uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Durability of oral hypoglycemic agents in drug naïve patients with type 2 diabetes: report from the Swedish National Diabetes Register (NDR)
Show others and affiliations
2015 (English)In: BMJ open diabetes research & care, ISSN 2052-4897, Vol. 3, e000059Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the durability of monotherapy with different classes of oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) in drug naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in real life.

METHODS: Men and women with T2DM, who were new users of OHA monotherapy and registered in the Swedish National Diabetes Register July 2005-December 2011, were available (n=17 309) and followed for up to 5.5 years. Time to monotherapy failure, defined as discontinuation of continuous use with the initial agent, switch to a new agent, or add-on treatment of a second agent, was analyzed as a measure of durability. Baseline characteristics were balanced by propensity score matching 1:5 between groups of sulfonylurea (SU) versus metformin (n=4303) and meglitinide versus metformin (n=1308). HRs with 95% CIs were calculated using Cox regression models.

RESULTS: SU and meglitinide, as compared with metformin, were associated with increased risk of monotherapy failure (HR 1.74; 95% CI 1.56 to 1.94 and 1.66; 1.37 to 2.00 for SU and meglitinide, respectively). When broken down by type of monotherapy failure, SU and meglitinide were associated with an increased risk of add-on treatment of a second agent (HR 3.14; 95% CI 2.66 to 3.69 and 2.52; 1.89 to 3.37 for SU and meglitinide, respectively) and of switch to a new agent (HR 2.81; 95% CI 2.01 to 3.92 and 3.78; 2.25 to 6.32 for SU and meglitinide, respectively). The risk of discontinuation did not differ significantly between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS: In this nationwide observational study reflecting clinical practice, SU and meglitinide showed substantially increased risk of switch to a new agent or add on of a second agent compared with metformin. These results indicate superior glycemic durability with metformin compared with SU and also meglitinide in real life.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2015. Vol. 3, e000059
National Category
Endocrinology and Diabetes
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-268229DOI: 10.1136/bmjdrc-2014-000059PubMedID: 25815205OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-268229DiVA: diva2:876252
Available from: 2015-12-03 Created: 2015-12-03 Last updated: 2015-12-04Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Authority records BETA

Cederholm, JanZethelius, Björn

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Cederholm, JanZethelius, Björn
By organisation
Family Medicine and Preventive MedicineGeriatrics
Endocrinology and Diabetes

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 526 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association
  • vancouver
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf