進階搜尋


   電子論文尚未授權公開,紙本請查館藏目錄
(※如查詢不到或館藏狀況顯示「閉架不公開」,表示該本論文不在書庫,無法取用。)
系統識別號 U0026-1408201501035700
論文名稱(中文) 利用台灣健保資料庫分析DPP-4 inhibitors對於第二型糖尿病病患的大血管病變的療效分析
論文名稱(英文) Comparative Effectiveness of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes: Evidence from a Population-Based National Cohort from Taiwan
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 臨床藥學與藥物科技研究所
系所名稱(英) Institute of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical sciences
學年度 103
學期 2
出版年 104
研究生(中文) 張凱程
研究生(英文) Kai-Cheng Chang
學號 S66021028
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 189頁
口試委員 指導教授-歐凰姿
口試委員-吳晉祥
口試委員-鄭靜蘭
召集委員-吳宗軒
口試委員-李惠娟
中文關鍵字 糖尿病  雙基胜肽酶-4型抑制劑  大血管病變  處方型態分析 
英文關鍵字 Type 2 diabetes mellitus  dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors utilization  macrovascular diseases  utilization 
學科別分類
中文摘要 研究背景
根據文獻回顧,全球糖尿病人口都在成長當中,預估在2035年全球糖尿病人口會超過5億人,這其中也包含著台灣,隨著糖尿病人口的增加,伴隨而來的問題並不僅是只有糖尿病本身的問題,還有其大小血管的併發症,醫療負擔將是更加的沉重,因此糖尿病的課題是我們當前一件重要的事情。糖尿病的治療,除了生活型態改變外,藥物的治療也是佔了相當大的一部分,目前第一線的口服降血糖藥物為metformin,二線用藥則有sulfonylurea、meglitinide、acarbose、thiazolidinedione與新型的口服降血糖藥物DPP-4 inhibitors,DPP-4 inhibitors相較於傳統的藥物副作用較少,臨床試驗也證實其降血糖的效果,但於預防大血管病變的風險,並無充足的實證比較DPP-4 inhibitors與傳統二線口服降血糖藥,且到目前為止台灣尚未有本土性實證,分析目前DPP-4 inhibitors的處方型態與臨床療效 (effectiveness)。
研究目的
1. DPP-4 inhibitors處方型態分析
2. DPP-4 inhibitors臨床療效分析 (effectiveness)
研究方法
本研究利用台灣健保資料庫中的糖尿病病人抽樣歸人檔1999-2012年承保資料,擷取第二型糖尿病病人,於處方型態分析-(1),分析2008年至2012年口服降血糖藥的耗用量及花費;處方型態分析-(2),擷取1999年至2010年第二型糖尿病並且接受metformin-based治療的病人,分析在2011年至2012年DPP-4 inhibitors被處方的型態;比較metformin合併二線藥物,擷取單一穩定使用metformin的第二型糖尿病病人,並且在2009年至2010年加上 (add-on) 第二線口服降血糖藥物,追蹤病人加入二線藥物後,因大血管事件 (中風、心衰竭與急性心肌梗塞) 住院的風險,利用Cox proportional hazard model作存活分析;DPP-4 inhibitors療效分析,考慮糖尿病在臨床治療上的多變性,利用time-varying Cox proportional hazard model,加入隨時間改變的變項,分析各類藥物於大血管事件的風險。
研究結果
處方型態分析-(1)的結果,DPP-4 inhibitors的耗用量比率從2009年的1.5%,至2012年成長到9.4%,花費從2009年的$126,341,610 (5.9%),至2012年成長到$769,964,779 (33%);處方型態分析-(2),目前DPP-4 inhibitors在台灣的使用上,metformin單一使用組,有75%的病人會將metformin換成DPP-4 inhibitors,metformin-based組,有58.2%的病人會將DDP-4 inhibitors選擇作為第三線用藥;DPP-4 inhibitors療效分析,結果顯示DPP-4 inhibitors相較於sulfonylurea發生大血管事件的風險為1.06 (95%信賴區間,0.94-1.19),中風風險為1.05 (95%信賴區間,0.91-1.21);比較metformin合併二線口服降血糖藥物,合併DPP-4 inhibitors組相較於sulfonylurea組,在傾向分數 (propensity score) 1:1配對後,發生合併全部大血管事件風險為0.814 (95%信賴區間,0.668- 0.991 ),中風風險為0.755 (95%信賴區間,0.580-0.983 ),心衰竭為1.047 (95%信賴區間,0.763-1.438 )。
研究結論
研究結果顯示DPP-4 inhibitors在台灣使用趨勢顯示逐年上升,花費更是上升更為快速,但目前DPP-4 inhibitors在台灣還是被認為是二線藥物的替代選擇或三線用藥,療效分析結果顯示,DPP-4 inhibitors作為metformin的add-on用藥,降低大血管事件 (中風與急性心衰竭) 風險比sulfonylurea較為優秀,因此在臨床上,建議DPP-4 inhibitors可為二線用藥的首選。

關鍵字:糖尿病、雙基胜肽酶-4型抑制劑、大血管病變、處方型態分析
英文摘要 SUMMARY
We analyzed the prescription and medical expenditures of oral hypoglycemic agents in Taiwan, especially focusing on dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i). Then, we analyzed the effectiveness of DPP4i and comparative effectiveness of DPP4i as second-line oral hypoglycemic agents in the patient with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The trend of amount and cost of DPP4i increased rapidly from 2009 to 2012 in Taiwan. DPP4i were shown to decrease the risk of CVD by using 1 defined daily dose. And metformin plus DPP4i showed more effectiveness on CVD events as compared to metformin plus sulfonylurea.

