Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus insulin glargine over 52 weeks as add-on to metformin with or without sulphonylurea in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, parallel-design, open-label, Phase 3 trial.

AIM: Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin (DAPA + SAXA) were compared with insulin glargine (INS) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in a 52-week extension study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This international Phase 3 study randomized adults with T2D on metformin with/without sulphonylurea. They received DAPA + SAXA or INS for 24 weeks (short-term) with a 28-week (long-term) extension. Week 52 exploratory endpoints included adjusted mean change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and body weight, and a proportion of patients achieving optimal glycaemic response without hypoglycaemia and without requiring rescue medication. RESULTS: Of the 1163 patients enrolled, 643 received treatment; 600 (DAPA + SAXA, 306; INS, 294) entered the long-term phase. At 52 weeks, HbA1c [adjusted least squares (LS) mean; 95% confidence interval (CI)] decreased more with DAPA + SAXA (-1.5% [-1.6%, -1.4%]) than with INS (-1.3% [-1.4%, -1.1%]); the LS mean difference (95% CI) was -0.25% (-0.4%, -0.1%; P = 0.009). Total body weight reduced with DAPA + SAXA [LS mean (95% CI): -1.8 kg (-2.4, -1.3)] and increased with INS [LS mean (95% CI): +2.8 kg (2.2, 3.3)]. More patients on DAPA + SAXA (17.6%) achieved HbA1c <7.0% without hypoglycaemia versus those on INS (9.1%). Rescue medication was required by 77 patients (23.8%) and 97 patients (30.4%) in the DAPA + SAXA and INS groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: DAPA + SAXA treatment was non-inferior to INS in reducing HbA1c and body weight, and in achieving optimal glycaemic control without hypoglycaemia in patients with T2D 52 weeks after initiation.

Dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin add-on to metformin reduces liver fat and adipose tissue volume in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIM: To assess the effects of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin plus metformin versus glimepiride plus metformin on liver fat (proton density fat fraction) and visceral and subcutaneous adipose tissue volumes over 52 weeks of treatment. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a magnetic resonance imaging substudy of a 52-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group trial that evaluated the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin 10 mg/day plus saxagliptin 5 mg/day versus titrated glimepiride 1-6 mg (1, 2, 3, 4 or 6 mg) in 82 patients with type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 7.5%-10.5%) on metformin ≥1500 mg/day background. Analyses were exploratory and not controlled for multiplicity; P-values are nominal. RESULTS: Magnetic resonance imaging was performed on 59 patients; liver fat and adipose tissue volumes were analysed for 59 and 57 patients, respectively. There was a significant >30% reduction from baseline in liver fat (P = 0.007) and >10% reduction in adipose tissue volumes (P < 0.01) with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin plus metformin at week 52 versus glimepiride plus metformin. In the full-study population, dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin plus metformin decreased body weight and serum alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels over 52 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin significantly decreased liver fat and adipose tissue volume versus glimepiride, and reduced serum liver enzyme levels, indicating a favourable metabolic profile of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes on metformin therapy.

Efficacy and safety of dual add-on therapy with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus glimepiride in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes on a stable dose of metformin: Results from a 52-week, randomized, active-controlled trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin (DAPA) + saxagliptin (SAXA) compared with glimepiride (GLIM) in patients with type 2 diabetes who were inadequately controlled [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.5-10.5% (58-91 mmol/mol)] on metformin monotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, active-controlled study (NCT02419612) randomized (1:1) patients on metformin to add-on DAPA 10 mg + SAXA 5 mg (n = 227) or GLIM 1-6 mg (titrated; n = 217). The primary efficacy endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 52. RESULTS: Baseline mean ± standard deviation of age, duration of diabetes and HbA1c were 56.1 ± 9.7 years, 7.8 ± 6.4 years and 8.5% ± 0.8% (69 ± 9.0 mmol/mol), respectively. Adjusted mean change from baseline in HbA1c was -1.35% (-14.8 mmol/mol) with DAPA + SAXA versus -0.98% (-10.7 mmol/mol) with GLIM (P <0.001). Changes from baseline in body weight and systolic blood pressure were -3.1 kg and -2.6 mmHg with DAPA + SAXA versus +1.0 kg (P <0.001) and +1.0 mmHg (P = 0.007) with GLIM. More patients achieved HbA1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol) (44.3% vs. 34.3%; P = 0.044), and fewer patients required treatment intensification (1.3% vs. 8.8%; P = 0.002) with DAPA + SAXA than with GLIM. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with GLIM, concurrent addition of DAPA + SAXA significantly improved glycaemic control, body weight and other metabolic parameters in patients inadequately controlled on metformin. Trial: NCT02419612, ClinicalTrials.gov.

