emotions associated with tirzepatide, including increased confidence (n = 23; 82.1%), hope (n = 23; 82.1%), self-esteem (n = 23; 82.1%), relief (n = 22; 78.6%), optimism (n = 21; 75.0%), sense of control (n = 21; 75.0%), happiness (n = 15; 53.6%), and motivation (n = 15; 53.6%), as well as reduced worry/anxiety (n = 19; 67.9%). Negative emotional impact was less commonly reported but included frustration (n = 2; 7.1%), worry/anxiety (n = 1; 3.6%), fear (n = 1; 3.6%), and feeling depressed (n = 1; 3.6%). Two new PROs, the Emotional Impact of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaires (EIDTQ, status and comparison versions), were developed based on these finding. The status version assesses the emotional impact of current treatment, while the comparison version allows for comparison of the current treatment to a previous treatment. The questionnaires were refined on the basis of cognitive interviews with 20 additional patients (mean age 58.3 years; 60.0% female), and results suggest that the final instruments were clear, comprehensible, and relevant to patients. CONCLUSION: The EIDTQ-Status and Comparison measures can be used as a supplement to clinical outcomes, such as hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and body weight, to provide a broader picture of the patient's emotional experience with medication treatment for T2D.

Medical treatment can have broad effects beyond symptom improvement, including an emotional impact. Emotional impact is subjective and therefore can only be assessed from the patient perspective. However, there is no previously published patient-reported outcome measure assessing both positive and negative emotional impact of medication treatment for type 2 diabetes. Thus, the purpose of this study was to conduct qualitative research to support the development of two new patient-reported outcome measures designed to assess the emotional impact of type 2 diabetes. Overall, the results add to previous research indicating that treatment for type 2 diabetes can have an emotional impact. The newly developed Emotional Impact of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaires were designed to assess this emotional impact, and current qualitative results support the content validity of these instruments in patients with type 2 diabetes. These instruments can be used as a supplement to clinical outcomes, such as HbA1c and body weight, to provide a broader picture of the patient's experience with medication treatment for type 2 diabetes.

Efficacy and Safety of Tirzepatide in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes: A Perspective for Primary Care Providers.

This article reviews the efficacy and safety data of tirzepatide, a once-weekly, novel glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist approved in the United States, the European Union, and other regions for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. All doses of tirzepatide demonstrated superiority in reducing A1C and body weight from baseline versus placebo or active comparators. The safety profile of tirzepatide was consistent with that of the GLP-1 receptor agonist class, with mild to moderate and transient gastrointestinal side effects being the most common adverse events. With clinically and statistically significant reductions in A1C and body weight without increased risk of hypoglycemia in various populations, tirzepatide has demonstrated potential as a first-in-class treatment option for many people with type 2 diabetes.

Five-year morbidity and mortality rates in a U.S. population with obesity with and without prediabetes.

AIMS: This research examines the prevalence of morbidity and mortality among people with obesity with or without prediabetes. METHODS: This observational study uses Optum® Market Clarity deidentified data from 2007 to 2020. Individuals with obesity without prediabetes (obesity only) were matched 1:1 to adults with prediabetes plus obesity based upon age, sex, race, ethnicity, and region. Age and sex adjusted prevalence rates and 95 % CIs were calculated for morbidity and mortality for each 365-day period post index date and over the entire 5-year post-period. RESULTS: After 5-years, the adjusted mortality rate was 10.1 % for adults with obesity plus prediabetes and 6.9 % for adults with obesity only (p < 0.05). Five years post index date, the prevalence of type 2 diabetes was 25.3 % for people with obesity plus prediabetes and 9.2 % for people with obesity only (p < 0.05). Prevalence rates after 5 years for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (13.1 % v 8.1 %), composite cardiovascular outcome (7.0 % v 4.4 %) and composite cardio-renal outcome (8.9 % v 5.0 %) were significantly higher for adults with obesity plus prediabetes compared to adults with obesity only (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this study indicate that the presence of prediabetes contributes to the development of additional morbidity and mortality in adults with obesity.

The Impact of Substantial Improvements in HbA1c and Weight Loss on the Medication Preferences of People with Type 2 Diabetes.