Key words: dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, type 2 diabetes mellitus, utilization, macrovascular diseases

INTRODUCTION
The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) increases substantially worldwide. The burden of diabetes and associated complications will become more serious in the future. In the pharmacotherapy of T2DM, Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) are newly available antidiabetic drugs that can be used as combination therapy with other oral hypoglycemic agents (as 2nd or 3rd add-on drug). The effect of DPP4i on CVD outcomes has been investigated in clinical trials where DPP4i was not associated with an increased CVD risk or had a potential reduction of CVD events. However, comparative researches with sufficient sample and follow up are exile. Moreover, the utilization of oral hypoglycemic agents, including DPP4i, has not been analysis in Taiwan. Our study objective specified in below:
1. Prescription and medical expenditures of oral hypoglycemic agents in Taiwan, especially focusing on DPP4i.
2. Comparative effectiveness and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in Taiwan T2DM patient.

MATERIALS AND METHODS
We utilized the Longitudinal Cohort of Diabetes Patients (LHDB), the database is sampling the diabetes patients from National Health Insurance Research database (NHIRD).

Utilization of oral hypoglycemic agents-
Study patients were derived from the LHDB if they met: aged > 18 years, type 2 diabetes and at least one OHAs prescribed. First, we presented the market share of each OHA per year as the percentage of amount (in terms of defined daily dose, DDD) and costs for a given OHA within total OHAs through 2009 to 2012. Second, we analyzed prescription pattern of OHAs to identify the percentage of the patients being added-on or switched to DPP4i since it was available.
Comparative effectiveness and safety of metformin plus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in Taiwan T2DM patient-
The 1999-2010 dataset were used to identify cases with any hospitalized event for diabetes as one of the discharge diagnoses or those with any outpatient visits for DM. The patient with stable metformin use and add-on second-line OHAs in 2009-2010 were be included in study population. The primary outcome were observation the first macro vascular disease (MCVD) related hospitalization after index date. We used Cox proportional hazards model to analysis the relative risk between each class OHAs.
Effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors-
We included T2DM patient with first use OHAs in 2009-2010. Because the treatment of DM may change according to patient situation. We use time-varying Cox proportional hazard to control the some variables that may change by time and analysis the relative risk between DPP4i and sulfonylurea.

RESULT
Utilization of oral hypoglycemic agents-
The average annual utilization and costs associated with DPP4i significantly increased over time. The percentage of DPP4i use in OHAs was 1.53 % in 2010 and 9.42 % in 2012 (6 fold of) which was most prescribed OHA as followed by sulfonylurea and metformin. The estimated average costs of DPP4i were $126,341,610 (NTD) and $769,964,779 (NTD) in 2012, which accounted for 33% of total healthcare spending of OHAs and was the highest spending OHA. Also, during 2010-2012, 75% of mono-therapy OHA users (n=1,647) switched to DPP4i and 13.7% of them (n=1,478) were added on DPP4i; 42.6% of dual OHA users (n=953) were switched to DPP4i and 58.2% of them (n=9,707) were added on DPP4i; 7% of triple OHA therapy users (n=2,137) switched to DPP4i.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of metformin plus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in Taiwan T2DM patient-
A total of 47,346 patients who met our criteria were included in the study cohort used with SU (n=37248), DPP4i (n=3411), TZD (n=1060), Acarbose (n=2742), Meglitinde (n=2885). In adjusted analyses with metformin+SU as reference, metformin+DPP4i was associated with relative risk of 0.814 (0.668-0.991) for MCVD, 0.755 (0.580-0.983) for stroke, 0.598 (0.370-0.966) for Acute myocardial infarction, 1.047 (0.763-1.438) for heart failure.
Effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors-
The cohort included 123,132 new users of oral antidiabetic drugs. DPP-4 inhibitors users show similar relative risk of MCVD hospitalization to sulfonylurea users (adjusted hazard ratio 1.060, 95% confidence interval, 0.944-1.189), the adjusted hazard ratio of patients without CVD history is 0.895 (95% confidence interval, 0.745-1.074).

CONCLUSION
The use and cost of DPP-4 inhibitors have rapidly increased after DPP-4 inhibitors was approved in Taiwan. There was a reduction in MCVD relative hospitalization for patients treated with metformin combined with DPP4i versus metformin plus SU.
論文目次 目錄
中文摘要 i
Extended abstract iii
表目錄… xii
圖目錄… xiv
第一篇 利用台灣健保資料庫比較Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4抑制劑於 第二型糖尿病病患之大血管病變療效分析 1
第一章 研究背景 1
第二章 文獻回顧 2
第二章 第一節 糖尿病介紹 2
2.1.1 糖尿病定義與臨床症狀 2
2.1.2 糖尿病流行病學 4
2.1.3 糖尿病相關併發症 6
2.1.4 糖尿病併發症流行病學 8
2.1.5 糖尿病的治療 10
第二章 第二節 DPP-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) efficacy 11
2.2.1 簡介口服降血糖藥 ─ DPP-4 inhibitors 11
2.2.2 DPP-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) 臨床療效 14
第二章 第三節 DPP-4 inhibitors effectiveness 16
