Safety and efficacy of long-term treatment with teneligliptin: Interim analysis of a post-marketing surveillance of more than 10,000 Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

14Citations
Citations of this article
34Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

This article is free to access.

Abstract

Background: This post-marketing surveillance examined the safety and efficacy of long-term teneligliptin therapy in Japanese patients. Research design and methods: We report interim results (cut-off date: 28 June 2017) of a 3-year PMS undertaken in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Survey items included demographics, treatments, adverse drug reactions (ADRs), and laboratory variables. A subgroup analysis was also performed across three age groups (<65 years; 65 to <75 years; ≥75 years). Main outcome measures were incidence of ADRs, laboratory variables, and change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline over time. Results: Of 11,677 patients registered, data from 10,532 patients (6,338 males/4,194 females) were analyzed for the safety analysis set; the median administration period was 731 days. Overall, ADRs and serious ADRs were reported in 364 (3.46%) and 91 patients (0.86%), respectively. The most common ADRs were all hypoglycemia (0.32%), constipation (0.27%), and hepatic function abnormal (0.24%). No change in mean body weight occurred, and a reduction in mean HbA1c was observed until 2 years. The safety and efficacy profiles did not differ markedly among the three age groups. Conclusions: These interim results show that teneligliptin was well tolerated and improved hyperglycemia in Japanese patients with T2DM in clinical practice.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Kadowaki, T., Haneda, M., Ito, H., Ueno, M., Matsukawa, M., Yamakura, T., … Iijima, H. (2018). Safety and efficacy of long-term treatment with teneligliptin: Interim analysis of a post-marketing surveillance of more than 10,000 Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Expert Opinion on Pharmacotherapy, 19(2), 83–91. https://doi.org/10.1080/14656566.2017.1420165

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free