Purpose: To quantify the preferences of people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) for treatment attributes of a glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP)/glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist (RA) versus an injectable GLP-1 RA medication profile. Patients and Methods: Injection-naive people taking oral medications for T2D in the US and UK completed a web survey including a discrete choice experiment to quantify patients' preferences for five treatment attributes: delivery system, frequency of nausea, frequency of hypoglycemia, HbA1c reduction, and weight reduction. Attributes and levels were based on head-to-head clinical trial data of tirzepatide 5mg, 10mg, and 15mg versus semaglutide 1mg. Preference data were analyzed separately by country using multinomial mixed logit (MXL) models. MXL parameters were used to estimate the predicted preference for each tirzepatide dose versus semaglutide 1mg. Direct preferences for each dose of tirzepatide versus semaglutide 1mg were elicited. Results: Participants (N=620) in the US (N=301) and UK (N=319) were 50.8% and 50.5% female with mean ages of 60.7 years and 58.9 years, respectively. The order and magnitude of relative attribute importance (RAI) scores differed between countries. HbA1c reduction (26.3%) had the greatest impact on US participants' preferences, and hypoglycemia (32.8%) did among UK participants. Attribute-level marginal utility results indicated preferences for greater HbA1c improvements, the single-use pre-filled pen, lower hypoglycemia, greater weight reductions, and lower frequency of nausea. Assuming the availability of only tirzepatide or semaglutide 1mg, the predicted preference for tirzepatide (5, 10, and 15mg) in the US is 95.6% (vs 4.4% for semaglutide 1mg) and in the UK was 86.3% (vs 13.7% for semaglutide 1mg). Conclusion: HbA1c reduction, frequency of hypoglycemia, and weight reduction are key drivers of preferences among people with T2D when considering medication options. Overall, people with T2D are likely to prefer the tirzepatide over the semaglutide 1mg medication profiles.

The Association Between Obesity and the 5-Year Prevalence of Morbidity and Mortality Among Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: This retrospective claims database study examined the prevalence of mortality and morbidity among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity. METHODS: The study used deidentified data from 2007 to 2021 from the Optum® Market Clarity Dataset. A cohort of adults with T2D and obesity were identified, and age- and sex-adjusted prevalence rates were calculated for mortality, a composite cardiovascular outcome (CCO), a composite microvascular outcome (CMO), and other complications. Results were examined overall and by obesity class (class 1, class 2, and class 3). RESULTS: For the 15,970 adults included in the study, the prevalence of CCO and CMO after 5 years was 15.3% and 60.7%, respectively. The 5-year prevalence of mortality was 10.9%. There were statistically significant differences in prevalence rates by obesity class, with obesity class 3 associated with higher rates of morbidity and mortality compared to obesity classes 1 or 2. Specifically, after 5 years, the prevalence of mortality was 9.4%, 10.3% and 13.6% for obese classes 1, 2 and 3, respectively (P < 0.05 between class 3 and class 2 or 1). Similarly, For obesity classes 1, 2 and 3, the 5-year prevalence of CCO was 13.0%, 14.5% and 18.4% and the rates for CMO were 58.0%, 57.9% and 64.8%, respectively (both P < 0.05 between class 3 and class 2 or 1). Regarding other complications, differences in the prevalence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) were statistically significantly higher with increasing obesity class. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that for a cohort of adults with T2D and obesity, obesity class 3 is associated with significantly higher mortality and morbidity, including CCO, CMO, ASCVD and OSA. These findings suggest that treatment which reduces obesity among individuals with T2D may have significant health benefits, although additional studies are needed to confirm the results.

The Benefits of Safely Achieving Near Normoglycemia from the Perspective of People with Type 2 Diabetes: A Quantitative Survey Study.

