Search

Aim: To compare the proportion of participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with once-weekly (OW) subcutaneous (SC) semaglutide versus comparators who achieved a composite metabolic endpoint., Materials and Methods: SUSTAIN 1-5, 7-10 and SUSTAIN China trial data were pooled. Participants with T2D (aged ≥18 years) and glycated haemoglobin ≥7.0% (≥53 mmol/mol) who had been randomized to OW SC semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg) or comparator in addition to background medication. Using patient-level data pooled by treatment, proportions of participants achieving the metabolic composite endpoint, defined as glycated haemoglobin <7% (<53 mmol/mol), blood pressure <140/90 mmHg and non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol <130 mg/dl (<3.37 mmol/L), were evaluated following baseline adjustments. Endpoints were analysed per trial using a binomial logistic regression model with treatment, region/country and stratification factor as fixed effects and baseline value as covariate. Pooled analysis used logistic regression with treatment and trial as fixed effects and baseline value as covariate., Results: This post hoc analysis included data from 7633 participants across 10 trials. The proportion of participants who achieved the metabolic composite endpoint was significantly higher with OW SC semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg versus comparators (23.7% and 32.0% vs. 11.5%, respectively; p < .0001). Likewise, when the OW SC semaglutide doses were pooled, significantly higher proportions of patients receiving semaglutide achieved the composite metabolic endpoint versus comparators (29.1% vs. 11.4%, respectively; p < .0001)., Conclusions: Treatment with OW SC semaglutide versus comparators was associated with increased proportions of participants with T2D meeting the composite metabolic endpoint., (© 2023 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of titrated canagliflozin, a sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on metformin and sitagliptin., Methods: In this randomized, double-blind study, patients with T2DM (N = 218) on metformin ≥1500 mg/day and sitagliptin 100 mg received canagliflozin 100 mg or placebo. After 6 weeks, the canagliflozin dose was increased from 100 to 300 mg (or from placebo to matching placebo) if all of the following criteria were met: baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥70 ml/min/1.73 m(2) ; fasting self-monitored blood glucose ≥5.6 mmol/l (≥100 mg/dl); and no volume depletion-related adverse events (AEs) within 2 weeks before dose increase. Endpoints included change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at week 26 (primary); proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7.0%; and changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight and systolic blood pressure (SBP). Safety was assessed using AE reports., Results: Overall, 85.4% of patients were titrated to canagliflozin 300 mg or matching placebo (mean ± standard deviation time to titration 6.2 ± 0.8 weeks). At week 26, canagliflozin (pooled 100 and 300 mg) demonstrated superiority in HbA1c reduction versus placebo (-0.91% vs. -0.01%; p < 0.001). Canagliflozin provided significant reductions in FPG, body weight and SBP compared with placebo (p < 0.001). The overall AE incidence was 39.8 and 44.4% for canagliflozin and placebo, respectively. Canagliflozin was associated with an increased incidence of genital mycotic infections., Conclusions: Titrated canagliflozin significantly improved HbA1c, FPG, body weight and SBP, and was generally well tolerated over 26 weeks in patients with T2DM as add-on to metformin and sitagliptin., (© 2016 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of two insulin intensification strategies for patients with type 2 diabetes previously treated with basal insulin--insulin degludec (IDeg) and insulin aspart (IAsp)--administered as a co-formulation (IDegAsp) or as a basal-bolus regimen (IDeg and IAsp in separate injections)., Methods: This 26-week, open-label, treat-to-target, phase IIIb, non-inferiority trial randomized patients (1 : 1) to IDegAsp twice daily with main meals (n = 138; IDegAsp group) or IDeg once daily and IAsp 2-4 times daily (n = 136; IDeg+IAsp group)., Results: After 26 weeks, the mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level was 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) for the IDegAsp group and 6.8% (51 mmol/mol) for the IDeg+IAsp group (Δ%HbA1c from baseline -1.31 and -1.50%, respectively). The non-inferiority of IDegAsp versus IDeg+IAsp was not confirmed for mean change in HbA1c [estimated treatment difference (ETD) 0.