Sex differences in the prognostic role of achieving target doses of heart failure medications: Data from the Swedish Heart Failure Registry.

AIMS: Guidelines recommend target doses (TD) of heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) medications regardless of sex. Differences in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics may explain heterogeneity in treatment response, adverse reactions, and tolerability issues across sexes. The aim of this study was to explore sex-based differences in the association between TD achievement and mortality/morbidity in HFrEF. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients with HFrEF and HF duration ≥6 months registered in the Swedish HF Registry between May 2000 and December 2020 (follow-up until December 2021) were analysed. Treatments of interest were renin-angiotensin system inhibitors (RASI) or angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors (ARNI), and beta-blockers. Multivariable Cox regression models were performed to explore the risk of cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization for HF across dose categories in females versus males. A total of 17 912 patients were analysed (median age 77.0 years, interquartile range [IQR] 70.0-83.0), 29% were female. Over a median follow-up of 1.33 years (IQR 0.29-3.22), for RASI/ARNI there was no significant difference in outcome for females achieving 50-99% versus 100% of TD (hazard ratio 0.92, 95% confidence interval 0.83-1.03), whereas males showed a gradual lowering in risk together with the achievement of higher % of TD (p-interaction = 0.030). For beta-blockers the achievement of TD was associated with the lowest risk of outcome regardless of sex. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that females and males might differently benefit from the same dose of RASI/ARNI, and do represent a general call for randomized controlled trials to consider sex-specific up-titration schemes when testing HFrEF treatments in need of up-titration.

Willingness of people with type 2 diabetes to engage in healthy eating, physical activity and medication taking.

AIM: To assess the willingness of people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) to engage in healthy eating, physical activity and medication taking, and explore associated patient factors. METHODS: Online survey among recently diagnosed T2D patients recruited in the Netherlands and the United Kingdom (UK). Patient factors included general factors and behaviour-specific beliefs. Logistic regression analyses and explorative comparisons were conducted. RESULTS: Overall, 48% of 67 patients were willing to engage in all three management options, whereas 6% were not willing to follow any of them. 73% were willing to manage T2D with healthy eating, 73% with physical activity, and 72% with medication. Country of recruitment was significantly associated with willingness for healthy eating, with higher willingness among Dutch participants. Beliefs surrounding capability, opportunity, and motivation were significantly associated with willingness to engage in physical activity and medication taking. Many beliefs were similar regardless of willingness but those willing to engage in physical activity perceived less barriers and those willing to take medication had more positive and less negative outcome beliefs than those not willing. CONCLUSIONS: Willingness to engage in all management options was limited among recently diagnosed patients, and partly associated with behaviour-specific patient beliefs.

Sex disparities in treatment patterns after metformin initiation among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

PURPOSE: To assess sex differences in treatment patterns after metformin initiation among type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) patients. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted using the Groningen Initiative to ANalyze Type 2 diabetes Treatment (GIANTT) primary care database. Patients aged ≥18 years initiating metformin were followed 2-5 years. Markov modeling was conducted to estimate treatment transition rates and calculate adjusted hazard ratios (aHR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) comparing men with women adjusted for age, HbA1c level at initiation, and cardiovascular disease history. Kaplan-Meier analyses and Cox proportional-hazards models were used to determine the time to and likelihood of getting treatment intensification. HbA1c levels at initiation and intensification were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: In total, 11 508 metformin initiators were included (50.1% women). The most common transition after initiation was a dose increase (probability women 0.52, men 0.59, no significant difference). Women were more likely than men to switch to any other non-insulin hypoglycemic agent after initiation (aHR 1.66; 95% CI 1.31-2.12), after dose increase (aHR 1.48; 95% CI 1.10-1.98) and after dose decrease (aHR 2.64; 95% CI 1.28-5.46). Time to intensification was longer, time to switching was shorter, and HbA1c levels at initiation and intensification were lower for women than men. CONCLUSIONS: Sex disparities were observed in treatment transitions after metformin initiation. Women more often switched treatment than men, which suggest that prescribers acknowledge more tolerance or other problems for metformin in women. Men intensified treatment earlier and at higher HbA1c levels, indicative of a higher need for treatment intensification.

What Factors Make EU Regulators Want to Communicate Drug Safety Issues Related to SGLT2 Inhibitors? An Online Survey Study.

