Search

Aim: To evaluate the real‐world effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla‐300) in achieving glycaemic goals in insulin‐naïve people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Mexico, Colombia and Peru (Latin America region) in the A Toujeo Observational Study (ATOS). Materials and Methods: ATOS was a multicentre, prospective, 12‐month observational study, which included 4422 insulin‐naïve adults (age ≥ 18 years) with T2D uncontrolled (HbA1c > 7% and ≤11%) on at least one oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) who initiated Gla‐300 treatment as per routine practice. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants achieving their predefined individualized HbA1c goal at month 6. Key secondary endpoints included change from baseline in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting self‐monitored blood glucose (SMBG), body weight and incidence of hypoglycaemia. Results: In this subgroup analysis, a total of 314 participants with T2D received Gla‐300. At baseline, mean ± SD age was 56.0 ± 11.6 years, duration of diabetes was 9.7 ± 6.6 years and 65.9% of participants were on at least two OADs. The individualized HbA1c target was achieved by 25.8% of participants (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3‐31.9) at month 6 and by 35.3% (95% CI: 28.5‐42.5) at month 12. Gla‐300 treatment improved glycaemic control with meaningful reductions in mean HbA1c, FPG and fasting SMBG. The incidence of hypoglycaemia reported was low and body weight remained stable. Conclusions: In a real‐world setting in the Latin America region, the initiation of Gla‐300 in people with T2D uncontrolled on OADs resulted in improved glycaemic control with a low incidence of hypoglycaemia and no change in body weight. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To analyze the costs of high thromboembolic risk patients who require low molecular weight heparins (LMWHs) as a thromboprophylaxis strategy., Methods: Cost analysis was conducted to assess LMWHs (enoxaparin versus comparators: nadroparin and dalteparin) as thromboprophylaxis for hospitalized patients with high thromboembolic risk in Oncology, General or Orthopedic Surgery, and Internal Medicine services from the healthcare provider's perspective in Colombia. A decision tree was developed, and the health outcomes considered in the analysis were deep vein thrombosis, major bleeding, pulmonary thromboembolism, and chronic pulmonary hypertension. Clinical inputs were obtained from a systematic review of the literature and the economic parameters from micro-costing. Inputs were validated by three clinical experts. Costs were expressed in 2020 US dollars (USD)., Results: In a hypothetical cohort of 10,000 patients with a thromboprophylaxis use rate of 40%, the use of enoxaparin was less costly than that of dalteparin in Oncology (difference of USD 624,669), Orthopedic Surgery (difference of USD 275,829), and Internal Medicine (difference of USD 109,119) patients. For these services, using enoxaparin was more efficient than using nadroparin (cost differences of USD 654,069, USD 416,927, and USD 92,070, respectively). Sensitivity analysis showed an important influence of the number of patients undergoing thromboprophylaxis, as well as the unit cost, and the risk of events (DVT, PTE, and CTEPH)., Conclusion: Enoxaparin is the least expensive health technology for thromboprophylaxis in most of the medical contexts analyzed in Colombia due to its efficacy and the lower risk of complications than dalteparin and nadroparin., Competing Interests: JRS serve as a speaker for Sanofi on an occasional basis, participating in events and presentations related to the company’s interests in the healthcare sector. JCGC, JZ, JFL, and NJAZ received fees from ALZAK for developing this project. SLG and LSG are full-time employees of Sanofi and may own stock or stock options. The authors report no other conflicts of interest in this work., (© 2024 Rojas-Suarez et al.)