Addressing the Burden of Multiple Daily Insulin Injections in Type 2 Diabetes with Insulin Pump Technology: A Narrative Review.

The growing prevalence of type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains a leading health concern in the US. Despite new medications and technologies, glycemic control in this population remains suboptimal, which increases the risk of poor outcomes, increased healthcare resource utilization, and associated costs. This article reviews the clinical and economic impacts of suboptimal glycemic control in patients on basal-bolus insulin or multiple daily injections (MDI) and discusses how new technologies, such as tubeless insulin delivery devices, referred to as "patch pumps", have the potential to improve outcomes in patients with T2D.

Prioritizing Patient Experiences in the Management of Diabetes and Its Complications: An Endocrine Society Position Statement.

Diabetes can be an arduous journey both for people with diabetes (PWD) and their caregivers. While the journey of every person with diabetes is unique, common themes emerge in managing this disease. To date, the experiences of PWD have not been fully considered to successfully implement the recommended standards of diabetes care in practice. It is critical for health-care providers (HCPs) to recognize perspectives of PWD to achieve optimal health outcomes. Further, existing tools are available to facilitate patient-centered care but are often underused. This statement summarizes findings from multistakeholder expert roundtable discussions hosted by the Endocrine Society that aimed to identify existing gaps in the management of diabetes and its complications and to identify tools needed to empower HCPs and PWD to address their many challenges. The roundtables included delegates from professional societies, governmental organizations, patient advocacy organizations, and social enterprises committed to making life better for PWD. Each section begins with a clinical scenario that serves as a framework to achieve desired health outcomes and includes a discussion of resources for HCPs to deliver patient-centered care in clinical practice. As diabetes management evolves, achieving this goal will also require the development of new tools to help guide HCPs in supporting PWD, as well as concrete strategies for the efficient uptake of these tools in clinical practice to minimize provider burden. Importantly, coordination among various stakeholders including PWD, HCPs, caregivers, policymakers, and payers is critical at all stages of the patient journey.

Early Intervention by Family Physicians to Delay Type 1 Diabetes.

KEY TAKEAWAYS: Type 1 diabetes (T1D) is an autoimmune disease mediated by T cells that target and destroy insulin-producing beta cells. Individuals with genetic risk of T1D will progress at variable rates through 3 stages of immune activation and development of islet autoimmunity. Measuring pancreatic islet cell autoantibodies predicts risk for progression that can take weeks to years before the onset of T1D. Screening options available to family physicians can identify persons at risk or in the early stages of T1D, such as first- and second-degree relatives or those with a family history of autoimmune disorders, to ultimately offer proven interventions that may delay or prevent the condition. Screening can reduce emergency room visits, hospitalizations, and intensive care unit admissions for diabetic ketoacidosis, which can be fatal, and can educate and prepare individuals and families for a smoother transition to insulin therapy when necessary. Recent advances in technology and understanding of the immune pathogenesis of T1D has resulted in emerging disease-modifying therapies that are changing how family physicians approach delaying and potentially preventing or reversing the disease.

Real-World Persistence, Adherence, Hypoglycemia, and Health Care Resource Utilization in People With Type 2 Diabetes Who Continued With the Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analog Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL or Switched to a First-Generation Basal Insulin (Insulin Glargine 100 Units/mL or Detemir 100).

People with type 2 diabetes receiving a second-generation basal insulin (BI) analog may be switched to a first-generation formulation for financial reasons or changes in health insurance. However, because second-generation BI analogs have more even pharmacokinetic profiles, longer durations of action (>24 vs. ≤24 hours), and more stable action profiles than first-generation BI analogs, such a change may result in suboptimal treatment persistence and/or adherence. This study compared treatment persistence, treatment adherence, rates of hypoglycemia, and health care resource utilization outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes who either continued treatment with the second-generation BI Gla-300 or switched to a first-generation BI. The study showed that continuing with Gla-300 was associated with a lower risk of discontinuing therapy, fewer emergency department visits, and lower hypoglycemia event rates than switching to a first-generation BI.

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

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

Identifying patients with type 2 diabetes who might benefit from insulin pump therapy: Literature review, clinical opportunities, potential benefits and challenges.

The global prevalence and increasing incidence rates of type 2 diabetes (T2D) have rippling effects on healthcare costs and diminishing quality of life. Despite advances in technology, continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII), or insulin pump therapy, is rarely being recommended by healthcare professionals and is underutilized in T2D management. This review analyses the available literature on CSII use in T2D patients. In addition, it discusses which groups of patients may benefit from CSII, identifies potential challenges associated with CSII use, and suggests future directions for research to expand the applicability of this technology to the broader T2D population.

A Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) of Hypoglycemia and Hyperglycemia for Continuous Glucose Monitoring Validated by Clinician Ratings.

BACKGROUND: A composite metric for the quality of glycemia from continuous glucose monitor (CGM) tracings could be useful for assisting with basic clinical interpretation of CGM data. METHODS: We assembled a data set of 14-day CGM tracings from 225 insulin-treated adults with diabetes. Using a balanced incomplete block design, 330 clinicians who were highly experienced with CGM analysis and interpretation ranked the CGM tracings from best to worst quality of glycemia. We used principal component analysis and multiple regressions to develop a model to predict the clinician ranking based on seven standard metrics in an Ambulatory Glucose Profile: very low-glucose and low-glucose hypoglycemia; very high-glucose and high-glucose hyperglycemia; time in range; mean glucose; and coefficient of variation. RESULTS: The analysis showed that clinician rankings depend on two components, one related to hypoglycemia that gives more weight to very low-glucose than to low-glucose and the other related to hyperglycemia that likewise gives greater weight to very high-glucose than to high-glucose. These two components should be calculated and displayed separately, but they can also be combined into a single Glycemia Risk Index (GRI) that corresponds closely to the clinician rankings of the overall quality of glycemia (r = 0.95). The GRI can be displayed graphically on a GRI Grid with the hypoglycemia component on the horizontal axis and the hyperglycemia component on the vertical axis. Diagonal lines divide the graph into five zones (quintiles) corresponding to the best (0th to 20th percentile) to worst (81st to 100th percentile) overall quality of glycemia. The GRI Grid enables users to track sequential changes within an individual over time and compare groups of individuals. CONCLUSION: The GRI is a single-number summary of the quality of glycemia. Its hypoglycemia and hyperglycemia components provide actionable scores and a graphical display (the GRI Grid) that can be used by clinicians and researchers to determine the glycemic effects of prescribed and investigational treatments.

Treatment persistence and adherence in people with type 2 diabetes switching to iGlarLixi vs free-dose combinations of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist.

BACKGROUND: Fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin (BI) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have greater simplicity of administration with expected improved adherence/persistence with therapy, but real-world data are lacking. OBJECTIVE: To compare medication persistence, adherence, and health care resource utilization (HRU) and costs for insulin glargine 100 U/mL and the GLP-1 RA lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) with newly initiated free-dose combinations of BI and GLP-1 RAs initiated simultaneously or sequentially. METHODS: This analysis used the US Optum Clinformatics (January 2017 to November 2019) database and included data from adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with type 2 diabetes and a glycated hemoglobin A1c (A1c) of 8% or more. Participants received iGlarLixi or free-dose combinations of BI and GLP-1 RAs prescribed simultaneously or subsequently. Participants were followed for 12 months. Cohorts were propensity score matched on baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was persistence (days on treatment without discontinuation). Secondary outcomes were adherence (proportion of days covered), change in A1c, and all-cause and diabetes-related health care resource utilization and costs. Subgroup analyses were performed for individuals with A1c levels of 9% or more. RESULTS: After propensity score matching, there were 1,357 patients in each group; groups were well balanced. In the free-dose combination group, 65.6% started on BI, then added GLP-1 RAs; 28.5% started on GLP-1 RAs, then added BI; and 5.9% started on GLP-1 RAs and BI on the same day. In the subgroup with a baseline of A1c levels of 9% or more, 952 (iGlarLixi) and 932 (free-dose combination) participants were included. A significantly higher proportion of participants in the overall population who received iGlarLixi vs free-dose combinations were persistent (44.8% vs 36.3% [hazard ratio = 1.22, 95% CI = 1.11-1.35, P < 0.001]; the median [Q1, Q3] number of persistent days was 150 [63, 360] vs 120 [60, 310]) and adherent to therapy (41.3% vs 18.7%, [odds ratio = 3.06, 95% CI = 2.57-3.65; P < 0.001]). Results for persistence in the subpopulation of participants with HbA1c levels of 9% or more were similar. Reductions in A1c from baseline were similar between iGlarLixi and the free-dose combination group (overall population: -1.2% vs -1.3%; P = 0.1913), but the number of participants in the database with follow-up A1c data was low. All-cause and diabetes-related pharmacy visits and total medication and diabetes medication pharmacy claims costs were significantly lower (all P < 0.001) for those receiving iGlarLixi vs free-dose combinations in both populations. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with type 2 diabetes, iGlarLixi was associated with longer persistence by approximately 30 days, improved adherence, and reductions in outpatient and pharmacy visits and in pharmacy costs. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Sanofi US. Medical writing support was provided by Barrie Anthony, PhD, CMPP, of Evidence Scientific Solutions and funded by Sanofi US. Dr Edelman has been on an advisory board and speakers' bureau for AstraZeneca, MannKind, and Xeris and on an advisory board for BrightSight and is a board member for Senseonics and Team-Type1. Mr Cassarino is on the speakers' bureau for Sanofi. Dr Kayne has been a consultant and speakers' bureau member for AstraZeneca, Bayer, Dexcom, Eli Lilly & Company, Janssen, MannKind, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi. Dr Dex and Mr Li are employees of Sanofi. Dr Pasquel has received unrestricted research support from Dexcom, Insulet, and Merck and has been a consultant for Medscape, AI Health, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Dexcom.