INTRODUCTION: Previous studies have found differences in the communication of safety issues among medicines regulatory agencies. OBJECTIVES: To explore (1) to what extent regulators' opinions regarding the need to communicate safety issues related to sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors might be influenced by their concern about the safety issue, and (2) whether regulators' concerns might be influenced by certain characteristics of the safety issue or by the demographic and professional characteristics and attitudes of the regulators. METHODS: An online cross-sectional survey study with a rating-based conjoint analysis among clinical and pharmacovigilance assessors from the EU regulatory network was performed between April and June 2021. Regulators were invited by email, and participants were asked about their level of concern and their opinion regarding the need to communicate about 12 scenarios defined by four characteristics: adverse drug reaction, source of information, causality, and frequency. The outcomes for the first objective were to update the summary of product characteristics (SmPC; yes/no) and to send direct healthcare professional communications (DHPC; yes/no). The determinant was regulators' level of concern (range 0-100%). The outcome of the second objective was regulators' level of concern, and the determinants were the characteristics of the safety issue, demographic and professional characteristics, and attitudes of the regulators (beliefs about medicines and risk perception). RESULTS: A total of 222 regulators completed the survey (64% women; mean age 46 ± 10 years). Depending on the scenario, 54-94% and 25-74% of the participants would update the SmPC or send a DHPC, respectively. The participants' level of concern influenced their opinions regarding the need to update the SmPC and send a DHPC (odds ratio (OR) 13.0; 95% confidence interval (CI) 7.8-21.7 and OR 13.6; 95% CI 9.5-19.2, respectively, for every 10% increase in the level of concern). All characteristics of the safety issue influenced the level of concern. Younger participants, women, and those working for Eastern European agencies had a higher level of concern than older participants, men, and those working in other regions. Beliefs about medicines and general risk perception also influenced their concern. CONCLUSIONS: The opinion regarding the need to communicate safety issues was influenced by the concern of regulators. Regulators' concern was influenced by the characteristics of the safety issue, demographic characteristics, and attitudes. Diverse groups of experts regarding such factors would ensure that various views are incorporated in risk communication decisions.

Sex disparities in medication prescribing amongst patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus managed in primary care.

BACKGROUND: Sex differences in clinical outcomes have been observed for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). These could be related to sex disparities in treatment. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether there are sex disparities in medication prescribing amongst patients with T2DM. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted using the Groningen Initiative to ANalyze Type 2 diabetes Treatment (GIANTT) database, which includes data from primary care patients with T2DM from the north of the Netherlands. Data on demographics, physical examinations, laboratory measurements and prescribing were extracted. A set of validated prescribing quality indicators assessing the prevalence, start, intensification and safety of glucose-, lipid-, blood pressure- and albuminuria-lowering medication was applied for the calendar year 2019. Univariate logistic regression analyses were conducted. RESULTS: We included 10,456 patients (47% females). Females were less often treated with metformin (81.7% vs. 86.5%; OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.61-0.80), and were less often prescribed a renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitor (RAAS-i) when treated with multiple blood pressure-lowering medicines (81.9% vs. 89.3%; OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.46-0.64) or when having albuminuria (74.7% vs. 82.1%; OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.49-0.85) than males. Statin treatment was less frequently started (19.7% vs. 24.7%; OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.58-0.96) and prescribed (58.7% vs. 63.9%; OR 0.80, 95% CI 0.73-0.89) in females. There were no differences in starting and intensifying glucose-, blood pressure- and albuminuria-lowering medication. CONCLUSIONS: Sex disparities in medication prescribing amongst T2DM patients were seen, including less starting with statins and potential undertreatment with RAAS-i in females. Such disparities may partly explain higher excess risks for cardiovascular and renal complications associated with diabetes observed in females.

Less Timely Initiation of Glucose-Lowering Medication Among Younger and Male Patients With Diabetes and Similar Initiation of Blood Pressure-Lowering Medication Across Age and Sex: Trends Between 2015 and 2020.

