Real-world HbA1c changes and prescription characteristics among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients initiating treatment with once weekly semaglutide for diabetes.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate patient, prescriber, and dose characteristics and evaluate changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) for patients prescribed once weekly semaglutide for diabetes (OW sema T2D). Methods: This study was a retrospective claims-based study using the Optum Research Database. The sample included adult patients who had at least one claim for OW sema T2D between Jan 1, 2018, and Dec 31, 2019, were continuously enrolled in the health plan and had a diagnosis of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) during the pre-index or post-index periods. Demographic and clinical characteristics of patients using OW sema T2D were collected, as were the dose and prescriber specialty and the change between pre-index and post-index HbA1c measures was calculated. Results were stratified by the latest pre-index HbA1c measurement (HbA1c greater than or equal to 9.0%, uncontrolled vs. HbA1c less than 9%, controlled). Statistical comparisons between HbA1c groups were conducted. Results: Most patients, 76.3%, were prescribed a 0.25/0.50 mg dose of OW sema T2D. Patients had an overall decrease in HbA1c of 0.8% and patients with uncontrolled diabetes had a greater reduction in mean HbA1c compared to those with controlled diabetes (-2.1% vs. -0.3%, p < 0.001). Most patients had their index dose of OW sema T2D prescribed by endocrinologists (27.6%) primary care providers (24.6%) and internal medicine providers (21.6%). Conclusions: OW sema T2D is an effective real-world T2DM treatment. Future research should further investigate real-world use patterns of this medication.

Real-World Effectiveness of Once-Weekly Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists (OW GLP-1RAs) in Comparison with Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors (DPP-4is) for Glycemic Control and Weight Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (RELATE).

BACKGROUND: The efficacy of once-weekly (OW) glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) has been established in several trials in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM); however, real-world evidence on their effectiveness is limited. This study evaluated the effectiveness of OW GLP-1RA regarding glycemic and weight outcomes, and relative to DPP-4i in a comparator analysis. METHODS: This observational cohort study evaluated glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and weight outcomes in people with T2DM with two or more prescription claims for the same OW GLP-1RA using a pre-post study design (including for a semaglutide OW T2DM subgroup, hereafter referred to as semaglutide). Comparator analysis for the same outcome was performed for OW GLP-1RAs versus DPP-4i and semaglutide subgroup versus DPP-4i. A linked patient population from the IQVIA PharMetrics® Plus database and the Ambulatory Electronic Medical Records (AEMR) database was analyzed using data from January 2017 to April 2022. HbA1c and weight were assessed at baseline and at the end of the 12-month post-index period. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used to adjust for imbalances in baseline patient characteristics in the comparator analysis. RESULTS: In the pre-post analysis, a greater numerical reduction in HbA1c and weight was observed for the semaglutide subgroup (N = 354) relative to the OW GLP-1RA cohort (N = 921). In the semaglutide subgroup, 52.5% and 34.2% of patients achieved HbA1c of < 7.0% and ≥ 5% weight loss, respectively. For the comparator analysis, the OW GLP-1RAs (N = 651) were significantly more effective (p < 0.001) in reducing HbA1c (- 1.5% vs. -  1.0%) and weight (- 3.2 kg vs. -  1.0 kg) than the DPP-4is (N = 431). Similarly, the semaglutide cohort (N = 251) also displayed more effectiveness (p < 0.001) in reducing HbA1c (- 1.7% vs. -  0.9%) and weight (- 4.1 kg vs. -  1.3 kg) than the respective DPP-4i cohort (N = 417). Patients initiating OW GLP-1RAs, including the semaglutide cohort, were at least twice as likely to achieve HbA1c and weight outcomes as well as composite outcomes compared with those initiating DPP-4is. CONCLUSION: The study reinforces that OW GLP-1RAs are more effective in glycemic control and weight reduction compared with DPP-4is in people with T2DM in the real-world setting. These findings align with the recommendation in the current guidelines for utilizing glucose-lowering treatment regimens that support weight-management goals in people with T2DM.