New Digital Health Technologies for Insulin Initiation and Optimization for People With Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The health and economic burden of type 2 diabetes is of global significance. Many people with type 2 diabetes eventually need insulin to help reduce their risk of serious associated complications. However, barriers to the initiation and/or optimization of insulin expose people with diabetes to sustained hyperglycemia. In this review, we investigated how new and future technologies may provide opportunities to help overcome these barriers to the initiation and/or optimization of insulin. METHODS: A focused literature search of PubMed and key scientific congresses was conducted. Software tools and devices developed to support the initiation and/or optimization of insulin were identified by manually filtering >300 publications and conference abstracts. RESULTS: Most software tools have been developed for smartphone platforms. At present, published data suggest that the use of these technologies is associated with equivalent or improved glycemic outcomes compared with standard care, with additional benefits such as reduced time burden and improved knowledge of diabetes among health care providers. However, there remains paucity of good-quality evidence. Most new devices to support insulin therapy help track the dose and timing of insulin. CONCLUSION: New digital health tools may help to reduce barriers to optimal insulin therapy. An integrated solution that connects glucose monitoring, dose recording, and titration advice as well as records comorbidities and lifestyle factors has the potential to reduce the complexity and burden of treatment and may improve adherence to titration and treatment, resulting in better outcomes for people with diabetes.

Practical Strategies to Help Reduce Added Sugars Consumption to Support Glycemic and Weight Management Goals.

Overconsumption of added sugars is a key contributor to the growing obesity, prediabetes, and type 2 diabetes pandemics. The nutrition therapy guidance of the American Diabetes Association recognizes that using low- and no-calorie sweeteners (LNCS) to reduce consumption of added sugars can reduce low-nutrient-density sources of calories and carbohydrate to beneficially affect glycemia, weight, and cardiometabolic health. This article provides information for primary care providers, diabetes care and education specialists, and other diabetes clinicians on the safety of LNCS and summarizes research evidence on the role of LNCS in glycemic and weight management. It also provides practical strategies for counseling individuals about how to integrate LNCS into their healthy eating pattern.

Utilizing continuous glucose monitoring in primary care practice: What the numbers mean.

Use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been shown to improve glycemia control, reduce hypoglycemia, lower glycemic variability and enhance quality of life for individuals with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes. However, many primary care physicians may be unfamiliar with the how CGM data can interpreted and acted upon. As adoption of this technology continues to grow, primary care physicians will be challenged to integrate CGM into their clinical practices. This article is intended to provide clinicians with practical guidance in interpreting and utilizing CGM data with their patients.