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.04, 0.41; p = non-significant]. No significant differences were observed in the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7.0% (56.5 and 59.6%, respectively). IDegAsp treatment resulted in a significantly lower total daily insulin dose, a smaller change in body weight, numerically lower rates of confirmed hypoglycaemia (self-reported plasma glucose <3.1 mmol/l; rate ratio 0.81; p = non-significant), and nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes (rate ratio 0.80; p = non-significant) versus IDeg+IAsp. Patient-reported outcome scores for social functioning were significantly higher for IDegAsp versus IDeg+IAsp (ETD 2.2; 95% CI 0.3, 4.1; p < 0.05)., Conclusions: Both intensification strategies effectively improved glycaemic control. Although non-inferiority was not confirmed, there were no significant differences between the groups that could affect clinical utility., (© 2015 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To evaluate, using post hoc analyses, whether the novel combination of a basal insulin, insulin degludec, and a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, liraglutide (IDegLira), was consistently effective in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), regardless of the stage of T2D progression., Methods: Using data from the DUAL I extension [insulin-naïve patients uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs), n = 1660, 52 weeks] and DUAL II (patients uncontrolled on basal insulin plus OADs, n = 398, 26 weeks) randomized trials, the efficacy of IDegLira was investigated with regard to measures of disease progression stage including baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), disease duration and previous insulin dose., Results: Across four categories of baseline HbA1c (≤7.5-9.0%), HbA1c reductions were significantly greater with IDegLira (1.1-2.5%) compared with IDeg or liraglutide alone in DUAL I. In DUAL II, HbA1c reductions were significantly greater with IDegLira (0.9-2.5%) than with IDeg in all but the lowest HbA1c category. In DUAL I, insulin dose and hypoglycaemia rate were lower across all baseline HbA1c categories for IDegLira versus IDeg, while hypoglycaemia was higher with IDegLira than liraglutide, irrespective of baseline HbA1c. In DUAL II, insulin dose and hypoglycaemia rate were similar with IDegLira and IDeg (maximum dose limited to 50 U) independent of baseline HbA1c. The reduction in HbA1c with IDegLira was independent of disease duration and previous insulin dose but varied depending on pre-trial OAD treatment., Conclusions: IDegLira effectively lowered HbA1c across a range of measures, implying suitability for patients with either early or advanced T2D., (© 2015 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To confirm the superiority, compared with placebo, of adding liraglutide to pre-existing basal insulin analogue ± metformin in adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.0-10.0% (53-86 mmol/mol)]., Methods: In this 26-week, double-blind, parallel-group study, conducted in clinics or hospitals, 451 subjects were randomized 1 : 1 to once-daily liraglutide 1.8 mg (dose escalated from 0.6 and 1.2 mg/day, respectively, for 1 week each; n = 226) or placebo (n = 225) added to their pre-existing basal insulin analogue (≥20 U/day) ± metformin (≥1500 mg/day). After randomization, insulin adjustments above the pre-study dose were not allowed. The primary endpoint was HbA1c change., Results: After 26 weeks, HbA1c decreased more with liraglutide [-1.3% (-14.2 mmol/mol)] than with placebo [-0.1% (-1.2 mmol/mol); p < 0.0001]. More subjects on liraglutide reached HbA1c targets: <7.0% (59% vs 14%; p < 0.0001) and ≤6.5% (43% vs 4%; p < 0.0001) using slightly less insulin (35.8 IU vs 40.1 IU). Greater decreases from baseline (estimated treatment differences vs placebo; p < 0.0001) occurred in fasting plasma glucose (-1.3 mmol/l), seven-point glucose profiles (-1.6 mmol/l), body weight (-3.1 kg) and systolic blood pressure (-5.0 mmHg). Transient gastrointestinal adverse events (nausea: 22.2% vs 3.1%) and minor hypoglycaemia (18.2% vs 12.4%) were more frequent with liraglutide than placebo, and pulse increased (4.5 beats/min) compared with placebo. No severe hypoglycaemia or pancreatitis occurred., Conclusions: Adding liraglutide to a basal insulin analogue ± metformin significantly improved glycaemic control, body weight and systolic blood pressure compared with placebo. Typical gastrointestinal symptoms and minor hypoglycaemia were more frequent with liraglutide., (© 2015 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: To confirm, in a 26-week extension study, the sustained efficacy and safety of a fixed combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) compared with either insulin degludec or liraglutide alone, in patients with type 2 diabetes., Methods: Insulin-naïve adults with type 2 diabetes randomized to once-daily IDegLira, insulin degludec or liraglutide, in addition to metformin ± pioglitazone, continued their allocated treatment in this preplanned 26-week extension of the DUAL I trial., Results: A total of 78.8% of patients (1311/1663) continued into the extension phase. The mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration at 52 weeks was reduced from baseline by 1.84% (20.2 mmol/mol) for the IDegLira group, 1.40% (15.3 mmol/mol) for the insulin degludec group and 1.21% (13.2 mmol/mol) for the liraglutide group. Of the patients on IDegLira, 78% achieved an HbA1c of <7% (53 mmol/mol) versus 63% of the