In type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are used for managing blood sugar levels and major adverse cardiovascular event risk reduction. In clinical trials, once-weekly (OW) GLP-1RAs showed better control of blood sugar levels and body weight than those administered daily, as well as another class of daily T2DM medications called dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4is). However, there is limited evidence of OW GLP-1RAs-based routine care to confirm these findings. This study gathered prescription and outcomes data for people with T2DM (January 2017­April 2022) from two linked US databases. Body weight measurements and glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) test results (measuring average blood sugar levels) were used to evaluate the effectiveness of OW GLP-1RAs (exenatide, dulaglutide, and semaglutide) via a pre-post analysis, and compare OW GLP-1RAs with DPP-4is. We found that treatment with semaglutide lowered body weight and blood sugar levels to a greater extent than OW GLP-1RAs in the pre-post analysis. In the comparator analysis, people receiving OW GLP-1RAs, including semaglutide, were at least twice as likely to achieve reduced HbA_1c levels and body weight compared with those receiving DPP-4is. People receiving OW GLP-1RAs were three times more likely than those on DPP-4is to achieve the recommended target of HbA_1c < 7.0% and weight loss ≥ 5%, while treatment with semaglutide increased this likelihood by > 4.6 times. This study shows clear benefits of OW GLP-1RAs, building on current evidence for integration of this treatment into overall management of T2DM.

Durability of Effectiveness Between Users of Once-Weekly Semaglutide and Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitors (DPP-4i) in US Adults with Type 2 Diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Long-term effectiveness and durability of glucose-lowering medications are important considerations in managing type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to compare durability of treatment efficacy of once-weekly (OW) semaglutide for T2D with that of the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor (DPP-4i) class. METHODS: This observational cohort study used 2017-2022 data from the Optum® Clinformatics® Data Mart to compare long-term clinical outcomes associated with semaglutide or DPP-4i in US adults with T2D. The primary outcomes were HbA1c at 2-year follow-up, change in HbA1c from baseline, and the odds of achieving HbA1c targets. BMI at 2-year follow-up, change in BMI from baseline, odds of reducing BMI category, and the need for treatment augmentation were exploratory outcomes. Bivariate and multivariate analyses were conducted using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) weighted descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Weighted HbA1c and BMI cohorts included 865 and 642 semaglutide users and 779 and 537 DPP-4i users, respectively. In the weighted HbA1c cohort, semaglutide and DPP-4i users had an average age of 60 years and similar baseline characteristics including HbA1c level and comorbidity status. Two-year follow-up HbA1c with semaglutide was 0.56% lower than with DPP-4i; reduction in HbA1c from baseline was 0.61% greater. Odds of achieving HbA1c level < 7% were 2.16 times greater after covariate adjustment (all, p < 0.001). Semaglutide was associated with 1.03 kg/m2 greater reduction in BMI and 2.27 times greater odds of reducing BMI category vs DPP-4i (p < 0.001). Semaglutide users were less likely to add new glucose-lowering treatment (hazard ratio [HR] 0.57; p < 0.001) or initiate insulin (HR 0.49; p < 0.001) vs DPP-4i users. CONCLUSION: Compared with DPP-4i, semaglutide was associated with lower follow-up HbA1c and BMI, greater reduction in HbA1c and BMI from baseline, and reduced likelihood of requiring treatment augmentation or insulin initiation to manage T2D in US adults, suggesting better durability of semaglutide vs DPP-4i. INFOGRAPHIC.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a progressive disease. Over time, many patients with T2D will need multiple drugs to manage their disease. Long-term efficacy is important for achieving treatment goals, such as blood sugar control and weight loss. The amount of time that different types of diabetes drugs remain effective varies. This study used real-world data to compare two distinct types of diabetes drugs, semaglutide and dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP­4is). We looked at how blood sugar control and body weight changed with each drug after 2 years of use. We also compared how many patients needed to start using new drugs to meet their treatment goals and the odds that a patient would need to start using new drugs. Semaglutide was better than DPP­4i in reducing both blood sugar levels and body weight. Patients had over two times the odds of meeting target blood sugar levels with semaglutide. Fewer patients needed to start using new drugs with semaglutide, and patients were 43% less likely to start using new drugs to lower blood sugar than patients taking DPP­4is.

Contemporary use of cardiovascular risk reduction strategies in type 2 diabetes. Insights from the diabetes collaborative registry.

