A comparative effectiveness study of degludec and insulin glargine 300 U/mL in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIMS: To compare the real-world effectiveness of insulin degludec (degludec) and glargine 300 units/mL (glargine U300) in insulin-naïve adult patients with type 2 diabetes in routine US clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: CONFIRM is a non-interventional comparative effectiveness study following US patients across the continuum of care, through electronic medical records from multiple health systems and integrated delivery networks. Propensity-score matching controlled for confounding. The primary endpoint, change in HbA1c from baseline to 180 days of follow-up, was estimated using a repeated-measure of covariance analysis with subject as random effect. Change in the rate of hypoglycaemic episodes (defined using International Classification of Diseases codes 9/10) and change in proportion of patients with hypoglycaemia were estimated using negative binomial and logistic regression, respectively. Time-to-discontinuation of the initial basal insulin/initiation with another prescribed basal insulin was analysed using a Cox Proportional Hazard model. RESULTS: Data concerning 4056 patients were analysed. After matching, baseline characteristics were comparable (n = 2028 in each group). After 180 days of follow-up, degludec was associated with a larger reduction in HbA1c (estimated treatment difference, -0.27%; P = 0.03), greater reductions in change in rate (rate ratio, 0.70; P < 0.05) and greater reductions in change in the likelihood of hypoglycaemia (odds ratio, 0.64; P < 0.01]) compared with glargine U300. In addition, patients treated with degludec were 27% less likely to discontinue treatment at follow-up compared with those treated with glargine U300 (hazard ratio, 0.73; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Significantly improved HbA1c, larger reductions in rates and likelihood of hypoglycaemia and lower risk of treatment discontinuation were demonstrated with degludec vs glargine U300.

A new integrated care pathway for ambulance attended severe hypoglycaemia in the East of England: The Eastern Academic Health Science Network (EAHSN) model.

AIMS: We developed a new clinical integrated pathway linking a regional Ambulance Trust with a severe hypoglycaemia (SH) prevention team. We present clinical data from the first 2000 emergency calls taken through this new clinical pathway in the East of England. METHODS: SH patients attended by Ambulance crew receive written information on SH avoidance, and are contacted for further education through a new regional SH prevention team. All patients are contacted unless they actively decline. RESULTS: Median age (IQR) was 67 (50-80) years, 23.6% of calls were for patients over 80years old, and patients more than 90years old were more common than 20-25year olds in this population. Most calls were for patients (84.9%) who were insulin treated, even those over 80years (75%). One - third of patients attended after a call were unconscious on attendance. 5.6% of patients in this call population had 3 or more ambulance call outs, and they generated 17.6% of all calls. In total, 728 episodes (36.4%) were repeat calls. Insulin related events were clinically more severe than oral hypoglycaemic related events. Patients conveyed to hospitals (13.8%) were significantly older, with poorer recovery in biochemical hypoglycaemia after ambulance crew attendance. Only 19 (1%) opted out of further contact. Patients were contacted by the SH prevention team after a median 3 (0-6) days. The most common patient self - reported cause for their SH episode was related to perceived errors in insulin management (31.4%). CONCLUSIONS: This new clinical service is simple, acceptable to patients, and a translatable model for prevention of recurrent SH in this largely elderly insulin treated SH population.