第二章 第四節 DPP-4 inhibitors safety 21
第三章 研究目的 22
3.1.1 文獻回顧總結 22
3.1.2 論文研究目的 23
3.1.3 論文研究假設 23
第四章 研究方法 24
第四章 第一節 研究架構 24
4.1.1 研究類型 24
4.1.2 研究材料 24
4.1.3 研究架構 24
第四章 第二節 DPP-4 inhibitors 處方型態研究 – (1) 25
4.2.1 研究背景及研究設計 25
4.2.2 納入條件 25
第四章 第二節 DPP-4 inhibitors 處方型態研究 – (2) 26
4.2.1 研究設計 26
4.2.2 納入條件 27
4.2.3 排除條件 27
4.2.4 各研究組別分析結果圖示 27
第四章 第三節 DPP-4 inhibitors 於大血管病變療效分析 28
4.3.1 研究背景及研究設計 28
4.3.2 納入條件 29
4.3.3 排除條件 29
4.3.4 研究流程 30
第四章 第四節 於糖尿病二線藥物中比較Metformin合併DPP-4 inhibitors與傳統Metformin合併sulfonylurea於大血管病變療效分析 31
4.4.1 研究背景及研究設計 31
4.4.2 納入條件 32
4.4.3 排除條件 33
4.4.4 研究流程 33
第四章 第五節 研究名詞及操作型定義 34
4.5.1 研究名詞及操作型定義 34
第四章 第六節 統計分析 48
4.6.1 統計工具 48
4.6.2 統計模式設定 48
4.6.3 資料分析方法 48
第五章 研究結果 49
第五章 第一節 DPP-4 inhibitors 處方型態分析-(1) 研究結果 49
5.1.1 處方型態分析研究流程 49
5.1.2 各類口服降血糖藥物使用量分析結果 50
5.1.3 各類口服降血糖藥物花費 54
第五章 第二節 DPP-4 inhibitors 處方型態分析-(2) 研究結果 58
5.2.1 研究流程及病人摘選 58
5.2.2 糖尿病病人換藥或加藥的選擇 59
第五章 第三節 DPP-4 inhibitors 於大血管事件療效分析結果 62
5.3.1 研究流程 62
5.3.2 世代研究病人臨床特質 62
5.3.3 各組預防大血管事件的風險 65
5.3.4 DPP-4 inhibitors於大血管事件療效分析總結 68
第五章 第四節 於糖尿病二線藥物中比較Metformin合併DPP-4 inhibitors與傳統Metformin合併sulfonylurea於大血管病變療效分析 69
5.4.1 世代研究病人篩選 69
5.4.2 各研究組病人臨床特質 71
5.4.3 以所有變項計算出各組的傾向分數 (propensity score) 74
5.4.4 各組利用傾向分數配對後的病人特質 74
5.4.5 各組尚未配對前大血管事件及死亡的發生百分比 85
5.4.6 各組配對後發生大血管事件的比率與相對風險 87
5.4.7 次分析 ─ 各組發生死亡的風險 89
5.4.8次分析 ─ 增加觀察終點 (censor point) 後各組大血管事件的風險 95
5.4.9 次分析 ─ 加入隨時間改變的變項後大血管事件的風險 98
5.4.10 次分析-加入指標日期後病人metformin藥品持有率的排除條件 101
5.4.11次分析 ─ DPP-4 inhibitors 做為第三線口服降血糖藥物的療效 103
5.4.12 安全性分析 ─ DPP-4 inhibitors發生低血糖及胰臟炎之風險 108
5.4.13比較Metformin合併DPP-4 inhibitors或其他二線藥物與傳統Metformin合併sulfonylurea於大血管病變療效分析研究結果總結 109
第六章 研究結果討論 110
第六章 第一節 處方型態分析 ─ (1) 結果討論 110
6.1.1 口服降血糖藥耗用量結果討論 110
6.1.2 口服降血糖藥物花費結果討論 112
第六章 第二節 處方型態分析 ─ (2) 結果討論 113
第六章 第三節 DPP-4 inhibitors療效分析結果討論 114
6.3.1 病人臨床特質分布 114
6.3.2 研究方法與研究結果討論 115
第六章 第四節 於糖尿病二線藥物中Metformin合併DPP-4 inhibitors與傳統Metformin合併sulfonylurea於大血管病變療效分析結果討論 117
6.4.1 世代研究病人臨床特質討論 117
6.4.2 大血管事件風險結果討論 119
6.4.3 DPP-4 inhibitors心衰竭風險討論 123
6.3.4 安全性討論 128
第六章 第四節 研究優勢 131
第六章 第五節 研究限制 132
第六章 第六節 研究結果總論與臨床建議 133
第六章 第七節 未來研究方向 134
第二篇 臨床藥事服務 ─ 評估糖尿病病人生活品質 135
第一章 服務背景 135
第二章 服務目標 136
第三章 服務方法及服務材料 136
第三章 第一節 服務方法 136
3.1.1 服務對象 136
3.1.2 服務地點 137
第三章 第二節 服務材料 137
第四章 服務結果 138
第五章 服務討論與未來方向 138
參考文獻 139
附錄…… 147


參考文獻 參考文獻
1. Guariguata L, Whiting DR, Hambleton I, Beagley J, Linnenkamp U, Shaw JE. Global estimates of diabetes prevalence for 2013 and projections for 2035. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2014;103(2):137-149.