Purpose: To understand the perspectives of people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) on safely reaching near normoglycemia, defined as a glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) value of <6%. HbA1c indicates the average blood sugar level over the past few months. Patients and Methods: This cross-sectional online quantitative survey of people with T2D asked about the current impacts of T2D, the anticipated benefits of safely achieving near normoglycemia among participants with a current HbA1c ≥6%, or the actual benefits of safely achieving near normoglycemia among participants who had an HbA1c <6%. Participants reported on specific areas of psychological/emotional impact of T2D and the psychological/emotional benefits of achieving near normoglycemia. Results: Participants (N = 1000; United States = 500 and United Kingdom = 500) were 53.1% male and had a mean age of 62.9 years (SD = 13.3). The majority reported that the current HbA1c ≥6% (81.2%) and 49.2% had been diagnosed more than 10 years ago. The vast majority of participants (>90%) indicated that achieving near normoglycemia was meaningful, with 95% of the participants indicating that achieving near normoglycemia would be of somewhat or extreme importance to them. In total, 93.8% of participants with a current HbA1c ≥6% and 80.3% of those with a current HbA1c <6% anticipated/reported having experienced improvements as a result of achieving near normoglycemia. Among those who experienced or anticipated positive psychological/emotional impacts (n = 247), the most commonly reported impacts included less worry about future diabetes-related complications (79.8%), feeling in control over one's life (72.9%), and overall health-related quality of life (59.9%). Conclusion: Achieving near normoglycemia is both meaningful and important to the majority of people with T2D, including both those who have and those who have not experienced reaching near normoglycemia. A wide range of specific impacts, including psychological/emotional concepts, are experienced by people with T2D, many of which may be improved through achieving near normoglycemia.

Treatment-Related Attributes of Diabetes Therapies and How People with Type 2 Diabetes Report Their Impact on Indicators of Medication-Taking Behaviors.

Purpose: Understanding the treatment-related attributes influencing medication-taking behaviors in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is important for delivery of patient-centered care. This review aimed to identify and summarize studies in which people with T2D (PwD) directly indicated the treatment-related attributes associated with medication-taking behaviors or intentions. Materials and Methods: EMBASE and PubMed were searched for studies (Jan 2005-May 2021) reporting the link between PwD-expressed diabetes treatment-related attributes and the decision to initiate, adhere to, or discontinue a T2D medication. Eligible studies reported attributes associated with oral antidiabetes drugs or injectables (not insulin). Studies not explicitly exploring the link between attributes and indicators of behaviors (eg most discrete-choice experiments [DCE] and those interrogating electronic medical records or claims databases) were excluded, as were studies where the link between attribute and behavior came from anyone but the PwD. Results: Of the 6464 studies identified, 16 were included. Studies were conducted across multiple countries; the USA was most represented (n = 8 studies). The impact of treatment attributes was described on indicators of initiation (n = 3), adherence (n = 12), and discontinuation (n = 4). Some studies evaluated multiple behaviors. PwD perspectives were solicited by structured questionnaires (n = 10), qualitative approaches (n = 4), or DCE explicitly exploring the link to medication-taking behaviors (n = 2). Closed- (n = 9) and open-ended questions (n = 7) were employed. Across studies, several factors including glycemic efficacy (n = 9), weight change (n = 9), dosing frequency (n = 9), hypoglycemia (n = 8), gastrointestinal adverse events (n = 8), regimen complexity (n = 6), route of administration (n = 3), and cardiovascular risk (n = 1) were reported as influencing behaviors, being motivators or barriers to initiation, adherence, or discontinuation. Conclusion: Several attributes influence how PwD take their medications. Insights gained directly from PwD have the potential to assist stakeholders in making more informed, patient-centered, treatment decisions, thus choosing and managing medications that PwD are comfortable initiating and persisting with over the longer term.

An Early Assessment of the Real-World Treatment Patterns of Type 2 Diabetes: A Comparison to the 2018 ADA/EASD Consensus Report Recommendations.

INTRODUCTION: Using the American Diabetes Association (ADA) Hyperglycemic Pharmacotherapy Guidelines for type 2 diabetes, we evaluated the medication use patterns in real-world patients with type 2 diabetes in the USA. METHODS: Health care claims among patients with type 2 diabetes were analyzed (IBM® MarketScan® 2007 to 2019 Commercial and Medicare Databases). Diabetes treatment patterns were evaluated for the total patient sample of 580,741 during the year 2019. Prior years' claims data were used to construct patient history and determine clinical groups per the 2018 ADA/EASD consensus statement: atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), heart failure (HF), hypoglycemia (hypo), and obesity. The recommended therapy use rates (RTUR) were calculated for clinical groups. Univariate chi-square tests were performed to compare RTUR within and outside clinical groups. Multivariate logistic regression was used to identify variables associated with recommended therapy use. RESULTS: A large proportion of patients belonged to multiple clinical groups; this was more common in the Medicare cohort. Each clinical group in the Commercial cohort had a substantially higher RTUR than in the Medicare cohort. However, no clinical group achieved > 40% RTUR. The RTUR was the highest in the CKD and obesity groups in the Commercial cohort and in the hypo and obesity groups in the Medicare cohort, but lowest in hypo and HF groups in the Commercial and Medicare cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSION: Prevalence of guideline-aligned treatment use in 2019 was low, particularly since many patients fit into multiple risk groups with established treatment benefits.

