Prototype of an evidence-based tool to aid individualized treatment for type 2 diabetes.

Data-driven tools are needed to inform individualized treatment decisions for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). To show how treatment might be individualized, an interactive outline tool was developed to predict treatment outcomes. Individualized predictions were generated for change in HbA1c and body weight after initiation of newer antidiabetes drugs recommended by current guidelines. These predictions were based on data from randomized controlled trials of glucose-lowering drugs. The data included patient demographics and clinical characteristics (sex, age, body mass index, weight, diabetes duration, HbA1c level, current diabetes treatment and renal function). Predicted outcomes were determined using prespecified statistical models from original trial protocols and estimated coefficients for selected baseline characteristics. This prototype illustrates how evidence-based individualized treatment might be facilitated in the clinic for people with T2D. Further and ongoing development is required to improve the tool's prognostic value, including the addition of disease co-morbidities and patient-orientated outcomes. Patient engagement and data-sharing by sponsors of clinical trials, as well as real-world evidence, are needed to provide reliable predicted outcomes to inform shared patient-physician decision-making.

Costs of diabetes complications: hospital-based care and absence from work for 392,200 people with type 2 diabetes and matched control participants in Sweden.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The risk of complications and medical consequences of type 2 diabetes are well known. Hospital costs have been identified as a key driver of total costs in studies of the economic burden of type 2 diabetes. Less evidence has been generated on the impact of individual diabetic complications on the overall societal burden. The objective of this study was to analyse costs of hospital-based healthcare (inpatient and outpatient care) and work absence related to individual macrovascular and microvascular complications of type 2 diabetes in Sweden in 2016. METHODS: Data for 2016 were retrieved from a Swedish national retrospective observational database cross-linking individual-level data for 1997-2016. The database contained information from population-based health, social insurance and socioeconomic registers for 392,200 people with type 2 diabetes and matched control participants (5:1). Presence of type 2 diabetes and of diabetes complications were derived using all years, 1997-2016. Costs of hospital-based care and of absence from work due to diabetes complications were estimated for the year 2016. Regression analysis was used for comparison with control participants to attribute absence from work to individual complications, and to account for joint presence of complications. RESULTS: Use of hospital care for complications was higher in type 2 diabetes compared with control participants in 2016: 26% vs 12% had ≥1 hospital contact; there were 86,104 vs 24,608 outpatient visits per 100,000 people; and there were 9894 vs 2546 inpatient admissions per 100,000 people (all p < 0.001). The corresponding total costs of hospital-based care for complications were €919 vs €232 per person (p < 0.001), and 74.7% of costs were then directly attributed to diabetes (€687 per person). Regression analyses distributed the costs of days absent from work across diabetes complications per se, basic type 2 diabetes effect and unattributed causes. Diabetes complications amounted to €1317 per person in 2016, accounting for possible complex interactions (25% of total costs of days absent). Key drivers of costs were the macrovascular complications angina pectoris, heart failure and stroke; and the microvascular complications eye diseases, including retinopathy, kidney disease and neuropathy. Early mortality in working ages cost an additional €579 per person and medications used in risk-factor treatment amounted to €418 per person. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The economic burden of complications in type 2 diabetes is substantial. Costs of absence from work in this study were found to be greater than of hospital-based care, highlighting the need for considering treatment consequences in a societal perspective in research and policy. Graphical abstract.

Days absent from work as a result of complications associated with type 2 diabetes: Evidence from 20 years of linked national registry data in Sweden.

AIMS: To analyse days absent from work related to individual microvascular, macrovascular and other complications of type 2 diabetes (T2D) and to identify key drivers of absence. MATERIALS AND METHODS: National health and socio-economic individual-level data were analysed for the years 1997 to 2016 for people with T2D, and age-, sex- and residential region-matched controls (5:1) using linkage to Swedish national administrative registers, based on personal identity numbers. Regression analyses accounting for individual-level clustering and education were estimated to obtain days absent by individual complications. Alternative analyses, for example, workforce indicator and age subgroups, were explored for robustness and comparison purposes. RESULTS: A total of 413 000 people with T2D aged <66 years, comprising 4.9 million person-years, was included. The crude proportion with any absence was higher among those with T2D compared to controls (47% vs. 26%) in the index year, and the median (IQR) number of days was higher (223 [77;359] vs. 196 [59;352]) if any absence. Regression analyses showed that complications per se were a key driver of days absent: stroke (+102 days); end-stage renal disease (+70 days); severe vision loss (+56 days); and angina pectoris, heart failure, and osteoarthritis (+53 days each). The alternative analyses showed similar levels of days absent and age subgroups differed in expected directions. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides evidence of the persisting impact on productivity from complications that supports continued efforts to reduce risk factors in T2D. Future studies on burden of disease and economic evaluations of new therapies and disease management may use this new set of complication-specific estimates to improve understanding of the value of reducing complications.

Effects of once-weekly semaglutide vs once-daily canagliflozin on body composition in type 2 diabetes: a substudy of the SUSTAIN 8 randomised controlled clinical trial.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Intra-abdominal or visceral obesity is associated with insulin resistance and an increased risk for cardiovascular disease. This study aimed to compare the effects of semaglutide 1.0 mg and canagliflozin 300 mg on body composition in a subset of participants from the SUSTAIN 8 Phase IIIB, randomised double-blind trial who underwent whole-body dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA) scanning. METHODS: Adults (age ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c 53-91 mmol/mol (7.0-10.5%), on a stable daily dose of metformin (≥1500 mg or maximum tolerated dose) and with an eGFR ≥60 ml min-1 [1.73 m]-2 were randomised 1:1 to semaglutide 1.0 mg once weekly and canagliflozin placebo once daily, or canagliflozin 300 mg once daily and semaglutide placebo once weekly. Body composition was assessed using whole-body DXA scans. The study participants and investigator remained blinded throughout the trial, and quality of DXA scans was evaluated in a blinded manner. Change from baseline to week 52 in total fat mass (kg) was the confirmatory efficacy endpoint. RESULTS: A subset of 178 participants (semaglutide, n = 88; canagliflozin, n = 90) underwent DXA scanning at screening and were randomised into the substudy. Of these, 114 (semaglutide, n = 53; canagliflozin, n = 61) participants had observed end-of-treatment data included in the confirmatory efficacy analysis. Of the 178 participants in the substudy, numerical improvements in body composition (including fat mass, lean mass and visceral fat mass) were observed after 52 weeks with both treatments. Total fat mass (baseline 33.2 kg) was reduced by 3.4 kg and 2.6 kg with semaglutide and canagliflozin, respectively (estimated treatment difference: -0.79 [95% CI -2.10, 0.51]). Although total lean mass (baseline 51.3 kg) was also reduced by 2.3 kg and 1.5 kg with semaglutide and canagliflozin, respectively (estimated treatment difference: -0.78 [-1.61, 0.04]), the proportion of lean mass (baseline 59.4%) increased by 1.2%- and 1.1%-point, respectively (estimated treatment difference 0.14 [-0.89, 1.17]). Changes in visceral fat mass and overall changes in body composition (assessed by the fat to lean mass ratio) were comparable between the two treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: In individuals with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes on stable-dose metformin therapy, the changes in body composition with semaglutide and canagliflozin were not significantly different. Although numerical improvements in body composition were observed following treatment in both treatment arms, the specific impact of both treatments on body composition in the absence of a placebo arm is speculative at this stage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03136484. FUNDING: This trial was supported by Novo Nordisk A/S, Denmark.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide versus daily canagliflozin as add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 8): a double-blind, phase 3b, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Existing guidelines for management of type 2 diabetes recommend a patient-centred approach to guide the choice of pharmacological agents. Although glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are increasingly used as second-line agents, direct comparisons between these treatments are insufficient. In the SUSTAIN 8 trial, we compared the efficacy and safety of semaglutide (a GLP-1 receptor agonist) with canagliflozin (an SGLT2 inhibitor) in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This was a double-blind, parallel-group, phase 3b, randomised controlled trial done at 111 centres in 11 countries. Eligible patients were at least 18 years old and had uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 7·0-10·5% [53-91 mmol/mol]) on stable daily metformin therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by use of an interactive web response system to subcutaneous semaglutide 1·0 mg once weekly or oral canagliflozin 300 mg once daily. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c, and the confirmatory secondary endpoint was change from baseline in bodyweight, both at week 52. The primary analysis population included all randomly assigned patients, using on-treatment data collected before initiation of rescue medication. The safety analysis was done on a population that included all patients exposed to at least one dose of trial product. The trial was powered for HbA1c and bodyweight superiority under reasonable assumptions. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03136484. FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2017, and Nov 16, 2018, 788 patients were randomly assigned to semaglutide 1·0 mg (394 patients) or canagliflozin 300 mg (394 patients). 739 patients completed the trial (367 in the semaglutide group and 372 in the canagliflozin group). From overall baseline mean, patients receiving semaglutide had significantly greater reductions in HbA1c and bodyweight than those receiving canagliflozin (HbA1c estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0·49 percentage points, 95% CI -0·65 to -0·33; -5·34 mmol/mol, 95% CI -7·10 to -3·57; p<0·0001; and bodyweight ETD -1·06 kg, 95% CI -1·76 to -0·36; p=0·0029). Gastrointestinal disorders, most commonly nausea, were the most frequently reported adverse events with semaglutide, occurring in 184 (47%) of 392 patients; whereas infections and infestations (defined using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities, version 21.0), most commonly urinary tract infections, occurred more frequently with canagliflozin, in 136 (35%) of 394 patients. Premature treatment discontinuation because of adverse events occurred in 38 (10%) of 392 patients with semaglutide and in 20 (5%) of 394 patients with canagliflozin. One fatal adverse event confirmed unlikely to be caused by treatment occurred in the semaglutide group. INTERPRETATION: Once-weekly semaglutide 1·0 mg was superior to daily canagliflozin 300 mg in reducing HbA1c and bodyweight in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on metformin therapy. These outcomes might guide treatment intensification choices. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Semaglutide once weekly as add-on to SGLT-2 inhibitor therapy in type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 9): a randomised, placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Semaglutide is a once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue for type 2 diabetes. Few clinical trials have reported on the concomitant use of GLP-1 receptor agonists with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of semaglutide when added to SGLT-2 inhibitor therapy in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes. METHODS: The SUSTAIN 9 double-blind, parallel-group trial was done at 61 centres in six countries (Austria, Canada, Japan, Norway, Russia, and the USA). Adults with type 2 diabetes and HbA1c 7·0-10·0% (53-86 mmol/mol), despite at least 90 days of treatment with an SGLT-2 inhibitor, were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive subcutaneous semaglutide 1·0 mg or volume-matched placebo once weekly for 30 weeks, after a dose-escalation schedule of 4 weeks of 0·25 mg semaglutide or placebo and 4 weeks of 0·5 mg semaglutide or placebo. Existing antidiabetic medications, including SGLT-2 inhibitor treatment, were continued for the duration of the trial. Rescue medication, defined as intensification of background antidiabetic treatment or the initiation of new glucose-lowering medications, could be given to patients meeting specific criteria at the discretion of the investigator. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline at week 30, assessed in the full analysis set (all patients randomly allocated to treatment) using on-treatment data collected before rescue medication was started. The confirmatory secondary outcome was change in bodyweight from baseline to week 30. Safety was also assessed in the safety analysis set (all patients who received at least one dose of treatment). The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03086330). FINDINGS: Between March 15, and Dec 4, 2017, 302 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive semaglutide 1·0 mg or placebo (full analysis set), of whom 301 received at least one dose of treatment (safety analysis set). One patient was assigned to semaglutide but was not treated (reason unknown). 294 (97·4%) patients completed the trial and 267 (88·4%) completed treatment. Baseline characteristics were generally comparable between groups. In addition to randomised medication and SGLT-2 inhibitor, 216 (71·5%) patients were taking metformin and 39 (12·9%) were taking sulphonylurea. Patients given semaglutide had greater reductions in HbA1c (estimated treatment difference -1·42% [95% CI -1·61 to -1·24]; -15·55 mmol/mol [-17·54 to -13·56]) and bodyweight (-3·81 kg [-4·70 to -2·93]) versus those randomised to placebo (both p<0·0001). 356 adverse events were reported by 104 (69·3%) patients in the semaglutide group, and 247 adverse events were reported by 91 (60·3%) patients in the placebo group. Gastrointestinal adverse events were most common and were reported in 56 (37·3%) patients in the semaglutide group and 20 (13·2%) in the placebo group. Serious adverse events occurred in seven (4·7%) patients in the semaglutide group and six (4·0%) in the placebo group. Severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemic events were reported in four patients on semaglutide (2·7%). 16 patients stopped treatment early because of an adverse event, 13 of whom were in the semaglutide group. There were no deaths during the trial. INTERPRETATION: Adding semaglutide to SGLT-2 inhibitor therapy significantly improves glycaemic control and reduces bodyweight in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes, and is generally well tolerated. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Impact on HbA1c and body weight of switching from other GLP-1 receptor agonists to semaglutide: A model-based approach.

