BackgroundGuidelines for Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) management in Japan provide physicians the discretion to select treatment options based on patient pathophysiology of the disease. There exists a wide variation of preference for initial antidiabetes drugs (AD). The current database analysis aimed to understand the real world treatment patterns in drug-naive patients with T2DM in Japan.MethodsWe analyzed data of patients (≥ 18 years) diagnosed with T2DM between October 2012 and September 2016 from the Medical Data Vision, a Diagnosis Procedure Combination database. The primary objective was to determine the proportion of T2DM patients receiving each type of treatment as first-line therapy among the drug-naive cohort.ResultsOf the 436,546 drug-naive patients, 224,761 received their first-line T2DM treatment in the outpatient setting. The mean age of the patient population was 65.6 years at index date. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor was the most prescribed (56.8%) outpatient AD monotherapy, followed by metformin (15.4%). DPP-4 inhibitors were prescribed over metformin in patients with renal disease (odds ratio [OR]: 4.20; p < 0.0001), coronary heart disease and stroke (OR: 2.22; p < 0.0001). Male (OR: 1.03; p = 0.0026), presence of diabetic complications [retinopathy (OR: 1.33; p < 0.0001), neuropathy (OR: 1.05; p = 0.0037), nephropathy (OR: 1.08; p < 0.0001)] and a high baseline HbA1c (OR: 1.45; p < 0.0001) received treatment intensification during 180 days.ConclusionDPP-4 inhibitors were the most prevalent first-line T2DM treatment followed by metformin in Japan. The findings from this retrospective analysis also support the previously published web survey results and can help understand the real world utilization of T2DM treatment.Trial registration Retrospectively registered

Background Nighttime blood pressure (BP) and an abnormal nocturnal BP dipping profile are important cardiovascular risk factors in patients with hypertension. This post hoc analysis investigated the effects of sacubitril/valsartan on 24‐hour BP in patients with mild‐to‐moderate hypertension and in patient subgroups based on nocturnal BP dipping status. Methods and Results Data from a randomized clinical trial comparing the BP‐lowering effects of 8 weeks of treatment with sacubitril/valsartan (200 or 400 mg/d) and olmesartan (20 mg/d) in Japanese patients with mild‐to‐moderate hypertension were analyzed. The primary end point was change in 24‐hour, daytime, and nighttime BP in patient subgroups based on nocturnal BP dipping status (dipper, nondipper). Six hundred thirty‐two patients with baseline and follow‐up ambulatory BP data were included. Both sacubitril/valsartan dosages reduced 24‐hour, daytime, and nighttime systolic BP, and 24‐hour and daytime diastolic BP, to a significantly greater extent than olmesartan in the dipper and nondipper groups. However, between‐group differences in nighttime systolic BP were more significant in the nondipper group (difference [95% CI] for sacubitril/valsartan 200 and 400 mg/d versus olmesartan 20 mg/d: –4.6 [95% CI, −7.3 to −1.8] and −6.8 [95% CI, −9.5 to −4.1] mm Hg, respectively; P <0.01 and P <0.001). Between‐group differences in the BP control rate were greatest in the nondipper subgroup (systolic BP control rate of 34.4% and 42.6% with sacubitril/valsartan 200 and 400 mg/d versus 23.1% with olmesartan 20 mg/d). Conclusions This analysis highlights the value of sacubitril/valsartan therapy in patients with a nondipper profile of nocturnal BP and confirms this agent's potent 24‐hour BP‐lowering effect in Japanese populations with hypertension. Registration URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov ; Unique identifier: NCT01599104.

Background Repeated hospitalization is a predictor of outcomes in heart failure, indicating the presence of symptoms, a deteriorated condition at pre-admission, and worsened prognosis. Objectives The current database study aimed to understand the clinical and economic burden of repeated hospitalizations among patients with heart failure in Japan. The effect of repeated hospitalizations on the subsequent in-hospital mortality was the primary objective; economic burden of heart failure after discharge was investigated as a secondary outcome. Methods Between 2013 and 2018, administrative claims and discharge summary data of patients aged ≥ 20 years and diagnosed with heart failure were obtained from a Diagnosis Procedure Combination database maintained by Medical Data Vision. Hospitalization, mortality, and economic burden data were analyzed. Results This study included 49,094 patients. The mean length of the first hospital stay was 22.9 days. The in-hospital mortality rate was approximately 10%, with one to five repeated hospitalizations. The time interval between repeated hospitalizations for heart failure decreased with an increasing number of hospitalizations. In-hospital mortality did not increase even with an increasing number of hospitalizations. The mean heart failure-related healthcare cost per patient was ¥564,281 ± 990,447 (US$5178 ± 9,088), 67.3% of which was hospitalization costs. Among hospitalization costs, other costs were high, mainly for basic hospitalization fees (71.7%; ¥233,146/person-year). Conclusions Repeated hospitalization did not increase in-hospital mortality; however, it may shorten the intervals between heart failure-related hospitalizations, potentially caused by deterioration of the patient's condition, and increase the clinical and economic burden on patients. Key PointsRepeated hospitalization was shown to be an important predictor of outcomes in patients with heart failure.The 2013-18 data showed that there was a 10% in-hospital mortality rate among patients who underwent one to five repeated hospitalizations.In-hospital mortality did not increase with the number of hospitalizations.

Background: We investigated the impact of heart failure (HF) on daily life and satisfaction with current HF medication from the patient perspective in a real-world study in Japan. Methods and Results: A cross-sectional survey of 154 HF patients treated by 58 cardiologists was conducted in Japan using patient self-completed questionnaires about their daily life and satisfaction with HF medication, as well as patient record forms completed by their physicians capturing corresponding data. The mean age of patients was 72.7 years. The proportion of patients within New York Heart Association Class I, II, III, and IV was 39%, 44%, 16%, and 1%, respectively. Symptoms reported by patients included dyspnea when active (46%), nocturia (43%), anxiety (18%), and depression (6%). There was a discordance between physician- and patient-reported symptoms, especially for nocturia and inability to sleep. The most frequent lifestyle recommendation from physicians was ‘reduce salt/sodium intake’, but only 51% of patients receiving this recommendation followed the advice. In all, 44% of patients reported dissatisfaction with their current medication; according to the patients, 27% reported no discussion with their physicians about their prescribed medication, while physicians reported the opposite. Conclusions: HF negatively impacts patient daily life. There is discordance between patients and physicians in symptom reporting, lifestyle modification advice and adherence, and reported medication decision making. Gaps in patient–physician communication exist.