GLP-1 receptor agonist added to insulin versus basal-plus or basal-bolus insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Inpatient diabetes management

Diabetes mellitus is currently approaching epidemic proportions and disproportionately affects patients in the hospital setting. In the United States, individuals living with diabetes represent over 17 million emergency department visits and 8 million admissions annually. The management of these patients in the hospital setting is complex and differs considerably from the outpatient setting. All patients with hyperglycemia should be screened for diabetes, as in-hospital hyperglycemia portends a greater risk for morbidity, mortality, admission to an intensive care unit, and increased hospital length of stay. However, the definition of hyperglycemia, glycemic targets, and strategies to manage hyperglycemia in the inpatient setting can vary greatly depending on the population considered. Moreover, the presenting illness, changing nutritional status, and concurrent hospital medications often necessitate thoughtful consideration to adjustments of home diabetes regimens and/or the initiation of new insulin doses. This review article will examine core concepts and emerging new literature surrounding inpatient diabetes management, including glycemic targets, insulin dosing strategies, noninsulin medications, new diabetes technologies, inpatient diabetes management teams, and discharge planning strategies, to optimize patient safety and satisfaction, clinical outcomes, and even hospital financial health.

Open questions on basal insulin therapy in T2D: a Delphi consensus

AIMS

The revolution in the therapeutic approach to type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires a rethinking of the positioning of basal insulin (BI) therapy. Given the considerable number of open questions, a group of experts was convened with the aim of providing, through a Delphi consensus method, practical guidance for doctors.

METHODS

A group of 6 experts developed a series of 29 statements on: the role of metabolic control in light of the most recent guidelines; BI intensification strategies: (1) add-on versus switch; (2) inertia in starting and titrating; (3) free versus fixed ratio combination; basal-bolus intensification and de-intensification strategies; second generation analogues of BI (2BI). A panel of 31 diabetologists, by accessing a dedicated website, assigned each statement a relevance score on a 9-point scale. The RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method was adopted to assess the existence of disagreement among participants.

RESULTS

Panelists showed agreement for all 29 statements, of which 26 were considered relevant, one was considered not relevant and two were of uncertain relevance. Panelists agreed that the availability of new classes of drugs often allows the postponement of BI and the simplification of therapy. It remains essential to promptly initiate and titrate BI when required. BI should always, unless contraindicated, be started in addition to, and not as a replacement, for ongoing treatments with cardiorenal benefits. 2BIs should be preferred for their pharmacological profile, greater ease of self-titration and flexibility of administration.

CONCLUSION

In a continuously evolving scenario, BI therapy still represents an important option in the management of T2D patients.

Real-world study of the concomitant use of biphasic insulin aspart 30/70 with GLP-1 receptor agonist versus first-generation basal insulin with GLP-1 receptor agonist in type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Combining insulin with a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) to treat type 2 diabetes (T2D) is common. While many studies have investigated concomitant therapy with basal insulin+GLP-1RA, few have reported on premixed insulin+GLP-1RA. We aimed to address this gap using data from the Clinical Practice Research Datalink Aurum database in England.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study with propensity score matching assessed glycaemic levels and other clinical outcomes in people with T2D, comparing biphasic insulin aspart 30/70 (BIAsp 30) + GLP-1RA with basal insulin (insulin detemir/glargine U100) + GLP-1RA (from 2006 to 2021).

RESULTS

In total, 4770 eligible people were identified; 1511 had a BIAsp 30 + GLP-1RA regimen and were propensity score-matched to an equal number receiving basal+GLP-1RA. There was no significant difference in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction between cohorts at 6 months (p = 0.15), with a decrease of -1.07 (95% CI: -1.16; -0.98) %-points (-11.7 mmol/mol [95% CI: -12.7; -10.7]) in the BIAsp 30 + GLP-1RA cohort, versus -0.97 (95% CI: -1.07; -0.88) %-points (-10.6 mmol/mol [95% CI: -11.7; -9.6]) in the basal+GLP-1RA cohort. Body mass index (BMI) decreased by -0.35 kg/m2 (95% CI: -0.52;-0.18) at 6 months with BIAsp 30 + GLP-1RA, versus -0.72 kg/m2 (95% CI: -0.90;-0.54) with basal+GLP-1RA (p = 0.003). BMI was influenced by the initiation sequence of GLP-1RA in relation to insulin (p < 0.0001). Hypoglycaemia rates were low and not significantly different between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining BIAsp 30 + GLP-1RA provides glycaemic control with no significant difference to that of propensity score-matched people receiving basal insulin+GLP-1RA, with no increase in hypoglycaemia risk or weight gain.

Effectiveness of insulin degludec/liraglutide versus insulin degludec/insulin aspart in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes

Aims

To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of once-daily insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) to that of once-daily insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) after switching from basal insulin therapy at 6 months by assessing changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body weight, and insulin doses in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Materials and methods

A total of 91 patients with T2D with HbA1c levels exceeding 7.0% were included in this study. Adjusted least square mean changes in HbA1c, body weight, and total insulin doses were compared between the IDegLira group and IDegAsp group. Subgroup analyses were performed, stratified by median values of HbA1c (< 8.5 and ≥ 8.5%), obesity (body mass index < 25 and ≥ 25 kg/m2), and basal insulin doses (< 14 and ≥ 14 units) at baseline to assess treatment interaction by subgroup.

Results

The IDegLira group showed a greater reduction in HbA1c levels than the IDegAsp group (- 0.17 vs - 0.79%, p = 0.003) with comparable body weight changes. The analyses of adjusted mean changes of total insulin doses showed that the IDegAsp group had a larger increase than the IDegLira group (3.64 vs 1.30 unis, p = 0.016). The effect of IDegLira on HbA1c levels was superior to that of IDegAsp in patients with high HbA1c. There were no inter-group differences in the rate of hypoglycemic episodes.

Conclusions

Once-daily IDegLira had greater effects on HbA1c and a lesser increase in insulin doses than IDegAsp when patients are switched from basal insulin therapy. Moreover, the effect on HbA1c was enhanced in patients with high HbA1c levels at baseline.

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Treatment intensification following glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment in type 2 diabetes: The RESTORE-G real-world study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To assess intensification approaches with basal insulin (BI) following glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) treatment in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Real-world data were collected in electronic medical records by 32 Italian diabetes clinics between 2011 and 2021. Primary endpoint was the proportion of insulin-naïve T2D patients treated with GLP-1 RA who initiated (add-on or switch) BI. Secondary endpoints were: treatment approaches, mean time to BI start, effectiveness and safety. Among 7,962 eligible patients, BI was prescribed to 3,164 (39.7%; 95%CI 38.7; 40.8): 67.6% switched to BI (22.1% also starting 1-3 injections of short-acting insulin), 22.7% added BI while maintaining GLP-1 RA, and 9.7% switched to a fixed-ratio combination of GLP-1 RA and BI (FRC). Median time since the first GLP-1 RA to BI/FRC prescription was 27.4 (IQ range 11.8-53.5) months. In this study 60.3% of patients did not start BI/FRC, among whom 15.2% intensified GLP-1 RA therapy with other oral agents. Effectiveness and safety were documented in all intensification approaches with BI/FRC, but HbA1c level at intensification time of ≥9.0% and suboptimal BI titration suggested clinical inertia. Use of second generation BI and add-on to GLP-1 RA schemes increased over time and effectiveness improved.

CONCLUSION

Clinical inertia should be overcome using innovative insulin options. Timely combination therapy of BI and GLP-1 RA is a valuable choice.

[Evolution of the non-insulin therapeutic strategy in type 2 diabetes]

While the prevalence of diabetes continues to rise worldwide, with 537 million adults aged 20-79-years-old having diabetes in 2021, the development of new therapeutic classes improving not only glycemic control but also kidney function and cardiovascular prevention has revolutionized patient care. Today, the treatment of diabetes is no longer just the treatment of blood sugar level. In this context, the individualized therapeutic strategy has been completely reviewed, with in particular sulfamides indicated much later in the therapeutic strategy, while SGLT2 inhibitors are indicated very early in patients with kidney disease and/or with ischemic heart disease or chronic heart failure, and GLP-1 analogues in obese patients and/or in primary or secondary cardiovascular prevention. As for lifestyle rules and metformin, they remain the cornerstone of treatment. Knowledge of antidiabetic effects in terms of efficacy and hypoglycemic risk, of cardiovascular, nephroprotective and weight effects is essential to optimize the management of diabetic patients today.

