ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Limited real-world data on the benefits and risks associated with 3 and 4.5 mg doses of dulaglutide currently exists, making it difficult to determine the impact of dose titration for patients currently managed with dulaglutide 1.5 mg weekly. OBJECTIVE: To determine the impact of dulaglutide 3 and 4.5 mg doses on weight and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), in clinical practice. METHODS: Retrospective, observational study of adult T2DM patients receiving dulaglutide 3 or 4.5 mg weekly within a large, university-affiliated, primary care network. The primary outcome was change in weight and HbA1c from baseline to 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes included incremental changes in weight and HbA1c, and describing trends related to dose reductions. RESULTS: Ninety-five patients were included, 62 in the dulaglutide 3 mg group and 33 in the dulaglutide 4.5 mg group. After 24 weeks, the mean changes in weight and HbA1c from baseline were -1.8 kg (P < 0.01) and -0.4% (P < 0.01) in the 3 mg group, and -4.2 kg (P < 0.01) and -0.4% (P = 0.119) in the 4.5 mg group. Incremental change in weight and HbA1c among patients who were titrated from dulaglutide 3 to 4.5 mg weekly were -2.6 kg (P < 0.01) and -0.2% (P = 0.04), respectively. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: Titration from dulaglutide 1.5 to 3 mg resulted in significant reductions in weight and HbA1c after 24 weeks. Additional, statistically significant, reductions in weight and HbA1c were seen when patients were further titrated to dulaglutide 4.5 mg weekly.
ABSTRACT
Collaborative care models incorporating pharmacists have been shown to improve quality of care for patients with hypertension and/or diabetes. Little is known about how to integrate such services outside of clinical trials. The authors implemented a 22-month observational study to evaluate pharmacy collaborative care for hypertension and diabetes in a safety net medical home that incorporated population risk stratification, clinical decision support, and medication dose adjustment protocols. Patients in the pharmacy group saw their primary care provider (PCP) more often and had higher baseline systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and A1c levels compared to patients who only received care from their PCPs. There were no significant differences in the proportion of patients achieving treatment goals (SBP <140, DBP <90; A1c < 8) or the magnitude of change in BP or A1c among patients who underwent collaborative care versus those who did not. Age, race, and number of PCP encounters were associated with BP and A1c trends. The median time to achieve disease control was longer in the pharmacy group. Although 70% of all patients with poorly controlled hypertension achieved treatment goals within 7 months, less than 50% of patients with poorly controlled diabetes achieved A1c < 8 within 15 months, suggesting that diabetes was harder to manage overall. Contextual factors that facilitated or hindered practice redesign included organizational culture, health information technology and related workflows, and pharmacy caseload optimization. Future studies should further examine implementation strategies that work best in specific settings to optimize the benefits of team-based care with clinical pharmacists.
