No abstract

The aim of this analysis was to identify Young Mania Rating Scale (YMRS) meaningful benchmarks for clinicians (severity threshold, minimal clinically significant difference [MCSD]) using the Clinical Global Impressions Bipolar (CGI-BP) mania scale, to provide a clinical perspective to randomized clinical trials (RCTs) results. We used the cohort of patients with acute manic/mixed state of bipolar disorders (N = 3459) included in the European Mania in Bipolar Longitudinal Evaluation of Medication (EMBLEM) study. A receiver-operating characteristic analysis was performed on randomly selected patients to determine the YMRS optimal severity threshold with CGI-BP mania score ≥ "Markedly ill" defining severity. The MCSD (clinically meaningful change in score relative to one point difference in CGI-BP mania for outcome measures) of YMRS, was assessed with a linear regression on baseline data. At baseline, YMRS mean score was 26.4 (±9.9), CGI-BP mania mean score was 4.8 (±1.0) and 61.7% of patients had a score ≥ 5. The optimal YMRS severity threshold of 25 (positive predictive value [PPV] = 83.0%; negative predictive value [NPV] = 66.0%) was determined. In this cohort, a YMRS score of 20 (typical cutoff for RCTs inclusion criteria) corresponds to a PPV of 74.6% and to a NPV of 77.6%, meaning that the majority of patients included would be classified as severely ill. The YMRS minimal clinically significant difference was 6.6 points.

SHOX deletions and point mutations as well as downstream SHOX enhancer deletions were identified in almost one third of the patients tested. An anomaly in this latter region seemed to be linked to a milder phenotype. Although further confirmation is needed, we suggest that the enhancer region should be systematically analyzed in patients suspected of SHOX deficiency.

OBJECTIVEThis multicenter, open-label, parallel-arm study compared the efficacy and safety of exenatide once weekly (EQW) with titrated insulin detemir in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin (with or without sulfonylureas).RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSPatients were randomized to EQW (2 mg) or detemir (once or twice daily, titrated to achieve fasting plasma glucose ≤5.5 mmol/L) for 26 weeks. The primary outcome was proportion of patients achieving A1C ≤7.0% and weight loss ≥1.0 kg at end point, analyzed by means of logistic regression. Secondary outcomes included measures of glycemic control, cardiovascular risk factors, and safety and tolerability.RESULTSOf 216 patients (intent-to-treat population), 111 received EQW and 105 received detemir. Overall, 44.1% (95% CI, 34.7–53.9) of EQW-treated patients compared with 11.4% (6.0–19.1) of detemir-treated patients achieved the primary outcome (P < 0.0001). Treatment with EQW resulted in significantly greater reductions than detemir in A1C (least-square mean ± SE, −1.30 ± 0.08% vs. −0.88 ± 0.08%; P < 0.0001) and weight (−2.7 ± 0.3 kg vs. +0.8 ± 0.4 kg; P < 0.0001). Gastrointestinal-related and injection site–related adverse events occurred more frequently with EQW than with detemir. There was no major hypoglycemia in either group. Five (6%) patients in the EQW group and six (7%) patients in the detemir group experienced minor hypoglycemia; only one event occurred without concomitant sulfonylureas (detemir group).CONCLUSIONSTreatment with EQW resulted in a significantly greater proportion of patients achieving target A1C and weight loss than treatment with detemir, with a low risk of hypoglycemia. These results suggest that EQW is a viable alternative to insulin detemir treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycemic control using oral antidiabetes drugs.

IntroductionGlucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are a relatively new class of injectable drugs used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). This retrospective database study evaluated real-world treatment patterns of T2D patients initiating GLP-1 RAs in Belgium (BE), France (FR), Germany (DE), The Netherlands (NL) and Sweden (SE).MethodsAdult T2D patients initiating exenatide twice daily (exBID), exenatide once weekly (exQW), liraglutide (LIRA) or lixisenatide (LIXI) during 2013 were identified using the QuintilesIMS (QuintilesIMS, Durham, NC, and Danbury, CT, USA) longitudinal retail pharmacy databases (LRx; BE/FR/DE/NL) and national health register data (SE). Therapy initiation date was termed ‘index date.’ Eligible patients had ≥180-day pre- and variable follow-up (minimum ≥360 days post-index). Baseline patient and treatment characteristics were assessed. Treatment modification and persistence were evaluated over the 1-year follow-up. Kaplan-Meier (KM) survival curves evaluated stopping of the index therapy (first of discontinuation or switch) over the available follow-up.ResultsA total of 4339 exBID, 1499 exQW, 20,955 LIRA and 1751 LIXI patients were included in the analysis (45.1–61.9% female; mean age range 57.1–62.9 years). Mean follow-up ranged from 17.7 to 30.7 months. Across countries/databases, the proportion experiencing a treatment modification at 1-year ranged from 84.1 to 93.8% for exBID, 53.3–73.4% for exQW and 59.5–80.5% for LIRA patients. The proportion of LIXI patients with treatment modification was 55.0% in Belgium (N = 20) and 96.9% in Germany (LIXI taken off the German market in April 2014). In KM analyses, LIRA patients had the lowest proportion stopping therapy, while exBID patients had the highest proportion stopping therapy, across databases, with the exception of LIXI patents.ConclusionTreatment patterns varied among GLP-1 RA patients, and persistence was generally highest among LIRA and lowest among exBID across countries. Longer term data would be useful, given the recent approval of several GLP-1 RA therapies. Funding: Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, IN, USA.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s13300-016-0224-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.