A Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Compare the Real-World Effectiveness of V-Go versus Standard Delivery of Insulin in Patients with Advanced Type 2 Diabetes
**Background:** Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) do not have adequate glycemic control, leading to poor patient outcomes and high healthcare costs. **Objective:** This prospective pragmatic clinical trial evaluated V-Go, a wearable insulin delivery device, compared with standard t...
Saved in:
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Columbia Data Analytics, LLC
2019-03-01
|
Series: | Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.36469/9731 |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
_version_ | 1823860355306094592 |
---|---|
author | Mark J. Cziraky Scott Abbott Matt Nguyen Kay Larholt Elizabeth Apgar Thomas Wasser Poul Strange Leon Shi H. Courtenay Harrison Beverly Everitt Lynn Nowak |
author_facet | Mark J. Cziraky Scott Abbott Matt Nguyen Kay Larholt Elizabeth Apgar Thomas Wasser Poul Strange Leon Shi H. Courtenay Harrison Beverly Everitt Lynn Nowak |
author_sort | Mark J. Cziraky |
collection | DOAJ |
description | **Background:** Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) do not have adequate glycemic control, leading to poor patient outcomes and high healthcare costs.
**Objective:** This prospective pragmatic clinical trial evaluated V-Go, a wearable insulin delivery device, compared with standard treatment optimization (STO) among insulin-treated patients with T2DM in a realworld, community-based practice setting.
**Methods:** Study sites, rather than individual patients, were randomized to V-Go or STO via cluster randomization. Patients were treated according to routine clinical practice and followed up to 4 months. T2DM medications and supplies were purchased utilizing usual insurance and co-pay systems. The primary analysis was an unadjusted treatment group comparison of glycosylated hemoglobinA1c (HbA1c) change from baseline to end of study (EOS). A cost of therapy analysis was completed on patients who had received comparable baseline T2DM treatment with multiple daily basal-bolus insulin injections (MDI).
**Results:** Analysis included 415 patients (169 V-Go, 246 STO) enrolled from 52 US sites. Mean baseline HbA1c (9.6%) was higher in V-Go (9.9%, range 8.0% - 14.2%) than STO (9.3%, range 7.9% - 13.9%, p <.001). HbA1c decreased from baseline to EOS in both V-Go (-1.0%, p<.001) and STO (-0.5%, p<.001); V-Go had significantly larger decrease (p=.002). V-Go had a significant reduction (p<.001) in mean insulin total daily dose (TDD; 0.76 U/kg baseline, 0.57 U/kg EOS), not seen in STO (0.72 U/kg baseline and EOS). The MDI group included 95 (56.2%) V-Go and 113 STO (45.9%) patients. Mean baseline HbA1c was significantly higher in V-Go (9.9%) than STO (9.4%). V-Go also experienced larger decrease in HbA1c from baseline (-1.0%) than STO (-0.36%) (p=.006) with a decrease in TDD, while STO TDD remained unchanged. EOS mean per patient per day cost of diabetes treatment was lower for V-Go ($30.59) vs STO ($32.20) (p=.006). V-Go was more cost effective than STO ($24.02 per 1% drop in HbA1c vs $58.86, respectively).
**Conclusions:** This pragmatic clinical trial demonstrated improved HbA1c levels, lower cost, and decreased insulin dose in patients with T2DM initiating V-Go vs STO in a real-world community-based practice setting. Observed baseline HbAlc indicated use of V-Go in more difficult to manage diabetes patients. |
format | Article |
id | doaj-art-89733cc7314a40b3b3e424271cbbcd12 |
institution | Kabale University |
issn | 2327-2236 |
language | English |
publishDate | 2019-03-01 |
publisher | Columbia Data Analytics, LLC |
record_format | Article |
series | Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research |
spelling | doaj-art-89733cc7314a40b3b3e424271cbbcd122025-02-10T16:13:01ZengColumbia Data Analytics, LLCJournal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research2327-22362019-03-0162A Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Compare the Real-World Effectiveness of V-Go versus Standard Delivery of Insulin in Patients with Advanced Type 2 DiabetesMark J. CzirakyScott AbbottMatt NguyenKay LarholtElizabeth ApgarThomas WasserPoul StrangeLeon ShiH. Courtenay HarrisonBeverly EverittLynn Nowak**Background:** Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) do not have adequate glycemic control, leading to poor patient outcomes and high healthcare costs. **Objective:** This prospective pragmatic clinical trial evaluated V-Go, a wearable insulin delivery device, compared with standard treatment optimization (STO) among insulin-treated patients with T2DM in a realworld, community-based practice setting. **Methods:** Study sites, rather than individual patients, were randomized to V-Go or STO via cluster randomization. Patients were treated according to routine clinical practice and followed up to 4 months. T2DM medications and supplies were purchased utilizing usual insurance and co-pay systems. The primary analysis was an unadjusted treatment group comparison of glycosylated hemoglobinA1c (HbA1c) change from baseline to end of study (EOS). A cost of therapy analysis was completed on patients who had received comparable baseline T2DM treatment with multiple daily basal-bolus insulin injections (MDI). **Results:** Analysis included 415 patients (169 V-Go, 246 STO) enrolled from 52 US sites. Mean baseline HbA1c (9.6%) was higher in V-Go (9.9%, range 8.0% - 14.2%) than STO (9.3%, range 7.9% - 13.9%, p <.001). HbA1c decreased from baseline to EOS in both V-Go (-1.0%, p<.001) and STO (-0.5%, p<.001); V-Go had significantly larger decrease (p=.002). V-Go had a significant reduction (p<.001) in mean insulin total daily dose (TDD; 0.76 U/kg baseline, 0.57 U/kg EOS), not seen in STO (0.72 U/kg baseline and EOS). The MDI group included 95 (56.2%) V-Go and 113 STO (45.9%) patients. Mean baseline HbA1c was significantly higher in V-Go (9.9%) than STO (9.4%). V-Go also experienced larger decrease in HbA1c from baseline (-1.0%) than STO (-0.36%) (p=.006) with a decrease in TDD, while STO TDD remained unchanged. EOS mean per patient per day cost of diabetes treatment was lower for V-Go ($30.59) vs STO ($32.20) (p=.006). V-Go was more cost effective than STO ($24.02 per 1% drop in HbA1c vs $58.86, respectively). **Conclusions:** This pragmatic clinical trial demonstrated improved HbA1c levels, lower cost, and decreased insulin dose in patients with T2DM initiating V-Go vs STO in a real-world community-based practice setting. Observed baseline HbAlc indicated use of V-Go in more difficult to manage diabetes patients.https://doi.org/10.36469/9731 |
spellingShingle | Mark J. Cziraky Scott Abbott Matt Nguyen Kay Larholt Elizabeth Apgar Thomas Wasser Poul Strange Leon Shi H. Courtenay Harrison Beverly Everitt Lynn Nowak A Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Compare the Real-World Effectiveness of V-Go versus Standard Delivery of Insulin in Patients with Advanced Type 2 Diabetes Journal of Health Economics and Outcomes Research |
title | A Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Compare the Real-World Effectiveness of V-Go versus Standard Delivery of Insulin in Patients with Advanced Type 2 Diabetes |
title_full | A Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Compare the Real-World Effectiveness of V-Go versus Standard Delivery of Insulin in Patients with Advanced Type 2 Diabetes |
title_fullStr | A Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Compare the Real-World Effectiveness of V-Go versus Standard Delivery of Insulin in Patients with Advanced Type 2 Diabetes |
title_full_unstemmed | A Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Compare the Real-World Effectiveness of V-Go versus Standard Delivery of Insulin in Patients with Advanced Type 2 Diabetes |
title_short | A Pragmatic Clinical Trial to Compare the Real-World Effectiveness of V-Go versus Standard Delivery of Insulin in Patients with Advanced Type 2 Diabetes |
title_sort | pragmatic clinical trial to compare the real world effectiveness of v go versus standard delivery of insulin in patients with advanced type 2 diabetes |
url | https://doi.org/10.36469/9731 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT markjcziraky apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT scottabbott apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT mattnguyen apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT kaylarholt apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT elizabethapgar apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT thomaswasser apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT poulstrange apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT leonshi apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT hcourtenayharrison apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT beverlyeveritt apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT lynnnowak apragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT markjcziraky pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT scottabbott pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT mattnguyen pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT kaylarholt pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT elizabethapgar pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT thomaswasser pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT poulstrange pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT leonshi pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT hcourtenayharrison pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT beverlyeveritt pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes AT lynnnowak pragmaticclinicaltrialtocomparetherealworldeffectivenessofvgoversusstandarddeliveryofinsulininpatientswithadvancedtype2diabetes |