Efficacy and safety of adding sotagliflozin, a dual sodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT)1 and SGLT2 inhibitor, to optimized insulin therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes and baseline body mass index ≥ 27 kg/m2.

Sotagliflozin, a dual sodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT)1/SGLT2 inhibitor, is currently approved in Europe as an adjunct to optimal insulin therapy in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and a body mass index (BMI) ≥ 27 kg/m2 . In this post hoc analysis, efficacy at 24 weeks and safety at 52 weeks from pooled phase 3 clinical trials were evaluated in patients with baseline BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2 . Sotagliflozin 200 mg and 400 mg added to insulin reduced glycated haemoglobin level and increased time in range assessed by continuous glucose monitoring versus placebo and also reduced body weight and systolic blood pressure. Differences in efficacy endpoints between sotagliflozin and placebo tended to be greater among patients with BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2 compared to those with baseline BMI < 27 kg/m2 . Consistent with published results for the entire population, fewer severe hypoglycaemia and documented hypoglycaemia ≤3.1 mmol/L events and a higher incidence of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred with sotagliflozin versus placebo in patients with BMI ≥ 27 kg/m2 . Sotagliflozin as an adjunct to optimized insulin therapy in overweight/obese patients with T1D addressed some unmet needs and may help achieve optimal glycaemic control, mitigating weight gain without increasing hypoglycaemia risk in this high-risk population.

Demographic characteristics and acute complications among adults with type 1 diabetes: Comparison of two multicentre databases from Germany and the United States.

BACKGROUND: Studies on acute complications in adult T1D were previously reported from the United States (U.S.) and from Germany. The aim was to compare demographic characteristics and patterns of severe hypoglycaemia (SH) and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) between Germany and the U.S. METHODS: Descriptive comparison on individuals aged ≥18 years, with T1D duration ≥2 years were made between the German diabetes-patient registry (DPV) and the U.S. electronic-health-record database (T1PCO). Individuals in both databases were divided into patients with haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <7% and HbA1c ≥7%. RESULTS: 5190 (DPV) and 31,430 individuals (T1PCO) fulfilled the inclusion criteria. DPV patients were younger, more often male and had lower body-mass index. In both databases, more males than females had HbA1c <7%. Individuals had higher HbA1c in T1PCO compared to DPV. The relationship between HbA1c and DKA was similar in both databases. SH revealed a U-shaped curve in T1PCO, but no clear pattern was present in DPV. SH events increased with higher age in DPV, but not in T1PCO. CONCLUSION: Patterns of SH differ between Germany and U.S. Differences in capture of SH among the databases cannot be excluded, but differences in health care including patient education and level of care by specialists are likely.

Comparison of Second-Generation Basal Insulin Analogs: A Review of the Evidence from Continuous Glucose Monitoring.

Many people with insulin-treated diabetes continue to experience inadequate glycemic control and a high incidence of hypoglycemic events, despite improvements in therapeutic strategies. While glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) is currently recognized as the gold-standard for assessing glycemic control, the measure reflects mean blood glucose levels over a period of time, does not inform on acute glycemic deviations, and can be unreliable in certain populations. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) facilitates the acquisition of blood glucose data around the clock and, importantly, predicts and/or captures acute hyper- and hypoglycemic episodes. In light of the recent publication of the Time in Range (TIR) International Consensus Group report on key CGM metrics, we performed a review of current CGM evidence for second-generation basal insulins in both people with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. The identified studies highlight the varied CGM-related metrics used to assess basal insulins, which complicate comparisons. Furthermore, all studies had small sample sizes and typically were of short duration, which may account for the lack of statistically significant between-treatment differences observed. Differences were seen in the titration approaches used and the settings in which participants were observed. These results highlight the need for further studies of second-generation basal insulin analogs that are designed to capture the standard metrics proposed by the TIR consensus group, with additional consideration given to sample size and study duration.

