Glucose-lowering medication

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:2型糖尿病(T2DM)越来越多地被诊断为老年人。我们的目标是评估不同降糖药物在这一特定人群中的优势和潜在缺陷。
    方法:进行了网络荟萃分析,以确定随机对照试验,该试验检查了年龄≥65岁的T2DM成人以患者为中心的结局。我们搜索了PubMed,科克伦中部,和Embase至2023年9月23日。使用CochraneRoB2.0工具评估合格研究的质量。
    结果:共纳入22项试验,涉及41654名参与者,掺入钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白-2(SGLT2)抑制剂,胰高血糖素样肽-1受体激动剂(GLP-1RAs),二肽基肽酶-4(DPP-4)抑制剂,二甲双胍,磺酰脲类(SU)和阿卡波糖。我们的研究结果表明,GLP-1RA可降低主要不良心血管事件的风险(风险比[RR],0.83;95%置信区间[CI],0.71至0.97)和体重(平均差[MD],-3.87千克;95%CI,-5.54至-2.21)。SGLT2抑制剂可预防心力衰竭住院(RR,0.66;95%CI,0.57至0.77),肾脏综合结局(RR,0.69;95%CI,0.53至0.89),并减轻体重(MD,-1.85千克;95%CI,-2.42至-1.27)。SU治疗会增加任何低血糖的风险(RR,4.19;95%CI,3.52至4.99)和严重低血糖(RR,7.06;95%CI,3.03至16.43)。GLP-1RA,SGLT2抑制剂,二甲双胍,SU和DPP-4抑制剂可有效降低血糖参数。值得注意的是,在大多数情况下,随着年龄的增加,所需的治疗次数减少。
    结论:对于老年糖尿病患者,应优先选择效益大于风险的新型降糖药物。
    BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is increasingly being diagnosed in older adults. Our objective is to assess the advantages and potential drawbacks of different glucose-lowering medications in this specific population.
    METHODS: A network meta-analysis was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials that examined patient-centered outcomes in adults aged ≥65 years with T2DM. We searched PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Embase up to September 23, 2023. Quality of eligible studies were assessed using the Cochrane RoB 2.0 tool.
    RESULTS: A total of 22 trials that involved 41 654 participants were included, incorporating sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, metformin, sulfonylureas (SU) and acarbose. Our findings reveal that GLP-1RAs reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (risk ratio [RR], 0.83; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.71 to 0.97) and body weight (mean difference [MD], -3.87 kg; 95% CI, -5.54 to -2.21). SGLT2 inhibitors prevent hospitalization for heart failure (RR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.77), renal composite outcome (RR, 0.69; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.89), and reduce body weights (MD, -1.85 kg; 95% CI, -2.42 to -1.27). SU treatment increases the risk of any hypoglycaemia (RR, 4.19; 95% CI, 3.52 to 4.99) and severe hypoglycaemia (RR, 7.06; 95% CI, 3.03 to 16.43). GLP-1RAs, SGLT2 inhibitors, metformin, SU and DPP-4 inhibitors are effective in reducing glycaemic parameters. Notably, the number of treatments needed decreases in most cases as age increases.
    CONCLUSIONS: Novel glucose-lowering medications with benefits that outweigh risks should be prioritized for older patients with diabetes.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    复发性同种异体移植脂肪变性发生在三分之一的移植肝脏中。胰高血糖素样肽-1受体激动剂(GLP1RA)和2型钠-葡萄糖协同转运蛋白(SGLT2)抑制剂等抗糖尿病药物可有效治疗普通人群中的肥胖和肝性脂肪变性;然而,有有限的证据支持它们在同种异体脂肪变性中的应用。我们的目的是评估它们对脂肪变性的影响,体重,和我们机构肝移植受者的血糖控制。
    在这项目前正在使用GLP1RA或SGLT2抑制剂(2015-2022年移植)的肝移植受者的单中心回顾性队列研究中,我们比较了用药前和随访时的临床和放射学数据.使用Wilcoxon符号秩检验比较差异。
    37名肝移植受者正在服用这些药物。糖尿病是最常见的适应症(n=33),其次是肥胖(n=4)。中位随访时间为427天(301,798天)。在有脂肪变性的患者中(n=21),5例脂肪变性改善,4例恶化,1例保持不变,11例由于缺乏成像前后的可比性,无法评估变化.平均体重减轻3.2kg(p<0.001),BMI降低1.2kg/m2(p<0.001)。血红蛋白A1c下降0.6mmol/mol(p=0.0014),胰岛素需求减少7单位/天(p=0.02),其他抗糖尿病药物没有变化。
    GLP1RA和SGLT-2抑制剂在移植患者中耐受,并导致体重减轻和更好的血糖控制。它们是治疗复发性或从头肝脏同种异体脂肪变性的有前途的药物,但需要进一步的研究来评估肝移植受者的长期结局.