Triple therapy with low-dose dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus dual therapy with each monocomponent, all added to metformin, in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of triple therapy with low-dose dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin added to metformin in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 24-week, double-blind trial (NCT02681094) randomized 883 patients (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.5-10.0%) on metformin ≥1500 mg/d to add-on dapagliflozin 5 mg/d plus saxagliptin 5 mg/d or to add-on of either monocomponent. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline. RESULTS: Baseline mean ± SD patient characteristics were: age 56.7 ± 10.5 years; HbA1c 8.2 ± 0.9%; and diabetes duration 7.6 ± 6.1 years. Triple therapy significantly decreased HbA1c versus dual therapy (-1.03% vs. -0.63% [dapagliflozin] vs. -0.69% [saxagliptin]; P < .0001). More patients achieved HbA1c <7.0% with triple versus dual therapy (41.6% vs. 21.8% [dapagliflozin; P < .0001] vs. 29.8% [saxagliptin; P = .0018]). Triple therapy significantly decreased fasting plasma glucose (-1.5 mmol/L vs. -1.1 mmol/L [dapagliflozin; P = .0135] vs. -0.7 mmol/L [saxagliptin; P < .0001]) and body weight (-2.0 kg vs. -0.4 kg [saxagliptin; P < .0001]), and ß-hydroxybutyrate levels were lower than with dapagliflozin plus metformin (mean difference -0.51; P = .0009). Urinary tract/genital infections and hypoglycaemia occurred in <5.0% and 5.8% of patients, respectively, with triple therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Triple therapy with once-daily dapagliflozin 5 mg, saxagliptin 5 mg and metformin significantly improved glycaemic control versus dual therapy with either agent added to metformin in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes, and was generally well tolerated.

Sustained 52-week efficacy and safety of triple therapy with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus dual therapy with sitagliptin added to metformin in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of an intensification strategy of early triple combination therapy with dapagliflozin (DAPA) plus saxagliptin (SAXA) to a dual therapy strategy with sitagliptin (SITA) in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin (MET) monotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This multinational, active-controlled, parallel-group phase 3b trial randomized 461 patients, at least 18 years of age, with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 8%-10.5% (64-91 mmol/mol), to either DAPA plus SAXA or SITA, added to MET, for a 26-week double-blind treatment period and an extension of a 26-week blinded treatment period. RESULTS: Mean (± SD) baseline HbA1c was 8.8% ± 0.9% (73.0 ± 9.3 mmol/mol). DAPA plus SAXA (n = 232) provided a greater reduction from baseline in HbA1c at Weeks 26 and 52 compared with SITA (n = 229) (adjusted mean ± SE change, Week 26: -1.41 ± 0.07% vs -1.07 ± 0.07% [-15.4 ± 0.8 mmol/mol vs 11.7 ± 0.8 mmol/mol]; P = 0.0008; Week 52: -1.29 ± 0.08% vs -0.81 ± 0.09% [14.1 ± 0.9 mmol/mol vs 8.9 ± 1.0 mmol/mol]). The between-group difference in adjusted mean (95% CI) change from baseline in HbA1c increased from -0.34 (-0.54, -0.14) at Week 26 to -0.48 (-0.71, -0.25) at Week 52. DAPA plus SAXA was generally well tolerated and the incidence of adverse events was similar in both treatment arms. CONCLUSIONS: Early intensification to triple therapy with DAPA plus SAXA results in better, more durable glycaemic control than addition of SITA only (dual therapy) in patients with high HbA1c levels who are uncontrolled with MET monotherapy.

Safety and tolerability of dapagliflozin, saxagliptin and metformin in combination: Post-hoc analysis of concomitant add-on versus sequential add-on to metformin and of triple versus dual therapy with metformin.