patients on insulin degludec and 57% of those on liraglutide. The mean fasting plasma glucose concentration at the end of the trial was similar for IDegLira (5.7 mmol/l) and insulin degludec (6.0 mmol/l), but higher for liraglutide (7.3 mmol/l). At 52 weeks, the daily insulin dose was 37% lower with IDegLira (39 units) than with insulin degludec (62 units). IDegLira was associated with a significantly greater decrease in body weight (estimated treatment difference, -2.80 kg, p < 0.0001) and a 37% lower rate of hypoglycaemia compared with insulin degludec. Overall, all treatments were well tolerated and no new adverse events or tolerability issues were observed for IDegLira., Conclusions: These 12-month data, derived from a 26-week extension of the DUAL I trial, confirm the initial 26-week main phase results and the sustainability of the benefits of IDegLira compared with its components in glycaemic efficacy, safety and tolerability., (© 2015 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a new basal insulin with an ultra-long and stable glucose-lowering effect. We compared once-daily IDeg and insulin glargine (IGlar), both in combination with metformin ± dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, in a 52-week, open-label, treat-to-target trial in patients with type 2 diabetes followed by a 52-week extension trial in which subjects [n = 725/1030 (70.4%)] maintained their initial randomised treatment. Health status was assessed at baseline and 105 weeks using the Short Form-36 (SF-36 v2) questionnaire. SF-36 scores were analysed (ITT population) using anova, with adjustments for covariates. At 105 weeks, the overall physical component score was significantly better with IDeg versus IGlar [treatment contrast (TC): 1.1 (0.1; 2.1)95% CI , p < 0.05]. This was largely because of significantly better physical functioning [TC: 1.1 (0.0; 2.3)95% CI , p < 0.05] and bodily pain sub-domain scores [TC: 1.5 (0.2; 2.9)95% CI , p < 0.05]. Improvements in health status with IDeg compared to IGlar were maintained after 2 years., (© 2014 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: Two treatment strategies were compared in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) on basal insulin requiring intensification: addition of once-daily (OD) liraglutide (Lira) or OD insulin aspart (IAsp) with largest meal., Methods: Subjects completing 104 weeks (52-week main trial BEGIN ONCE-LONG + 52-week extension) on insulin degludec (IDeg) OD + metformin with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% (≥53 mmol/mol) were randomized to IDeg+Lira [n = 88, mean HbA1c: 7.7% (61 mmol/mol)] or IDeg+IAsp (n = 89, mean HbA1c: 7.7%) for 26 weeks, continuing metformin. Subjects completing 104 weeks with HbA1c <7.0% continued IDeg + metformin in a third, non-randomized arm (n = 236)., Results: IDeg+Lira reduced HbA1c (-0.74%-points) significantly more than IDeg+IAsp (-0.39%-points); estimated treatment difference (ETD) (IDeg+Lira-IDeg+IAsp) -0.32%-points (95% CI -0.53; -0.12); p = 0.0024. More IDeg+Lira (49.4%) than IDeg+IAsp (7.2%) subjects achieved HbA1c <7.0% without confirmed hypoglycaemia [plasma glucose <3.1 mmol/l (<56 mg/dl) or severe hypoglycaemia) and without weight gain; estimated odds ratio (IDeg+Lira/IDeg+IAsp) 13.79 (95% CI 5.24; 36.28); p < 0.0001. IDeg+Lira subjects had significantly less confirmed and nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia, and significantly greater weight loss (-2.8 kg) versus IDeg+IAsp (+0.9 kg); ETD (IDeg+Lira-IDeg+IAsp) -3.75 kg (95% CI -4.70; -2.79); p < 0.0001. Other than more gastrointestinal side effects with IDeg+Lira, no safety differences occurred. Durability of IDeg was established in the non-randomized arm, as mean HbA1c remained <7.0% [mean 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) at end-of-trial]., Conclusions: IDeg+Lira improved long-term glycaemic control, with weight loss and less hypoglycaemia versus adding a single daily dose of IAsp in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with IDeg + metformin., (© 2014 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Integrating patient-centered diabetes care and algorithmic medicine poses particular challenges when optimized basal insulin fails to maintain glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Multiple entwined physiological, psychosocial and systems barriers to insulin adherence are not easily studied and are not adequately considered in most treatment algorithms. Moreover, the limited number of alternatives to add-on prandial insulin therapy has hindered shared decision-making, a central feature of patient-centered care. This article considers how the addition of a glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analogue to basal insulin may provide new opportunities at this stage of treatment, especially for patients concerned about weight gain and risk of hypoglycaemia. A flexible framework for patient-clinician discussions is presented to encourage development of decision-support tools applicable to both specialty and primary care practice., (© 2013 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)