Metformin discontinuation in patients beginning second-line glucose-lowering therapy: results from the global observational DISCOVER study programme

Objectives To evaluate the extent to which patients with type 2 diabetes discontinue metformin therapy when initiating second-line treatment and factors associated with metformin discontinuation, using baseline data from the DISCOVER study programme. Design DISCOVER is a 3-year, prospective, observational study programme including data from 38 countries across 6 continents from 2014 to 2019. Setting Primary and secondary healthcare centres, hospitals and specialist diabetes centres in both urban and rural locations. Participants A total of 15 992 patients with type 2 diabetes initiating second-line glucose-lowering therapy. Primary and secondary outcome measures The proportion of patients who discontinued metformin as a second-line therapy and the factors associated with this treatment change. Results Of the 14 668 patients (from 37 countries) with valid treatment data, 11 837 (80.7%) received metformin as first-line glucose-lowering therapy; 8488 (71.7%) received metformin monotherapy and 3349 (28.3%) received metformin as part of a combination therapy. Overall, treatment with metformin was discontinued in 15.1% (1782) of patients who received first-line metformin (14.1% (1194) and 17.6% (588) in those who received metformin as monotherapy and as part of a combination, respectively); this proportion varied across regions from 6.9% (54) in Africa to 20.6% (628) in South-East Asia. On metformin discontinuation, 73.6% (1311) of patients received a non-insulin monotherapy at second line. Factors associated with an increased odds of metformin discontinuation were older age (≥75 years) and having a history of chronic kidney disease. The probability of metformin monotherapy discontinuation was lower in patients from Africa than in those from Europe. Conclusions A substantial number of patients discontinued taking metformin when beginning second-line therapy. Most of these patients subsequently received a non-insulin monotherapy at second line, in contradiction to international guidelines and potentially leaving them at an increased risk of hyperglycaemia and associated adverse outcomes. Trial registration numbers NCT02322762 and NCT02226822.

[1]  C. Mathieu,et al.  Correction to: 2019 update to: Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2018. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of diabetes (EASD) , 2020, Diabetologia.

[2]  M. Dietlein.  [Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes. Consensus Report 2018 by the ADA and EASD]. , 2019, MMW Fortschritte der Medizin.

[3]  Geltrude Mingrone,et al.  Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2018. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) , 2018, Diabetes Care.

[4]  S. Yusuf,et al.  Availability and affordability of essential medicines for diabetes across high-income, middle-income, and low-income countries: a prospective epidemiological study. , 2018, The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology.

[5]  Irl B Hirsch,et al.  AACE/ACE Consensus Statement CONSENSUS STATEMENT BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY ON THE COMPREHENSIVE TYPE 2 DIABETES MANAGEMENT ALGORITHM – 2018 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY , 2018 .

[6]  W. Rathmann,et al.  Towards an improved global understanding of treatment and outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes: Rationale and methods of the DISCOVER observational study program. , 2017, Journal of diabetes and its complications.

[7]  R. Herings,et al.  Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treatment Patterns Across Europe: A Population-based Multi-database Study. , 2017, Clinical therapeutics.

[8]  Mark C. Wheldon,et al.  Extending Metformin Use in Diabetic Kidney Disease: A Pharmacokinetic Study in Stage 4 Diabetic Nephropathy , 2017, Kidney international reports.

[9]  M. Barry,et al.  Oral Pharmacologic Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Clinical Practice Guideline Update From the American College of Physicians. , 2017, Annals of internal medicine.

[10]  Krystal L. Edwards,et al.  Provider Decisions and Patient Outcomes After Premature Metformin Discontinuation , 2017, Diabetes Spectrum.

[11]  A. Hung,et al.  Comparative Effectiveness of Second-Line Agents for the Treatment of Diabetes Type 2 in Preventing Kidney Function Decline. , 2016, Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN.

[12]  D. Matthews,et al.  Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2015: a patient-centred approach. Update to a Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes , 2015, Diabetologia.

[13]  D. Matthews,et al.  Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2015: A Patient-Centered Approach: Update to a Position Statement of the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes , 2014, Diabetes Care.

[14]  Paul Shekelle,et al.  Oral Pharmacologic Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Clinical Practice Guideline From the American College of Physicians , 2012, Annals of Internal Medicine.

[15]  V. Basevi,et al.  Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes , 2018 .

[16]  K. Lipska,et al.  Use of Metformin in the Setting of Mild-to-Moderate Renal Insufficiency , 2011, Diabetes Care.

[17]  K. Larsen,et al.  Interpreting Parameters in the Logistic Regression Model with Random Effects , 2000, Biometrics.

[18]  K. Stowman.  World health statistics. , 1949, The Milbank Memorial Fund quarterly.

[19]  K. Ogurtsova.  IDF Diabetes Atlas: Global estimates for theprevalence of diabetes for 2015 and 2040 - K. Ogurtsova - International Diabetes Federation, Brussels, Belgium , 2020 .

[20]  Belgium.,et al.  Global guideline for type 2 diabetes. , 2014, Diabetes research and clinical practice.

[21]  Juan Merlo,et al.  Appropriate assessment of neighborhood effects on individual health: integrating random and fixed effects in multilevel logistic regression. , 2005, American journal of epidemiology.