Aims: We aimed to assess trends in glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) thresholds at initiation of glucose- and blood pressure-lowering medication among patients with type 2 diabetes and assess the influence of age and sex on these trends. Materials and Methods: We used the Groningen Initiative to ANalyze Type 2 diabetes Treatment (GIANTT) primary care database. Patients initiating a first non-insulin glucose-lowering or any blood pressure-lowering medication between 2015 and 2020 with an HbA1c or SBP measurement in the 120 days before initiation were included. We used multilevel regression analyses adjusted for potential confounders to assess the influence of calendar year, age or sex, and the interaction between calendar year and age or sex on trends in HbA1c and SBP thresholds at initiation of medication. Results: We included 2,671 and 2,128 patients in the analyses of HbA1c and SBP thresholds, respectively. The overall mean HbA1c threshold at initiation of glucose-lowering medication significantly increased from 7.4% in 2015 to 8.0% in 2020 (p < 0.001), and particularly in the younger age groups. Compared to patients ≥80 years, patients aged 60-69 years initiated medication at lower levels mainly in the early years. Patients <60 years and between 70-79 years initiated medication at similar levels as patients ≥80 years. Females initiated medication at lower levels than males throughout the study period (p < 0.001). The mean SBP threshold at initiation of blood pressure-lowering medication varied from 145 to 149 mmHg without a clear trend (p = 0.676). There were no differences in SBP thresholds between patients of different ages or sex. Conclusion: The rising trend in the HbA1c threshold for initiating glucose-lowering medication in the lower age groups was unexpected and requires further investigation. Males appear to receive less timely initiation of glucose-lowering medication than females. The lack of higher thresholds for the oldest age group or lower thresholds for the youngest age group in recent years is not in line with the age-related recommendations for personalized diabetes care and calls for health systems interventions.

Prediction of the Effects of Liraglutide on Kidney and Cardiovascular Outcomes Based on Short-Term Changes in Multiple Risk Markers.

Aims: The LEADER trial demonstrated that the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA) liraglutide reduces kidney and cardiovascular (CV) risk in patients with type 2 diabetes. We previously developed a Parameter Response Efficacy (PRE) score that translates multiple short-term risk marker changes, from baseline to first available follow-up measurement, into a predicted long-term drug effect on clinical outcomes. The objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of the PRE score in predicting the efficacy of liraglutide in reducing the risk of kidney and CV outcomes. Methods: Short-term changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (BP), urinary-albumin-creatinine-ratio (UACR), hemoglobin, body weight, high-density-lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, low-density-lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, and potassium were monitored in the LEADER trial. Associations between risk markers and kidney or CV outcomes were established using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model in a separate pooled database of 6,355 patients with type 2 diabetes. The regression coefficients were then applied to the short-term risk markers in the LEADER trial to predict the effects of liraglutide on kidney (defined as a composite of doubling of serum creatinine or end-stage kidney disease) and CV (defined as a composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, and CV death) outcomes. Results: Liraglutide compared to placebo reduced HbA1c (1.4%), systolic BP (3.0 mmHg), UACR (13.2%), body weight (2.3 kg), hemoglobin (2.6 g/L), and increased HDL-cholesterol (0.01 mmol/L) (all p-values <0.01). Integrating multiple risk marker changes in the PRE score resulted in a predicted relative risk reduction (RRR) of 16.2% (95% CI 13.7-18.6) on kidney outcomes which was close to the observed RRR of 15.5% (95% CI -9.0-34.6). For the CV outcome, the PRE score predicted a 7.6% (95% CI 6.8-8.3) RRR, which was less than the observed 13.2% (95% CI 3.2-22.2) RRR. Conclusion: Integrating multiple short-term risk markers using the PRE score adequately predicted the effect of liraglutide on the composite kidney outcome. However, the PRE score underestimated the effect of liraglutide for the composite CV outcome, suggesting that the risk markers included in the PRE score do not fully capture the CV benefit of liraglutide.

Attention for sex in COVID-19 trials: a review of regulatory dossiers.