    UNASSIGNED: Recurrent allograft steatosis occurs in one-third of transplanted livers. Antidiabetic agents like glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) and sodium-glucose cotransporter type-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are effective in the management of obesity and hepatic steatosis in the general population; however, there is limited evidence supporting their use in allograft steatosis. We aimed to evaluate their effects on steatosis, body weight, and glycemic control in liver transplant recipients at our institution.
    UNASSIGNED: In this single-center retrospective cohort study of liver transplant recipients currently on a GLP1RA or SGLT2 inhibitor (transplanted 2015-2022), we compared clinical and radiological data before medication use and at follow-up. Differences were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test.
    UNASSIGNED: Thirty-seven liver transplant recipients were taking the agents. Diabetes was the most common indication (n = 33) followed by obesity (n = 4). Median follow up was 427 days (301,798). Among those with documented steatosis (n = 21), steatosis improved in 5, worsened in 4, remained unchanged in 1, and change could not be evaluated in 11 due to lack of comparable pre and post imaging. Average weight loss was 3.2 kg (p < 0.001) and BMI decreased by 1.2 kg/m2 (p < 0.001). Hemoglobin A1c decreased by 0.6 mmol/mol (p = 0.0014), insulin requirement reduced by 7 units/day (p = 0.02), and there was no change in additional antidiabetic medications.
    UNASSIGNED: GLP1RA and SGLT-2 inhibitors are tolerated in transplant patients and result in weight loss and better glycemic control. They are promising agents to treat recurrent or de-novo liver allograft steatosis, but further research is needed to evaluate long-term outcomes in liver transplant recipients.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:本研究的目的是评估定期使用5天禁食模拟饮食(FMD)计划作为2型糖尿病患者常规护理的辅助手段对代谢控制的影响。
    方法:在这个随机的,控制,评估者盲法试验,使用二甲双胍作为血糖控制的唯一降糖药物和/或饮食的2型糖尿病患者被随机分配接受每月5天的FMD周期,作为其全科医生常规治疗的辅助治疗或仅接受常规治疗.主要结果是12个月后降糖药物的变化(通过药物效果评分反映)和HbA1c水平。此外,将个体参与者的降糖药物使用和/或HbA1c水平的变化结合起来,以产生临床相关的结果测量(“血糖管理”),被归类为改进,随访1年后稳定或恶化。还检查了几个次要结果指标,包括体重的变化。
    结果:100名2型糖尿病患者,年龄18-75岁,BMI≥27kg/m2,随机分为FMD组(n=51)或对照组(n=49)。八名FMD参与者和十名对照参与者失去了随访。意向治疗分析,使用线性混合模型,显示药物效果评分的校正估计治疗效果(-0.3;95%CI-0.4,-0.2;p<0.001),12个月时的HbA1c(-3.2mmol/mol;95%CI-6.2,-0.2和-0.3%;95%CI-0.6,-0.0;p=0.04)和体重(-3.6kg;95%CI-5.2,-2.1;p<0.001)。53%的使用FMD的参与者与8%的对照参与者的血糖管理有所改善。保持稳定在23%和33%,分别为23%和59%(p<0.001)。
    结论:在使用二甲双胍作为唯一降糖药物和/或饮食控制血糖的2型糖尿病患者的常规初级保健中整合每月口蹄疫计划可减少对降糖药物的需求。改善HbA1c,尽管药物使用减少,在常规临床实践中似乎是安全的。
    背景:ClinicalTrials.govNCT03811587资助:该项目由Health〜Holland共同资助,顶级行业生命科学与健康,荷兰糖尿病基金会和L-Nutra。
    OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact on metabolic control of periodic use of a 5-day fasting-mimicking diet (FMD) programme as an adjunct to usual care in people with type 2 diabetes under regular primary care surveillance.
    METHODS: In this randomised, controlled, assessor-blinded trial, people with type 2 diabetes using metformin as the only glucose-lowering drug and/or diet for glycaemic control were randomised to receive 5-day cycles of an FMD monthly as an adjunct to regular care by their general practitioner or to receive regular care only. The primary outcomes were changes in glucose-lowering medication (as reflected by the medication effect score) and HbA1c levels after 12 months. Moreover, changes in use of glucose-lowering medication and/or HbA1c levels in individual participants were combined to yield a clinically relevant outcome measure (\'glycaemic management\'), which was categorised as improved, stable or deteriorated after 1 year of follow-up. Several secondary outcome measures were also examined, including changes in body weight.
    RESULTS: One hundred individuals with type 2 diabetes, age 18-75 years, BMI ≥27 kg/m2, were randomised to the FMD group (n=51) or the control group (n=49). Eight FMD participants and ten control participants were lost to follow-up. Intention-to-treat analyses, using linear mixed models, revealed adjusted estimated treatment effects for the medication effect score (-0.3; 95% CI -0.4, -0.2; p<0.001), HbA1c (-3.2 mmol/mol; 95% CI -6.2, -0.2 and -0.3%; 95% CI -0.6, -0.0; p=0.04) and body weight (-3.6 kg; 95% CI -5.2, -2.1; p<0.001) at 12 months. Glycaemic management improved in 53% of participants using FMD vs 8% of control participants, remained stable in 23% vs 33%, and deteriorated in 23% vs 59% (p<0.001).
    CONCLUSIONS: Integration of a monthly FMD programme in regular primary care for people with type 2 diabetes who use metformin as the only glucose-lowering drug and/or diet for glycaemic control reduces the need for glucose-lowering medication, improves HbA1c despite the reduction in medication use, and appears to be safe in routine clinical practice.
    BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03811587 FUNDING: The project was co-funded by Health~Holland, Top Sector Life Sciences & Health, the Dutch Diabetes Foundation and L-Nutra.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    背景:真实世界的数据提供了关于药物在临床实践中如何发挥作用的见解。PioneerREALSwitzerland研究旨在了解口服司马鲁肽治疗成人2型糖尿病(T2D)的临床结果。
    方法:Pioneer真正的瑞士是一个34-44周,多中心,prospective,非干预性,在常规临床实践中开始口服司马鲁肽的T2D未接受可注射降糖药的成人的单臂研究。主要终点是糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c)从基线(BL)到研究结束(EOS)的变化;次要终点包括从BL到EOS的体重(BW)变化以及达到HbA1c<7.0%和复合终点HbA1c降低≥1%-点,BW降低≥3%或≥5%EOS。在接受≥1剂口服司马鲁肽的参与者中评估安全性。
    结果:在185名参与者中(女性/男性,n=67/118)开始口服司马鲁肽,168人(90.8%)完成了研究,143人(77.3%)仍在EOS口服司马鲁肽治疗。在BL,参与者的平均年龄为62岁,糖尿病病程6.4年,HbA1c为7.7%,体重为95.6kg,体重指数为33.2kg/m2;56.2%的参与者正在接受降糖药物。HbA1c(估计变化-0.91%;95%置信区间[CI]-1.10,-0.71;p<0.0001)和BW(估计变化-4.85%;95%CI-5.70,-4.00;p<0.0001)显著下降。总的来说,65名(35.1%)参与者报告了139起不良事件(AE);大多数为轻度或中度。最常见的不良事件是胃肠道疾病(27.0%);20名(10.8%)参与者中的31种不良事件导致口服司马鲁肽停药。报告了6种严重的不良事件;所有不良事件均被认为不太可能与口服司马鲁肽有关。
    结论:在瑞士口服司美鲁肽治疗的患有T2D的人在临床上实现了HbA1c和BW的显著降低,没有新的安全信号.
    背景:ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT04537624。本文提供了图形摘要。
    BACKGROUND: Real-world data provide insight into how medications perform in clinical practice. The PIONEER REAL Switzerland study aimed to understand clinical outcomes with oral semaglutide in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).
    METHODS: PIONEER REAL Switzerland was a 34-44-week, multicentre, prospective, non-interventional, single-arm study of adults with T2D naïve to injectable glucose-lowering medication who were initiated on oral semaglutide in routine clinical practice. The primary endpoint was change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline (BL) to end of study (EOS); secondary endpoints included change in body weight (BW) from BL to EOS and the proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 7.0% and the composite endpoints HbA1c reduction ≥ 1%-points with BW reduction ≥ 3% or ≥ 5% at EOS. Safety was assessed in participants who received ≥ 1 dose of oral semaglutide.
