Geriatric Assessment Impairment Profiles and Mortality in Older Adults with Gastrointestinal Cancers: Latent Class Analysis of the CARE Registry.

BACKGROUND: Many older adults with cancer have ≥2 impairments on geriatric assessment which impacts present and future frailty status, treatment tolerability, and outcomes. Our objective was to identify and describe distinct geriatric assessment impairment classes using latent class analysis (LCA) in older patients with gastrointestinal malignancies and assess 1-year mortality. METHODS: We used the Cancer & Aging Resilience Evaluation (CARE) Study, a registry of older adults (≥60 years) at University of Alabama at Birmingham. The analytic cohort included patients with gastrointestinal malignancies who completed a self-administered geriatric assessment (CARE tool) before chemotherapy and had ≥1 geriatric assessment impairment. Thirteen geriatric assessment impairments were used as indicators in LCA. Resultant classes were described, mortality was estimated, and risk contrasts (differences, hazard ratios) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals. For comparison, estimates were provided for frailty categories (robust, pre-frail, frail) determined from 44 items in the CARE tool. Stratified analyses included high-risk (pancreatic, hepatobiliary, esophageal) vs. low-risk gastrointestinal cancers, and stage (IV vs. I-III). RESULTS: Six geriatric assessment impairment classes were identified: Mild impairment (LC1); Social support impairment (LC2); Weight loss alone (LC3); Impaired, low anxiety/depression (LC4); Impaired with anxiety/depression (LC5); Global impairment (LC6). One-year mortality was 14%, 22%, 29%, 34%, 50% and 50% for LC1-LC6, respectively. For frailty categories, estimates ranged from 18% (robust) to 40% (frail). In stratified analyses, LC4-LC6 consistently had higher mortality estimates compared to LC1. CONCLUSIONS: The 6 geriatric assessment impairment classes showed a wider spread of mortality estimates compared to frailty categories and could be used to identify vulnerable patients and to plan interventions.

The demise of islet allotransplantation in the United States: A call for an urgent regulatory update.

Islet allotransplantation in the United States (US) is facing an imminent demise. Despite nearly three decades of progress in the field, an archaic regulatory framework has stymied US clinical practice. Current regulations do not reflect the state-of-the-art in clinical or technical practices. In the US, islets are considered biologic drugs and "more than minimally manipulated" human cell and tissue products (HCT/Ps). In contrast, across the world, human islets are appropriately defined as "minimally manipulated tissue" and not regulated as a drug, which has led to islet allotransplantation (allo-ITx) becoming a standard-of-care procedure for selected patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus. This regulatory distinction impedes patient access to islets for transplantation in the US. As a result only 11 patients underwent allo-ITx in the US between 2016 and 2019, and all as investigational procedures in the settings of a clinical trials. Herein, we describe the current regulations pertaining to islet transplantation in the United States. We explore the progress which has been made in the field and demonstrate why the regulatory framework must be updated to both better reflect our current clinical practice and to deal with upcoming challenges. We propose specific updates to current regulations which are required for the renaissance of ethical, safe, effective, and affordable allo-ITx in the United States.

Newer second-line glucose-lowering drugs versus thiazolidinediones on cirrhosis risk among older US adult patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) accelerates progression of chronic liver disease to cirrhosis, yet the effects of most glucose-lowering drugs (GLDs) on cirrhosis risk in T2D are unknown. To address this gap, we compared cirrhosis risk following initiation of newer second-line GLDs vs. thiazolidinediones (TZDs), which improve histology in non-alcoholic fatty liver disease. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Using the US Medicare Fee-for-Service database (2007-2015) and an active comparator, new-user design, we estimated crude incidence rates (IRs) and propensity-score adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) for incident cirrhosis, comparing newer GLDs (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA), and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i)) vs. TZDs. RESULTS: Among 239,549 total initiators, we observed 318, 151, and < 30 cirrhosis events when comparing DPP4i vs. TZD, GLP1RA vs. TZD, and SGLT2i vs. TZD, respectively. IRs ranged from 1.7 [95% CI, 0.8-3.6] to 3.6 [2.5-5.2] events per 1000 person-years. Point aHR estimates for cirrhosis were elevated among newer GLD initiators vs. TZD (DPP4i: 1.15 [0.89-1.50]; GLP1RA: 1.34 [0.82-2.20]; SGLT2i: 1.16, [0.44-3.08]), although estimates were imprecise due to short durations of drug exposure. CONCLUSIONS: We observed mildly elevated cirrhosis risk with newer GLDs vs. TZD; however, uncertainty remains due to imprecise and statistically non-significant effect estimates.

Decreased Antihyperglycemic Drug Use Driven by High Out-of-Pocket Costs Despite Medicare Coverage Gap Closure.

OBJECTIVE: Using the 2016 Medicare Part D coverage gap as an example, we explored effects of increased out-of-pocket costs on adherence to branded dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) in patients without financial subsidies relative to subsidized patients who do not experience increased spending during the gap. We also explored seasonality of reinitiation, because discontinuers may be more likely to reinitiate in January when benefits reset. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We identified DPP-4i or sulfonylurea initiators, aged ≥66 years, from a 20% sample of 2015-2016 Medicare claims. Difference-in-differences Poisson regression was used to compare adherence before and after entering the coverage gap between nonsubsidized and subsidized patients. Among discontinuers, monthly hazard ratios (HRs) for reinitiation relative to January 2016 were derived with Cox models. As a second control, we repeated analyses using sulfonylureas, generic low-cost alternatives. RESULTS: In 2016, 8,096 subsidized and 6,173 nonsubsidized DPP-4i initiators entered the coverage gap. For nonsubsidized patients, copayment in the coverage gap was 45% ($227 per DPP-4i prescription), and adherence decreased from 68.4% to 49.0% after gap entry. Accounting for adherence differences in subsidized patients, nonsubsidized patients demonstrated reduced adherence to DPP-4i (difference-in-difference: -16.9%; 95% CI -18.7%, -15.1%) but not sulfonylureas (-1.6%; 95% CI -3.4%, 0.2%). Reinitiation was lowest in the months before January (HR 0.4-0.5) among nonsubsidized DPP-4i patients, demonstrating a strong seasonal pattern. CONCLUSIONS: Increased out-of-pocket costs negatively affect adherence and reinitiation of branded antihyperglycemic drugs among patients without financial subsidies. Despite closure of the coverage gap, affordability remains a concern given increasing list prices for many drugs on Medicare and the growing use of deductibles and coinsurance by commercial health plans.

Diabetes and COVID-19: Risks, Management, and Learnings From Other National Disasters.

Evidence relating to the impact of COVID-19 in people with diabetes (PWD) is limited but continuing to emerge. PWD appear to be at increased risk of more severe COVID-19 infection, though evidence quantifying the risk is highly uncertain. The extent to which clinical and demographic factors moderate this relationship is unclear, though signals are emerging that link higher BMI and higher HbA1c to worse outcomes in PWD with COVID-19. As well as posing direct immediate risks to PWD, COVID-19 also risks contributing to worse diabetes outcomes due to disruptions caused by the pandemic, including stress and changes to routine care, diet, and physical activity. Countries have used various strategies to support PWD during this pandemic. There is a high potential for COVID-19 to exacerbate existing health disparities, and research and practice guidelines need to take this into account. Evidence on the management of long-term conditions during national emergencies suggests various ways to mitigate the risks presented by these events.

Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitors and Risk of Inflammatory Bowel Disease: Real-world Evidence in U.S. Adults.

