Abdulrahman Alshaikh¹, Hussein Elbadawi², Mohammed Aleissa³, Fahad Alsabaan⁴, Fatima Alslail⁵, Hajer Almudaiheem⁵, Saud Alsifri⁶ and Emad R Issak⁷*

¹Dr. Soliman Fakeeh Hospital, Jeddah, KSA
²My Clinic Medical Center, Jeddah, KSA
³Prince Sultan Military Medical City, Riyadh, KSA
⁴Security Forces Hospital, Riyadh, KSA
⁵Ministry of Health, Riyadh, KSA
⁶Al Hada Armed Forces Hospital, Taif, KSA
⁷Medicine Department, Asalam Center, Cairo, Egypt

*Corresponding Author: Emad R Issak, Specialist of Internal Medicine and Research Director, Asalam Center, Zahraa Al-Maadi, Cairo, Egypt.

Received: September 21, 2022; Published: October 17, 2022

Abstract

Backgrounds and Objectives: The preferences of patients for oral GLP-1 RA treatments, particularly in KSA, have not yet been sufficiently studied. In order to add to the body of knowledge already available in this field, the current study sought to determine the acceptance and preference of various GLP-1 RA formulations (weekly injectable vs. daily oral) among T2DM patients in KSA as well as to investigate how doctors who treat T2DM patients there felt about GLP-1RAs.

Methods: The current cross-sectional two-arm (patients-arm and physicians-arm) study was carried out all over KSA using an online survey. Two online surveys were used, one for each arm. The analyses were carried out on 700 T2DM cases and 400 physicians (150 diabetes specialists and 250 general practitioners) who completed the surveys. The primary outcome measure in the patients-arm was the preference for oral GLP-1RA or injectable GLP-1RA. For the physicians-arm, the primary outcome measure was the right time of GLP-1RA prescription or delay.

Results: Out of the 700 patient respondents, 588 (84.0%) prefer the daily oral formula of GLP-1RA, while 112 (16.0%) prefer the once-weekly subcutaneous formula. About 40.2% of those who prefer the injectable formula perceive that the injectable formula is more effective, 30.3% reported that it is more convenient for them, and 28.6% stated that they take too many oral medications. On the other hand, reasons for preference for oral formula were perception of injections as a ‘last resort’ treatment (23.0%), fear of injection (20.2%), fear of hypoglycemia (19.2%), convenience (19.0%), and poor communication with physicians (18.5%). 

Out of the 400 physicians, 340 (85.0%) were delayed in the prescription of GLP-1RAs for their patients, and only 60 (15.0%) prescribed GLP-1RAs at the right time. Among different criteria of respondents, only specialty affects this delay (Table 2). Interestingly, the delay is only among the general physician group (73.%) of those who delay. Reasons behind hesitance differ among groups (p-value < 0.0001), among those who delay prescription of GLP-1RAs, were injectable (72.6%, followed by time constraints (20.3%), and unavailability (7.1%). However, in those who did not delay, they perceived that the reasons behind hesitance were time constraints (45.0%), followed by unavailability (33.3%), and being injectable (21.7%).

Conclusions: In conclusion, the preference for the oral form of GLP-1RAs is self-evident in this two-arm study among patients and physicians. That can help to tackle the problem of underutilization of this group when they are indicated.

Keywords: GLP-1RAs; Adminstration Form; Delay in Prescription; Control; Preference

References

1. International Diabetes Federation, IDF Diabetes Atlas, International Diabetes Federation, Brussels, Belgium, 8^th edition, (2017).
2. Al Dawish MA., et al. “Diabetes Mellitus in Saudi Arabia: A Review of the Recent Literature”. Current Diabetes Reviews 4 (2016): 359-368.
3. Alkhatib N., et al. “Economic Analysis of glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonists from the Saudi Arabia Payer Perspective”. Saudi Pharmaceutical Journal (2020): 30.
4. DeFronzo RA. “Combination therapy with GLP-1 receptor agonist and SGLT2 inhibitor”. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism 10 (2017): 1353-1362.
5. DeFronzo RA., et al. “Type 2 diabetes mellitus”. Nature Reviews Disease Primers 1 (2015): 15019.
6. Mardetko N., et al. “Uptake of new antidiabetic medicines in 11 European countries”. BMC Endocrine Disorders 1 (2021): 127.
7. “FDA Approves First Oral GLP-1 Treatment for Type 2 Diabetes”. FDA. FDA (2019).
8. Drugs List | Saudi Food and Drug Authority (sfda.gov.sa) (2022).
9. Brooks A., et al. “Patient preferences for GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Japan: a discrete choice experiment”. Diabetes Therapy2 (2019): 735-749.
10. Gelhorn HL., et al. “Evaluating preferences for profiles of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists among injection-naive type 2 diabetes patients in Japan”. Patient Prefer Adherence 10 (2016): 1337-1348.
11. Gelhorn HL., et al. “Evaluating preferences for profiles of GLP-1 receptor agonists among injectionnaive type 2 diabetes patients in the UK”. Patient Prefer Adherence 9 (2015): 1611-1622.
12. Hauber AB., et al. “A discrete-choice experiment to quantify patient preferences for frequency of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist injections in the treatment of type 2 diabetes”. Current Medical Research and Opinion 2 (2016): 251-262.
13. Polster M., et al. “A comparison of preferences for two GLP-1 products—liraglutide and exenatide—for the treatment of type 2 diabetes”. Journal of Medical Economics 4 (2010): 655-661.
14. Qin L., et al. “Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment attributes important to injection-naive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a multinational preference study”. Diabetes Therapy2 (2017a): 321-334.
15. Qin L., et al. “Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment attributes important to injection-experienced patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a preference study in Germany and the United Kingdom”. Diabetes Therapy2 (2017b): 335-353.

Citation

Citation: Abdulrahman Alshaikh., et al. “Perceptions and Preferences Toward GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Type 2 Diabetes Management in Saudi Arabia: A Cross-sectional, Two-arm Study”.Acta Scientific Medical Sciences 6.11 (2022): 41-46.

Copyright

Copyright: © 2022 Abdulrahman Alshaikh., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.