Effect of dapagliflozin as an adjunct to insulin over 52 weeks in individuals with type 1 diabetes: post-hoc renal analysis of the DEPICT randomised controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: The DEPICT-1 and DEPICT-2 studies showed that dapagliflozin as an adjunct to insulin in individuals with inadequately controlled type 1 diabetes improved glycaemic control and bodyweight, without increase in risk of hypoglycaemia. We aimed to determine the effect of dapagliflozin on urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) using pooled data from the DEPICT studies. METHODS: In this post-hoc analysis, we used data pooled from both DEPICT studies (DEPICT-1 ran from Nov 11, 2014, to Aug 25, 2017; DEPICT-2 ran from July 8, 2015, to April 18, 2018), in which participants were aged 18-75 years, with inadequately controlled type 1 diabetes and with a baseline UACR of at least 30 mg/g. In the DEPICT studies, participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to receive dapagliflozin (5 mg or 10 mg) or placebo all plus insulin, for 24 weeks, with a 28-week long-term extension (ie, 52 weeks in total). In this post-hoc analysis, we assessed the percentage change from baseline in UACR and in eGFR, up to 52 weeks. UACR, eGFR, and safety were assessed in all eligible participants who had received at least one dose of study drug. HbA1c, bodyweight, and systolic blood pressure were assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug during the first 24-week period, and who had a baseline and any post-baseline assessment for that parameter. The DEPICT trials were registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02268214 (DEPICT-1), NCT02460978 (DEPICT-2), and are now complete. RESULTS: 251 participants with albuminuria at baseline were included in this post-hoc analysis; of whom 80 (32%) had been randomly assigned to dapagliflozin 5 mg, 84 (33%) to dapagliflozin 10 mg, and 87 (35%) to placebo. Compared with placebo, treatment with both dapagliflozin doses improved UACR over 52 weeks. At week 52, mean difference in change from baseline versus placebo in UACR was -13·3% (95% CI -37·2 to 19·8) for dapagliflozin 5 mg and -31·1% (-49·9 to -5·2) for dapagliflozin 10 mg. No notable change from baseline was seen in eGFR, with a mean difference in change from baseline versus placebo of 3·27 mL/min per 1·73 m2 (95% CI -0·92 to 7·45) for dapagliflozin 5 mg and 2·12 mL/min per 1·73 m2 (-2·03 to 6·27) for dapagliflozin 10 mg. Similar proportions of participants in each treatment group had adverse events and serious adverse events, including hypoglycaemia and diabetic ketoacidosis; no new safety signals were identified in this population. INTERPRETATION: Treatment with dapagliflozin resulted in UACR reduction, which might provide renoprotective benefits in individuals with type 1 diabetes and albuminuria. Dedicated prospective studies are needed to confirm these findings as prespecified endpoints. FUNDING: AstraZeneca.

Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Are Willing to Do More to Overcome Therapeutic Inertia: Results From a Double-Blind Survey.

We performed a survey of 305 patients with type 2 diabetes receiving basal insulin and 240 physicians to measure key contrasts and similarities in patients' preferences and providers' beliefs and perceptions regarding insulin use. Many patients reported being more frustrated with their lack of treatment progress than physicians were aware of. Patients were also more likely to say they would do more than their physicians believed they would to better manage their diabetes. Identifying priorities and setting clear goals and timelines for achieving glycemic control could provide an opportunity to address these differences and reduce patients' frustration.

Differences between patients with type 1 diabetes with optimal and suboptimal glycaemic control: A real-world study of more than 30 000 patients in a US electronic health record database.

AIMS: To use electronic health record data from real-world clinical practice to assess demographics, clinical characteristics and disease burden of adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D) in the United States. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study of adults with T1D for ≥24 months at their first visit with a T1D diagnosis code ("index date") between July 2014 and June 2016 in the Optum Humedica database. Demographic characteristics, acute complications (severe hypoglycaemia [SH], diabetic ketoacidosis [DKA]), microvascular complications, cardiovascular (CV) events and health care resource utilization during the 12 months before the index date ("baseline period") were compared between patients with optimal versus suboptimal glycaemic control (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] <7.0% vs. ≥7.0% [53 mmol/mol]) at the closest measurement to the index date. RESULTS: Of 31 430 adults with T1D, 79.9% had suboptimal glycaemic control (mean HbA1c 8.8% [73 mmol/mol]). These patients were more likely to be younger, African American, uninsured or on Medicaid, obese, smokers, have uncontrolled hypertension and have depression. Despite worse glycaemic control and increased CV risk factors of uncontrolled hypertension, obesity and smoking, rates of coronary heart disease and stroke were not higher in these patients. Patients with suboptimal glycaemic control also experienced more diabetes complications (including SH, DKA and microvascular disease) and utilized more emergency care, with more emergency department visits and inpatient stays. CONCLUSION: This real-world study of >30 000 adults with T1D showed that individuals with suboptimal versus optimal glycaemic control differed significantly in terms of health care coverage, comorbidities, diabetes-related complications, health care utilization and CV risk factors. However, suboptimal control was not associated with increased risk of CV outcomes.