The safety of triple oral therapy with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin plus metformin versus dual therapy with dapagliflozin or saxagliptin plus metformin was compared in a post-hoc analysis of 3 randomized trials of sequential or concomitant add-on of dapagliflozin and saxagliptin to metformin. In the concomitant add-on trial, patients with type 2 diabetes on stable metformin received dapagliflozin 10 mg/d plus saxagliptin 5 mg/d. In sequential add-on trials, patients on metformin plus either saxagliptin 5 mg/d or dapagliflozin 10 mg/d received dapagliflozin 10 mg/d or saxagliptin 5 mg/d, respectively, as add-on therapy. After 24 weeks, incidences of adverse events and serious adverse events were similar between triple and dual therapy and between concomitant and sequential add-on regimens. Urinary tract infections were more common with sequential than with concomitant add-on therapy; genital infections were reported only with sequential add-on of dapagliflozin to saxagliptin plus metformin. Hypoglycaemia incidence was <2.0% across all analysis groups. In conclusion, the safety and tolerability of triple therapy with dapagliflozin, saxagliptin and metformin, as either concomitant or sequential add-on, were similar to dual therapy with either agent added to metformin.

Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin or dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus glimepiride as add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin and dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin vs glimepiride as add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This 52-week, multicentre, double-blind, active-controlled study (NCT02471404) randomized (1:1:1) patients (n = 939; HbA1c 7.5%-10.5%) on metformin monotherapy (≥1500 mg/day) to add-on dapagliflozin 10 mg, dapagliflozin 10 mg plus saxagliptin 5 mg, or glimepiride 1 to 6 mg (titrated). The primary efficacy end point was change in HbA1c from baseline to Week 52. RESULTS: Baseline mean age, diabetes duration and HbA1c were 58.4 years, 7.0 years and 8.3%, respectively. Adjusted mean HbA1c change from baseline was -1.20% with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin and -0.82% with dapagliflozin, vs -0.99% with glimepiride (mean dose at Week 52, 4.6 mg). Changes in body weight (-3.2 kg and -3.5 kg vs +1.8 kg) and systolic blood pressure (SBP; -6.4 mm Hg and -5.6 mm Hg vs -1.6 mm Hg) were significantly greater with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin and dapagliflozin than with glimepiride. FPG decreased significantly with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin compared with glimepiride (-2.1 mmol/L vs -1.5 mmol/L) and was similar with dapagliflozin (-1.6 mmol/L) compared with glimepiride. Confirmed incidence of hypoglycaemia was lower with dapagliflozin regimens than with glimepiride (0 and 1 vs 13 patients) and fewer patients required rescue. Genital infections were more frequent with dapagliflozin; other AE profiles were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Dapagliflozin, saxagliptin and metformin improved glycaemic control compared with glimepiride plus metformin; add-on of dapagliflozin alone showed efficacy similar to that of glimepiride. Both dapagliflozin regimens decreased body weight and SBP, with a lower incidence of hypoglycaemia compared with glimepiride.

Patient perceptions of their glycemic control and its influence on type 2 diabetes outcomes: an international survey of online communities.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to assess awareness of glycated hemoglobin (A1C) testing and targets, perceived level of glycemic control and risk of complications, attitudes toward medications and self-management, and regimen-related distress in an international sample of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: The descriptive study used a single time-point survey of adults in online health communities in the USA, Canada, the UK, Germany, Spain, and Mexico, who self-reported T2D diagnosed by a physician. RESULTS: In total, 661 patients participated. Awareness of their A1C value at last test varied considerably between countries (42%-89%), as did awareness of having an A1C target (26%- 70%). Self-reported A1C values were similar across US, Canadian, and European respondents (mean, 6.8%-7.3%). Approximately two-thirds of respondents from these countries (66%-71%) reported that their T2D was very or fairly well controlled, and few (5%-15%) expected to experience serious complications within 1 year. However, many respondents expected to experience microvascular (rather than macrovascular) complications in this time frame (eg, nerve pain, 5%-47%). Self-reported adherence to oral medication was generally high, with most respondents (86%-98%) taking their pills or tablets as directed by their healthcare provider, although for insulin injections adherence was lower in the USA (71%) and Mexico (78%) than in the other countries (86%-95%). The majority of respondents across countries (71%-79%) reported that taking injectable medications was not at all or a little burdensome. Respondents across countries appeared to be reasonably confident that they could adequately manage their blood sugar levels; despite this, a sizeable minority (21%-35%) had clinically significant levels of regimen-related distress. CONCLUSION: Limited patient awareness of their A1C value and the potential complications of poorly controlled T2D, particularly regarding cardiovascular complications, may be a widespread problem. Furthermore, greater patient support may be needed to improve self-management of T2D and to reduce regimen-related distress.