    RESULTS: Of the 185 participants (female/male, n = 67/118) initiating oral semaglutide, 168 (90.8%) completed the study and 143 (77.3%) remained on treatment with oral semaglutide at EOS. At BL, participants had a mean age of 62 years, diabetes duration of 6.4 years, HbA1c of 7.7%, BW of 95.6 kg and body mass index of 33.2 kg/m2; 56.2% of participants were receiving glucose-lowering medications. Significant reductions were observed for HbA1c (estimated change - 0.91%; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 1.10, - 0.71; p < 0.0001) and BW (estimated change - 4.85%; 95% CI - 5.70, - 4.00; p < 0.0001). In total, 139 adverse events (AEs) were reported in 65 (35.1%) participants; most were mild or moderate. The most frequent AEs were gastrointestinal disorders (27.0%); 31 AEs in 20 (10.8%) participants led to discontinuation of oral semaglutide. Six serious AEs were reported; all were considered unlikely to be related to oral semaglutide.
    CONCLUSIONS: People living with T2D treated with oral semaglutide in Switzerland achieved clinically significant reductions in HbA1c and BW, with no new safety signals.
    BACKGROUND: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT04537624. A graphical abstract is available for this article.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Pubmed)

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    目的:探讨2型糖尿病(T2D)的影响,血糖控制和降糖药物的使用对COVID-19住院患者临床结局的影响。
    方法:对于在丹麦首都地区(2020年3月1日至2021年12月1日)住院并确诊为COVID-19的所有患者,我们提取了死亡率数据,入住重症监护病房(ICU),人口统计,合并症,电子健康记录系统的药物使用和实验室检查。我们使用Cox比例风险模型对T2D患者和无糖尿病患者进行了比较。结果是30天死亡率和入住ICU。对于T2D患者,我们还分析了基线血红蛋白A1c(HbA1c)水平和特定降糖药物的使用与结局的相关性.
    结果:总计,对4430例患者进行了分析,1236与T2D和2194无糖尿病。30天的总死亡率为19%(n=850)和10%(n=421)进入ICU。粗略分析显示,患有T2D的患者死亡率增加[风险比(HR)1.37;95%CI1.19-1.58]和ICU入院风险增加(HR1.28;95%CI1.04-1.57)。当针对可用的混杂因素进行调整时,死亡率(校正后HR1.13;95%CI0.95~1.33)和ICU入住风险(校正后HR1.01;95%CI0.79~1.29)均降低了这一差异.基线血红蛋白A1c和特定降糖药物的使用均与结果无显著相关。
    结论:在因COVID-19住院的患者中,T2D患者的死亡和ICU入住风险并不高,当调整混杂因素时。
    OBJECTIVE: To explore the impact of type 2 diabetes (T2D), glycaemic control and use of glucose-lowering medication on clinical outcomes in hospitalized patients with COVID-19.
    METHODS: For all patients admitted to a hospital in the Capital Region of Denmark (1 March 2020 to 1 December 2021) with confirmed COVID-19, we extracted data on mortality, admission to intensive care unit (ICU), demographics, comorbidities, medication use and laboratory tests from the electronic health record system. We compared patients with T2D to patients without diabetes using Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for available confounding variables. Outcomes were 30-day mortality and admission to an ICU. For patients with T2D, we also analysed the association of baseline haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels and use of specific glucose-lowering medications with the outcomes.
    RESULTS: In total, 4430 patients were analysed, 1236 with T2D and 2194 without diabetes. The overall 30-day mortality was 19% (n = 850) and 10% (n = 421) were admitted to an ICU. Crude analyses showed that patients with T2D both had increased mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 1.37; 95% CI 1.19-1.58] and increased risk of ICU admission (HR 1.28; 95% CI 1.04-1.57). When adjusted for available confounders, this discrepancy was attenuated for both mortality (adjusted HR 1.13; 95% CI 0.95-1.33) and risk of ICU admission (adjusted HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.79-1.29). Neither baseline haemoglobin A1c nor specific glucose-lowering medication use were significantly associated with the outcomes.