AIMS: Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The impact of switching treatment from another GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) to semaglutide was investigated by analyses of exposure-response models. METHODS: HbA1c and body weight time-course models were developed, using up to 30 weeks of observations from four trials in the semaglutide phase 3 programme. Given the recommended dosing for each GLP-1RA, pharmacokinetic profiles were simulated based on published population pharmacokinetic models and exposure was adjusted by the relative potencies to ensure that model predictions matched the effects observed in clinical trials. After 26 weeks of simulated treatment with liraglutide, dulaglutide or exenatide extended-release, simulated semaglutide treatment was initiated 1 day after the last once-daily dose of liraglutide and 1 week after the last once-weekly doses of dulaglutide or exenatide extended-release. RESULTS: The potency-adjusted total effective GLP-1RA concentration increased after switching from another GLP-1RA to semaglutide and was associated with reductions ranging from ~0.3% to ~0.8%-points for HbA1c and from ~2% to ~4% for body weight with semaglutide 1.0 mg. Temporary slight deteriorations in HbA1c were observed after switching to semaglutide 0.25 mg from liraglutide 1.2/1.8 mg or dulaglutide 1.5 mg. CONCLUSIONS: Exposure-response modelling suggests that switching to semaglutide from liraglutide, dulaglutide or exenatide extended-release results in further reductions in HbA1c and body weight. Initial slight deterioration in outcome values when switching to semaglutide 0.25 mg could be avoided by initiating semaglutide treatment at a higher dose.