The patient's perspective of computerised records: a questionnaire survey in primary care.

BACKGROUND: The general practice consultation today has become a three-way process where patient, doctor and computer interact. Some studies have shown that the introduction of the computer has caused concern to some patients, possibly affecting their behaviour. If patients are less frank about their problems in a computer-mediated consultation this may cause concerns among doctors and become a barrier to computer use. OBJECTIVES: A questionnaire was developed to test the prevalence of worries among patients about confidentiality breaches of computer records and to identify whether those worries translated into a reduction in patients' frankness. RESULTS: The study had a 62% response rate. Almost 48% of responders had experienced confidentiality worries during past consultations. All responders denied withholding any relevant information from their general practitioner (GP) as a result of confidentiality worries. Gender, computer literacy, knowledge of computer uses in consultation and patients' perceptions of computer record safety were selected covariates in the multivariate logistic regression model explaining patients' worry. Thirty-three percent of patients stated they always understand what their GP is doing at the computer during consultation, 9.7% stated they did not ever know; though 64% judged it important to know what their GPs were doing. CONCLUSIONS: Patients worry about the confidentiality of their computer record and it seems that those less familiar with computers, females and those less aware of their GP's actions at the computer worry more. Patients' understanding of their GPs' actions at the computer during consultation is far from complete and they seem to place great importance on this. Those patients who place greatest importance on needing an understanding of their GP's actions are those most likely to worry about confidentiality.

Dapagliflozin versus saxagliptin as add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin.

OBJECTIVE: This analysis compared the efficacy and safety of the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, dapagliflozin, and the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitor, saxagliptin, both added on to metformin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a post-hoc analysis from a double-blind, randomized, 24-week clinical trial (NCT01606007) of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with metformin. We compared the dapagliflozin 10 mg (n = 179) and saxagliptin 5 mg (n = 176) treatment arms. RESULTS: Dapagliflozin showed significantly greater mean reductions versus saxagliptin in HbA1c (difference versus saxagliptin [95% CI]: -0.32% [-0.54, -0.10]; p < 0.005), fasting plasma glucose (-0.98 [-1.42, -0.54] mmol/L; p < 0.0001), body weight (-2.39 [-3.08, -1.71] kg; p < 0.0001) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) (-3.89 [-6.15, -1.63] mmHg; p < 0.001). More dapagliflozintreated than saxagliptin-treated patients achieved the composite endpoint of HbA1c reduction ≥ 0.5%, weight loss ≥ 2 kg, SBP reduction ≥ 2 mmHg and no major/minor hypoglycemia (24% versus 7%). No major events of hypoglycemia were reported. More patients on dapagliflozin (6%) versus saxagliptin (0.6%) experienced genital infections. CONCLUSION: Dapagliflozin demonstrated greater glycemic efficacy than saxagliptin with additional benefits on weight and SBP, and the safety profile was consistent with previous studies.

Elevated Potassium Levels in Patients With Congestive Heart Failure: Occurrence, Risk Factors, and Clinical Outcomes: A Danish Population-Based Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Data on the true burden of hyperkalemia in patients with heart failure (HF) in a real-world setting are limited. METHODS AND RESULTS: Incidence rates of hyperkalemia (first blood test with a potassium level >5.0 mmol/L) in primary or hospital care were assessed in a population-based cohort of patients with incident HF diagnoses in northern Denmark from 2000 to 2012. Risk factors and clinical outcomes were compared in patients with HF with versus without hyperkalemia. Of 31 649 patients with HF, 39% experienced hyperkalemia (mean follow-up, 2.2 years). Risks of experiencing a second, third, or fourth event were 43%, 54%, and 60%, respectively. Among patients with HF with stage 3A, 3B, 4, or 5 kidney dysfunction, 26%, 35%, 44%, and 48% experienced hyperkalemia within the first year. Important hyperkalemia risk factors included chronic kidney disease (prevalence ratio, 1.46; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.43-1.49), diabetes mellitus (prevalence ratio, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.32-1.45), and spironolactone use (prevalence ratio, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.42-1.54). In patients with HF who developed hyperkalemia, 53% had any acute-care hospitalization 6 months before the hyperkalemia event, increasing to 74% 6 months after hyperkalemia (before-after risk ratio, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.38-1.44). Compared with matched patients with HF without hyperkalemia, adjusted 6-month hazard ratios in patients with hyperkalemia were 2.75-fold (95% CI, 2.65-2.85) higher for acute-care hospitalization and 3.39-fold (95% CI, 3.19-3.61) higher for death. CONCLUSIONS: Almost 4 in 10 patients with HF develop hyperkalemia, and many patients have recurrent hyperkalemia episodes. Hyperkalemia risk is strongly associated with degree of reduced kidney function and use of spironolactone. Hyperkalemia is associated with severe clinical outcomes and death in HF.

