Table 3.
Key results from DCEs evaluating preference for profiles of different GLP1 RAs in patients with T2DM
| Injection experience | Key results | |
|---|---|---|
| Gelhorn et al18 | Injection-naïve | Most important attributes: dose frequency (RI 41.6%) and type of delivery system (35.5%); others of minor importance (frequency of nausea 10.4%, weight change 5.9%, HbAlc change 3.6%, frequency of hypoglycemia 3.0%) |
| Gelhorn et al19 | Injection-naïve | Most important attributes: dose frequency (RI 44.1%) and type of delivery system (26.3%); others of minor importance (frequency of nausea 15.1%, frequency of hypoglycemia 7.4%, weight change 6.2%, HbAlc change 1.0%) |
| Hauber et al20 | Injection-experienced and -naïve | Better device attributes preferred to worse attributes in all groupsa Change from QW to QD most important attribute in all groups; switching from longer/thicker to shorter/thinner needle and elimination of injection-site nodules also important predictors of choice All process attributes less important to patients when dosing was less frequent (ie, QW versus QD) |
| Jendle et al24 | NR | WTP for liraglutide (1.2 mg/day) versus exenatide (20 μg): change in HbAlc at 26 weeks €0.27/day, change in SBP at 26 weeks €0.20/day, change in body weight at 26 weeks −€0.46/day, minor hypoglycemia event rate €0.07/day, administration (frequency and mealtime dosing) €1.04/day, BG tests €0.00/day, frequency of nausea €0.08/day Overall, patients were prepared to pay an extra €0.81/day for liraglutide QD compared with exenatide BID |
| Polster et al22 | Injection-experienced and -naïve | HbAlc change and frequency of nausea most important attributes (RI 39% and 30%, respectively); frequency of hypoglycemia and dose schedule less important (17% and 14%, respectively)b |
| Qin et al15 | Injection-naïve | AEs, HbAlc change, and dose frequency most important attributes (ORs 2.14, 1.85, and 1.63, respectively; all P<0.05); less important were evidence of long-term efficacy/safety, need for titration, required preparation, type of device, and needle size (ORs 1.30, 1.12, 1.09, 1.04, and 1.03, respectively; all P<0.05) 64.2%, 31.1%, and 4.7% stated that QW, QD, and BID injectable regimens were easiest to follow |
| Qin et al23 | Injection-experienced | AEs, HbAlc change, dose frequency, required preparation, and evidence of long-term efficacy/safety were most important attributes (ORs 2.67, 2.58, 2.26; 1.71, and 1.13, respectively; all P≤0.01); type of device, needle size, and need for titration not significant predictors of preference HbAlc change (1.5-point improvement) was the most valued attribute in German patients (Germany versus UK OR 3.27 versus 2.00), while AE profile most valued in UK patients (Germany versus UK OR 2.91 versus 2.50) 72.0%, 27.1%, and 1.0% stated that QW, QD, and BID injectable regimens were easiest to follow |
Notes:
a
With exception of need for storage in a refrigerator, which was unexpectedly preferred by current liraglutide QD and insulin users;
b
dose schedule included frequency and timing (QD without regard to mealtimes versus QW during the hour prior to main meal).
Abbreviations: AE, adverse event; BG, blood glucose; BID, bis in die (twice daily); DCEs, discrete-choice experiments; HbAlc, glycated hemoglobin; NR, not reported; QD, quaque die (once daily); QW, once weekly; RAs, receptor agonists; RI, relative importance; SBP, systolic blood pressure; T2DM, type 2 diabetes mellitus; WTP, willingness to pay.