2. Jiang Y-D, Chang C-H, Tai T-Y, Chen J-F, Chuang L-M. Incidence and prevalence rates of diabetes mellitus in Taiwan: Analysis of the 2000–2009 Nationwide Health Insurance database. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association.111(11):599-604.
3. Cheng JS, Tsai WC, Lin CL, et al. Trend and factors associated with healthcare use and costs in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a decade experience of a universal health insurance program. Medical care. 2015;53(2):116-124.
4. Drucker DJ. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition and the treatment of type 2 diabetes: preclinical biology and mechanisms of action. Diabetes care. 2007;30(6):1335-1343.
5. Association AD. 7. Approaches to Glycemic Treatment. Diabetes care. 2015;38(Supplement 1):S41-S48.
6. Amori RE, Lau J, Pittas AG. Efficacy and safety of incretin therapy in type 2 diabetes: systematic review and meta-analysis. Jama. 2007;298(2):194-206.
7. Scheen AJ, Charpentier G, Ostgren CJ, Hellqvist A, Gause-Nilsson I. Efficacy and safety of saxagliptin in combination with metformin compared with sitagliptin in combination with metformin in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetes Metab Res Rev. 2010;26(7):540-549.
8. Patil HR, Al Badarin FJ, Al Shami HA, et al. Meta-analysis of effect of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors on cardiovascular risk in type 2 diabetes mellitus. Am J Cardiol. 2012;110(6):826-833.
9. Association AD. 2. Classification and Diagnosis of Diabetes. Diabetes care. 2015;38(Supplement 1):S8-S16.
10. Report of the Expert Committee on the Diagnosis and Classification of Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes care. 1997;20(7):1183-1197.
11. Zhang X, Gregg EW, Williamson DF, et al. A1C level and future risk of diabetes: a systematic review. Diabetes care. 2010;33(7):1665-1673.
12. IDF DIABETES ATLAS. 2013. www.idf.org/diabetesatlas.
13. Chan JC, Malik V, Jia W, et al. Diabetes in Asia: epidemiology, risk factors, and pathophysiology. Jama. 2009;301(20):2129-2140.
14. Ramachandran A, Ma RC, Snehalatha C. Diabetes in Asia. Lancet. 2010;375(9712):408-418.
15. 台灣國人十大死因. http://www.hpa.gov.tw/Bhpnet/Web/Index/Index.aspx.
16. Association AD. 8. Cardiovascular Disease and Risk Management. Diabetes care. 2015;38(Supplement 1):S49-S57.
17. Association AD. 9. Microvascular Complications and Foot Care. Diabetes care. 2015;38(Supplement 1):S58-S66.
18. Huang Y-Y, Lin K-D, Jiang Y-D, et al. Diabetes-related kidney, eye, and foot disease in Taiwan: An analysis of the nationwide data for 2000–2009. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association.111(11):637-644.
19. Tseng L-N, Tseng Y-H, Jiang Y-D, et al. Prevalence of hypertension and dyslipidemia and their associations with micro- and macrovascular diseases in patients with diabetes in Taiwan: An analysis of nationwide data for 2000–2009. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association.111(11):625-636.
20. Selvin E, Marinopoulos S, Berkenblit G, et al. Meta-analysis: glycosylated hemoglobin and cardiovascular disease in diabetes mellitus. Ann Intern Med. 2004;141(6):421-431.
21. Intensive blood-glucose control with sulphonylureas or insulin compared with conventional treatment and risk of complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (UKPDS 33). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Lancet. 1998;352(9131):837-853.
22. Patel A, MacMahon S, Chalmers J, et al. Intensive blood glucose control and vascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes. The New England journal of medicine. 2008;358(24):2560-2572.
23. Ismail-Beigi F, Craven T, Banerji MA, et al. Effect of intensive treatment of hyperglycaemia on microvascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: an analysis of the ACCORD randomised trial. Lancet. 2010;376(9739):419-430.
24. Duckworth W, Abraira C, Moritz T, et al. Glucose control and vascular complications in veterans with type 2 diabetes. The New England journal of medicine. 2009;360(2):129-139.
25. Gerstein HC, Riddle MC, Kendall DM, et al. Glycemia treatment strategies in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial. Am J Cardiol. 2007;99(12A):34i-43i.
