Abstract

While MET is generally recommended as initial pharmacologic therapy for T2D, the substantial proportion of patients who do not achieve glycemic targets with monotherapy argues for initial use of dual therapy in patients with high A1C levels (e.g., >7.5% per AACE and >9.0% per ADA guidelines). The individualization of glycemic targets based on patient characteristics adds an additional complexity to treatment decision-making. This analysis was designed to identify the baseline A1C range from which patients benefitted the most with initial dual therapy (compared with monotherapy) across a range of A1C goals. Data from 3 randomized clinical trials containing treatment arms of both initial MET monotherapy (1700-2000 mg qd, n=778) and initial MET + SITA dual therapy (1700-2000 mg + 100 mg qd, n=789) were pooled. Patients in all 3 trials had an entry A1C of at least 7.5% (mean = 9.4% in both groups). Demographic and disease-related baseline characteristics were well balanced in both groups. Rates of achieving various A1C goals after 18-24 weeks of treatment were assessed across a range of baseline A1C, and odds ratios for goal attainment were calculated (Table). Initial combination therapy with MET + SITA was generally more effective than MET monotherapy in achieving treatment targets across a broad range of individualized glycemic goals and baseline A1C values. Post-treatment A1C goalGoal achieved, % (n/n) MET/SITA, N = 789Goal achieved, % (n/n) MET, N = 778Odds ratio (95% CI)Baseline A1C 7 - 7.5%< 6.5%74.1 (43/58)44.8 (26/58)1.9 (1.27, 2.78)< 7.0%91.4 (53/58)75.9 (44/58)1.8 (1.06, 3.18)Baseline A1C 7.5 - 8%< 6.5%60.7 (65/107)31.8 (41/129)1.8 (1.39, 2.38)< 7.0%82.2 (88/107)65.9 (85/129)1.5 (1.14, 2.11)< 7.5%90.7 (97/107)80.6 (104/129)1.5 (1.03, 2.26)Baseline A1C 8 - 8.5%< 6.5%43.2 (54/125)24.8 (27/109)1.5 (1.15, 2.01)< 7.0%69.6 (87/125)47.7 (52/109)1.6 (1.21, 2.07)< 7.5%81.6 (102/125 )66.1 (72/109)1.5 (1.12, 2.04)< 8.0%89.6 (112/125)80.7 (88/109)1.4 (0.99, 2.08)Baseline A1C 8.5 - 9%< 6.5%46.5 (47/101)17.4 (16/92)2.0 (1.46, 2.84)< 7.0%67.3 (68/101)41.3 (38/92)1.7 (1.28, 2.30)< 7.5%80.2 (81/101)60.9 (36/92)1.6 (1.17, 2.23)< 8.0%86.1 (87/101)77.2 (71/92)1.4 (0.93, 1.97)Baseline A1C 9 - 9.5%< 6.5%32.2 (29/90)15.9 (13/82)1.6 (1.10, 2.30)< 7.0%52.2 (47/90)32.9 (27/82)1.5 (1.09, 2.03)< 7.5%71.1 (64/90)58.5 (48/82)1.3 (0.96, 1.81)< 8.0%82.2 (74/90)75.6 (62/82)1.2 (0.84, 1.77)Baseline A1C 9.5- 10%< 6.5%32.8 (21/64)15.1 (11/73)1.7 (1.10, 2.51)< 7.0%53.1 (34/64)23.3 (17/73)1.9 (1.34, 2.79)< 7.5%60.9 (39/64)35.6 (26/73)1.7 (1.19, 2.38)< 8.0%68.8 (44/64)50.7 (37/73)1.5 (1.03, 2.08)Baseline A1C >10.0%< 6.5%19.0 (46/242)11.3 (26/230)1.4 (1.05, 1.76)< 7.0%32.6 (79/242)22.6 (52/230)1.3 (1.05, 1.58)< 7.5%44.6 (108/242)33.9 (78/230)1.3 (1.04, 1.51)< 8.0%56.6 (137/242)42.6 (98/230)1.3 (1.10, 1.59) Disclosure A. Raji: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. M.C. Ellison: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. R.L.H. Lam: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. E.A. O'Neill: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc. S.S. Engel: Employee; Self; Merck & Co., Inc.. Stock/Shareholder; Self; Merck & Co., Inc..

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.