Factors Associated With Improved A1C Values Among People Using High-Dose Insulin With Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes

Uncontrolled diabetes negatively affects millions of people in the United States and contributes to significant health burden. Many people with diabetes require high insulin doses to achieve glycemic control, but glycemia in this group has historically been difficult to manage. This retrospective, case-control study evaluated which therapeutic interventions and patient factors were associated with an improvement in A1C in people with type 2 diabetes using high-dose insulin at a county health system serving primarily low-income patients. Medication nonadherence was found to be the most influential factor affecting glycemic control in these individuals.

Effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists on glucose excursion and inflammation in overweight or obese type 2 diabetic patients

BACKGROUND

Currently, the lack of comparative studies between weekly and daily formulations of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) for glucose excursion is worth investigation.

AIM

To investigate the effects of weekly and daily formulations of GLP-1RA on glucose excursion and inflammation in overweight and obese patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Seventy patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who were treated at our hospital between January 2019 and January 2022 were enrolled in this retrospective analysis. All patients were treated with metformin. We evaluated changes in blood glucose levels and a series of important indicators in patients before and after treatment with either a weekly or daily preparation of GLP-1RA (group A; n = 33 and group B; n = 37).

RESULTS

The degree of decrease in the levels of fasting blood glucose, mean blood glucose, mean amplitude of glycemic excursions, total cholesterol, triglycerides, tumor necrosis factor-α, interleukin-6, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein after treatment in group A was higher than that in group B (P < 0.05), whereas the 2-h postprandial blood glucose levels decreased more so in group B than in group A (P < 0.001). However, there were no statistically significant differences in the levels of glycated hemoglobin, standard deviation of blood glucose, coefficient of variation, absolute mean of daily differences, percentage of time with 3.9 mmol/L < glucose < 10 mmol/L, and high- and low-density lipoproteins between the two groups (P > 0.05). The incidence of adverse reactions was significantly lower in group A than in group B (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The effect of the weekly preparation of GLP-1RA in controlling blood glucose levels in the patients, suppressing inflammation, and reducing adverse reactions was significantly higher than that of the daily preparations, which is worthy of clinical promotion.

A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of iGlarLixi Versus IDegAsp and Appropriate Price Exploration of iGlarLixi for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients in China

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, a fixed-ratio combination (FRC) of basal insulin glargine plus lixisenatide, have been demonstrated in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. However, no relevant economic analysis of iGlarLixi has been done in China. Thus, the primary objective of this study is to evaluate the cost effectiveness of iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp in Chinese T2DM patients, and then back-calculate the appropriate drug price of iGlarLixi to support its pricing after listing in China.

METHODS

The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcome Model 2 (UKPDS OM2) was applied to estimate lifetime health and economic outcomes from the Chinese health-care system perspective. As no head-to-head comparison data are currently available, the baseline cohort characteristics and the initial clinical data for iGlarLixi were derived from the randomized LixiLan-L-China trial. The relative treatment effects for IDegAsp were based on an indirect treatment comparison. Due to the unavailability of iGlarLixi pricing data, the annual medication cost of iGlarLixi was assumed to be equal to that of IDegAsp at the beginning of the study. Afterwards, a break-even analysis using comparator drug price and the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was performed to back-calculate the appropriate drug price of iGlarLixi. One-way sensitivity analysis, scenario analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were conducted to assess the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

Based on the initial assumption of equal annual medication cost of iGlarLixi and IDegAsp, iGlarLixi was cost effective compared to IDegAsp with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) far below the WTP threshold in Chinese T2DM patients. From the back calculation for the price of iGlarLixi, the annual medication cost of iGlarLixi was $656.96 and $1075.96 to obtain an ICER of iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp close to 1 × GDP and 3 × GDP, respectively. When the discount rate was changed from the base value to 8% (the most sensitive parameter to the model results in one-way sensitivity analysis), the ICER was nearly equal to 1 × GDP and 3 × GDP with the annual medication cost of iGlarLixi decreasing to $590.41 and $865.03, respectively. Thus, iGlarLixi was dominant over IDegAsp with an annual medication cost of $590.41 to $865.03. The findings were robust to one-way sensitivity analysis, PSA and scenario analysis.

CONCLUSION

This long-term cost-effectiveness analysis in Chinese T2DM patients indicates that iGlarLixi, assuming equal price to IDegAsp, is cost-effective versus IDegAsp with an ICER far below the WTP threshold. With 1 × GDP and 3 × GDP threshold set we back-calculate the appropriate annual medication cost of iGlarLixi to be $590.41 to $865.03, respectively.

De-intensification of basal-bolus insulin regimen after initiation of a GLP-1 RA improves glycaemic control and promotes weight loss in subjects with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To evaluate the impact of adding a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in basal-bolus (BB) insulin regimen, on insulin requirement, HbA1c, weight loss up to 24 months.

METHODS

Data on subjects with T2D on BB who initiated a GLP-1 RA have been retrospectively collected. HbA1c, body weight, and insulin dose were recorded at baseline, 6, 12, and 24 months after initiation of GLP-1 RA therapy. A linear mixed model for repeated measures was used to evaluate the changes in HbA1c, body weight, and insulin requirement over time.

RESULTS

We included 156 subjects (63.5% males; age 62 ± 11 years, HbA1c 70 ± 22.0 mmol/mol; 8.6 ± 4.2%). Compared to baseline, HbA1c and body weight were significantly lower at 6 months after introducing a GLP-1RA and remained stable up to 24 months (all p < 0.0001 vs. baseline). At 24 months, 81% of subjects discontinued prandial insulin, while 38.6% discontinued basal insulin as well. Insulin requirement at baseline (aOR 0.144; 95% CI, 0.046-0.456; P = 0.001) was the only significant predictor of prandial insulin discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Replacing prandial insulin with GLP-1 RA is a valuable strategy to simplify the BB insulin regimen while improving glycaemic control and promoting weight loss in subjects with T2D.

iGlarLixi versus basal plus Rapid-Acting insulin in adults with type 2 diabetes advancing from basal insulin therapy: The SoliSimplify Real-World study

AIM

For people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on basal insulin (BI), guidelines recommend several treatment advancement options. This study compared the clinical effectiveness of once-daily iGlarLixi versus a multiple-injection BI + rapid acting insulin (RAI) regimen in adults with T2D advancing from BI therapy in real-world clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic medical records from the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) database were analysed retrospectively using propensity score matching to compare therapy advancement with iGlarLixi or BI + RAI in US adults ≥18 years with T2D on BI who had ≥1 valid glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) value at baseline and at the 6-month follow-up. The primary objective was non-inferiority of iGlarLixi to BI + RAI in HbA1c change from baseline to 6 months (margin 0.3%).

RESULTS

Propensity score matching generated cohorts with balanced baseline characteristics (N = 814 in each group). HbA1c reduction from baseline to 6 months with iGlarLixi was non-inferior to BI + RAI [mean difference (95% confidence interval): 0.1 (-0.1, 0.2)%; one-sided p = .0032]. At 6 months, weight gain was significantly lower with iGlarLixi than with BI + RAI [-0.8 (-1.3, -0.2) kg; two-sided p = .0069]. Achievement of HbA1c <7% without hypoglycaemia and weight gain were similar between groups [odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 1.15 (0.81, 1.63); p = .4280]. Hypoglycaemia was low in both groups, probably because of underreporting.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world clinical practice, glycaemic outcomes 6 months after treatment advancement from BI are similar for people with T2D using iGlarLixi versus BI + RAI, with iGlarLixi leading to less weight gain.

An Indirect Comparison of Basal Insulin Plus Once-Weekly Semaglutide and Fully Optimised Basal-Bolus Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

To date, there have been few head-to-head comparisons between semaglutide once-weekly (OW) and short-acting meal-time insulin in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with basal insulin and requiring treatment intensification. This indirect comparison evaluated the effects of these regimens on glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c), body weight, hypoglycaemia, and other clinically relevant outcomes.

METHODS

A post-hoc, unanchored, individual participant data meta-analysis was conducted on the basis of data from single treatment arms in the SUSTAIN 5 and DUAL 7 trials. Semaglutide 0.5 mg OW and 1.0 mg OW plus basal insulin were compared with an optimised (treat-to-target) basal-bolus regimen of insulin glargine and insulin aspart over 26 weeks, using regression adjustment to account for baseline differences between the trials.

