Survey Reveals Patient and Health Care Provider Experiences and Challenges With the Use of High Doses of Basal Insulin.

Type 2 diabetes is a chronic, progressive disease, and its management results in a high emotional burden on patients. Eventually many patients require and can benefit from the use of insulin. This article reports results of a survey of patients and health care providers regarding their experiences of and challenges with the use of basal insulin. Health care providers can play a key role in helping people with type 2 diabetes overcome the challenges associated with the use of basal insulin, including connecting with their emotional needs and understanding the stressors associated with managing diabetes.

Patient preferences for newer oral therapies in type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate patient preferences towards three oral antihyperglycaemic therapies using conjoint analysis to determine which attributes may influence use. METHODS: We used an online survey, completed by 553 US respondents with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM; mean age 64 ± 9 years; 55% had cardiovascular [CV] risk; 27% had CV disease), to present hypothetical, blinded, pairwise, drug profile comparison choices, between different benefit/risk attributes and effect ranges. Attributes were derived from phase 3 trials for empagliflozin 25 mg (SGLT2 inhibitor), oral semaglutide 14 mg (GLP-1 receptor agonist) and sitagliptin 100 mg (DPP-4 inhibitor). Predicted therapy preference outcomes and relative importance of each attribute were calculated (presented as a percentage). RESULTS: Preference score was highest for the profile matching empagliflozin (56%), versus sitagliptin (38%; z-test, P < 0.001) and oral semaglutide (6%, z-test, P < 0.001). Results were overall consistent in subgroup analyses. Genital infection risk was the most important attribute (relative score: 19% [z-test, P = 0.077]). Other important attributes were fasting requirements (15%), weight reduction (15%), risk of vomiting (14%), CV benefit (12%), and risk of nausea (11%). HbA1c reduction (8%) and ability to take medication with other drugs (6%) were considered less important. While blinded to drug name/dose, respondents chose a drug profile similar to empagliflozin (41%) versus sitagliptin (31%), oral semaglutide (11%), or 'none of the options' (17%). CONCLUSION: While the drug profile comparable to empagliflozin was preferred, CV benefit was not the top patient priority. A shared physician-patient decision model and increased patient education are needed to ensure optimal use of guideline-directed T2DM therapies.

Exploring Patient Preferences for Adjunct-to-Insulin Therapy in Type 1 Diabetes.

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.

Adjunct Therapy in Type 1 Diabetes: A Survey to Uncover Unmet Needs and Patient Preferences Beyond HbA1c Measures.

Background: Adjunct therapy can help patients with type 1 diabetes achieve glycemic goals while potentially mitigating some of the side effects of insulin. In this study, we used a patient survey to identify the unmet needs in type 1 diabetes therapy, patient views of treatment benefit-risk trade-offs, and patient preferences for the use of an adjunct therapy. Methods: A quantitative survey was sent to 2084 adults with type 1 diabetes in November 2017. "Jobs-to-be-done" and conjoint analyses were performed on survey responses to identify unmet needs and the importance of treatment-associated benefits and risks to patients. A 5-point Likert scale measured the importance and satisfaction with patients' current therapy, and with gaps relating to unmet needs. In the conjoint analysis, patients were asked to choose between "packages" of attributes of two doses of adjunct therapy (200 and 400 mg) and placebo, based on established benefits and side effects. Results: A total of 1313 patients (63%) responded. The greatest unmet needs identified were simplifying treatment, lowering/maintaining glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), reducing mental effort, and increasing time in range (TIR). Conjoint analysis showed that reductions in body weight and TIR had the highest attribute importance (25% and 18%, respectively). The majority (93%) of patients had a preference for the adjunct therapy (either dose) over placebo. Conclusions: This survey highlights the importance of measures beyond HbA1c, such as treatment simplification and TIR, and patient preference for adjunct therapies that help address unmet needs in type 1 diabetes treatment.