[Cardiac myxoma--a rare cause of cerebral embolism]. / Kardialt myksom--en sjaelden årsag til iskaemisk stroke.

Cardiac myxoma is the most common benign heart tumor. We report a case with multiple brain metastases, presumably due to tumor embolization. It is important to perform transthoracic echocardiography at a very early stage to exclude structural heart disease in patients with signs of multiple brain metastases. Though myxoma is a rare cause of cerebral embolism, detection of this tumor is relatively easy and surgical resection of myxoma is usually a permanent measure to prevent subsequent stroke.

[Outpatient treatment of deep-vein thrombosis]. / Ambulant behandling af dyb venetrombose.

INTRODUCTION: The treatment of deep-vein thrombosis (DVT) is increasingly managed in an outpatient setting. This is the first retrospective study of an outpatient treatment program for DVT patients in a Danish hospital. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Case records from all DVT patients treated at Frederikshavn Hospital between 1997 and 2003 were studied to analyse patient characteristics and the risk of pulmonary embolism, bleeding and recurrence. Questionnaires about the use of outpatient treatment programs were sent to all Danish hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 265 patients were registered, of whom 141 (53.2%) were treated in an inpatient setting, 120 (45.3%) were treated only in an outpatient setting and 4 (1.5%) underwent initial inpatient treatment for less than 24 hours followed by outpatient treatment. The percentage of patients in ambulatory care increased during the study period. Outpatient treatment proved to be as safe as treatment during hospitalisation. Most hospitals reported that the majority of DVT patients are still managed in primary hospitalisation. CONCLUSION: The organisation used by Frederikshavn is recommended to hospitals that plan to utilise an outpatient treatment program for DVT patients. A certain delay must be expected in the transition from an inpatient to an outpatient setting. International studies have documented the cost-effectiveness as well as patient benefits and preferences from such programs.

[Orphan drugs--medications for patients with rare diseases]. / Orphan drugs--laegemidler til patienter med sjaeldne sygdomme.

Orphan drugs (ODs) are products developed for the diagnosis and/or treatment of rare diseases and conditions. Patients with this group of disorders have historically been denied access to medical therapy because prescription drug manufacturers could rarely make a profit from marketing such drugs. This changed in 1983, when the U.S. Congress passed the Orphan Drug Act, creating financial incentives for manufacturers. Since 2000 the EU has had a similar regulation, resulting in more than 20 ODs being granted marketing authorisation in the EU.