BACKGROUND: Cardiovascular disease remains the primary source of morbidity and mortality in type 2 diabetes (T2D). We characterized the change over time in the use of evidence-based therapies to reduce cardiovascular risk in US patients with T2D. METHODS: Data from a longitudinal outpatient diabetes registry were used to calculate the prescription of SGLT2i or GLP-1RA over time and among those with high-risk comorbidities (atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease [ASCVD], heart failure [HF], chronic kidney disease [CKD]) and a diabetes cardiovascular composite score (DCCS; calculated as: #eligible medications prescribed/#eligible medications x 100 for SGLT2i, GLP-1RA, statin, antiplatelet/anticoagulant therapy, ACEi/ARB/ARNI). Scores ranged from 0% to 100% (higher=more optimal care). RESULTS: Among 1,001,542 outpatients from 391 US sites, 51.7% patients had ASVCD, 17.7% HF, and 23.0% CKD. The percentage of patients prescribed an SGLT2i or GLP-1RA increased over time (7.3% in 2013 to 28.8% in 2019), and 18.3% of patients with ASCVD, HF, or CKD were on at least one of these medications at last follow-up vs 25.5% of patients without any of these comorbidities. Mean DCCS was 54±36%; 54±25% in patients with ASCVD, HF, or CKD vs 52±50% in patients without any of these comorbidities (P<0.001 for both). In a hierarchical linear model, male sex, and a diagnosis of CKD were independently associated with higher DCCS whereas a diagnosis of HF or ASCVD was associated with a lower DCCS. CONCLUSIONS: In a large, contemporary cohort of patients with T2D, we found improvement in the use of SGLT2i and GLP-1RA but unexpectedly lower use in patients with ASCVD, heart failure, and CKD, highlighting a treatment-risk paradox. Further education is needed to shift the understanding of these medications as tools for glucose-lowering to cardiovascular risk reduction and to improve their implementation in clinical practice.

Increased Healthcare Resource Use and Costs After Discontinuation of Liraglutide in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes from a Commercial- and Medicaid-Insured Claims Database.

INTRODUCTION: Liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), is effective in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), but treatment discontinuation without new T2D therapy initiation may compromise outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study (July 1, 2012, to December 31, 2019) identified patients ≥ 18 years with T2D in the Optum® Clinformatics® Data Mart who discontinued liraglutide (index date). Patients with continuous enrollment for ≥ 12 months before and after discontinuation (baseline), ≥ 6 months liraglutide coverage pre-index, and no new T2D therapy start during follow-up were included. Changes from baseline in all-cause healthcare resource utilization (HCRU; outpatient visits, emergency room [ER] visits, and hospitalization events), costs, and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) over 12 months after discontinuation were evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 625 of 186,630 patients who discontinued liraglutide during the baseline period (mean [standard deviation (SD)] age, 62.1 [10.1] years) were included in the 12-month analysis. A significant increase in the rate of ER visits (rate ratio [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 1.23 per 100 person-months [1.05, 1.43]; P = 0.0079), hospitalizations (1.36 [1.09, 1.70]; P = 0.0056), and outpatient visits (1.03 [1.01, 1.06]; P = 0.0075) was observed. Total HCRU costs significantly increased after discontinuation ($436.12 per patient per month [$90.07, $782.17]; P = 0.0136), driven by significantly higher outpatient costs ($238.70 [$34.16, $443.25]; P = 0.0223). HbA1c increased significantly by 12 months from mean (SD) 7.37 (1.53) at baseline to 7.63 (1.64; difference: + 0.25 [95% CI 0.14, 0.36]; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients who discontinued liraglutide showed increases in HCRU; costs, mainly driven by outpatient cost; and HbA1c within 12 months, emphasizing the importance of treatment optimization on clinical and economic outcomes in patients with T2D.

Liraglutide is indicated in patients with type 2 diabetes and elevated cardiovascular risk or established cardiovascular disease. In this study, we observed that adults with type 2 diabetes who discontinued liraglutide showed increases in healthcare resource utilization; costs, which were mainly driven by increases in outpatient visits; and glycated hemoglobin within 12 months. In adults with type 2 diabetes, treatment discontinuation without restarting or initiating a new therapy impacts short-term healthcare resource utilization and economic outcomes, and future work may further investigate the long-term implications of sustained treatment discontinuation.

Glucose-lowering treatment patterns in patients with diabetic kidney disease.

OBJECTIVES: Recent trials of glucose-lowering drugs (GLDs) have drawn attention to renal outcomes. Our goal was to understand how patients with diabetic kidney disease (DKD) are treated in general practices in the United States. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using a national-level claims data set and electronic health records. METHODS: Patients (≥ 18 years) with type 2 diabetes, whose estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFRs) were between 15 and 89 mL/min/1.73 m2 between 2016 and 2018, were selected. Use of different GLDs during a 12-month period was examined across all eGFR levels. RESULTS: Of the 25,486 sample patients, 69.2%, 18.9%, 9.6%, and 2.3% had an eGFR in the ranges of 60 to 89, 45 to 59, 30 to 44, and 15 to 29 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively. Metformin was used by nearly 33% of patients with an eGFR of 30 to 44 mL/min/1.73 m2 and by 10% of patients with an eGFR less than 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Less than 10% (across all eGFR levels) of patients used glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Use of insulin was more frequent among patients with a lower eGFR (P < .05). The findings were similar in subgroups with different hemoglobin A1c levels (< 7% and ≥ 7%). CONCLUSIONS: Real-world treatment of DKD in the United States is suboptimal. Inappropriate use of some GLD classes, especially in advanced DKD stages, was found along with lower than expected use of modern agents that are considered safe and effective to treat glycemic outcomes. Efforts may be needed to improve understanding of safety, glycemic efficacy, and overall clinical value of GLDs across DKD stages.

Exploring Why People With Type 2 Diabetes Do or Do Not Persist With Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Therapy: A Qualitative Study.

OBJECTIVE: Despite the demonstrated benefits of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist therapy, adherence and persistence with this therapy is often challenging. The purpose of this study was to expand current understanding of patients' experiences, motivations, and challenges relevant to their persistence with GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy. DESIGN AND METHODS: This noninterventional, cross-sectional, qualitative study used face-to-face interviews with 36 adults with type 2 diabetes who had been treated with at least one GLP-1 receptor agonist medication. Inclusion criteria were: ≥18 years of age, diagnosed with type 2 diabetes, and currently treated with a GLP-1 receptor agonist for ≥1 month at the time of screening ("continuers") or discontinued use of a GLP-1 receptor agonist ≤1 year of screening but with a total ≥1 month of treatment ("discontinuers"). Interviews were conducted using a semi-structured qualitative interview guide that included open-ended questions and probes to obtain both spontaneous and prompted input from participants about their current and past treatment experiences with GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy. RESULTS: Among continuers (n = 16), the most commonly identified facilitators supporting the decision to continue were the observations of improved glucose control (50%) and weight loss (55%). Among discontinuers (n = 20), the most commonly identified challenges leading to treatment discontinuation were side effects (55%) and high cost (50%). Continuers were more likely than discontinuers to receive clinically relevant information from their health care team, including facts about GLP-1 receptor agonist medications, likely treatment benefits, the importance of gradual dose titration, and the need to adjust diet after initiation. CONCLUSION: Although cost is a major obstacle to treatment continuation, it can only be resolved through changes in ongoing reimbursement coverage and policies. However, many other obstacles could potentially be addressed (e.g., reducing side effects with gradual dosage titration and setting appropriate expectations regarding efficacy) through more collaborative patient-clinician interactions before initiating therapy.

Real-world Effectiveness of Liraglutide vs. Sitagliptin Among Older Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Enrolled in a Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug Plan: A Retrospective Observational Study.

INTRODUCTION: Liraglutide and sitagliptin were compared on glycemic control and all-cause healthcare costs over a 1-year period among older adults with type 2 diabetes (65-89 years) enrolled in a national Medicare Advantage Prescription Drug health plan. METHODS: This was a retrospective study in which the index date was the first prescription fill for liraglutide or sitagliptin between 25 January 2010 and 31 December 2014. Post-index treatment persistence and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at baseline and 1 year (± 90 days) post-index date were required. Patients were excluded if their record included use of insulin during the baseline period. Inverse probability of treatment weighting using stabilized weights was employed with final covariate adjusted regression modeling to estimate the primary outcome (mean change in HbA1c) and secondary outcomes (achieving glycemic goal and costs), each at 1-year post-index date. RESULTS: Overall, 3056 patients met the selection criteria, of whom 218 filled prescriptions for liraglutide and 2838 for sitagliptin. Adjusted mean change in HbA1c at 1 year post-index was - 0.42 with liraglutide versus - 0.12 with sitagliptin (P = 0.0012). Adjusted odds of achieving the treatment goals of HbA1c < 7% and achieving an HbA1c reduction of ≥ 1% were higher for  those on liraglutide than for those on sitagliptin (1.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.25-2.24 and 1.76, 95% CI 1.31-2.36), respectively. Total healthcare costs in those achieving an HbA1c of < 7% were not significantly different between treatment groups but were higher within the liraglutide group for those achieving an HbA1c < 8%. CONCLUSIONS: When compared to sitagliptin, liraglutide was associated with greater achievement of an HbA1c < 7% over a 1-year period in an older population. This finding was not associated with a statistically significant increase in all-cause total healthcare costs, although costs were slightly higher in the liraglutide group than in the sitagliptin group.

Injectable Antihyperglycemics: A Systematic Review and Critical Analysis of the Literature on Adherence, Persistence, and Health Outcomes.

INTRODUCTION: Improving real-world medication adherence to injectable antihyperglycemics in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a clinical challenge. Quantification of the level of adherence required to achieve a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) in glycemic control would assist in meeting this goal. The study objective was to review the literature regarding the relationships of medication adherence and persistence with health outcomes in adult T2DM patients using injectable antihyperglycemics. METHODS: Systematic searches were conducted using electronic databases to identify publications over the last decade. Publications were screened against established eligibility criteria. Study data were extracted, evaluated, and used to identify strengths, limitations, and gaps in current evidence. RESULTS: Eligibility criteria were met by 38 studies, and this report analyzed 34 studies related to glycemic control (n = 25), healthcare resource use (n = 9), and healthcare costs (n = 14). Eight of these studies examined adherence to glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA), including 1 study regarding adherence to GLP-1 RA or to insulin, and 1 study investigating a GLP-1 RA/insulin combination; the remaining studies involved insulin. Studies used a broad range of measures to classify adherence and persistence, and most measures were unable to reliably evaluate the complexities of patient behavior over time. Better adherence to injectable antihyperglycemic medications was generally found to be associated with improved glycemic control, although no studies attempted to identify a MCID. Although higher diabetes-related pharmacy and total healthcare costs were reported for adherent or persistent patients, these patients tended to have lower diabetes-related and all-cause medical costs. CONCLUSION: Results of this review confirmed the effectiveness of injectable antihyperglycemic medications for glycemic control, suggesting that there are clinical and financial consequences to nonadherence. Although attempts were made to quantify the effects of nonadherence, the interpretation of study results was limited by the lack of a MCID and inadequate study design. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk, Inc., Plainsboro Township, NJ, USA. Plain language summary available for this article.

Cost-effectiveness and budget impact of liraglutide in type 2 diabetes patients with elevated cardiovascular risk: a US-managed care perspective.

BACKGROUND: The Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcomes Results (LEADER) clinical trial demonstrated that liraglutide added to standard-of-care (SoC) therapy for type 2 diabetes (T2D) with established cardiovascular disease (CVD) or elevated cardiovascular (CV) risk was associated with lower rates of death from CVD, nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), or nonfatal stroke than SoC alone. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness (CE) and budget impact of liraglutide vs SoC in T2D patients with established CVD or elevated CV risk, over a lifetime horizon from a US managed care perspective. METHODS: A cohort state-transition model (costs and benefits discounted at 3% per year) was used to predict diabetes-related complications and death (CV and all-cause). Events, treatment effects, and discontinuation rates were from LEADER trial; utility and cost data (US$, 2017) were from literature. Sensitivity analysis explored the impact of uncertainty on results. Additionally, a budget impact analysis was conducted to evaluate the financial impact of liraglutide use in this population, with displacement from dulaglutide, assuming a health care plan with 1 million members. RESULTS: Liraglutide patients experienced 6.3% fewer events, had event-related cost-savings of $15,182, gained additional life-years of 0.67 and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of 0.57, and had additional total costs ($60,928) vs SoC. Liraglutide was cost-effective with an incremental CE ratio of $106,749/QALY which was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $150,000/QALY accepted by the Institute of Clinical and Economic Research. Liraglutide was cost-effective across all sensitivity analyses, except when the hazard ratio for all-cause mortality varied. The budget impact was neutral, with a per-plan-per-year and per-member-per-month cost-savings of $266,334 and $0.02, respectively. CONCLUSION: From a US-managed care perspective, for T2D patients with established CVD or elevated CV risk, liraglutide is a cost-effective and a budget neutral treatment option for health care plans.