RESULTS

Over 26 weeks, semaglutide 1.0 mg OW plus basal insulin reduced mean HbA_1c by significantly more than the basal-bolus regimen (treatment difference: - 0.36%; p = 0.003), while semaglutide 0.5 mg OW plus basal insulin was comparable with basal-bolus insulin (treatment difference: 0.08%, p = 0.53). Both doses of semaglutide were associated with significant weight loss relative to insulin intensification (treatment differences: 6.8-9.4 kg; p < 0.001). At both doses, semaglutide intensification required less basal insulin per day than bolus intensification, and more participants on semaglutide met HbA_1c targets of < 7.0% and ≤ 6.5% without hypoglycaemia or weight gain (odds ratio [OR] for < 7.0%, 21.9; OR for ≤ 6.5%, 16.2; both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In T2D uncontrolled by basal insulin, intensification with semaglutide 1.0 mg OW was associated with better glycaemic control, weight loss, and reduced hypoglycaemia versus a basal-bolus regimen, while limiting the treatment burden associated with frequent injections. Clinicians could consider treatment intensification with semaglutide when T2D is uncontrolled by basal insulin, especially when weight management is a priority. Effective glycaemic control coupled with weight management can alleviate the burden of diabetes-associated complications.

Effectiveness, Safety, and Appropriateness in the Use of the Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine and Lixisenatide in Type 2 Diabetes: The ENSURE Retrospective Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Pivotal trials documented glycemic benefits of fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi), with no weight gain and low hypoglycemia risk in type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed at assessing effectiveness and patterns of use of iGlarLixi in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, multicenter, study, based on electronic medical records. All patients initiating iGlarLixi from May 2018 to July 2020 were considered.

RESULTS

Overall, 25 centers provided data on 675 patients initiating iGlarLixi with the following characteristics: age 66.4 ± 10.1 years, 54.2% men, T2D duration 15.5 ± 11.5 years, HbA1c 8.6 ± 1.4%, body mass index (BMI) 30.8 ± 5.3 kg/m², 45.1% already treated with basal insulin, and 21.9% with basal bolus (± oral hypoglycemic agents). Metformin and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors were used in 76.0% and 0.9% of patients, respectively. Combinations of iGlarLixi with other glucose-lowering drugs such as sulfonylureas or short-acting insulin were found in 32.4% of patients. Effectiveness of iGlarLixi (N = 184) showed that HbA1c declined by 0.77% [95% confidence interval (CI) -1.00, -0.54] after 6 months. In combination with metformin and/or SGLT-2i (N = 117), HbA1c declined by -0.92% (95% CI -1.22, -0.62) and weight significantly decreased by 1.21 kg. iGlarLixi dose was suboptimally titrated. Safety data (N = 171) showed incidence rates of blood glucose ≤ 70 and < 54 mg/mL of 0.26 and 0.05 events per person-month during 6 months, respectively, with a risk reduction of about 75% with respect the 6 months before iGlarLixi initiation. No severe hypoglycemia was reported.

CONCLUSION

In adults with T2D, effectiveness and safety of iGlarLixi were documented in a real-world setting; appropriateness of use and adequate titration should be urgently improved so that clinical practice outcomes become more comparable to clinical trials results. Further real-world studies on the effect of iGlarLixi therapy are warranted.

Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2022. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the previous consensus statements on the management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes in adults, published since 2006 and last updated in 2019. The target audience is the full spectrum of the professional healthcare team providing diabetes care in the USA and Europe. A systematic examination of publications since 2018 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on social determinants of health, the healthcare system and physical activity behaviours including sleep. There is a greater emphasis on weight management as part of the holistic approach to diabetes management. The results of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes trials involving sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, including assessment of subgroups, inform broader recommendations for cardiorenal protection in people with diabetes at high risk of cardiorenal disease. After a summary listing of consensus recommendations, practical tips for implementation are provided.

Hypoglycaemia events with iGlarLixi versus premix biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in people with type 2 diabetes advancing from basal insulin: An analysis of the SoliMix trial

AIMS

To explore details of the incidence and rates of daytime and nocturnal hypoglycaemia, levels of hypoglycaemia, and relationship to glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), when comparing iGlarLixi versus premixed biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in the SoliMix randomized controlled trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This exploratory analysis of SoliMix used logistic regression and negative binomial regression analyses to assess between-treatment differences in the incidence and rates of hypoglycaemia by time of day. A negative binomial model was used to derive estimated annualized hypoglycaemia rates as a function of HbA1c.

RESULTS

iGlarLixi was associated with lower incidence and rates of American Diabetes Association Level 2 (<54 mg/dL [<3.0 mmol/L]) hypoglycaemia during both night and day versus BIAsp 30. Incidence and rates of Level 1 (<70 to ≥54 mg/dL [<3.9 to ≥3.0 mmol/L]) hypoglycaemia were also mostly shown to be reduced with iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30. Severe (Level 3) events were too few for analysis (n = 3). iGlarLixi was associated with lower modelled event rates of Level 2 and Level 1 hypoglycaemia over a wide range of HbA1c levels versus BIAsp 30.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that the lower HbA1c levels and weight benefit seen with iGlarLixi versus premixed BIAsp 30 in people with type 2 diabetes advancing their basal insulin therapy in the SoliMix trial are also accompanied by a lower risk of hypoglycaemia at any time of day and across a broad range of HbA1c levels.

Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2022. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the previous consensus statements on the management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes in adults, published since 2006 and last updated in 2019. The target audience is the full spectrum of the professional health care team providing diabetes care in the U.S. and Europe. A systematic examination of publications since 2018 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on social determinants of health, the health care system, and physical activity behaviors, including sleep. There is a greater emphasis on weight management as part of the holistic approach to diabetes management. The results of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes trials involving sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, including assessment of subgroups, inform broader recommendations for cardiorenal protection in people with diabetes at high risk of cardiorenal disease. After a summary listing of consensus recommendations, practical tips for implementation are provided.

Effect of once-weekly semaglutide versus thrice-daily insulin aspart, both as add-on to metformin and optimized insulin glargine treatment in participants with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 11): A randomized, open-label, multinational, phase 3b trial

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of once-weekly (OW) semaglutide versus thrice-daily (TID) insulin aspart (IAsp) in participants with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with insulin glargine (IGlar) and metformin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SUSTAIN 11 (NCT03689374) was a randomized (1:1), parallel, open-label, multinational, phase 3b trial. After a 12-week run-in to optimize once-daily IGlar U100, 1748 adults with T2D (HbA1c >7.5% to ≤10.0%) were randomized to OW semaglutide or TID IAsp as add-on to optimized IGlar and metformin for 52 weeks. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from randomization to week 52. Confirmatory secondary endpoints included the occurrence of severe hypoglycaemic episodes and change in body weight (BW). Safety was assessed.

RESULTS

HbA1c (randomization: 8.6% [70.0 mmol/mol]) decreased by 1.5% points (16.6 mmol/mol) and 1.2% points (13.4 mmol/mol) with semaglutide (n = 874) and IAsp (n = 874), respectively (estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0.29% points [95% confidence interval {CI} -0.38; -0.20]; P < .0001 for non-inferiority). Few severe hypoglycaemic episodes were recorded in either group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups. Change in BW from randomization (87.9 kg) to week 52 was in favour of semaglutide (-4.1 kg) versus IAsp (+2.8 kg) (ETD -6.99 kg [95% CI -7.41; -6.57]). A higher proportion of participants experienced adverse events with semaglutide (58.5%) versus IAsp (52.1%); most were mild to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

In this basal insulin-treated population, OW semaglutide improved glycaemic control to a greater extent than TID IAsp and provided numerically greater weight loss.

IDegLira for the Real-World Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in Italy: Protocol and Interim Results from the REX Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

IDegLira was shown to maintain glycemic control while reducing risk of hypoglycemia and body weight gain. The REX study was designed to generate real-world evidence on the use of IDegLira in Italian clinical practice in two different subgroups of patients, those switching to IDegLira from a basal insulin-supported oral therapy (BOT group) and those from a basal plus bolus insulin regimen (BB group).

METHODS

Adult patients with T2D diagnosed for at least 12 months and having started IDegLira 2-3 months prior to enrolment, coming from a BOT or BB regimen, were enrolled in this multicenter observational prospective cohort study conducted in 28 Italian centers. This paper presents the methodological framework of the REX study and provides the interim analysis results describing the patients' baseline characteristics and the clinical reasons for IDegLira treatment initiation.

RESULTS

Of the 360 patients enrolled in the REX study, 331 were considered eligible for this interim analysis, 76.4% in the BOT and 23.6% in the BB group. Mean (SD) HbA1c was 8.5% (1.4) in the BOT and 8.2% (1.7) in the BB group. The most common T2D complications were diabetic macroangiopathy and diabetic nephropathy in both groups. The median (interquartile range) insulin daily dose before IDegLira was 15.0 (10.0-20.0) units in the BOT group and 42 (30.0-52.0) in the BB group. Oral antidiabetics were taken by 98% and 51.3% of patients, respectively. The main reason for switching to IDegLira was the inadequate glycemic control in the BOT group (86% of patients), and the intent to simplify the treatment in the BB group (66.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

IdegLira is initiated after BOT in inadequately controlled patients to improve glycemic control, whereas in BB patients it is used to simplify the therapeutic regimen. Final results of the REX study will shed light on patients' outcomes after IdegLira treatment under routine clinical care.

Fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) improves ß-cell function in people with type 2 diabetes

AIM

Multiple studies support the efficacy of combining a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) with basal insulin in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on dual/triple oral therapy. Fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin + GLP-1RA represent a further advance to facilitate management. We assessed the impact of fixed-ratio combination basal insulin + GLP-1RA treatment on β-cell function.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analysed data from 351 participants in the LixiLan-G trial (NCT02787551) randomized to receive iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U/ml + lixisenatide) or to continue daily/weekly GLP-1RA, both on top of metformin. Participants received a 2-h meal tolerance test before randomization and at study end (26 weeks), with timed plasma glucose and C-peptide determinations. β-cell function parameters were resolved using mathematical modelling.

RESULTS

In the GLP-1RA group (n = 162), both body weight and glycated haemoglobin decreased at week 26, yet none of the insulin secretion/β-cell function parameters changed significantly. In contrast, in the iGlarLixi group (n = 189), glycated haemoglobin decreased significantly more than in the GLP-1RA group (p < .0001) despite an increase in body weight (+1.7 ± 3.9 kg, p < .0001). Fasting and stimulated insulin secretion decreased at Week 26 (both p < .0001 vs. GLP-1RA), while β-cell glucose sensitivity increased by a median 35% (p = .0032 vs. GLP-1RA). The incremental meal tolerance test glucose area showed a larger reduction with iGlarLixi versus GLP-1RA (p < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In people with type 2 diabetes on metformin, 26-week treatment with iGlarLixi resulted in a marked improvement in β-cell function concomitant with sparing of endogenous insulin release and a reduction in meal absorption.

New Horizons: Next-Generation Insulin Analogues: Structural Principles and Clinical Goals

Design of "first-generation" insulin analogues over the past 3 decades has provided pharmaceutical formulations with tailored pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties. Application of a molecular tool kit-integrating protein sequence, chemical modification, and formulation-has thus led to improved prandial and basal formulations for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. Although PK/PD changes were modest in relation to prior formulations of human and animal insulins, significant clinical advantages in efficacy (mean glycemia) and safety (rates of hypoglycemia) were obtained. Continuing innovation is providing further improvements to achieve ultrarapid and ultrabasal analogue formulations in an effort to reduce glycemic variability and optimize time in range. Beyond such PK/PD metrics, next-generation insulin analogues seek to exploit therapeutic mechanisms: glucose-responsive ("smart") analogues, pathway-specific ("biased") analogues, and organ-targeted analogues. Smart insulin analogues and delivery systems promise to mitigate hypoglycemic risk, a critical barrier to glycemic control, whereas biased and organ-targeted insulin analogues may better recapitulate physiologic hormonal regulation. In each therapeutic class considerations of cost and stability will affect use and global distribution. This review highlights structural principles underlying next-generation design efforts, their respective biological rationale, and potential clinical applications.

Management of Diabetes in Candidates for Liver Transplantation and in Transplant Recipients

Diabetes is common in patients waitlisted for liver transplantation because of end-stage liver disease or hepatocellular cancer as well as in posttransplant phase (posttransplantation diabetes mellitus). In both conditions, the presence of diabetes severely affects disease burden and long-term clinical outcomes; careful monitoring and appropriate treatment are pivotal to reduce cardiovascular events and graft and recipients' death. We thoroughly reviewed the epidemiology of diabetes in the transplant setting and the different therapeutic options, from lifestyle intervention to antidiabetic drug use-including the most recent drug classes available-and to the inclusion of bariatric surgery in the treatment cascade. In waitlisted patients, the old paradigm that insulin should be the treatment of choice in the presence of severe liver dysfunction is no longer valid; novel antidiabetic agents may provide adequate glucose control without the risk of hypoglycemia, also offering cardiovascular protection. The same evidence applies to the posttransplant phase, where oral or injectable noninsulin agents should be considered to treat patients to target, limiting the impact of disease on daily living, without interaction with immunosuppressive regimens. The increasing prevalence of liver disease of metabolic origin (nonalcoholic fatty liver) among liver transplant candidates, also having a higher risk of noncirrhotic hepatocellular cancer, is likely to accelerate the acceptance of new drugs and invasive procedures, as suggested by international guidelines. Intensive lifestyle intervention programs remain however mandatory, both before and after transplantation. Achievement of adequate control is mandatory to increase candidacy, to prevent delisting, and to improve long-term outcomes.

GLP-1 receptor agonists and cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes: Clinical evidence and best practice

ABSTRACT

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) is a major cause of death and disability among people with type 2 diabetes (T2D), presenting a significant impact on longevity, patient quality of life, and health care costs. In the United States, attainment of recommended glycemic targets is low and T2D-related cardiovascular complications remain a significant burden. Many glucose-lowering treatment options are available, but glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors are recommended in recent guidelines as the preferred add-on therapy to metformin to improve glycemic control. This is particularly the case for patients with T2D and established atherosclerotic CVD, at high risk of atherosclerotic CVD, and/or with chronic kidney disease. Recommendations were based on GLP-1RA and SGLT-2 inhibitor cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs), which consistently showed that these agents pose no additional cardiovascular risk compared with placebo. Three GLP-1RAs (liraglutide, dulaglutide, and subcutaneous semaglutide) demonstrated significantly lower major adverse cardiovascular events versus placebo and are now approved for this indication. However, to realize improvement in outcomes in the clinical setting, organized, systematic, and coordinated approaches to patient management are also needed. For example, nurse-led diabetes self-management education and support programs have been shown to be effective. This article explores T2D management with emphasis on cardiovascular risk and CVOTs performed to date and reviews the clinical experience with GLP-1RAs for managing hyperglycemia and their impact on cardiovascular risk. In addition, practical guidance is given for key health care providers involved in the care of patients with T2D with cardiovascular risk outside of diabetes clinics/endocrinology centers.

The Longer-Term Benefits and Harms of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Previous meta-analyses of the benefits and harms of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs) have been limited to specific outcomes and comparisons and often included short-term results. We aimed to estimate the longer-term effects of GLP1RAs on cardiovascular risk factors, microvascular and macrovascular complications, mortality, and adverse events in patients with type 2 diabetes, compared to placebo and other anti-hyperglycemic medications.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Scopus, and clinicaltrials.gov (inception-July 2019) for randomized controlled trials ≥ 52 weeks' duration that compared a GLP1RA to placebo or other anti-hyperglycemic medication and included at least one outcome of interest. Outcomes included cardiovascular risk factors, microvascular and macrovascular complications, all-cause mortality, and treatment-related adverse events. We performed random effects meta-analyses to give summary estimates using weighted mean differences (MD) and pooled relative risks (RR). Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias in randomized trials tool. Quality of evidence was summarized using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. The study was registered a priori with PROSPERO (CRD42018090506).

RESULTS

Forty-five trials with a mean duration of 1.7 years comprising 71,517 patients were included. Compared to placebo, GLP1RAs reduced cardiovascular risk factors, microvascular complications (including renal events, RR 0.85, 0.80-0.90), macrovascular complications (including stroke, RR 0.86, 0.78-0.95), and mortality (RR 0.89, 0.84-0.94). Compared to other anti-hyperglycemic medications, GLP1RAs only reduced cardiovascular risk factors. Increased gastrointestinal events causing treatment discontinuation were observed in both comparisons.

DISCUSSION

GLP1RAs reduced cardiovascular risk factors and increased gastrointestinal events compared to placebo and other anti-hyperglycemic medications. GLP1RAs also reduced MACE, stroke, renal events, and mortality in comparisons with placebo; however, analyses were inconclusive for comparisons with other anti-hyperglycemic medications. Given the high costs of GLP1RAs, the lack of long-term evidence comparing GLP1RAs to other anti-hyperglycemic medications has significant policy and clinical practice implications.

Basal insulin intensification with GLP-1RA and dual GIP and GLP-1RA in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus: A rapid review of randomized controlled trials and meta-analysis

Tirzepatide, a dual agonist of Glucose-Dependent Insulinotropic Polypeptide (GIP) and Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptors, improved glucose control and reduced body weight in different therapeutic approaches. Herein, we overviewed the role of GIP and GLP-1 in the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes and systematically reviewed the efficacy and safety of injectable incretin-based therapy added to basal insulin in light of the results of the SURPASS-5 trial. We identified eleven randomized clinical trials. GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) or Tirzepatide added to basal insulin than rigorously titrated basal insulin significantly ameliorates glucose control (Δ HbA_1c = -1%, 95% CI -1.25; -0.74, I² 94%; Δ FPG = -14.6 mg/dL, 95% CI -21.6-; -7.6, I² 90%; chance to achieve HbA_{1c <}7% = RR 2.62, 95% CI 2.10; 3.26, I² 89%), reduces body weight (Δ = -3.95 kg, 95% CI -5.1, -2.79, I² 96%) without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia (RR = 1.01, 95% CI 0.86; 1.18, I² 7.7%). Tirzepatide provides an impressive weight loss exceeding that observed with GLP-1RAs. Injectable incretin-based therapy plus basal insulin remains a potent and safe therapeutic approach in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes patients previously treated with basal insulin alone. Tirzepatide is expected to ameliorate the management of "diabesity" in this usually difficult-to-treat cluster of patients.

Factors Associated With Improved A1C Values Among People With Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes

Uncontrolled diabetes negatively affects millions of people in the United States and contributes to significant health burden. This retrospective case-control study evaluated which therapeutic interventions and patient factors were associated with improvement in A1C values from ≥9.0 to <9.0% in people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes at a county health clinic serving primarily low-income, Hispanic patients. Medication adherence, high-dose insulin use, and clinical pharmacy specialist visits were found to be the most influential factors with regard to improving A1C.

Evaluation of the Association of CGM Metrics with Antihyperglycemic Drugs in Insulin-Treated Diabetics

<b><i>Introduction:</i></b> Intermittent flash glucose monitoring (FGM) and real-time continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) are used to monitor glycemic excursions for 14 days and can demonstrate time in range (TIR), time above range (TAR), and time below range (TBR). The utility of CGM metrics, such as TIR, TBR, and TAR, in diabetics treated with insulin combined with antihyperglycemic drugs is uncertain. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> In a cross-sectional and retrospective study, we investigated the relationship between target metrics from CGM/FGM and HbA1c or glucose variabilities in 80 type 1 and 2 diabetic patients receiving insulin treatment with ≥1 injections per day. The proportions of TIR, TAR, and TBR from FGM in relation to HbA1c and coefficient of variation (CV)% in types 1 and 2 diabetics were analyzed. Multivariable analyses were performed regarding the associations of TIR with biochemical factors and glycemic variabilities. TBR was also examined in relation to antidiabetic agents and diabetic type in multiple regression analyses. Finally, the association of retinopathy with FGM-CGM metrics was examined using a logistic analysis. <b><i>Results:</i></b> When patients were grouped by sex and diabetic type, significant differences in age, TIR, TBR, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLC), and insulin dose were detected using Kruskal-Wallis analyses. HbA1c significantly correlated with TIR (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001) and TAR (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001) using Pearson’s correlation analysis. TBR significantly correlated with CV% (<i>p</i> &#x3c; 0.001). Multivariable analysis of TIR showed a significant negative association with HbA1c (<i>p</i> = 0.02). Incretin combined with insulin therapy reduced the TBR proportion significantly according to the multivariate analysis. Retinopathy tended to be related to HbA1c (<i>p</i> = 0.059) and duration (<i>p</i> = 0.078) but not TIR (<i>p</i> = 0.891), according to the logistic analysis. <b><i>Conclusions:</i></b> These results demonstrate that CGM metrics reflect glucose control for 2 weeks using TIR. In addition, combined therapy with incretin and insulin therapy is superior for reducing hypoglycemia, based on TBR. Thus, TBR is also useful for monitoring hypoglycemia. However, FGM/CGM metrics do not predict retinopathy accurately.

Structural principles of insulin formulation and analog design: A century of innovation

BACKGROUND

The discovery of insulin in 1921 and its near-immediate clinical use initiated a century of innovation. Advances extended across a broad front, from the stabilization of animal insulin formulations to the frontiers of synthetic peptide chemistry, and in turn, from the advent of recombinant DNA manufacturing to structure-based protein analog design. In each case, a creative interplay was observed between pharmaceutical applications and then-emerging principles of protein science; indeed, translational objectives contributed to a growing molecular understanding of protein structure, aggregation and misfolding.

SCOPE OF REVIEW

Pioneering crystallographic analyses-beginning with Hodgkin's solving of the 2-Zn insulin hexamer-elucidated general features of protein self-assembly, including zinc coordination and the allosteric transmission of conformational change. Crystallization of insulin was exploited both as a step in manufacturing and as a means of obtaining protracted action. Forty years ago, the confluence of recombinant human insulin with techniques for site-directed mutagenesis initiated the present era of insulin analogs. Variant or modified insulins were developed that exhibit improved prandial or basal pharmacokinetic (PK) properties. Encouraged by clinical trials demonstrating the long-term importance of glycemic control, regimens based on such analogs sought to resemble daily patterns of endogenous β-cell secretion more closely, ideally with reduced risk of hypoglycemia.

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS

Next-generation insulin analog design seeks to explore new frontiers, including glucose-responsive insulins, organ-selective analogs and biased agonists tailored to address yet-unmet clinical needs. In the coming decade, we envision ever more powerful scientific synergies at the interface of structural biology, molecular physiology and therapeutics.

A practical approach to the clinical challenges in initiation of basal insulin therapy in people with type 2 diabetes

Initiating insulin therapy with a basal insulin analogue has become a standard of care in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Despite increasing choices in pharmacological approaches, intensified glucose monitoring and improvements in quality of care, many patients do not achieve the desired level of glycaemic control. Although insulin therapy, when optimized, can help patients reach their glycaemic goals, there are barriers to treatment initiation on both the side of the patient and provider. Providers experience barriers based on their perceptions of patients' capabilities and concerns. They may lack the confidence to solve the practical problems of insulin therapy and avoid decisions they perceive as risky for their patients. In this study, we review recommendations for basal insulin initiation, focussing on glycaemic targets, titration, monitoring, and combination therapy with non-insulin anti-hyperglycaemic medications. We provide practical advice on how to address some of the key problems encountered in everyday clinical practice and give recommendations where there are gaps in knowledge or guidelines. We also discuss common challenges faced by people with T2DM, such as weight gain and hypoglycaemia, and how providers can address and overcome them.

Different Indicators of Adiposity and Fat Distribution and Cardiometabolic Risk Factors in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of adiposity and fat distribution on the odds of elevated cardiovascular risk factors among adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

The present cross-sectional study included 2,427 adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Body fat was assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Multivariate-adjusted logistic regression was used to estimate effects of adiposity parameters on elevated hemoglobin A_1c (HbA_1c , ≥7.0%), hypertension (blood pressure ≥140/90 mmHg), and elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (≥2.6 mmol/L).

RESULTS

The multivariable-adjusted odds ratio (OR) for elevated HbA_1c was 0.82 (95% CI: 0.70-0.96) for each SD increase in leg fat mass. The multivariable-adjusted OR for hypertension was 1.15 (95% CI: 1.00-1.32) for each SD increase in android fat mass. Multivariable-adjusted ORs for elevated LDL cholesterol ranged from 1.16 (95% CI: 1.00-1.35) to 1.27 (95% CI: 1.06-1.51) for each SD increase in arm and android fat mass and percentage of total, truncal, arm, and android fat. Each SD increase in BMI, truncal-to-leg fat ratio, and android-to-gynoid fat ratio was significantly associated with increased risks of elevated HbA_1c , hypertension, and elevated LDL cholesterol.

CONCLUSIONS

Subcutaneous fat in the lower body was associated with a more favorable glycemic profile, but not blood pressure or lipid profile, whereas central adiposity was associated with poor control of cardiovascular risk factors among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Comparison of insulin degludec (IDeg)/insulin Aspart (IAsp) co-formulation therapy twice-daily with free combination of GLP-1 receptor agonist liraglutide plus insulin degludec in Tochigi: IDEAL Trial

AIM

We compared the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec/insulin aspart co-formulation (IDegAsp) twice-daily to a free combination of basal insulin degludec and GLP-1 receptor agonist liraglutide (IDeg + Lira) once-daily for patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes on insulin therapy and oral antidiabetic drugs.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients were randomly allocated at a 1:1 ratio to receive either the once-daily dual injection of IDeg + Lira (n = 24) or twice-daily single injection of IDegAsp (n = 28). The primary endpoints were as follows: HbA1c changes over 52 weeks of treatment and the percentage of participants achieving HbA1c < 7.0% at week 52.