Characterization of the Open-Label Lead-In Period of Two Randomized Controlled Phase 3 Trials Evaluating Dapagliflozin, Saxagliptin, and Metformin in Type 2 Diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: To examine the utility of sequential versus dual add-on approaches in patients who have type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycemic control with metformin therapy alone, we characterized the efficacy and safety of dual therapy with dapagliflozin or saxagliptin added to metformin in the open-label lead-in periods of two phase 3 trials (study 1, NCT01619059; study 2, NCT01646320) that evaluated triple therapy in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes. METHODS: During the lead-in periods of each trial, patients [glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 8.0-11.5%] who had been receiving metformin ≥ 1500 mg/day for ≥ 8 weeks received metformin immediate release at an equivalent dose plus dapagliflozin 10 mg/day (study 1; N = 482) or saxagliptin 5 mg/day (study 2; N = 349) for 16 weeks. Efficacy end points were assessed at week - 2 before randomization. RESULTS: Mean change in HbA1c [95% confidence interval (CI)] from lead-in baseline (study 1, 9.3%; study 2, 9.4%) was - 1.6% (- 1.7, - 1.5) in study 1 and - 1.3% (- 1.5, - 1.2) in study 2. Mean changes (95% CI) from lead-in baseline in weight and fasting plasma glucose were - 2.4 kg (- 2.6, - 2.1) and - 47.5 mg/dL (- 52.8, - 42.3) for study 1 and - 0.5 kg (- 0.8, - 0.2) and - 28.5 mg/dL (- 35.8, - 21.2) for study 2. At the end of the lead-in period, 22.0% of patients achieved HbA1c < 7.0% in study 1 and 17.5% in study 2. Dual therapy was well tolerated, with hypoglycemia incidence < 1% in both studies. CONCLUSION: Dual therapy improved glycemic control and was well tolerated; however, most patients required additional therapy to further improve HbA1c towards target, suggesting that an early move to triple therapy with oral glucose-lowering drugs rather than a stepwise approach may be beneficial for patients with high HbA1c levels on metformin therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01619059, NCT01646320. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Quality of life and satisfaction with treatment in subjects with type 2 diabetes: results in Spain of the PANORAMA study.

OBJECTIVES: Few studies are available on quality of life and treatment satisfaction of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Both of them were the primary objectives of the PANORAMA (NCT00916513) study. Metabolic control, treatment patterns, and management by healthcare professionals were also evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This multicenter, cross-sectional, observational study randomly recruited>40 year-old patients with T2DM from Spanish healthcare centers. HbA1c was measured using the same technique in all patients, who also completed quality of life (EQ-5D and ADDQoL) and treatment satisfaction (DTSQ) questionnaires and the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS-II). RESULTS: Fifty-four investigators recruited 751 patients, 60.3% of whom had HbA1c levels <7%. Approximately 25% of patients on monotherapy had HbA1c values ≥ 7%, Patients with longer disease duration and more complex treatments, especially with insulin, showed the poorer control. Despite good overall treatment satisfaction (mean 29.3±6.1, 0 to 36-point scale), patients with a poorer metabolic control, previous hypoglycemia episodes, and more complex therapies had a worse QoL and a greater fear of suffering hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in metabolic control, there are still areas to improve. Early addition of safe drugs to monotherapy would help achieve control objectives without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia, and delaying the start of insulin therapy. This would also improve QoL and treatment satisfaction.

