ABSTRACT
AIM: The study compared the duration of maintenance of treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) using dual therapy with either metformin and sitagliptin (M-Sita) or metformin and a sulphonylurea (M-SU). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This observational study included adult patients with T2D who had responded inadequately to metformin monotherapy and therefore had started de-novo treatment with Met-Sita or Met-SU within the previous eight weeks. Patient follow-up and changes to treatment were performed according to their general practitioner's usual clinical practice. The primary outcome was time to change in treatment for whatever cause. HbA1c and symptomatic hypoglycaemia were also documented. RESULTS: The median treatment duration for patients in the M-Sita group (43.2 months) was significantly longer (P < 0.0001) than in the M-SU group (20.2 months). This difference persisted after adjusting for baseline differences and confounders. A similar reduction in HbA1c was noted in both arms (-0.6%), and the incidence of hypoglycaemia prior to treatment modification was lower with M-Sita (9.7%) than with M-SU (21.0%). Adverse events potentially related to treatment were reported in 2.8% (n = 52) and 2.7% (n = 20) of patients in the M-Sita and M-SU arms, respectively. CONCLUSION: Under everyday conditions of primary diabetes care, dual therapy with M-Sita can be maintained for longer than M-SU. In addition, while efficacy, as measured by changes in HbA1c, was similar between treatments, the incidence of hypoglycaemia was lower in patients taking M-Sita.