An under-representation of women and a lack of sex-specific analyses in COVID-19 trials has been suggested. However, the higher number of men than women who are severely affected by COVID-19 and the restricted information in scientific publications may have biased these suggestions. Therefore, we evaluated sex proportionality and sex-specific efficacy and safety data in trials of COVID-19 treatments and vaccines using both publicly available regulatory documents and confidential documents used by regulators in their review of medicinal products. Included were two treatments (ie, remdesivir and dexamethasone) and four vaccines (ie, BNT162b2 mRNA (BioNTech/Pfizer), mRNA-1273 (Moderna), ChAdOx1-S (AstraZeneca) and Ad26.COV2-S (Janssen)) that received marketing authorisation by the European Commission at the time of the study conduct. An under-representation of women was shown in three of the nine data sets for one treatment (ie, remdesivir), but the proportion of women included was representative in each of the data sets for the other five products. This indicates that there is no structural under-representation of women in the COVID-19 trials. Currently, sex-specific efficacy data are available for five of the six assessed products and sex-specific safety data are available for half of the products only. It is important that this information will also be made available for the other products. There are only small differences in efficacy and safety between men and women which are likely to be of limited clinical relevance. Sex-specific efficacy information can generally be found in the publicly available regulatory documents other than the Summary of Product Characteristics, for which more awareness might be required.

Older Age, Polypharmacy, and Low Systolic Blood Pressure Are Associated With More Hypotension-Related Adverse Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With Antihypertensives.

Background and Aims: Low systolic blood pressure (SBP) levels while being treated with antihypertensives may cause hypotension-related adverse events (hrAEs), especially in the elderly, women, and frail patients. We aimed to assess the association between the occurrence of hrAEs and low SBP levels, age, sex, and polypharmacy among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with antihypertensives. Methods: In this cohort study, we used the Groningen Initiative to ANalyse Type 2 diabetes Treatment (GIANTT) database which includes patients managed for T2D in primary care from the north of the Netherlands. Patients treated with ≥1 antihypertensive drug and ≥1 SBP measurement between 2012 and 2014 were included. The outcome was the presence of an hrAE, i.e. postural hypotension, dizziness, weakness/tiredness, and syncope in 90 days before or after the lowest recorded SBP level. Age (≥70 vs. <70 years), sex (women vs. men), polypharmacy (5-9 drugs or ≥10 drugs vs. <5 drugs), and SBP level (<130 or ≥130 mmHg) were included as determinants. Logistic regression analyses were conducted for age, sex and polypharmacy, including the SBP level and their interaction, adjusted for confounders. Odds ratios (OR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) are presented. Results: We included 21,119 patients, 49% of which were ≥70 years old, 52% were women, 57% had polypharmacy, 61% had an SBP level <130 mmHg and 5.4% experienced an hrAE. Patients with an SBP level <130 mmHg had a significantly higher occurrence of hrAEs than patients with a higher SBP level (6.2 vs. 4.0%; ORs 1.41, 95%CI 1.14-1.75, 1.43, 95%CI 1.17-1.76 and 1.33, 95%CI 1.06-1.67 by age, sex, and polypharmacy, respectively). Older patients (OR 1.29, 95%CI 1.02-1.64) and patients with polypharmacy (OR 5-9 drugs 1.27, 95%CI 1.00-1.62; OR ≥10 drugs 2.37, 95% CI 1.67-3.37) were more likely to experience an hrAE. The association with sex and the interactions between the determinants and SBP level were not significant. Conclusion: Low SBP levels in patients with T2D treated with antihypertensives is associated with an increase in hrAEs. Older patients and those with polypharmacy are particularly at risk of hrAEs. Age, sex, and polypharmacy did not modify the risk of hrAEs associated with a low SBP level.

Motives to Report Adverse Drug Reactions to the National Agency: A Survey Study among Healthcare Professionals and Patients in Croatia, The Netherlands, and the UK.