26. Hayward RA, Reaven PD, Wiitala WL, et al. Follow-up of glycemic control and cardiovascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes. The New England journal of medicine. 2015;372(23):2197-2206.
27. Holman RR, Paul SK, Bethel MA, Matthews DR, Neil HAW. 10-Year Follow-up of Intensive Glucose Control in Type 2 Diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine. 2008;359(15):1577-1589.
28. Bennett WL, Maruthur NM, Singh S, et al. Comparative effectiveness and safety of medications for type 2 diabetes: an update including new drugs and 2-drug combinations. Ann Intern Med. 2011;154(9):602-613.
29. GLOBAL GUIDELINE FOR TYPE 2 DIABETES. 2012. http://www.idf.org/.
30. Yee HS, Fong NT. A review of the safety and efficacy of acarbose in diabetes mellitus. Pharmacotherapy. 1996;16(5):792-805.
31. Inzucchi SE. Oral antihyperglycemic therapy for type 2 diabetes: Scientific review. Jama. 2002;287(3):360-372.
32. Shaya FT, Shin JY, Mullins D, Fatodu HO, Gu A, Saunders E. Medicaid managed care: disparities in the use of thiazolidinediones compared with metformin. J Natl Med Assoc. 2005;97(4):493-497.
33. Turner RC, Cull CA, Frighi V, Holman RR. Glycemic control with diet, sulfonylurea, metformin, or insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: progressive requirement for multiple therapies (UKPDS 49). UK Prospective Diabetes Study (UKPDS) Group. Jama. 1999;281(21):2005-2012.
34. Karagiannis T, Paschos P, Paletas K, Matthews DR, Tsapas A. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in the clinical setting: systematic review and meta-analysis. Vol 3442012.
35. Golightly LK, Drayna CC, McDermott MT. Comparative clinical pharmacokinetics of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2012;51(8):501-514.
36. Baetta R, Corsini A. Pharmacology of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: similarities and differences. Drugs. 2011;71(11):1441-1467.
37. Inzucchi SE, Bergenstal RM, Buse JB, 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. Diabetes care. 2015;38(1):140-149.
38. Raz I, Hanefeld M, Xu L, Caria C, Williams-Herman D, Khatami H. Efficacy and safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin as monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Diabetologia. 2006;49(11):2564-2571.
39. Charbonnel B, Karasik A, Liu J, Wu M, Meininger G. Efficacy and safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin added to ongoing metformin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin alone. Diabetes care. 2006;29(12):2638-2643.
40. Rosenstock J, Aguilar-Salinas C, Klein E, Nepal S, List J, Chen R. Effect of saxagliptin monotherapy in treatment-naive patients with type 2 diabetes. Current medical research and opinion. 2009;25(10):2401-2411.
41. DeFronzo RA, Hissa MN, Garber AJ, et al. The efficacy and safety of saxagliptin when added to metformin therapy in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes with metformin alone. Diabetes care. 2009;32(9):1649-1655.
42. Ristic S, Byiers S, Foley J, Holmes D. Improved glycaemic control with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition in patients with type 2 diabetes: vildagliptin (LAF237) dose response. Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2005;7(6):692-698.
43. Ahren B, Gomis R, Standl E, Mills D, Schweizer A. Twelve- and 52-week efficacy of the dipeptidyl peptidase IV inhibitor LAF237 in metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes care. 2004;27(12):2874-2880.
44. Del Prato S, Barnett AH, Huisman H, Neubacher D, Woerle HJ, Dugi KA. Effect of linagliptin monotherapy on glycaemic control and markers of beta-cell function in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial. Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2011;13(3):258-267.
45. Taskinen MR, Rosenstock J, Tamminen I, et al. Safety and efficacy of linagliptin as add-on therapy to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2011;13(1):65-74.
46. DeFronzo RA, Fleck PR, Wilson CA, Mekki Q. Efficacy and safety of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor alogliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycemic control: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Diabetes care. 2008;31(12):2315-2317.