RESULTS

After 52 weeks, HbA1c decreased by 0.3% in the IDegAsp group and by 0.7% in the IDeg + Lira group. The HbA1c reduction was greater in the IDeg + Lira group than in the IDegAsp group. 19% of patients on IDegAsp versus 40% on IDeg + Lira achieved HbA1c < 7.0%. Pre-breakfast and pre-dinner blood glucose at 52 weeks were significantly lower in the IDeg + Lira group than in the IDegAsp group. The reduction in body mass index (BMI) was greater in the IDeg + Lira group than in the IDegAsp group throughout the study period. The confirmed hypoglycaemia rates were 1.32 and 0.69 per patient/year of exposure to IDegAsp and IDeg + Lira, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes on insulin therapy and oral antidiabetic drugs, treatment with the once-daily dual injection of IDeg + Lira compared with the twice-daily single injection of IDegAsp showed no significant difference in glycaemic control but statistically superior weight loss.

Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide compared with glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

One of the effective and consistent ways to achieve glycaemic control for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is once-daily basal insulin. But it is also associated with adverse outcomes such as hypoglycaemia. Dulaglutide, a novel long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonist, may be a more suitable therapy. The present meta-analysis aims to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide compared with insulin glargine for the treatment of T2DM.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase and Cochrane Library from inception to December 2020. Randomized clinical trials comparing dulaglutide with insulin glargine in adults with T2DM were included. Revman5.2 software was used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

We included 5 studies with 3383 randomized participants. Compared with insulin glargine, dulaglutide 1.5 mg led to greater mean HbA1c reduction (MD = -0.33%, 95% CI = -0.52, -0.15) whereas dulaglutide 0.75 mg did not (MD = -0.21%, 95% CI = -0.43, 0.01). Body weight loss was seen with dulaglutide whereas weight gain was seen with insulin glargine. The risk of hypoglycaemia was lower in dulaglutide 0.75 mg and 1.5 mg groups than in insulin glargine group,whereas dulaglutide had a statistically higher gastrointestinal adverse events incidence than insulin glargine.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS

Compared with insulin glargine, dulaglutide may serve as an effective alternative to provide improvement in glycaemic control with weight loss and less hypoglycaemia in patients with T2DM. It may be a more suitable therapy instead of basal insulin.

Delphi-Based Consensus on Treatment Intensification in Type 2 Diabetes Subjects Failing Basal Insulin Supported Oral Treatment: Focus on Basal Insulin + GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Combination Therapies

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to elaborate a consensus on treatment intensification strategies in patients with type 2 diabetes failing basal insulin supported oral therapy (BOT). The panel focused on glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and basal insulin (BI) combinations.

METHODS

The authors developed a Delphi questionnaire organized into ten statements and 77 items that focused on: the definition of BOT and BOT failure, intensification strategies, fixed-dose combinations in general and the BI/GLP-1RA fixed combination. The survey was administered in two rounds to a panel of 80 Italian diabetes specialists, who rated their level of agreement with each item on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as > 66% of the panel agreeing/disagreeing on any given item.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved for 71 of the 77 items. The panel agreed that the use of sulfonylureas in the BOT regimen is inappropriate. BOT failure was defined as individualized targets not being met for glycated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose and/or postprandial plasma glucose. There was agreement that postprandial hyperglycaemia and/or presence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia or weight gain define BOT failure. Addition of a GLP-1RA to BI therapy was considered to be the best option for BOT intensification. There was consensus for the use of BI/GLP-1RA fixed combinations as valuable options to increase compliance and safely improve glycaemic control. The panel agreed in considering the fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) to be preferable to the fixed-ratio combination insulin glargine/lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) in the control of glycaemia, body weight and cardiovascular risk.

CONCLUSION

According to this Delphi consensus, the addition of a GLP-1RA may be the best option to intensify BOT. The BI/GLP-1RA fixed combinations may increase compliance and optimize the advantages of each of these molecules.

Real-World Evaluation of Glycemic Outcomes and Extra-Glycemic Parameters in Diabetic Patients Treated with the Combined Formulation Degludec-Liraglutide (Ideglira)

INTRODUCTION

Combination therapy with both basal insulin (BI) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) is an effective treatment in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The recent development and release of a fixed-ratio combination of slow-release insulin degludec and the GLP-1RA liraglutide (IDegLira) represents an improvement to this therapy. We have conducted a real-world evidence study in Italian patients with T2DM to evaluate whether the encouraging clinical trial results obtained with IDegLira, which became available in Italy in January 2018, can be confirmed in Italian clinical practice.

METHODS

This was a multicenter, retrospective, observational study in patients with T2DM treated with IDegLira from January to December 2018. Prior to the initiation of IDegLira therapy, patients were treated with BI with or without one or more concomitant oral antidiabetic drugs (BOT group) or according to the basal bolus protocol (BI and rapid-acting insulin treatment; BB group).

RESULTS

A total of 244 patients were included in the present study, of whom 186 were in the BOT group and 58 in the BB group. Following the switch to IDegLira therapy, glycemic control improved in both groups, with significant reductions in glycated hemoglobin after 6 and 12 months of treatment in the BOT group and after 6 months of treatment in the BB group. No gain in body weight and body mass index and reductions in fasting plasma glucose and number of concomitant diabetic medications (in BOT patients) were observed. All results obtained during the study were achieved at a moderate dose of IDegLira.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this study show that in a real-world setting, the switch to IDegLira treatment is a valid option for patients who are failing to achieve glycemic control targets and/or struggling with the side effects, such as weight gain and hypoglycemia, of other insulin therapies.

Reporting and methodological quality of systematic reviews and meta-analysis with protocols in Diabetes Mellitus Type II: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Systematic reviews with or without meta-analyses (SR/MAs) are strongly encouraged to work from a protocol to facilitate high quality, transparent methodology. The completeness of reporting of a protocol (PRISMA-P) and manuscript (PRISMA) is essential to the quality appraisal (AMSTAR-2) and appropriate use of SR/MAs in making treatment decisions.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to describe the completeness of reporting and quality of SR/MAs, assess the correlations between PRISMA-P, PRISMA, and AMSTAR-2, and to identify reporting characteristics between similar items of PRISMA-P and PRISMA.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus SR/MAs of hypoglycemic agents with publicly available protocols. Cochrane reviews, guidelines, and specific types of MA were excluded. Two reviewers independently, (i) searched PubMed and Embase between 1/1/2015 to 20/3/2019; (ii) identified protocols of included studies by searching the manuscript bibliography, supplementary material, PROSPERO, and Google; (iii) completed PRISMA-P, PRISMA, and AMSTAR-2 tools. Data analysis included descriptive statistics, Pearson correlation, and multivariable linear regression.

RESULTS

Of 357 relevant SR/MAs, 51 had available protocols and were included. The average score for PRISMA-P was 15.8±3.3 (66%; maximum 24) and 25.2±1.1 (93%; maximum 27) for PRISMA. The quality of SR/MAs assessed using the AMSTAR-2 tool identified an overall poor quality (63% critically low, 18% low, 8% moderate, 12% high). The correlation between the PRISMA-P and PRISMA was not significant (r = 0.264; p = 0.06). Correlation was significant between PRISMA-P and AMSTAR-2 (r = 0.333; p = 0.02) and PRISMA and AMSTAR-2 (r = 0.555; p<0.01). Discrepancies in reporting were common between similar PRISMA-P and PRISMA items.

CONCLUSION

Adherence to protocol reporting guidance was poor while manuscript reporting was comprehensive. Protocol completeness is not associated with a completely reported manuscript. Independently, PRISMA-P and PRISMA scores were weakly associated with higher quality assessments but insufficient as a surrogate for quality. Critical areas for quality improvement include protocol description, investigating causes of heterogeneity, and the impact of risk of bias on the evidence synthesis.

Titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine plus lixisenatide: A simplified approach to glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Approximately 50% of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) do not achieve glycemic targets and require treatment intensification. A fixed-ratio combination of a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) with basal insulin, such as lixisenatide with insulin glargine (iGlarLixi), exploits the complementary mechanisms of action of each component to address hyperglycemia while mitigating potential adverse events (AEs). The iGlarLixi dose is titrated considering the effect of basal insulin on fasting plasma glucose, and the fixed-ratio combination ensures that the lixisenatide dose never exceeds 20 μg/day. We describe the characteristics of iGlarLixi therapy, based on the LixiLan clinical program, and provide guidance on the characteristics of patients likely to benefit from such treatment in routine clinical practice. In the phase III LixiLan trials, iGlarLixi resulted in significantly greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), better achievement of HbA1c targets, less glycemic variability versus insulin glargine, lixisenatide or GLP-1 RA alone, and was associated with weight control, less hypoglycemia versus insulin glargine, and fewer GI AEs versus lixisenatide. Findings were consistent regardless of age, diabetes duration, and baseline HbA1c. The efficacy, safety, and convenient once-daily administration schedule of iGlarLixi make it a valuable treatment option for patients with T2DM requiring treatment intensification.

Exenatide and Renal Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes and Diabetic Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular outcomes in clinical trials with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients have shown that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist can have a beneficial effect on the kidney. This trial aimed to assess the effects of exenatide on renal outcomes in patients with T2DM and diabetic kidney disease (DKD).

METHODS

We performed a randomized parallel study encompassing 4 general hospitals. T2DM patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥30 mL/min/1.73 m2 and macroalbuminuria, defined as 24-h urinary albumin excretion rate (UAER) >0.3 g/24 h were randomized 1:1 to receive exenatide twice daily plus insulin glargine (intervention group) or insulin lispro plus glargine (control group) for 24 weeks. The primary outcome was the UAER percentage change from the baseline after 24 weeks of intervention. The rates of hypoglycemia, adverse events (AEs), and change in eGFR during the follow-up were measured as safety outcomes.

RESULTS

Between March 2016 and April 2019, 92 patients were randomized and took at least 1 dose of the study drug. The mean age of the participants was 56 years. At baseline, the median UAER was 1,512.0 mg/24 h and mean eGFR was 70.4 mL/min/1.73 m2. After 24 weeks of treatment, the UAER percentage change was significantly lower in the intervention group than in the control group (p = 0.0255). Moreover, the body weight declined by 1.3 kg in the intervention group (the difference between the 2 groups was 2.7 kg, p = 0.0001). Compared to the control group, a lower frequency of hypoglycemia and more gastrointestinal AEs were observed in the intervention group.

CONCLUSION

Exenatide plus insulin glargine treatment for 24 weeks resulted in a reduction of albuminuria in T2DM patients with DKD.

iGlarLixi effectively reduces residual hyperglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin: A post hoc analysis from the LixiLan-L study

Globally, nearly half of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) do not successfully achieve target HbA1c with basal insulin, despite meeting fasting plasma glucose (FPG) targets. In this post hoc analysis of the LixiLan-L study, we determined whether iGlarLixi, a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine Gla-100 (iGlar) and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide (Lixi), addresses the challenge of reducing residual hyperglycaemia in patients with T2D. In LixiLan-L, a randomized, open-label study, 1018 patients with T2D on basal insulin for ≥6 months ± oral antidiabetes drugs entered a 6-week run-in period, during which they were switched to and/or optimized for a daily dose of iGlar while continuing only metformin. Following the run-in period, 736 patients were then randomized to receive iGlarLixi or were continued on iGlar for 30 weeks ± metformin. Residual hyperglycaemia was defined as HbA1c ≥ 7.0% despite FPG of <140 mg/dL. The proportion of patients with residual hyperglycaemia was similar in both treatment arms at screening (~~42%), and increased after the run-in period (~~62%). After 30 weeks, the proportion of patients with residual hyperglycaemia declined to 23.8% in the iGlarLixi versus 47.1% in the iGlar arm (P < .0001). The proportion of patients achieving both HbA1c (<7.0%) and FPG (<140 mg/dL) targets was higher in the iGlarLixi compared with the iGlar arm (50.3% vs. 27.4%, respectively; P < .0001). iGlarLixi effectively reduces residual hyperglycaemia in patients with T2D on basal insulin therapy.

Dulaglutide and Insulin: How Can the AWARD Studies Help Guide Clinical Practice?

The glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) dulaglutide has many characteristics to recommend it both as a second-line agent and as an alternative to or in combination with insulin. This commentary summarises recent updates to diabetes management guidelines regarding the use of GLP-1RAs such as dulaglutide, both as a second-line agent and as a first-line injectable agent in type 2 diabetes (T2D). It also examines how the Assessment of Weekly AdministRation of LY2189265 [dulaglutide] in Diabetes (AWARD) studies with dulaglutide and insulin may help to guide clinical practice for the use of dulaglutide as an alternative to basal insulin or in combination with insulin.Individualising glucose-lowering therapy is important in patients with T2D, especially given patients' heterogeneity in terms of age, lifestyle, disease duration, level of hyperglycaemia and comorbidities. Choice of therapy should be guided by clinical considerations (e.g. high risk or existing cardiovascular [CV] disease, heart failure, chronic kidney disease, risk of hypoglycaemia), side effect profile, contraindications, patient preferences and cost. The recently updated American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes (ADA/EASD) guidelines now recommend adding a GLP-1RA with proven CV benefit to metformin in patients with T2D and indicators of high risk or established atherosclerotic CV disease. The AWARD studies demonstrate that dulaglutide provides effective glucose lowering together with sustained weight loss and a low incidence of hypoglycaemia when used as the first injectable option and when used in combination with titrated basal insulin or prandial insulin, providing a valid treatment option across a wide range of patients with T2D, including those with chronic kidney disease.

Fixed-Ratio Combinations of Basal Insulin and GLP-1RA in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Highlights from the Literature

New pieces of evidence suggest that combining basal insulin with glucagone-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) in patients with type 2 diabetes could promptly ameliorate glucose control and prevent both hypoglycemic events and unnecessary weight gain compared to more intensive insulin regimens. To review the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin and GLP- 1RA (FRCs). Authors searched PubMed/MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for freely available original articles, randomized clinical trials (RCTs), clinical reviews, and meta-analysis written in English until January 2020. FRCs provide significative reductions in HbA1c levels in both insulin-naïve (-1.4% to -2%) and insulin- experienced (-1.5% to -2%) type 2 diabetic patients with moderate glucose impairment. More patients achieved the recommended glycemic targets on FRCs compared to those on mono-therapy with basal insulin or GLP-1RAs. The intensification with FRCs results in better glycemic control compared to basal insulin at fasting as well as during the postprandial state. The frequency of hypoglycemia is similar or lower in patients treated with FRCs than in those on basal insulin alone at a similar dose. Weight trend can be variable, ranging from -2.7 to +2 Kg for iDegLira and -0.7 to -1.3 Kg for iGlar- Lixi. However, a lower weight gain is obtained with iDegLira compared to iDeg (-2.2 to -2.5 Kg), iGlar (-1.7 to -3.2 Kg), and basal-bolus (-3.6 Kg) as well as with iGlarLixi compared to iGlar (-1.4 Kg). FRCs should be considered to safely improve the metabolic control in type 2 diabetic patients with moderate glycemic impairment while on oral medications, basal oral regimen or GLP-1RAs. However, a few but significative pieces of evidence suggest that FRCs could be a safe and effective treatment instead of a low dose basal-bolus intensification for patients with mild or moderate glucose impairment in order to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia and unnecessary weight gain, and for simplifying treatment regimen as well.

Efficacy of exenatide and insulin glargine on nonalcoholic fatty liver disease in patients with type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of exenatide and insulin glargine in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

METHODS

We performed a 24-week randomized controlled multicentre clinical trial. Seventy-six patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive exenatide or insulin glargine treatment. The endpoints included changes in liver fat content (LFC), visceral adipose tissue (VAT), and subcutaneous adipose tissue (SAT) measured by magnetic resonance spectroscopy, blood glucose, liver enzymes, lipid profile, body weight, and Fibrosis-4 index (FIB-4).

RESULTS

LFC, VAT, SAT, and FIB-4 were significantly reduced after exenatide treatment (ΔLFC, -17.55 ± 12.93%; ΔVAT, -43.57 ± 68.20 cm² ; ΔSAT, -28.44 ± 51.48 cm² ; ΔFIB-4, -0.10 ± 0.26; all P < .05). In comparison, only LFC (ΔLFC, -10.49 ± 11.38%; P < .05), and not VAT, SAT, or FIB-4 index (all P > .05), was reduced after insulin glargine treatment. Moreover, exenatide treatment resulted in greater reductions in alanine transaminase (ALT), aspartate transaminase (AST), and gamma glutamyl transpeptidase (GGT) than insulin glargine (P < 0.05). The body weight, waist circumference, postprandial plasma glucose, and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in the exenatide group also presented greater reductions than the insulin glargine group (P < .05). The proportion of adverse events were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Both exenatide and insulin glargine reduced LFC in patients with drug-naive T2DM and NAFLD; however, exenatide showed greater reductions in body weight, visceral fat area, liver enzymes, FIB-4, postprandial plasma glucose, and LDL-C.

Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Since the discovery of insulin, it was the only drug available for the treatment of diabetes until the development of sulfonylureas and biguanides 50 years later. But even with the availability of oral glucose-lowering drugs, insulin supplementation was often needed to achieve good glucose control in type 2 diabetes. Insulin NPH became the basal insulin therapy of choice and adding NPH to metformin and/or sulfonylureas became the standard of care until basal insulin analogs were developed and new glucose-lowering drugs became available.