    CONCLUSIONS: Among those hospitalized for COVID-19, patients with T2D did not have a higher risk of death and ICU admission, when adjusting for confounders.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Multicenter Study
    背景:在多老年2型糖尿病(T2DM)患者中,降糖药(GLM)的强度应集中在达到适当水平的糖化血红蛋白(HbA1c),同时避免副作用.我们旨在确定2型糖尿病过度治疗的患者以及相关的危险因素。
    方法:在对多中心老年患者的多中心研究的二次分析中,我们评估了T2DM患者的HbA1c水平.患者年龄≥70岁,患有多种疾病(≥3种慢性诊断)和多种药物(≥5种慢性药物),就读于欧洲的四个大学医学中心(比利时,爱尔兰,荷兰,和瑞士)。我们将过度治疗定义为HbA1c<7.5%,除二甲双胍外,GLM≥1,正如在年龄和性别校正分析中明智选择和使用患病率比(PRs)评估过度治疗的危险因素所建议的那样.
    结果:在564名T2DM患者中(中位年龄78岁,39%的女性),平均±标准差HbA1c为7.2±1.2%.二甲双胍(患病率51%)是最常用的GLM,199(35%)患者被过度治疗。严重肾功能损害(PR1.36,1.21-1.53)和门诊医生(除全科医生[GP]外,即专家)或急诊科就诊(1-2次就诊的PR1.22,1.03-1.46,≥3次访视和无访视的PR1.35、1.19-1.54)与过度治疗相关。在多变量分析中,这些因素仍然与过度治疗有关。
    结论:在这项多国家老年T2DM患者的研究中,超过三分之一的人被过度治疗,突出了这个问题的高患病率。在选择GLM时,仔细平衡收益和风险可能会改善患者护理,特别是在严重肾功能损害等合并症的背景下,和频繁的非全科医生医疗保健接触。
    In multimorbid older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the intensity of glucose-lowering medication (GLM) should be focused on attaining a suitable level of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c ) while avoiding side effects. We aimed at identifying patients with overtreatment of T2DM as well as associated risk factors.
    In a secondary analysis of a multicenter study of multimorbid older patients, we evaluated HbA1c levels among patients with T2DM. Patients were aged ≥70 years, with multimorbidity (≥3 chronic diagnoses) and polypharmacy (≥5 chronic medications), enrolled in four university medical centers across Europe (Belgium, Ireland, Netherlands, and Switzerland). We defined overtreatment as HbA1c  < 7.5% with ≥1 GLM other than metformin, as suggested by Choosing Wisely and used prevalence ratios (PRs) to evaluate risk factors of overtreatment in age- and sex-adjusted analyses.
    Among the 564 patients with T2DM (median age 78 years, 39% women), mean ± standard deviation HbA1c was 7.2 ± 1.2%. Metformin (prevalence 51%) was the most frequently prescribed GLM and 199 (35%) patients were overtreated. The presence of severe renal impairment (PR 1.36, 1.21-1.53) and outpatient physician (other than general practitioner [GP], i.e. specialist) or emergency department visits (PR 1.22, 1.03-1.46 for 1-2 visits, and PR 1.35, 1.19-1.54 for ≥3 visits versus no visits) were associated with overtreatment. These factors remained associated with overtreatment in multivariable analyses.
    In this multicountry study of multimorbid older patients with T2DM, more than one third were overtreated, highlighting the high prevalence of this problem. Careful balancing of benefits and risks in the choice of GLM may improve patient care, especially in the context of comorbidities such as severe renal impairment, and frequent non-GP healthcare contacts.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Observational Study
    目的:确定长期护理(LTC)机构中2型糖尿病(T2DM)居民每年的降糖药物处方,并量化其每年的低血糖频率。
    方法:系列横断面研究,使用一个去识别的真实世界数据库,包括来自LTC设施的电子健康记录。
    方法:符合本研究条件的受试者年龄≥65岁,患有T2DM,并且在5个研究年(2016-2020年)中的任何一个在美国LTC机构中记录的住院时间≥100天。不包括接受姑息治疗或临终关怀的个人。
    方法:按照给药途径(口服或注射)和以往的药物类别,总结了每个日历年中每位患有T2DM的LTC居民的降糖药物的药物订单(处方)-处方(即,一次包括多个处方),总体和按年龄亚组分层,<3vs≥3合并症,和肥胖状况。我们计算了每年开过降糖药的患者的年度百分比,总体和药物类别,经历了≥1次低血糖事件。
    结果:从2016年到2020年,每年包括71,200至120,861名患有T2DM的LTC居民中,68%至73%(取决于年份)规定了≥1种降糖药物,包括59%至62%的口服药物和70%至71%的注射剂。二甲双胍是最常用的口服药物,其次是磺酰脲类和二肽基肽酶4抑制剂;基础加餐时胰岛素是最常用的处方注射方案.从2016年到2020年,总体和患者亚组的处方模式保持相对一致。在每个学习年度,有T2DM的LTC居民中有35%经历了1级低血糖(血糖≥54至<70mg/dL),包括10%至12%的仅处方口服药物和≥44%的处方注射剂。总的来说,24%至25%经历2级低血糖(葡萄糖浓度<54mg/dL)。
    结论:研究结果表明,对于患有T2DM的LTC居民,存在改善糖尿病管理的机会。
    To characterize prescribing of glucose-lowering medication annually and to quantify the annual frequency of hypoglycemia among residents in long-term care (LTC) facilities with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).