Exit Interviews Examining the Patient Experience in Clinical Trials of Tirzepatide for Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Qualitative exit interviews can supplement clinical trial results by providing a rich and detailed picture of the patient's experience, while highlighting the treatment benefits that are meaningful to patients. Exit interviews can be particularly useful for providing insight into newer medications when less is known about the patient's subjective experience of treatment. Tirzepatide is a novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist for type 2 diabetes mellitus. The purpose of this study was to conduct exit interviews with patients following participation in two trials to better understand the impact of tirzepatide from the patients' point of view. METHODS: Telephone interviews were conducted with patients with type 2 diabetes treated with tirzepatide soon after completing one of two trials (SURPASS-2, SURPASS-3). Interviews, conducted according to a semi-structured interview guide, were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed following a content analysis approach using ATLAS.ti. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients (64% female; mean age 57.6 years) completed interviews. All participants (100%) reported at least one treatment benefit. Patients provided descriptions of treatment benefits, including improved glycemic control (reported by 96% of the sample), weight loss (93%), decreased appetite (79%), and increased energy (79%), as indicated by qualitative coding. All participants said these treatment-related changes mattered to them. Patients described improvements in quality of life and daily activities associated with these treatment benefits. Despite adverse events reported by some patients (most commonly nausea, reported by 13 patients), all 28 said they would recommend tirzepatide to others, and 27 said they would be willing to continue treatment. Examples of representative quotations are presented for descriptions of treatment benefits, quality-of-life impact, and adverse events. DISCUSSION: The current results indicate that treatment benefits observed in clinical trials of tirzepatide are important to patients. As demonstrated in quotations from patients, the most enthusiastic descriptions of treatment outcomes focused on the weight loss associated with tirzepatide. The study also highlights the usefulness of exit interviews, which can supplement quantitative trial data by showing how these benefits have a meaningful impact on patients' quality of life.

The Association Between Sustained HbA1c Control and Long-Term Complications Among Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Study.

INTRODUCTION: The prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) represents a rising burden in the US and worldwide, with the condition shown to be associated with relatively large human and economic costs. Part of the reason for such high costs associated with T2D is that the condition is often accompanied by additional health-related complications. The goal of this research is to examine the association between glycemic control and diabetes-related complications for individuals with T2D. METHODS: The Optum Clinformatics® Data Mart (CDM) database from 2007 to 2020 was used to identify adults with T2D. Individuals were classified as having sustained glycemic control (all hemoglobin A1c [HbA1c] < 7%) or poor glycemic control (all HbA1c ≥ 7%) over the 5-year post-period, and diabetes-related complications were identified based upon the Diabetes Complications Severity Index. Multivariable analyses examined the association between sustained glycemic control and diagnosis of a diabetes-related complication in the post-period. RESULTS: Maintaining HbA1c < 7% over the 5-year post-period, compared to maintaining HbA1c ≥ 7%, was associated with reduced odds of the diabetes-related complications of cardiovascular disease (odds ratio [OR] = 0.76, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.61-0.94), metabolic disease (OR = 0.37, 95% CI 0.22-0.600), neuropathy (OR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.45-0.84), nephropathy (OR = 0.81, 95% CI 0.69-0.94), and peripheral vascular disease (OR = 0.52, 95% CI 0.33-0.83). There was no statistically significant association between sustained glycemic control and cerebrovascular disease. CONCLUSIONS: Sustained glycemic control was found to be associated with significant reductions in the odds of being diagnosed with diabetes-related complications over a 5-year post-period.