INTRODUCTION: Healthcare professionals (HCPs) and patients have various motives to report adverse drug reactions (ADRs) to their national agency. These motives may differ between countries. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess to what extent motives of HCPs and patients to report ADRs differ between countries. METHODS: HCPs and patients from Croatia (HR), The Netherlands (NL), and the UK were asked to complete a web-based survey containing questions regarding demographics and ADR reporting. HCPs and patients could select all motives for reporting that applied to them, with a total of 23 and 24 motives, respectively. Descriptive statistics are presented and Chi-square tests were used to test for differences across the countries, with effect sizes calculated using Cramer's V. RESULTS: In total, 296 HCPs and 423 patients were included (60% and 32% from Croatia, 19% and 44% from NL, and 21% and 24% from the UK, respectively). For most of the motives to report or not to report an ADR, there were no differences between countries. Most HCPs from all countries would be motivated to report an ADR if there was a strong suspicion of causality (89%), if it concerned a severe/serious ADR (86%), and if it concerned an ADR for a new, recently marketed drug (77%). Most patients from all countries agreed that they would report an ADR if it concerned a severe ADR (96%), if the ADR influenced their daily activities (91%), and if they were worried about their own situation (90%). Differences across the countries (p < 0.05 and V ≥ 0.21) were observed for three and four of the HCP and patient motives, respectively. For HCPs, these differences were seen in motives related to legal obligation (65% HR, 24% NL, 38% UK), black triangle medicines (27% HR, 4% NL, 77% UK), and the reporting of well-known ADRs (53% HR, 85% NL, 69% UK). For patients, these differences were seen in motives related to a linkage between the ADR report and the medical notes (59% HR, 60% NL, 30% UK), complexity and time taken to report (25% HR, 13% NL, 40% UK), medicines purchased on the internet (59% HR, 39% NL, 65% UK), and the reporting of embarrassing ADRs (32% HR, 11% NL, 35% UK). CONCLUSIONS: HCPs' and patients' motives to report or not to report ADRs to the national agency were mostly similar across the three countries. Such motives can be used in general strategies to promote and increase ADR reporting. The observed differences provide guidance to further fine-tune ADR reporting at a national level.

Capturing Data in Rare Disease Registries to Support Regulatory Decision Making: A Survey Study Among Industry and Other Stakeholders.

INTRODUCTION: In rare diseases, registry-based studies can be used to provide natural history data pre-approval and complement drug efficacy and/or safety knowledge post-approval. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to investigate the opinion of stakeholders about key aspects of rare disease registries that are used to support regulatory decision making and to compare the responses of employees from industry to other stakeholders. METHODS: A web-based survey was used to gauge the importance of (1) common data elements (including safety outcomes), (2) data quality and (3) governance aspects that are generic across different rare diseases. The survey included 47 questions. The data were collected in the period April-October 2019. RESULTS: Seventy-three respondents completed ≥ 80% of the survey. Most of the respondents were from the industry (n = 42, 57%). For safety data, 31 (42%) respondents were in favour of collecting all adverse events. For data quality, the respondents found a level of 30% reasonable for source data verification. For missing data, a level of 20% was considered acceptable. Compared to responders from industry, the other stakeholders found it less relevant to share data with industry and found it less acceptable if the registry is financed by industry. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed that the opinion towards data and governance is well aligned across parties, and issues of data and governance on their own should not pose a barrier to collaboration. This finding is supportive of the European Medicines Agency's efforts to encourage stakeholders to work with existing registries when collecting data to support regulatory decision making.

Perspectives on a Way Forward to Implementation of Precision Medicine in Patients With Diabetic Kidney Disease; Results of a Stakeholder Consensus-Building Meeting.

Aim: This study aimed to identify from different stakeholders the benefits and obstacles of implementing precision medicine in diabetic kidney disease (DKD) and to build consensus about a way forward in order to treat, prevent, or even reverse this disease. Methods: As part of an ongoing effort of moving implementation of precision medicine in DKD forward, a two-day consensus-building meeting was organized with different stakeholders involved in drug development and patient care in DKD, including patients, patient representatives, pharmaceutical industry, regulatory agencies representatives, health technology assessors, healthcare professionals, basic scientists, and clinical academic researchers. The meeting consisted of plenary presentations and discussions, and small group break-out sessions. Discussion topics were based on a symposium, focus groups and literature search. Benefits, obstacles and potential solutions toward implementing precision medicine were discussed. Results from the break-out sessions were presented in plenary and formed the basis of a broad consensus discussion to reach final conclusions. Throughout the meeting, participants answered several statement and open-ended questions on their mobile device, using a real-time online survey tool. Answers to the statement questions were analyzed descriptively. Results of the open-ended survey questions, the break-out sessions and the consensus discussion were analyzed qualitatively. Results and conclusion: Seventy-one participants from 26 countries attended the consensus-building meeting in Amsterdam, April 2019. During the opening plenary on the first day, the participants agreed with the statement that precision medicine is the way forward in DKD (n = 57, median 90, IQR [75-100]). Lack of efficient tools for implementation in practice and generating robust data were identified as significant obstacles. The identified benefits, e.g., improvement of the benefit-risk ratio of treatment, offer substantive incentives to find solutions for the identified obstacles. Earlier and increased multi-stakeholder collaboration and specific training may provide solutions to alter clinical and regulatory guidelines that lie at the basis of both obstacles and solutions. At the end of the second day, the opinion of the participants toward precision medicine in DKD was somewhat more nuanced (n = 45, median 83, IQR [70-92]) and they concluded that precision medicine is an important way forward in improving the treatment of patients with DKD.