47. Seino Y, Miyata Y, Hiroi S, Hirayama M, Kaku K. Efficacy and safety of alogliptin added to metformin in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with an open-label, long-term extension study. Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2012;14(10):927-936.
48. Eurich DT, Simpson S, Senthilselvan A, Asche CV, Sandhu-Minhas JK, McAlister FA. Comparative safety and effectiveness of sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes: retrospective population based cohort study. BMJ (Clinical research ed.). 2013;346:f2267.
49. Mogensen UM, Andersson C, Fosbol EL, et al. Cardiovascular safety of combination therapies with incretin-based drugs and metformin compared with a combination of metformin and sulphonylurea in type 2 diabetes mellitus--a retrospective nationwide study. Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2014;16(10):1001-1008.
50. Morgan CL, Mukherjee J, Jenkins-Jones S, Holden SE, Currie CJ. Combination therapy with metformin plus sulphonylureas versus metformin plus DPP-4 inhibitors: association with major adverse cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality. Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2014;16(10):977-983.
51. White WB, Cannon CP, Heller SR, et al. Alogliptin after Acute Coronary Syndrome in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes. New England Journal of Medicine. 2013;369(14):1327-1335.
52. Scirica BM, Bhatt DL, Braunwald E, et al. Saxagliptin and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The New England journal of medicine. 2013;369(14):1317-1326.
53. Green JB, Bethel MA, Armstrong PW, et al. Effect of Sitagliptin on Cardiovascular Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes. The New England journal of medicine. 2015.
54. Elashoff M, Matveyenko AV, Gier B, Elashoff R, Butler PC. Pancreatitis, pancreatic, and thyroid cancer with glucagon-like peptide-1-based therapies. Gastroenterology. 2011;141(1):150-156.
55. Garg R, Chen W, Pendergrass M. Acute pancreatitis in type 2 diabetes treated with exenatide or sitagliptin: a retrospective observational pharmacy claims analysis. Diabetes care. 2010;33(11):2349-2354.
56. Singh S, Chang HY, Richards TM, Weiner JP, Clark JM, Segal JB. Glucagonlike peptide 1-based therapies and risk of hospitalization for acute pancreatitis in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a population-based matched case-control study. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(7):534-539.
57. 高雅慧, 郭垂文, 洪輝榮, 賈淑雯. Classification of Pharmaceutical Products Reimbursed by National Health Insurance by the ATC System. The Chinese Pharmaceutical Journal. 2002;54(4):283-290.
58. 2001 年ICD-9-CM 疾病碼一覽表. http://www.nhi.gov.tw/webdata/webdata.aspx?menu=20&menu_id=712&webdata_id=10082014.
59. Lee E, Wei LJ, Amato D, Leurgans S. Cox-Type Regression Analysis for Large Numbers of Small Groups of Correlated Failure Time Observations. In: Klein J, Goel P, eds. Survival Analysis: State of the Art. Vol 211: Springer Netherlands; 1992:237-247.
60. Charlson ME, Pompei P, Ales KL, MacKenzie CR. A new method of classifying prognostic comorbidity in longitudinal studies: development and validation. J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-383.
61. O'Connell RL, Lim LL. Utility of the Charlson comorbidity index computed from routinely collected hospital discharge diagnosis codes. Methods Inf Med. 2000;39(1):7-11.
62. Young BA, Lin E, Von Korff M, et al. Diabetes complications severity index and risk of mortality, hospitalization, and healthcare utilization. Am J Manag Care. 2008;14(1):15-23.
63. D'Agostino RB, Jr. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment to a non-randomized control group. Stat Med. 1998;17(19):2265-2281.
64. Chang C-H, Jiang Y-D, Chung C-H, Ho L-T, Chuang L-M. National trends in anti-diabetic treatment in Taiwan, 2000–2009. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association.111(11):617-624.
65. Rafaniello C, Arcoraci V, Ferrajolo C, et al. Trends in the prescription of antidiabetic medications from 2009 to 2012 in a general practice of Southern Italy: A population-based study. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 2015.
66. Chang YC, Chuang LM, Lin JW, Chen ST, Lai MS, Chang CH. Cardiovascular risks associated with second-line oral antidiabetic agents added to metformin in patients with Type 2 diabetes: a nationwide cohort study. Diabetic medicine : a journal of the British Diabetic Association. 2015.
67. Monami M, Dicembrini I, Martelli D, Mannucci E. Safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Current medical research and opinion. 2011;27 Suppl 3:57-64.
68. Frederich R, Alexander JH, Fiedorek FT, et al. A systematic assessment of cardiovascular outcomes in the saxagliptin drug development program for type 2 diabetes. Postgrad Med. 2010;122(3):16-27.
69. Ussher JR, Drucker DJ. Cardiovascular biology of the incretin system. Endocr Rev. 2012;33(2):187-215.
70. Monami M, Lamanna C, Desideri CM, Mannucci E. DPP-4 inhibitors and lipids: systematic review and meta-analysis. Adv Ther. 2012;29(1):14-25.
71. Koska J, Sands M, Burciu C, Reaven P. Cardiovascular effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes & vascular disease research. 2015;12(3):154-163.
72. Kannan S, Pantalone KM, Matsuda S, Wells BJ, Karafa M, Zimmerman RS. Risk of overall mortality and cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes on dual drug therapy including metformin: A large database study from the Cleveland Clinic. J Diabetes. 2015.
73. Weir DL, McAlister FA, Senthilselvan A, Minhas-Sandhu JK, Eurich DT. Sitagliptin use in patients with diabetes and heart failure: a population-based retrospective cohort study. JACC Heart Fail. 2014;2(6):573-582.
74. Monami M, Dicembrini I, Mannucci E. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and heart failure: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis. 2014;24(7):689-697.
75. Yu OH, Filion KB, Azoulay L, Patenaude V, Majdan A, Suissa S. Incretin-based drugs and the risk of congestive heart failure. Diabetes care. 2015;38(2):277-284.
76. Wang SH, Chen DY, Lin YS, et al. Cardiovascular Outcomes of Sitagliptin in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Acute Myocardial Infarction, a Population-Based Cohort Study in Taiwan. PLoS One. 2015;10(6):e0131122.
77. Li L, Shen J, Bala MM, et al. Incretin treatment and risk of pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised studies. Vol 3482014.
78. Hsu PF, Sung SH, Cheng HM, et al. Association of clinical symptomatic hypoglycemia with cardiovascular events and total mortality in type 2 diabetes: a nationwide population-based study. Diabetes care. 2013;36(4):894-900.
79. Zhao Y, Campbell CR, Fonseca V, Shi L. Impact of hypoglycemia associated with antihyperglycemic medications on vascular risks in veterans with type 2 diabetes. Diabetes care. 2012;35(5):1126-1132.
80. Chou HC, Chen WW, Hsiao FY. Acute pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: a population-based nested case-control study. Drug Saf. 2014;37(7):521-528.
81. Association AD. 3. Initial Evaluation and Diabetes Management Planning. Diabetes care. 2015;38(Supplement 1):S17-S19.
82. Berzon R, Hays RD, Shumaker SA. International use, application and performance of health-related quality of life instruments. Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 1993;2(6):367-368.
83. Naughton MJ, Shumaker SA. The case for domains of function in quality of life assessment. Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 2003;12 Suppl 1:73-80.
84. Watkins K, Connell CM. Measurement of health-related QOL in diabetes mellitus. PharmacoEconomics. 2004;22(17):1109-1126.
85. 黃情川, 黃一展, 吳明彥, 陳姿君, 吳菁珍, 林文德. 台灣版糖尿病生活品質測量工具Diabetes-39的發展與驗證. 臺灣公共衛生雜誌. 2009;28(3):218-231.
86. Li TC, Lin CC, Liu CS, Li CI, Lee YD. Validation of the Chinese version of the diabetes impact measurement scales amongst people suffering from diabetes. Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation. 2006;15(10):1613-1619.
87. Cheng AY, Tsui EY, Hanley AJ, Zinman B. Developing a quality of life measure for Chinese patients with diabetes. Diabetes Res Clin Pract. 1999;46(3):259-267.


論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2022-01-01起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw