Side-by-side comparison of change in A1C with canagliflozin versus DPP-4 inhibitors in randomized clinical trials and the real-world study. *Data are LS.

Slides:

Advertisements

Similar presentations

The efficacy of ‘Basal supported Oral Therapy ’ with ‘Sitagliptin’ in Japanese type 2 diabetes patients: Yoshihiko Suzuki HDC Atlas Clinic,

Advertisements

THE DIABETES PREVENTION PROGRAM RESEARCH GROUP*

2011 US Diabetes Statistics Diabetes affects 25.8 million people in the US (8.3% of the U.S. population) – 18.8 million diagnosed, 7.0 million undiagnosed.

Pathophysiology in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Newer Agents Part 4 of 5.

Improving Outcomes with SGLT2 Cotransporter Inhibitors in Challenging T2DM Patients Part 1.

Int J Clin Pract, December 2013, 67, 12,

Canagliflozin Compared With Sitagliptin for Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Who Do Not Have Adequate Glycemic Control With Metformin Plus Sulfonylurea A.

Supporting the Rationale for the Use of Dapagliflozin as an Add-on to Poorly Controlled Patients on Saxagliptin and Metformin Zachary Bloomgarden, MD Clinical.

Canagliflozin Cardiovascular Safety. 2 Potential CV protection pathways of SGLT2i Diab Vasc Dis Res Mar;12(2):

GLP-1 Agonists and DPP-4 Inhibitors How do they work? Part 3.

Date of download: 5/28/2016 From: United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study 17: A 9-Year Update of a Randomized, Controlled Trial on the Effect of Improved.

Dr. A. K. Singh M.D (Medicine), D.M (Endocrinology)

Copyright © 2015 by the American Osteopathic Association.

NATURAL HISTORY OF BETA CELL FAILURE IN T2DM

Taieb V, et al. Value Health Nov;18(7):A598.

Impact of Age and Estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate on the Glycemic Efficacy and Safety of Canagliflozin: A Pooled Analysis of Clinical Studies Richard.

Copyright © 2015 by the American Osteopathic Association.

Matthew P. Gilbert, DO, MPH, Richard E. Pratley, MD

Neal B, et al. Diabetes Care 2015;38:403–411

Real-world Clinical Outcomes Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Receiving Canagliflozin at a Specialty Diabetes Clinic: Subgroup Analysis by Baseline.

Foroutan N1,2, Muratov S1,2, Levine M1,2

Canagliflozin: Real World Experience

From: United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study 17: A 9-Year Update of a Randomized, Controlled Trial on the Effect of Improved Metabolic Control on Complications.

Copyright © 2015 by the American Osteopathic Association.

Adherence to and persistence with oral antidiabetic medication were evaluated in a sample of 238,372 patients with type 2 diabetes initiating a dipeptidyl.

Empagliflozin (Jardiance®)

SGLT2 Inhibitors: What Do the Data Mean for My Patients?

Global Projections for Diabetes:

Expert Panelists. Emerging CV Outcomes Trial Results: What Do They Mean for T2D Management?

EFFICACY AND MECHANISM

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors work by blocking the reabsorption of filtered glucose in the kidneys. This leads to glucosuria and improved.

Choosing glucose-lowering medication in those with established ASCVD, HF, and CKD. CV, cardiovascular; DPP-4i, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor; GLP-1.

Clinical Application of Incretin-Based Therapy: Therapeutic Potential, Patient Selection and Clinical Use David M. Kendall, MD, Robert M. Cuddihy, MD,

Antihyperglycemic therapy in type 2 diabetes: general recommendations.

Early and Intensive T2D Management:

Breaking Down the CVOTs

Antihyperglycemic therapy in type 2 diabetes: general recommendations

Recommendations for the treatment of confirmed hypertension in people with diabetes. *An ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or ARB is suggested to treat hypertension.

The Research Question Does self monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in patients with non-insulin treated type 2 diabetes improve glycemia or quality of.

Use of Combination of Saxagliptin/ Dapagliflozin in Patients With Poorly Controlled Diabetes on Metformin.

Matthew P. Gilbert, DO, MPH, Richard E. Pratley, MD

CV Risk Reduction with Diabetes Drugs -- Should Cardiologists or Diabetologists Take the Lead?

Impact of U-100 RHI administered with V-Go at OV1 (3 months after initiation) and OV2 (6 months after initiation) (n = 11) at 3 months (P = 0.32) and at.

Changes in A1C (A), body weight (B), and systolic blood pressure (C) with canagliflozin in combination with incretin-based therapies. *In the dose-advancement.

ADA/EASD general recommendations for type 2 diabetes management (1).

Kaplan-Meier plots of hHF: DPP-4i and SU cohort with baseline CVD (panel A); saxagliptin and sitagliptin cohorts with baseline CVD (panel B); DPP-4i and.

Range of mean changes from baseline in A1C in clinical studies of 24–52 weeks’ duration reported in prescribing information for five GLP-1 receptor agonists.

Cumulative incidence of monotherapy failure in matched samples of sulfonylurea (n=717) versus metformin (n=3585), when followed for up to 5.5 years. Cumulative.

Overview of the actions of SGLT2, including the role of SGLT2 in glucose reabsorption in the proximal tubule (A) and sites of action at which SGLT2 inhibitors.

Fig. 3. (A) Least-squares (LS) mean difference in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline, and (B) LS mean difference in HbA1c from baseline over.

Percentage of patients with type 2 diabetes with A1C < 7% (n = 248), blood pressure > 130/80 mmHg (n = 248), and LDL cholesterol < 100 mg/dl (n = 207)

Glucose-lowering medication in type 2 diabetes: overall approach.

The concept of immortal time bias is depicted schematically using the cohort study from the Taiwanese National Health Insurance data during 2000–2007:

Algorithm for the management of patients with prediabetes or T2DM and definite NASH. This suggested therapeutic algorithm is based on the safety and efficacy.

Observed RW, modeled, and published trial estimates of HbA1c change from baseline. Observed RW, modeled, and published trial estimates of HbA1c change.

Antihyperglycemic therapy in type 2 diabetes: general recommendations (22). Antihyperglycemic therapy in type 2 diabetes: general recommendations (22).

ORs of receiving metformin for outcome measures, including age, number of comorbidities, provider age, A1C level, history of CHF, and use of medications,

Glycemic control and body weight over 52 weeks.

HbA1c differences between intensively and conventionally treated patients in major clinical trials, with baseline to endpoint HbA1c level in type 1 diabetes.

A1C at baseline and each maintenance month by treatment in the GEMINI trial, including the modified intention-to-treat population. A1C at baseline and.

(D) Systolic blood pressure (BP) values at baseline and after treatment with anagliptin in 20 participants at 12 and 24 weeks. . (D) Systolic blood pressure.

Mean changes (standard error) from baseline in A1C (A and B) and body weight (C and D) for patients with type 1 (A and C) or type 2 (B and D) diabetes.

Effects of placebo or carvedilol CR on 24-hour mean systolic blood pressure and diastolic blood pressure obtained by ambulatory monitoring in hypertensive.

Antihyperglycemic therapy in adults with type 2 diabetes

Recommendations for the treatment of confirmed hypertension in people with diabetes. *An ACE inhibitor (ACEi) or ARB is suggested to treat hypertension.

Mean BP by visit - all patients

Fig. 3: Possible algorithm for controlling blood pressure in diabetic patients with microalbuminuria. [This algorithm is based on the opinions and practice.

Glucose log of a 51-year-old patient with insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes and an A1C of 7.8% who takes 10 mg of glyburide at bedtime and 25 units of.

Adjusted ORs of increasing severity of heartburn at follow-up in reference to baseline from model adjusted for BMI category, CVD history, BDI score >11,

Algorithm for the metabolic management of type 2 diabetes; Reinforce lifestyle interventions at every visit and check A1C every 3 months until A1C is

Presentation transcript:

Side-by-side comparison of change in A1C with canagliflozin versus DPP-4 inhibitors in randomized clinical trials and the real-world study. *Data are LS mean change from baseline. †Data are mean change from baseline for patients with baseline A1C ≥7.0% who had A1C data at baseline and follow-up. ‡P = 0.686 for CANA versus DPP-4 inhibitor cohort. §P = 0.706 for CANA versus SITA cohort. ||P = 0.004 for CANA versus DPP-4 inhibitor cohort. ¶P = 0.010 for CANA versus SITA cohort. Side-by-side comparison of change in A1C with canagliflozin versus DPP-4 inhibitors in randomized clinical trials and the real-world study. *Data are LS mean change from baseline. †Data are mean change from baseline for patients with baseline A1C ≥7.0% who had A1C data at baseline and follow-up. ‡P = 0.686 for CANA versus DPP-4 inhibitor cohort. §P = 0.706 for CANA versus SITA cohort. ||P = 0.004 for CANA versus DPP-4 inhibitor cohort. ¶P = 0.010 for CANA versus SITA cohort. BP, blood pressure; CANA, canagliflozin; LS, least squares; MET, metformin; RCT, randomized controlled trial; SITA, sitagliptin; SU, sulfonylurea. Richard E. Pratley, and Eugenio Cersosimo Clin Diabetes 2017;35:141-153 ©2017 by American Diabetes Association