ArticleDrugs & aging2015
Antidiabetic treatment patterns in a medicare advantage population in the United States.
Article in Drugs & aging, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
- Diabetes Care Among Older Adults Enrolled in Medicare Advantage Versus Traditional Medicare Fee-For-Service Plans: The Diabetes Collaborative Registry.Diabetes care · 2022Article
- Non-Persistence and Non-Adherence of Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Therapy with GLP-1 Receptor Agonists: A Retrospective Analysis.Diabetes therapy : research, treatment and education of diabetes and related disorders · 2016Article
- Preventing Unnecessary Costs of Drug-Induced Hypoglycemia in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes in the United States and Canada.PloS one · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPublished guidelines for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) agree on initial pharmacotherapy. However, few specific recommendations on second-line agents are provided.
objectiveThe objective of this study was to describe antidiabetic treatment patterns in Medicare Advantage patients with T2DM within 6 months of measurement of the glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level. RESEARCH
designThis retrospective cross-sectional study utilized medical, pharmacy, and laboratory claims from a large Medicare Advantage with Prescription Drug (MAPD) coverage payer. MAPD members between 65 and 89 years old identified as having T2DM between 2009 and 2011 were eligible for inclusion. A 12-month baseline period before the first HbA1c value (index date) was evaluated for demographic and clinical differences. Antidiabetic therapy was evaluated for 6 months post-index. The study population was stratified into three cohorts based on index HbA1c value: controlled (<8%, 64 mmoL/mol), uncontrolled (≥ 8%, 64 mmoL/mol and <10%, 86 mmoL/mol), and severely uncontrolled (≥ 10%, 86 mmoL/mol).
resultsDespite elevated HbA1c values (≥ 8%, 64 mmoL/mol), 7-8% of patients did not receive antidiabetic therapy during the post-index period. Metformin and sulfonylureas were the oral antidiabetics (OADs) most frequently used as monotherapy. The majority of patients on combination therapy were on two or more OADs and higher injectable use was observed in the severely uncontrolled cohort. Metformin was included in >60% of the combination regimens with metformin + sulfonylurea being the most common.
conclusionThis study suggests suboptimal treatment of those not in glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 8%, 64 mmoL/mol). Many patients classified as severely uncontrolled based on HbA1c received only monotherapy. Opportunities exist for treatment modification within this population to achieve tighter glycemic control.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.