Persistence with Basal-Bolus Insulin Therapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Effect on Clinical and Economic Outcomes: A Retrospective Claims Database Study.

BACKGROUND: Persistence with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) may be challenging for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). However, limited information is available regarding the effect of persistence with MDI on outcomes. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate persistence with basal and bolus insulin therapy and assess its relationship with clinical and economic outcomes in a real-world setting. METHODS: This retrospective matched cohort study used 2012-2015 data from multiple U.S. commercial health plans (IBM MarketScan). Patients with T2DM aged 18-64 years with ≥ 2 basal and ≥ 2 bolus insulin claims during a 12-month period were eligible for inclusion if they had 18 months of continuous health plan enrollment (6-month baseline and 12-month post-index). Persistence during 12 months post-index was defined using 2 methods: (a) method 1, ≤ 90-day gaps in both basal and bolus insulin claims and (b) method 2, ≥ 1 basal and ≥ 1 bolus insulin claim every quarter (every 90 days) for 4 consecutive quarters after index bolus claim. Propensity score matching was used to match persistent and nonpersistent method 2 cohorts. Mean per-patient all-cause and diabetes-related medical costs (2015 U.S. dollars, excluding outpatient drugs) and health care resource use (HCRU) were calculated. For patients with hemoglobin A1c (A1c) values during baseline and post-index months 10-12, treatment success was defined as (a) A1c decrease from baseline of ≥ 1% and/or (b) baseline A1c ≥ 7% with post-index A1c < 7%. Baseline characteristics of matched cohorts were compared using standardized mean differences (SMDs). Outcome variables were compared using t-tests, chi-square tests, and generalized linear models. RESULTS: Characteristics of 12,882 eligible patients and 12-month persistence rates were similar as defined by method 1 (22.4%) and method 2 (21.1%). After matching, the method 2 cohorts included 2,723 and 8,169 persistent and nonpersistent patients, respectively, with well-balanced baseline characteristics (mean age 53 years; 58% men; all SMDs < 0.1). All-cause annual medical costs were lower for the persistent cohort (mean $13,499 vs. $17,362; P < 0.0001), as were annual diabetes-related costs (mean $6,392 vs. $8,376; P < 0.0001). In persistent versus nonpersistent cohorts, 11% versus 15% of patients, respectively, experienced ≥ 1 hospitalization; 21% versus 24%, respectively, had ≥ 1 ED visit; 9% versus 12%, respectively, experienced ≥ 1 diabetes-related hospitalization; and 13% versus 15%, respectively, had ≥ 1 diabetes-related ED visit (P ≤ 0.005 for all). Mean baseline A1c was similar in persistent and nonpersistent cohorts (9.7% vs. 9.6%, respectively; P = 0.63). Persistence with MDI was associated with greater mean reduction in A1c (-1.3% vs. -0.8%, respectively; P = 0.006) and greater percentages of patients achieving treatment success (55% vs. 39%, respectively, for nonpersistent; P = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: Poor persistence with basal-bolus insulin therapy over 12 months of follow-up was prevalent and was associated with greater medical costs, greater HCRU, and poorer glycemic control than for patients who were persistent. Interventions are needed to improve persistence with insulin therapy and aid patients with T2DM to achieve glycemic control. DISCLOSURES: Funding for this study was provided by Becton, Dickinson and Company (BD). All authors except Edelman are employees and stockholders of BD. Edelman reports board membership at Senseonics and participation in advisory board/speakers bureau at Lilly USA, MannKind, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi-Aventis U.S., Merck, and AstraZeneca, all unrelated to this study. A poster for this study was presented at the AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting 2018; April 23-26, 2018; Boston MA.