Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Sitagliptin for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Japan: Results of a Multicentre, Open-Label, Observational Post-Marketing Surveillance Study

A post-marketing surveillance (PMS) study was conducted to confirm the long-term risk–benefit profile of sitagliptin administered to Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) under real-world conditions.

This prospective, multicentre, open-label PMS collected data from 3326 patients receiving sitagliptin according to the approved indication during the case registration period (July 2010–June 2012; observation period, 3 years). Safety was assessed via collection of data on adverse drug reactions (ADRs), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and cardiovascular events whereas efficacy was assessed via changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c).

In 3265 patients evaluated for safety, 270 ADRs occurred in 207 (6.3%) patients overall. Metabolism and nutrition disorders were the most common class of ADRs, occurring in 58 patients overall (53 non-serious, 5 serious) with hypoglycaemia (17 patients, 0.52%) the most common ADR. In patients with eGFR > 90 mL/min/1.73 m² at baseline (mean ± SD, 106.42 ± 18.11 mL/min/1.73 m², n = 584), eGFR declined by 11.83 ± 17.53 mL/min/1.73 m² (P < 0.0001; n = 360) over the observation period whereas eGFR appeared to be relatively maintained in patients with lower baseline eGFR levels. Cardiovascular events were infrequent [occurring in 4 of 84 (4.76%) patients at high cardiovascular risk] with no distinct features in this Japanese population and the cumulative incidence [8.42% (3.12–21.70) at 36 months; n = 32] was similar to that noted in previous studies involving sitagliptin. In patients evaluated for efficacy, the overall change in HbA1c from baseline to final evaluation was mean ± SD − 0.68 ± 1.34% (P < 0.0001, n = 2070). Reductions in HbA1c tended to be greater in younger patients and patients with higher body mass index (BMI) and HbA1c values at the start of administration.

Long-term sitagliptin administration in the routine clinical practice setting is associated with good efficacy, including as monotherapy, with no additional safety concerns.