Real-World Clinical Effectiveness and Cost Savings of Liraglutide Versus Sitagliptin in Treating Type 2 Diabetes for 1 and 2 Years.

INTRODUCTION: This study compared the clinical and economic outcomes of long-term use of liraglutide versus sitagliptin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in real-world practice in the USA. METHODS: We identified adult patients (≥ 18 years old) with T2DM who initiated liraglutide or sitagliptin in 2010-2014 using a large claims database. Quarterly glycemic control measures and annual healthcare costs were assessed during the 1st and 2nd years of persistent medication use. Their associations with medication use (liraglutide or sitagliptin) were estimated using multivariable regression models adjusted for patient demographic and clinical characteristics. RESULTS: A total of 3113 patients persistently used liraglutide (N = 493) or sitagliptin (N = 2620) for ≥ 1 year [mean age (standard deviation, SD): 53 (8.5) vs. 56 (9.7) years; 48.3% vs. 62.3% males; both p < 0.05]; 911 (including 113 liraglutide users) were persistent users for ≥ 2 years. During the 1st-year follow-up, liraglutide users (versus sitagliptin users, after adjustment) experienced larger glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) reductions from baseline (ranging from 0.34%-point in quarter 1 to 0.21%-point in quarter 4); higher likelihoods of obtaining HbA1c reductions of ≥ 1%-points or ≥ 2%-points [odds ratios (ORs) range 1.47-2.04]; and higher likelihoods of reaching HbA1c goals of < 6.5% or < 7% (ORs range 1.51-2.12) (all p < 0.05). Liraglutide users also experienced HbA1c reductions from baseline in the 2nd-year follow-up (0.53-0.33%-point, all p < 0.05). Although liraglutide users incurred higher healthcare costs than sitagliptin users during the 1st-year follow-up, they had $2674 (per patient) lower all-cause medical costs (adjusted cost ratio: 0.67, p < 0.05) and similar total costs (all-cause and diabetes-related) in the 2nd year. CONCLUSION: Long-term use of liraglutide for 1 or 2 years was associated with better glycemic control than using sitagliptin. Savings in medical costs were realized for liraglutide users during the 2nd year of persistent treatment, which offset differences in pharmacy costs. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk Inc.

CLCN2 chloride channel mutations in familial hyperaldosteronism type II.

Primary aldosteronism, a common cause of severe hypertension 1 , features constitutive production of the adrenal steroid aldosterone. We analyzed a multiplex family with familial hyperaldosteronism type II (FH-II) 2 and 80 additional probands with unsolved early-onset primary aldosteronism. Eight probands had novel heterozygous variants in CLCN2, including two de novo mutations and four independent occurrences of a mutation encoding an identical p.Arg172Gln substitution; all relatives with early-onset primary aldosteronism carried the CLCN2 variant found in the proband. CLCN2 encodes a voltage-gated chloride channel expressed in adrenal glomerulosa that opens at hyperpolarized membrane potentials. Channel opening depolarizes glomerulosa cells and induces expression of aldosterone synthase, the rate-limiting enzyme for aldosterone biosynthesis. Mutant channels show gain of function, with higher open probabilities at the glomerulosa resting potential. These findings for the first time demonstrate a role of anion channels in glomerulosa membrane potential determination, aldosterone production and hypertension. They establish the cause of a substantial fraction of early-onset primary aldosteronism.