OBJECTIVE: A recent study raises concerns that dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP4i) are associated with increased risk of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). We evaluated the association between new use of DPP4i and IBD risk compared with other second-line antihyperglycemics. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We implemented an active-comparator, new-user cohort design using two U.S. administrative claims databases for commercially insured (MarketScan) and older adult (Medicare fee-for-service, 20% random sample) patients from January 2007 to December 2016. We identified patients, aged ≥18 years, who initiated DPP4i versus sulfonylureas (SUs) or initiated DPP4i versus thiazolidinediones (TZDs) and were without prior diagnosis, treatment, or procedure for IBD. The primary outcome was incident IBD, defined by IBD diagnosis preceded by colonoscopy and biopsy and followed by IBD treatment. We performed propensity score weighting to control for measured baseline confounding, estimated adjusted hazard ratios (aHRs [95% CI]) using weighted Cox proportional hazards models, and used random-effects meta-analysis models to pool aHRs across cohorts. RESULTS: We identified 895,747 eligible patients initiating DPP4i, SU, or TZD; IBD incidence rates ranged from 11.6 to 32.3/100,000 person-years. Over a median treatment duration of 1.09-1.69 years, DPP4i were not associated with increased IBD risk across comparisons. The pooled aHRs for IBD were 0.82 (95% CI 0.41-1.61) when comparing DPP4i (n = 161,612) to SU (n = 310,550) and 0.76 (0.46-1.26) when comparing DPP4i (n = 205,570) to TZD (n = 87,543). CONCLUSIONS: Our population-based cohort study of U.S. adults with diabetes suggests that short-term DPP4i treatment does not increase IBD risk.

Long-term Cost-effectiveness of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine U100 in the UK: Evidence from the Basal-bolus Subgroup of the DEVOTE Trial (DEVOTE 16).

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec (degludec) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100) in basal-bolus regimens for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) at high cardiovascular (CV) risk based on the DEVOTE CV outcomes trial. METHODS: A microsimulation model, informed by clinical outcomes from the subgroup of patients using basal-bolus insulin therapy in DEVOTE (NCT01959529) and by the UKPDS Outcomes Model 2 risk equations, was used to model direct costs (2018 GBP) and effectiveness outcomes [quality-adjusted life years (QALYs)] with degludec versus glargine U100 over a 40-year time horizon. The model captured the development of eight diabetes-related complications, death, severe hypoglycemia and insulin dosing. This analysis was conducted from the perspective of National Health Service (NHS) England. RESULTS: Treatment with degludec versus glargine U100 in basal-bolus regimens was associated with improved clinical outcomes at a higher cost per patient [incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER): £14,956 GBP/QALY]. Degludec remained cost effective versus glargine U100 in all exploratory sensitivity analyses, with ICERs below the widely accepted willingness-to-pay threshold, although the result was most sensitive to assumptions regarding the persistence of treatment effects. CONCLUSIONS: Our long-term modeling analysis suggested that degludec was cost effective (from the perspective of NHS England) versus glargine U100 in basal-bolus regimens for patients with T2D at high CV risk. Our findings raise important questions regarding how to model the health economics of diabetes therapies.

Study design choices for evaluating the comparative safety of diabetes medications: An evaluation of pioglitazone use and risk of bladder cancer in older US adults with type-2 diabetes.

AIM: The aim of the study was to empirically demonstrate the effect of varying study designs when evaluating the safety of pioglitazone in treating bladder cancer. METHODS: We identified Medicare beneficiaries above 65 years of age with diabetes between 2008 and 2015 and with classified exposure (at least two claims within 180 days) to glucose-lowering drugs (GLD), pioglitazone or another drug. The effects of varying the following study design parameters on bladder cancer risk were assessed: use of a new vs existing drug, choice of referent (all non-users and users of GLDs, non-insulin GLDs and DPP-4s) and whether or not censoring accounted for treatment change. We used the Cox proportional hazards model to obtain adjusted HRs and 95% CIs. RESULTS: We included 1,510,212 patients classified as pioglitazone users (N = 135,188) or non-users (N = 1,375,024). Users had more diabetic complications than non-users, but fewer than insulin users. The HR ranged from 1.10 (1.01-1.20) to 1.13 (0.99-1.29) when censoring ignored treatment change, suggesting a weak association or none between pioglitazone and bladder cancer, probably under-estimating risk. However, the HR was 1.20 (1.01-1.42) when cohorts were restricted to new users, censored upon treatment change, and when DPP-4 was used as the referent, suggesting an increased risk of bladder cancer associated with pioglitazone. CONCLUSIONS: The continued demand for new GLDs indicates the need for more robust observational methods to improve the value of generating real-world evidence in equipping clinicians to make informed prescribing decisions. Although there is no one-size-fits-all approach, we recommend active comparator new user study designs that compare therapeutically equivalent drugs and account for treatment changes during follow-up to present the least biased comparative safety estimates.

