Combination therapy with insulin glargine and exenatide: real-world outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes.
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the real-world use of combination insulin glargine/exenatide therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and associated treatment persistence and glycemic control.


METHODS
In this retrospective study, data were extracted from a national US insurance claims database for patients with T2DM for whom insulin glargine and exenatide were co-prescribed in differing order: insulin glargine added after exenatide (EXE+); exenatide added after insulin glargine (GLA+); glargine and exenatide initiated together (GLA + EXE). Patients had continuous health plan coverage for 6 months pre- (baseline) and 1-year post-index (follow-up).


RESULTS
A total of 453 patients were eligible for analysis: 141 patients were included in the EXE+ cohort, 281 in the GLA+ cohort, and 31 in the GLA + EXE cohort. There were significant differences between the groups at baseline, including a significantly lower A1C in the GLA+ versus the EXE+ cohort (p = 0.0023). Around one third of patients stayed on both drugs up until the end of the follow-up period (GLA+: 30.2%; EXE+: 29.0%; GLA + EXE: 29.0%). However, more patients stayed on insulin glargine than on exenatide in each cohort. Significant A1C reductions were observed in each of the cohorts at follow-up: GLA+: -0.4%; EXE+: -0.9%; GLA + EXE: -1.2%; p < 0.01, and were significantly higher in the GLA + EXE and EXE+ cohorts than in the GLA+ cohort (p = 0.03 and p = 0.002, respectively). The mean number of hypoglycemic events increased slightly from baseline but remained low in each of the cohorts (GLA+: 0.12 to 1.42; EXE+: 0.09 to 1.04; GLA + EXE: 0.23 to 1.87 per patient, all p > 0.1).


CONCLUSIONS
Combined therapy with insulin glargine and exenatide resulted in A1C reductions in T2DM patients with poor glycemic control without a significantly increased risk of hypoglycemia irrespective of treatment order. Limitations of this study are the between-cohort differences at baseline, lack of a comparator group, and small n number, particularly in the GLA + EXE cohort.
MODEL Clinical Research, Baltimore, MD 21204, USA. pal3420@yahoo.com
Philip
P
Levin
Wenhui
W
Wei
Li
L
Wang
Chunshen
C
Pan
Damon
D
Douglas
Onur
O
Baser
D015331:Cohort Studies; D003924:Diabetes Mellitus, Type 2 / Q000188:drug therapy*; D004359:Drug Therapy, Combination; D000077270:Exenatide; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007003:Hypoglycemia / Q000139:chemically induced; D007004:Hypoglycemic Agents / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D007328:Insulin / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D000069036:Insulin Glargine; D049528:Insulin, Long-Acting / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D010455:Peptides / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*; D012189:Retrospective Studies; D016896:Treatment Outcome; D014688:Venoms / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000627:therapeutic use*
D007004:Hypoglycemic Agents; D007328:Insulin; D049528:Insulin, Long-Acting; D010455:Peptides; D014688:Venoms; D000069036:Insulin Glargine; D000077270:Exenatide