Sex Differences in Lipid Profile across the Life Span in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Primary Care-Based Study.

We assessed sex differences across the life span in the lipid profile of type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients treated and not treated with statins. We used the Groningen Initiative to ANalyze Type 2 diabetes Treatment database, which includes T2D patients from the north of the Netherlands. Patients with a full lipid profile determined between 2010 and 2012 were included. We excluded patients treated with other lipid-lowering drugs than statins. Sex differences in low- and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-c and HDL-c) and triglyceride (TG) levels across 11 age groups stratified by statin treatment were assessed using linear regression. We included 26,849 patients (51% women, 55% treated with statins). Without statins, women had significantly lower LDL-c levels than men before the age of 45 years, similar levels between 45 and 49 years, and higher levels thereafter. With statins, similar LDL-c levels were shown up to the age of 55, and higher levels in women thereafter. Women had significantly higher HDL-c levels than men, regardless of age or statin treatment. Men had significantly higher TG levels up to the age of 55 and 60, depending on whether they did not take or took statins, respectively, and similar levels thereafter. When managing cardiovascular risk in patients with T2D, attention is needed for the menopausal status of women and for TG levels in younger men.

Sex Proportionality in Pre-clinical and Clinical Trials: An Evaluation of 22 Marketing Authorization Application Dossiers Submitted to the European Medicines Agency.

This study assessed to what extent women were included in all phases of drug development; whether the clinical studies in the marketing authorization application dossiers include information per sex; and explored whether there are differences between women and men in the drugs' efficacy and safety. Data were extracted from dossiers submitted to the European Medicines Agency. Twenty-two dossiers of drugs approved between 2011 and 2015 for the treatment of various diseases were included. Female animals were included in only 9% of the pharmacodynamics studies, but female and male animals were included in all toxicology studies. Although fewer women than men were included in the clinical studies used to evaluate pharmacokinetics (PK) (29 to 40% women), all dossiers contained sex-specific PK parameter estimations. In the phase III trials, inclusion of women was proportional to disease prevalence for depression, epilepsy, thrombosis, and diabetes [participation to prevalence ratio (PPR) range: 0.91-1.04], but women were considered underrepresented for schizophrenia, hepatitis C, hypercholesterolemia, HIV, and heart failure (PPR range: 0.49-0.74). All dossiers contained sex-specific subgroup analyses of efficacy and safety. There seemed to be higher efficacy for women in one dossier and a trend toward lower efficacy in another dossier. More women had adverse events in both treatment (73.0 vs. 70.6%, p < 0.001) and placebo groups (69.5 vs. 65.5%, p < 0.001). In conclusion, women were included throughout all phases of clinical drug research, and sex-specific information was available in the evaluated dossiers. The included number of women was, however, not always proportional to disease prevalence rates.

Prediction of the Effects of Empagliflozin on Cardiovascular and Kidney Outcomes Based on Short-Term Changes in Multiple Risk Markers.