International Consensus on Risk Management of Diabetic Ketoacidosis in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes Treated With Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter (SGLT) Inhibitors.

Sodium-glucose cotransporter (SGLT) inhibitors are new oral antidiabetes medications shown to effectively reduce glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and glycemic variability, blood pressure, and body weight without intrinsic properties to cause hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes. However, recent studies, particularly in individuals with type 1 diabetes, have demonstrated increases in the absolute risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Some cases presented with near-normal blood glucose levels or mild hyperglycemia, complicating the recognition/diagnosis of DKA and potentially delaying treatment. Several SGLT inhibitors are currently under review by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European regulatory agencies as adjuncts to insulin therapy in people with type 1 diabetes. Strategies must be developed and disseminated to the medical community to mitigate the associated DKA risk. This Consensus Report reviews current data regarding SGLT inhibitor use and provides recommendations to enhance the safety of SGLT inhibitors in people with type 1 diabetes.

Impact of metformin use on the cardiovascular effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: An analysis of Medicare claims data from 2007 to 2015.

AIMS: To examine the outcomes of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor initiation with and without concurrent metformin treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We identified Medicare enrollees initiating a DPP-4 inhibitor, a sulphonylurea or a thiazolidinedione. Using propensity-score-weighted Poisson models, we evaluated 1-year cardiovascular (CV) outcome incidence among initiators of DPP-4 inhibitors versus comparators in subgroups with and without concurrent metformin use, and assessed the interaction between initiation drug and metformin. Outcomes included mortality, non-fatal myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, and a composite outcome. RESULTS: For the DPP-4 inhibitor (n = 13 391) versus sulphonylurea (n = 33 206) comparison, rate differences in composite outcome incidence favoured DPP-4 inhibitors: -2.0/100 person-years among metformin users (95% confidence interval [CI] -2.7 to -1.3) and - 1.0/100 person-years (95% CI -1.8 to -0.2) among metformin non-users. Similar rate difference trends among metformin users and non-users were seen for mortality (-1.5/100 person-years [95% CI -2.1 to -0.9] and -0.7/100 person-years [95% CI -1.4 to 0.0]) and non-fatal MI (-0.5/100 person-years [95% CI -0.8, -0.3] and 0.1/100 person-years [95% CI -0.2 to 0.4]). The interaction between DPP-4 inhibitor initiation and metformin was statistically significant for non-fatal MI (P = 0.008). For the DPP-4 inhibitor (n = 22 210) versus thiazolidinedione (n = 9517) comparison, rate differences in composite outcome incidence for DPP-4 inhibitor initiation were -0.6/100 person-years (95% CI -1.5 to 0.2) among metformin users and 1.0 (95% CI 0.0 to 2.0) among metformin non-users. Similar rate difference trends among metformin users and non-users were seen for mortality (-0.5/100 person-years [95% CI -1.3 to 0.1] and 0.8/100 person-years [95% CI -0.0 to 1.7]) and non-fatal MI (-0.1/100 person-years [95% CI -0.4 to 0.2] and 0.2/100 person-years [95% CI -0.1 to 0.6]). The interaction between DPP-4 inhibitor initiation and metformin was statistically significant for the composite outcome (P = 0.024) and mortality (P = 0.023). CONCLUSION: Incidence rate differences in multiple CV outcomes appeared more favourable when DPP-4 inhibitor initiation occurred in the presence of metformin, suggesting a possible interaction between DPP-4 inhibitors and metformin.