Dapagliflozin versus saxagliptin as add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin

ABSTRACT Objective: This analysis compared the efficacy and safety of the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor, dapagliflozin, and the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitor, saxagliptin, both added on to metformin. Materials and methods: This was a post-hoc analysis from a double-blind, randomized, 24-week clinical trial (NCT01606007) of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with metformin. We compared the dapagliflozin 10 mg (n = 179) and saxagliptin 5 mg (n = 176) treatment arms. Results: Dapagliflozin showed significantly greater mean reductions versus saxagliptin in HbA1c (difference versus saxagliptin [95% CI]: −0.32% [-0.54, −0.10]; p < 0.005), fasting plasma glucose (-0.98 [-1.42, −0.54] mmol/L; p < 0.0001), body weight (-2.39 [-3.08, −1.71] kg; p < 0.0001) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) (-3.89 [-6.15, −1.63] mmHg; p < 0.001). More dapagliflozintreated than saxagliptin-treated patients achieved the composite endpoint of HbA1c reduction ≥ 0.5%, weight loss ≥ 2 kg, SBP reduction ≥ 2 mmHg and no major/minor hypoglycemia (24% versus 7%). No major events of hypoglycemia were reported. More patients on dapagliflozin (6%) versus saxagliptin (0.6%) experienced genital infections. Conclusion: Dapagliflozin demonstrated greater glycemic efficacy than saxagliptin with additional benefits on weight and SBP, and the safety profile was consistent with previous studies.

Calidad de vida y satisfacción con el tratamiento de sujetos con diabetes tipo 2: resultados en España del estudio PANORAMA / Quality of life and satisfaction with treatment in subjects with type 2 diabetes: Results in Spain of the PANORAMA study

OBJETIVOS: La evaluación de la calidad de vida y la satisfacción con el tratamiento relacionados con la diabetes tipo 2 han sido poco estudiados. Ambos son los objetivos principales del estudio PANORAMA (NCT00916513). También se evalúa el grado de control metabólico, los patrones de tratamiento y la actuación del profesional sanitario. MATERIAL Y MÉTODOS: Estudio observacional, transversal y multicéntrico que incluyó pacientes diabéticos tipo 2 mayores de 40 años seleccionados de manera aleatorizada entre los centros de salud españoles. Se determinó la HbA1c mediante un mismo sistema y cada paciente completó cuestionarios de calidad de vida (EQ-5D y ADDQoL), satisfacción con el tratamiento (DTSQ) y temor a la hipoglucemia (HFS-II). RESULTADOS: Cincuenta y cuatro investigadores incluyeron 751 pacientes. El 60,3% presenta HbA1c < 7%. El mayor tiempo de evolución de la enfermedad y los tratamientos complejos, especialmente con insulina, se asocian a peor control. Cerca de un 25% de los pacientes en monoterapia presenta HbA1c ≥ 7%. Aunque la satisfacción con el tratamiento en general es buena (media 29,3 ± 6,1, escala de 0 a 36 puntos), los pacientes con peor control metabólico, hipoglucemias previas y tratamientos más complejos refieren significativamente peor calidad de vida y más miedo a sufrir hipoglucemias. CONCLUSIONES: Aunque el grado de control metabólico ha avanzado, todavía existen áreas de mejora. La adición precoz a la monoterapia de fármacos seguros ayudaría a lograr los objetivos de control sin aumentar el riesgo de hipoglucemias, y retrasando el inicio del tratamiento con insulina. Esto mejoraría la calidad de vida y la satisfacción con el tratamiento

OBJECTIVES: Few studies are available on quality of life and treatment satisfaction of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Both of them were the primary objectives of the PANORAMA (NCT00916513) study. Metabolic control, treatment patterns, and management by healthcare professionals were also evaluated. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This multicenter, cross-sectional, observational study randomly recruited > 40 year-old patients with T2DM from Spanish healthcare centers. HbA1c was measured using the same technique in all patients, who also completed quality of life (EQ-5D and ADDQoL) and treatment satisfaction (DTSQ) questionnaires and the Hypoglycemia Fear Survey (HFS-II). RESULTS: Fifty-four investigators recruited 751 patients, 60.3% of whom had HbA1c levels < 7%. Approximately 25% of patients on monotherapy had HbA1c values ≥ 7%, Patients with longer disease duration and more complex treatments, especially with insulin, showed the poorer control. Despite good overall treatment satisfaction (mean 29.3 ± 6.1, 0 to 36-point scale), patients with a poorer metabolic control, previous hypoglycemia episodes, and more complex therapies had a worse QoL and a greater fear of suffering hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: Despite advances in metabolic control, there are still areas to improve. Early addition of safe drugs to monotherapy would help achieve control objectives without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia, and delaying the start of insulin therapy. This would also improve QoL and treatment satisfaction