    Serial cross-sectional study using a deidentified real-world database comprising electronic health records from LTC facilities.
    Individuals eligible for this study were ≥65 years old with T2DM and recorded stay of ≥100 days at an LTC facility in the United States in any of 5 study years (2016-2020), excluding individuals receiving palliative or hospice care.
    Drug orders (prescriptions) for glucose-lowering medications for each LTC resident with T2DM in each calendar year were summarized by administration route (oral or injectable) and by drug class as ever-prescribed (ie, multiple prescriptions were included once), overall and stratified by age subgroup, <3 vs ≥3 comorbidities, and obesity status. We calculated the annual percentage of patients ever prescribed glucose-lowering medication each year, overall and by medication category, who experienced ≥1 hypoglycemic events.
    Among 71,200 to 120,861 LTC residents with T2DM included each year from 2016 to 2020, 68% to 73% (depending on the year) were prescribed ≥1 glucose-lowering medications, among them oral agents for 59% to 62% and injectable agents for 70% to 71%. Metformin was the most commonly prescribed oral agent, followed by sulfonylureas and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors; basal plus prandial insulin was the most commonly prescribed injectable regimen. Prescribing patterns remained relatively consistent from 2016 to 2020, both overall and by patient subgroup. During each study year, 35% of LTC residents with T2DM experienced level 1 hypoglycemia (glucose ≥54 to <70 mg/dL), including 10% to 12% of those prescribed only oral agents and ≥44% of those prescribed injectable agents. Overall, 24% to 25% experienced level 2 hypoglycemia (glucose concentration <54 mg/dL).
    Study findings suggest that opportunities exist for improving diabetes management for LTC residents with T2DM.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    To investigate changes in the pattern of drugs used to treat type 2 diabetes in Denmark from 2005 to 2021.
    A nationwide, population-based drug utilization study based on medical databases covering the Danish population was conducted. We assessed incident and prevalent use patterns among all 441 205 individuals initiating at least one non-insulin, glucose-lowering drug.
    The rate of new users of non-insulin, glucose-lowering drugs increased from 2005, peaked in 2011, decreased to stable levels during 2013 to 2019, then increased dramatically during 2020-2021. The prevalence of use increased from 2.1% (in 2005) to 5.0% (in 2021) of the entire adult population. In 2021, metformin comprised 39% of all glucose-lowering drug consumption, followed by insulin (17%), sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) (17%), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) (16%) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (7.5%). Overall, 56% of users were on monotherapy, 28% used dual therapy, while 13% and 2.8% used three and four drug classes, respectively. Both the intensity and diversity of therapies increased substantially over time, with 15 different treatment regimens each covering more than 1% of users in 2021. General practitioners prescribed 88% of all glucose-lowering drugs. Marked shifts towards GLP-1RA initiation by general practitioners and SGLT-2i initiation by specialists were observed, and changing user profiles suggested increasing use for non-diabetes indications.
    The rate of new users of non-insulin, glucose-lowering drugs has increased in recent years and the prevalence of glucose-lowering drug use increases steadily. Glucose-lowering drugs are mainly prescribed by general practitioners, and the intensity, diversity and indications of glucose-lowering treatment are increasing.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    In this narrative review, we have summarized the literature on fracture risk in T1DM and T2DM with a special focus on fracture site, time patterns, glucose-lowering drugs, and micro- and macrovascular complications.