Health Literacy, Glycemic Control, and Physician-Advised Glucose Self-Monitoring Use in Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To measure the association between health literacy and both patient-reported and clinical outcomes in patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We surveyed patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (n = 448) from 15 primary care practices. The association between health literacy and patient-reported and clinical outcomes, including numeracy of self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) use, how often physicians advised patients to conduct SMBG testing, and glycemic control (as measured by A1C), was investigated. RESULTS: Study participants included 448 patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes located within central North Carolina. Participants with limited health literacy had poorer glycemic control (A1C 7.7 ± 1.1% vs. 7.5 ± 1.0%, P = 0.016) despite using SMBG testing more frequently (daily SMBG testing 49.3 vs. 30.7%, P = 0.001) compared to individuals with adequate health literacy. The difference in how often physicians advised patients to conduct SMBG testing between limited and adequate health literacy groups was not significant (P = 0.68). CONCLUSION: Limited health literacy was associated with poorer glycemic control and an increased frequency of SMBG testing in patients with non-insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. There was no significant difference in how often physicians advised patients to conduct SMBG testing between patients with limited and adequate health literacy.

Genetic Tools for Coronary Risk Assessment in Type 2 Diabetes: A Cohort Study From the ACCORD Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated whether the increasing number of genetic loci for coronary artery disease (CAD) identified in the general population could be used to predict the risk of major CAD events (MCE) among participants with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A weighted genetic risk score (GRS) derived from 204 variants representative of all the 160 CAD loci identified in the general population as of December 2017 was calculated in 5,360 and 1,931 white participants in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) and Outcome Reduction With Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN) studies, respectively. The association between GRS and MCE (combining fatal CAD events, nonfatal myocardial infarction, and unstable angina) was assessed by Cox proportional hazards regression. RESULTS: The GRS was associated with MCE risk in both ACCORD and ORIGIN (hazard ratio [HR] per SD 1.27, 95% CI 1.18-1.37, P = 4 × 10-10, and HR per SD 1.35, 95% CI 1.16-1.58, P = 2 × 10-4, respectively). This association was independent from interventions tested in the trials and persisted, though attenuated, after adjustment for classic cardiovascular risk predictors. Adding the GRS to clinical predictors improved incident MCE risk classification (relative integrated discrimination improvement +8%, P = 7 × 10-4). The performance of this GRS was superior to that of GRS based on the smaller number of CAD loci available in previous years. CONCLUSIONS: When combined into a GRS, CAD loci identified in the general population are associated with CAD also in type 2 diabetes. This GRS provides a significant improvement in the ability to correctly predict future MCE, which may increase further with the discovery of new CAD loci.

Implementation and Evaluation of Shared Medical Appointments for Type 2 Diabetes at a Free, Student-Run Clinic in Alamance County, North Carolina.

INTRODUCTION: Type 2 diabetes is a significant problem among uninsured patients. Shared medical appointments (SMA) have been shown to improve outcomes in type 2 diabetes. We hypothesized that the SMA model could be adapted for a non-profit clinic in North Carolina that serves uninsured patients with diabetes that have incomes at/below 150% of the federal poverty line. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We implemented and sustained a patient-driven, student-led SMA model that incorporated the monthly rotations of students, physician assistant, and undergraduate students as well as pharmacy residents and an endocrinologist who collectively provide diabetes care at the free clinic. SMA groups are 'open' cohorts and include 4-12 patients scheduled for the monthly clinic. Teams of transdisciplinary trainees work together to perform triage, medication reconciliation, brief history, and physical exam, after which patients participate in the SMA. The endocrinologist evaluates SMA patients individually during and after the visit. RESULTS: Between November 2015 and January 2017, we enrolled 29 patients in SMA. There was high variability in HbA1c at baseline. Among eight type 2 diabetes patients seen in endocrine clinic and with complete data one year before and after SMA implementation, the mean (SD) HbA1c before SMA was 9.7% ± 1.7% (83±7 mmol/ mol); mean HbA1c after SMA was 9.2% ± 1.8% (77 ± 8mmol/mol). The median HbA1c before SMA was 9.5% (80 mmol/mol); median HbA1c after SMA was 8.9% (74 mmol/mol). Overall, 6/8 patients showed decreased HbA1c after SMA although there was variability between individuals in response of glycemic control to SMA. SMA increased clinic efficiency and offered an opportunity to integrate transdisciplinary trainees. Trainees gain experience with novel models of care and the complexities of the patient experience of diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: We hope this observation encourages others to implement such programs to enhance the evidence-base for SMA to address health disparities and increase the quality of free diabetes care.

DEVOTE 5: Evaluating the Short-Term Cost-Utility of Insulin Degludec Versus Insulin Glargine U100 in Basal-Bolus Regimens for Type 2 Diabetes in the UK.

INTRODUCTION: The aim of this study was to evaluate the short-term cost-utility of insulin degludec (degludec) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in the basal-bolus subgroup of the head-to-head cardiovascular (CV) outcome trial, DEVOTE. METHODS: A cost-utility analysis was conducted over a 2-year time horizon using a decision analytic model to compare costs in patients receiving once daily degludec or glargine U100, both as part of a basal-bolus regimen, in addition to standard care. Clinical outcomes and patient characteristics were taken exclusively from DEVOTE, whilst health-related quality of life utilities and UK-specific costs (expressed in 2016 GBP) were obtained from the literature. The analysis was conducted from the perspective of the National Health Service. RESULTS: Degludec was associated with mean cost savings of GBP 28.78 per patient relative to glargine U100 in patients with type 2 diabetes at high CV risk. Cost savings were driven by the reduction in risk of diabetes-related complications with degludec, which offset the higher treatment costs relative to glargine U100. Degludec was associated with a mean improvement of 0.0064 quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) compared with glargine U100, with improvements driven predominantly by lower rates of severe hypoglycemia with degludec versus glargine U100. Improvements in quality-adjusted life expectancy combined with cost neutrality resulted in degludec being dominant over glargine U100. Sensitivity analyses demonstrated that the incremental cost-utility ratio was stable to variations in the majority of model inputs. CONCLUSION: The present short-term modeling analysis found that for the basal-bolus subgroup of patients in DEVOTE, with a high risk of CV events, degludec was cost neutral (no additional costs) compared with glargine U100 over a 2-year time horizon in the UK setting. Furthermore, there were QALY gains with degludec, particularly due to the reduction in the risk of severe hypoglycemia. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk A/S. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01959529.

The Risk of Acute Pancreatitis After Initiation of Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitors: Testing a Hypothesis of Subgroup Differences in Older U.S. Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To examine whether dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4I) increase acute pancreatitis risk in older patients and whether the association varies by age, sex, and history of cardiovascular disease (CVD). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We conducted a cohort study of DPP-4I initiators versus thiazolidinedione (TZD) or sulfonylurea initiators using U.S. Medicare beneficiaries, 2007-2014. Eligible initiators were aged 66 years or older without history of pancreatic disease or alcohol-related diseases. Patients were followed up for hospitalization due to acute pancreatitis and censored at 90 days after treatment changes. Weighted Cox models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for acute pancreatitis. Analyses were performed overall as well as within subgroups defined by age, sex, and CVD history. RESULTS: We found no increased risk of acute pancreatitis comparing 49,374 DPP-4I initiators to 132,223 sulfonylurea initiators (weighted HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.83-1.24) and comparing 57,301 DPP-4I initiators to 32,612 TZD initiators (weighted HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.76-1.62). Age and sex did not modify the association. Among patients with CVD, acute pancreatitis incidence was elevated in initiators of DPP-4I and sulfonylurea (2.3 and 2.4 per 1,000 person-years, respectively) but not in TZD initiators (1.5). Among patients with CVD, higher risk of acute pancreatitis was observed with DPP-4I compared with TZD (weighted HR 1.84; 95% CI 1.02-3.35) but not compared with sulfonylurea. CONCLUSIONS: Our study provides evidence that DPP-4I is not associated with an increased risk of acute pancreatitis in older adults overall. The positive association observed in patients with CVD could be due to chance or bias but merits further investigation.

Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance and Survival in Patients With Diabetes and Acute Coronary Syndrome.

Objective: Insulin resistance has been linked to development and progression of atherosclerosis and is present in most patients with type 2 diabetes. Whether the degree of insulin resistance predicts adverse outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes and acute coronary syndrome (ACS) is uncertain. Design: The Effect of Aleglitazar on Cardiovascular Outcomes after Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus trial compared the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor-α/γ agonist aleglitazar with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes and recent ACS. In participants not treated with insulin, we determined whether baseline homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR; n = 4303) or the change in HOMA-IR on assigned study treatment (n = 3568) was related to the risk of death or major adverse cardiovascular events (cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, and stroke) in unadjusted and adjusted models. Because an inverse association of HOMA-IR with N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) has been described, we specifically examined effects of adjustment for the latter. Results: In unadjusted analysis, twofold higher baseline HOMA-IR was associated with lower risk of death [hazard ratio (HR): 0.79, 95% CI: 0.68 to 0.91, P = 0.002]. Adjustment for 24 standard demographic and clinical variables had minimal effect on this association. However, after further adjustment for NT-proBNP, the association of HOMA-IR with death was no longer present (adjusted HR: 0.99, 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.19, P = 0.94). Baseline HOMA-IR was not associated with major adverse cardiovascular events, nor was the change in HOMA-IR on study treatment associated with death or major adverse cardiovascular events. Conclusions: After accounting for levels of NT-proBNP, insulin resistance assessed by HOMA-IR is not related to the risk of death or major adverse cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes and ACS.

Longitudinal medical resources and costs among type 2 diabetes patients participating in the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS).

AIMS: TECOS, a cardiovascular safety trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00790205) involving 14 671 patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, demonstrated that sitagliptin was non-inferior to placebo for the primary composite cardiovascular outcome when added to best usual care. This study tested hypotheses that medical resource use and costs differed between these 2 treatment strategies. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Information concerning medical resource use was collected on case report forms throughout the trial and was valued using US costs for: Medicare payments for hospitalizations, medical procedures and outpatient visits, and wholesale acquisition costs (WAC) for diabetes-related medications. Hierarchical generalized linear models were used to compare resource use and US costs, accounting for variable intercountry practice patterns. Sensitivity analyses included resource valuation using English costs for a UK perspective. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in hospitalizations, inpatient days, medical procedures, or outpatient visits during follow-up (mean and median 3.0 years in both groups). Hospitalization rates appeared to diverge after 2 years, with lower rates among sitagliptin-treated vs placebo patients after 2.5 years (relative rate, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.83-0.97]; P = .01). Mean medical costs, exclusive of study medication, were 11 937 USD in the sitagliptin arm and 12 409 USD in the placebo arm (P = .06). Mean sitagliptin costs based on undiscounted WAC were 9978 USD per patient. Differential UK total costs including study drug costs were smaller (911 GBP), primarily because of lower mean costs for sitagliptin (1072 GBP). CONCLUSIONS: Lower hospitalization rates across time with sitagliptin slightly offset sitagliptin treatment costs over 3 years in type 2 diabetes patients at high risk for cardiovascular events.

Comparative safety of pioglitazone versus clinically meaningful treatment alternatives concerning the risk of bladder cancer in older US adults with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To compare bladder cancer incidence between patients initiating pioglitazone treatment and patients initiating treatment with dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors [DPP-4s] or sulfonylureas. METHODS: We identified Medicare beneficiaries aged >65 years who initiated treatment with pioglitazone (N = 38 700), DPP-4s (N = 82 552) or sulfonylureas (N = 126 104) between 2007 and 2014 after at least 6 months without prescriptions for these drug classes. Patients were followed from second prescription until bladder cancer outcome (2 claims within 60 days) using a 6-month induction/latency period, censoring for treatment change, death or end of 2014. We used propensity score-weighted Cox proportional-hazards models to obtain adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) and their 95% confidence intervals. RESULTS: Overall mean age of participants was 75 years and 41% were men. Over a median of 1.2 treatment years, 727 beneficiaries developed bladder cancer. Pioglitazone initiators had an increased incidence of bladder cancer (308 vs 204 [DPP-4s] or 231 [sulfonylureas] per 100 000 person-years; aHR, 1.57 [1.23-2.00] vs DPP-4s and 1.32 [1.02-1.70] vs sulfonylureas). The increased risk emerged within the first 2 years of treatment (aHR, 1.63 [1.22-2.17] vs DPP-4s and 1.32 [0.98-1.78] vs sulfonylureas). If treatment was discontinued within the first 2 years, the risk after 2 years post initiation was attenuated (aHR, 0.89 [0.61-1.28]) compared with patients treated for more than 2 years (aHR, 1.45 [0.93-2.26]) both vs DPP-4s. Findings were consistent across secondary and sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Pioglitazone was associated with an elevated risk of bladder cancer compared with DPP-4s and sulfonylureas. The elevated risk emerged within the first 2 years of treatment and was attenuated after discontinuing. Pioglitazone's relative effectiveness should be weighed against a small absolute increase in risk of bladder cancer.

No increased risk of cardiovascular events in older adults initiating dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors vs therapeutic alternatives.

AIM: To compare the cardiovascular (CV) risk associated with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors relative to sulphonylureas (SUs) and thiazolidinediones (TZDs). METHODS: During 2007 to 2013, using Medicare data for beneficiaries aged >65 years, we identified the following 2 cohorts of new-users, who had not been exposed to the drugs being compared in the 6 months before initiation: (1) DPP-4 inhibitor vs SU initiators and (2) DPP-4 inhibitor vs TZD initiators. Using propensity-score-adjusted Cox models accounting for competing risk by death, we estimated the hazard ratios (HRs), risk differences and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for myocardial infarction (MI), stroke, hospitalization for heart failure (HF), and a combined outcome (MI, stroke, all-cause mortality). RESULTS: In the DPP-4 inhibitor vs SU comparison, there were 30 130 DPP-4 inhibitor initiators and 68 382 SU initiators. Their mean age was 75 years, 41% were men and 55% had a baseline CV condition. The HR for the composite outcome was 0.75 (95% CI 0.72-0.79) over a median treatment duration of 1 year, but the 1-year risks of MI were 1.00 (95% CI 0.89-1.12) and 1.47 (95% CI 1.38-1.56) per 100 patients for DPP-4 inhibitors and SUs, respectively, and the corresponding stroke risks were 0.98 (95% CI 0.87-1.10) and 1.09 (95% CI 1.01-1.17). For the DPP-4 inhibitor vs TZD comparison, there were 20 596 DPP-4 inhibitor initiators and 13 526 TZD initiators without previous HF. Their mean age was 74 years, 42% were men and 30% had a baseline CV event. The composite outcome HR was 0.94 (95% CI 0.86-1.02) over a median treatment duration of 1 year. The 1-year risk for MI was ~0.90 and for stroke it was ~0.80 per 100 patients in both DPP-4 inhibitor and TZD initiators. CONCLUSION: Although limited by the short treatment period, the present study suggests there is no increased short-term risk of MI, stroke or HF with DPP-4 inhibitors vs SUs/TZDs.