AREAS OF UNCERTAINTY

The advantages in cost-benefit of insulin analogs and their combination with new glucose-lowering drugs are still a matter of debate. There is no general agreement on how to avoid inertia by prescribing insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes when really needed, as reflected by the diversity of recommendations in the current clinical practice guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

When necessary for this review, a systematic search of the evidence was done in PubMed and Cochrane databases.

THERAPEUTIC ADVANCES

Adding new oral glucose-lowering drugs to insulin such as DPP-4 inhibitors lead to a modest HbA1c reduction without weight gain and no increase in hypoglycemia. When SGLT-2 inhibitors are added instead, there is a slightly higher HbA1c reduction, but with body weight and blood pressure reduction. The downside is the increase in genital tract infections. GLP-1 receptor agonists have become the best alternative when basal insulin fails, particularly using fixed ratio combinations. Rapid-acting insulins via the inhaled route may also become an alternative for insulin supplementation and/or intensification. "Smart insulins" are under investigation and may become available for clinical use in the near future.

CONCLUSIONS

Aggressive weight loss strategies together with the new glucose-lowering drugs which do not cause hypoglycemia nor weight gain should limit the number of patients with type 2 diabetes needing insulin. Nevertheless, because of therapeutic inertia and the progressive nature of the disease, many need at least a basal insulin supplementation and insulin analogs are the best choice as they become more affordable. Fixed ratio combinations with GLP1 receptor agonists are a good choice for intensification of insulin therapy.

Efficacy and safety of long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 21 randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and safety of once weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) dulaglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library from inception to August 18, 2019. Revman5.3 and Stata13.0 software were used for meta-analysis.

RESULTS

Twenty-one trials including 20,367 patients were analyzed. Compared with control group, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) in 0.75 mg dulaglutide group and 1.5 mg dulaglutide group were reduced by 0.29% and 0.55%, respectively. More patients treated with 0.75 mg dulaglutide [RR 1.24, 95% CI (1.08, 1.42), p = 0.002] and 1.5 mg dulaglutide [RR 1.66, 95% CI (1.40, 1.99), p < 0.00001] had reached the target of HbA1c 7.0%. In patients with T2DM, 0.75 mg dulaglutide and 1.5 mg dulaglutide had a statistically higher adverse events (AEs) incidence than control, whereas the risk of hypoglycaemia was lower in 0.75 mg dulaglutide group and 1.5 mg dulaglutide group than in control group.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the current evidence, 0.75 and 1.5 mg dulaglutide are associated with better glycemic control and lower rate of hypoglycemia in patients with T2DM.

Incretin therapy for diabetes mellitus type 2

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Among the gastrointestinal hormones, the incretins: glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 have attracted interest because of their importance for the development and therapy of type 2 diabetes and obesity. New agonists and formulations of particularly the GLP-1 receptor have been developed recently showing great therapeutic efficacy for both diseases.

RECENT FINDINGS

The status of the currently available GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) is described, and their strengths and weaknesses analyzed. Their ability to also reduce cardiovascular and renal risk is described and analysed. The most recent development of orally available agonists and of very potent monomolecular co-agonists for both the GLP-1 and GIP receptor is also discussed.

SUMMARY

The GLP-1RAs are currently the most efficacious agents for weight loss, and show potential for further efficacy in combination with other food-intake-regulating peptides. Because of their glycemic efficacy and cardiorenal protection, the GLP-1 RAs will be prominent elements in future diabetes therapy.

Efficacy, Safety, and Tolerability of Oral Semaglutide Versus Placebo Added to Insulin With or Without Metformin in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: The PIONEER 8 Trial

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of oral semaglutide added to insulin with or without metformin.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on insulin with or without metformin were randomized to oral semaglutide 3 mg (N = 184), 7 mg (N = 182), or 14 mg (N = 181) or to placebo (N = 184) in a 52-week, double-blind trial. End points were change from baseline to week 26 in HbA1c (primary) and body weight (confirmatory secondary). Two estimands were defined: treatment policy (effect regardless of trial product discontinuation or rescue medication) and trial product (effect assuming trial product continuation without rescue medication) in randomized patients.

RESULTS

Oral semaglutide was superior to placebo in reducing HbA1c (estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0.5% [95% CI -0.7, -0.3], -0.9% [-1.1, -0.7], and -1.2% [-1.4, -1.0] for 3, 7, and 14 mg, respectively; P < 0.001) and body weight (ETD -0.9 kg [95% CI -1.8, -0.0], -2.0 kg [-3.0, -1.0], and -3.3 kg [-4.2, -2.3]; P = 0.0392 for 3 mg, P ≤ 0.0001 for 7 and 14 mg) at week 26 (treatment policy estimand). Significantly greater dose-dependent HbA1c and body weight reductions versus placebo were achieved with oral semaglutide at weeks 26 and 52 (both estimands). The most frequent adverse event with oral semaglutide was nausea (11.4-23.2% of patients vs. 7.1% with placebo; mostly mild to moderate).

CONCLUSIONS

Oral semaglutide was superior to placebo in reducing HbA1c and body weight when added to insulin with or without metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes. The safety profile was consistent with other glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists.

Effect of medication adherence on clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes: analysis of the SIMPLE study

Objective

Medication adherence is impacted by regimen complexity. The SIMPLE (Simple basal Insulin titration, Metformin Plus Liraglutide for type 2 diabetes with very Elevated HbA1c) study compared GLP1RA plus basal insulin (GLP1RA+BI) to basal-bolus insulin (BBI) regimen in participants with very uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This analysis aimed to evaluate medication adherence to GLP1RA+BI compared with BBI, the effect of adherence on clinical and patient-reported outcomes, and baseline predictors of adherence.

Research design and methods

This was an analysis of the SIMPLE study based on prespecified outcome. The study took place in pragmatic, real-world setting. A total of 120 adults with T2DM and HgbA1c≥10% were randomized to detemir plus liraglutide, or detemir plus aspart before each meal; 6-month follow-up. The main outcomes evaluated were: adherence, HgbA1c, weight, quality of life, and hypoglycemia. Adherence rate was calculated for each study medication at each follow-up visit; participants were classified as ≥80% or <80% adherent.

Result

A higher percentage of participants in the GLP1RA+BI compared with the BBI group had ≥80% adherence to detemir (59.3% vs 35.7%, p=0.02) as well as liraglutide versus aspart (57.4% vs 30.4%, p=0.007). Higher age was predictive of ≥80% adherence (OR per 5-year increment=1.48, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.0, p=0.01). Higher adherence led to greater improvement in HbA1c and weight in both groups. Treatment with GLP1RA+BI compared with BBI led to greater improvement in HbA1c, weight, and quality of life and lower risk of hypoglycemia even after adjusting for the difference in adherence between groups.

Conclusions

Adherence was higher with the simplified regimen of GLP1RA+BI compared with BBI. Greater adherence to the simpler regimen amplified the treatment effect on HbA1c, weight, quality of life, and risk of hypoglycemia, yet statistically significant greater benefits were noted even when adjusted for adherence.

Trial registration number

NCT01966978.

Fixed versus flexible combination of GLP-1 receptor agonists with basal insulin in type 2 diabetes: A retrospective multicentre comparative effectiveness study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The combination of basal insulin (BI) and GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) is a rational and effective therapy for patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D). We compared the effectiveness of fixed and flexible BI/GLP-1RA combinations using routinely accumulated clinical data.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, multicentre, real-world study concerning T2D patients initiating a fixed or flexible BI/GLP-1RA combination (NCT03959865). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c. Secondary endpoints were changes in body weight, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and systolic blood pressure (SBP). Confounding was addressed by propensity score matching (PSM) or multivariable adjustment (MVA).

RESULTS

A total of 609 patients were included in the study, 131 in the fixed group and 478 in the flexible group. The two groups differed in terms of diabetes duration, body weight and concomitant medications. After 5.7 months, observed HbA1c reductions were 0.6% and 0.8%, and body weight reductions were 2.8 kg and 1.2 kg in the flexible and fixed groups, respectively. Following PSM, HbA1c declined similarly in the two groups, whereas reduction in body weight was significantly in favour of the flexible combination. Findings were robust in sensitivity analyses, with the exception that, with MVA, a significantly higher reduction in HbA1c was detected in the fixed group. Final doses of BI were higher in the fixed group, whereas those of GLP-1RA were higher in the flexible group.

CONCLUSIONS

In routine specialist care, initiation of the fixed or flexible BI/GLP-1RA combination allowed similar improvement in glycaemic control, but greater weight loss was observed with the flexible combination. This difference reflected dosages of BI and GLP-1RAs.