    T1DM and T2DM were associated with an overall increased fracture risk, with preferent locations at the hip, vertebrae, humerus, and ankle in T1DM and at the hip, vertebrae, and likely humerus, distal forearm, and foot in T2DM. Fracture risk was higher with longer diabetes duration and the presence of micro- and macrovascular complications. In T2DM, fracture risk was higher with use of insulin, sulfonylurea, and thiazolidinediones and lower with metformin use. The increased fracture risk in T1DM and T2DM concerns specific fracture sites, and is higher in subjects with longer diabetes duration, vascular complications, and in T2DM with the use of specific glucose-lowering medication.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

    求助全文

  • 文章类型: Journal Article
    这项研究的目的是检查2型糖尿病(T2DM),使用降糖药物和子宫内膜癌(EC)的风险。
    方法:使用回顾性队列研究设计评估了立陶宛2型糖尿病女性的EC发病风险。在国家健康保险基金数据库中确定了在2000年1月1日至2012年12月31日之间注册的T2DM女性患者。从立陶宛癌症登记处确定了EC病例(ICD-10代码C54)。通过将T2DM患者中观察到的EC数量除以预期的EC数量来计算标准化发生率(SIR)。使用国家费率计算。
    结果:总共77,708名糖尿病妇女被纳入分析,并确定了995例EC。与普通人群相比,糖尿病女性的EC风险显着增加(SIR=1.69,95%CI1.59-1.80)。在T2DM诊断的年轻患者中发现最大的EC风险,随着年龄的增长,风险逐渐下降,但在所有年龄组中仍然显着增加。EC的风险随着糖尿病持续时间的增加而增加,并且在T2DM诊断后超过10年观察到最高的EC风险。在所有患者组中,通过降糖药物组合发现的EC风险明显高于普通人群的预期。在使用“仅口服”(不使用二甲双胍)(SIR=1.42,95%CI1.10-1.83)和“仅使用二甲双胍”(SIR=1.69,95%CI1.49-1.92)药物的糖尿病女性中,EC风险最低。在其余降糖药物类别中,观察到的EC风险增加了两倍。相比之下,仅使用胰岛素与更高的EC发生率风险无关(SIR=0.45,95%CI0.23-0.86);然而,风险估计是基于9例。
    结论:我们的研究表明,与普通人群相比,糖尿病女性的EC风险显著增加。在这项研究中,通过降糖药物组合在所有患者组中发现了显着更高的EC风险,只有胰岛素使用者除外。
    The aim of this study was to examine the association between type 2 diabetes (T2DM), use of glucose-lowering medications and endometrial cancer (EC) risk.
    METHODS: The risk of EC incidence among women with T2DM in Lithuania was assessed using a retrospective cohort study design. Female patients who were registered with T2DM between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2012 were identified in the National Health Insurance Fund database. EC cases (ICD-10 code C54) were identified from the Lithuanian Cancer Registry. Standardized incidence ratios (SIRs) were calculated by dividing the observed numbers of EC among patients with T2DM by the expected number of EC, calculated using national rates.
    RESULTS: A total of 77,708 diabetic women were included in the analysis, and 995 cases of EC were identified. A significantly increased EC risk in diabetic women was found as compared to the general population (SIR = 1.69, 95% CI 1.59-1.80). The greatest EC risk was found among younger patients at T2DM diagnosis, and the risk declined gradually with increasing age but persisted in being significantly increased among all age groups. The risk for EC increased with increasing duration of diabetes, and the highest EC risk was observed more than 10 years after T2DM diagnosis. A significantly higher EC risk than expected from the general population was found in all patient groups by glucose-lowering medication combinations. The lowest EC risk was observed in diabetic women who were users of \"oral only\" (without metformin) (SIR = 1.42, 95% CI 1.10-1.83) and \"metformin only\" (SIR = 1.69, 95% CI 1.49-1.92) medications. A two times greater EC risk was observed among the remaining glucose-lowering medication categories. In contrast, use of insulin only was not related to a higher EC incidence risk (SIR = 0.45, 95% CI 0.23-0.86); however, the risk estimation was based on nine cases.
    CONCLUSIONS: Our study shows a significantly increased EC risk in diabetic women as compared to the general population. In this study, a significantly higher EC risk was found in all patient groups by glucose-lowering medication combinations, except for insulin only users.
    导出

    更多引用

    收藏

    翻译标题摘要

    我要上传

       PDF(Sci-hub)

       PDF(Pubmed)

公众号