Aims: The EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial demonstrated that the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2) empagliflozin reduces the risk of cardiovascular (CV) and kidney outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. We previously developed the parameter response efficacy (PRE) score, which translates drug effects on multiple short-term risk markers into a predicted long-term treatment effect on clinical outcomes. The main objective of this study was to assess the accuracy of the PRE score in predicting the efficacy of empagliflozin in reducing the risk of CV and kidney outcomes. Methods: Short-term (baseline to 6-months) changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP), urinary-albumin-creatinine-ratio (UACR), hemoglobin, body weight, high-density-lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, low-density-lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, uric acid, and potassium were determined among 7020 patients with type 2 diabetes and established CV disease in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial. The beta-coefficients, derived from a Cox proportional hazards model in a pooled database consisting of 6355 patients with type 2 diabetes, were applied to the short-term risk markers in the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial to predict the empagliflozin-induced impact on CV (defined as a composite of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or CV death) and kidney (defined as a composite of doubling of serum creatinine or end-stage kidney disease) outcomes. Results: Empagliflozin compared to placebo reduced HbA1c (0.6%), SBP (4.2 mmHg), UACR (13.0%), body weight (2.1 kg), uric acid (20.4 µmol/L), and increased hemoglobin (6.6 g/L), LDL-cholesterol (0.1 mmol/L) and HDL-cholesterol (0.04 mmol/L) (all p<0.01). Integrating these effects in the PRE score resulted in a predicted relative risk reduction (RRR) for the CV outcome of 6.4% (95% CI 1.4-11.7), which was less than the observed 14.7% (95% CI 1.3-26.4%) RRR. For the kidney outcome, the PRE score predicted a RRR of 33.4% (95% CI 26.2-39.8); the observed RRR was 46.9% (95% CI 26.8-61.5). In a subgroup of 2,811 patients with UACR ≥30 mg/g at baseline, the PRE score predicted RRR was 40.8% (95% CI 31.2-49.1) vs. the observed RRR of 40.8% (95% CI 12.4-60.0) for the kidney outcome. Conclusions: Integrating multiple short-term risk marker changes in the PRE score underestimated the effect of empagliflozin on CV and kidney outcomes, suggesting that the currently used risk markers do not fully capture the effect of empagliflozin. In patients with increased albuminuria, the PRE score adequately predicted the effect of empagliflozin on kidney outcomes.

Trends in HbA1c thresholds for initiation of hypoglycemic agents: Impact of changed recommendations for older and frail patients.

AIMS: Less strict glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c ) thresholds have been recommended in older and/or frail type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients than in younger and less frail patients for initiating hypoglycemic agents since 2011. We aimed to assess trends in HbA1c thresholds at initiation of a first hypoglycemic agent(s) in T2D patients and the influence of age and frailty on these trends. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The groningen initiative to analyze type 2 diabetes treatment (GIANTT) database was used, which includes primary care T2D patients from the north of the Netherlands. Patients initiating a first non-insulin hypoglycemic agent(s) between 2008 and 2014 with an HbA1c measurement within 120 days before initiation were included. The influence of calendar year, age, or frailty and the interaction between calendar year and age or frailty were assessed using multilevel regression analyses adjusted for confounders. RESULTS: We included 4588 patients. The mean HbA1c threshold at treatment initiation was 7.4% up to 2010, decreasing to 7.1% in 2011 and increasing to 7.4% in 2014. This quadratic change over the years was significant (P < 0.001). Patients aged 60 to 79 initiated treatments at lower HbA1c and patients of different frailty at similar HbA1c levels. The interaction between year and age or frailty was not significant (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c thresholds at initiation of a first hypoglycemic agent(s) changed significantly over time, showing a decrease after 2010 and an increase after 2012. The HbA1c threshold at initiation was not influenced by age or frailty, which is in contrast with recommendations for more personalized treatment.

Changes in blood pressure thresholds for initiating antihypertensive medication in patients with diabetes: a repeated cross-sectional study focusing on the impact of age and frailty.

OBJECTIVE: To assess trends in systolic blood pressure (SBP) thresholds at initiation of antihypertensive treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes and the impact of age and frailty on these trends. STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: A repeated cross-sectional cohort study (2007-2014) using the Groningen Initiative to Analyse Type 2 diabetes Treatment database was conducted. The influence of calendar year, age or frailty and the interaction between year and age or frailty on SBP thresholds were assessed using multilevel regression analyses adjusted for potential confounders. RESULTS: We included 4819 patients. The mean SBP at treatment initiation was 157 mm Hg in 2007, rising to 158 mm Hg in 2009 and decreasing to 151 mm Hg in 2014. This quadratic trend was significant (p<0.001). Older patients initiated treatment at higher SBP, but similar decreasing trends after 2009 were observed in all age groups. There were no significant differences in SBP thresholds between patients with different frailty groups. The association between year and SBP threshold was not influenced by age or frailty. CONCLUSION: After an initial rise, the observed SBP thresholds decreased over time and were not influenced by age or frailty. This is in contrast with changed guideline recommendations towards more personalised treatment during the study period and illustrates that changing prescribing practice may take considerable time. Patient-specific algorithms and tools focusing on when and when not to initiate treatment could be helpful to support personalised diabetes care.