Simplifying Complex Insulin Regimens While Preserving Good Glycemic Control in Type 2 Diabetes

Real-Life Effectiveness of iGlarLixi (Insulin Glargine 100 U/ml and Lixisenatide) in People with Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) According to Baseline HbA1c and BMI

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of baseline body mass index (BMI) and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) on the effectiveness and safety of initiating iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U/ml and lixisenatide) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

We pooled patient-level data from 1406 people with inadequately controlled T2D, initiating a 24-week iGlarLixi treatment. Analysis sets were based on baseline BMI and HbA1c. In the BMI set, 894 (64%) people had a BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2 and 510 (36%) a BMI < 30 kg/m2; in the HbA1c set, 615 (44%) people had an HbA1c  >9%, 491 (35%) between 8 and 9%, and 298 (21%) < 8%.

RESULTS

After initiating iGlarLixi, HbA1c decreased in all participants, with the greatest least-squares mean reduction at 2.15% from baseline to week 24 in those with baseline HbA1c > 9% (using a mixed model for repeated measures). Overall, mean ± standard deviation body weight decreased by 1.9 ± 4.8 kg, with the most prominent loss of 2.6 ± 4.9 kg recorded in people presenting with obesity. Reported hypoglycemia rates were low across all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiation of iGlarLixi in people with uncontrolled T2D is effective and safe in clinical practice, across different baseline HbA1c and BMI categories.

Time-in-range derived from self-measured blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes advancing to iGlarLixi: A participant-level pooled analysis of three phase 3 LixiLan randomized controlled trials

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) using derived time-in-range (dTIR).

METHODS

Participant-level data from LixiLan-L, LixiLan-O and LixiLan-G were pooled and dTIR (70-180 mg/dL), derived time-above-range (> 180 mg/dL) and derived time-below-range (dTBR; < 70 mg/dL) were calculated from participant seven-point self-monitored blood glucose profiles.

RESULTS

This pooled analysis included data from 2420 participants receiving iGlarLixi (n = 1093), iGlar (n = 836), Lixi (n = 234) or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) (n = 257). Numerically greater improvements in least square (LS) means dTIR were seen from baseline to end of treatment (EOT) with iGlarLixi (25.7%) versus iGlar (15.8%), Lixi (11.7%) or GLP-1 RA (16.2%). At EOT, the mean (standard deviation) dTBR was 0.71% ± 3.4%, 0.61% ± 3.2%, 0.08% ± 1.0% and 0.0% ± 0.0% for iGlarLixi, iGlar, Lixi and GLP-1 RA, respectively. In a subgroup analysis, participants aged younger than 65 years (n = 1690) and 65 years or older (n = 713) showed numerically greater improvements in LS means dTIR from baseline to EOT with iGlarLixi versus iGlar, Lixi or GLP-1 RA.

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi achieved improvements in dTIR, with low dTBR values, providing further evidence to inform clinical outcomes with the use of iGlarLixi.

SPIRIT: Assessing Clinical Parameters Associated with Using IDegLira in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in a Real-World Setting in Colombia

INTRODUCTION

Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec (a basal insulin) and liraglutide (a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist [GLP-1RA]). This study aimed to investigate clinical outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) after initiating IDegLira treatment in a real-world setting in Colombia.

METHODS

SPIRIT is a non-interventional, single-arm, retrospective chart review study to assess clinical outcomes in people with T2DM. Participating patients were switched from a treatment regimen of basal insulin (with or without oral antidiabetics [OADs]) and started on treatment with IDegLira a minimum of 26 ± 6 weeks before the data collection start date. Data were collected from the medical records of 175 patients in ten clinical centers across Colombia.

RESULTS

Compared with baseline, there was a significant reduction in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (1.3%; 95% confidence interval [CI] - 1.6 to - 1.0; p < 0.0001) after 26 ± 6 weeks of follow-up. The mean HbA1c at baseline and at the end of the study was 9.1% and 7.8%, respectively. In addition, IDegLira significantly reduced absolute body weight by 1 kg (95% CI - 1.5 to - 0.5; p < 0.0001), from a mean of 76.1 kg at baseline to 75.1 kg after follow-up. The mean IDegLira dose at the end of the study was 21.3 U, and no severe hypoglycemic events were observed during the follow-up period.

CONCLUSION

In real-world practice, initiating IDegLira in patients with T2DM previously treated with basal insulin (± OAD) was associated with improved glycemic control, reduced body weight and reduced risk of hypoglycemia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05324462.

The IDEAL (Insulin therapy DE-intensificAtion with iglarLixi) Randomised Controlled Trial-Study Design and Protocol

INTRODUCTION

Multiple daily injection insulin regimen (MDI) represents the most intensive insulin regimen used in the management of people with type 2 diabetes (PwT2D). Its efficacy regarding glycaemic control is counterbalanced by the increased risk of hypoglycaemia, frequently observed tendency to weight gain and necessity for frequent glucose monitoring. Recent introduction of novel antidiabetic medications with pleiotropic effects reaching far beyond the reduction of glycaemia (HbA1c), such as the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), has significantly widened the therapeutic options available for management of T2D. Consequently, there is currently a substantial number of PwT2D for whom the MDI regimen was initiated at a time when no other options were available. Yet, in present times, these individuals could benefit from simplified insulin regimens ideally taking advantage of the beneficial effects of the novel classes of antidiabetic medications. iGlarLixi (Suliqua®) is a once-daily fixed-ratio combination of basal insulin analogue glargine 100 U/ml and a GLP-1 RA lixisenatide.

METHODS

Insulin therapy DE-intensificAtion with iglarLixi (IDEAL) is a six-centre, open-label, parallel-group, active comparator, phase IV randomised controlled trial with a 24-week active treatment period examining the efficacy and safety of MDI regimen de-intensification with once-daily administration of iGlarLixi versus MDI regimen continuation in PwT2D on a backgroud therapy with metformin ± sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor.

PLANNED OUTCOMES

The primary objective is to compare the effects of MDI therapy de-intensification with iGlarLixi versus MDI regimen continuation regarding glycaemic control (HbA1c). Secondary objectives include detailed evaluation of the effects of MDI regimen de-intensification with iGlarLixi on glycaemic control using standardised continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) metrics and self-monitoring of plasma glucose. Furthermore, body weight and body composition analysis, quality of life and safety profile are evaluated.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT04945070.

Effect of fixed-ratio insulin combinations on adherence in type 2 diabetes: Systematic review

AIMS

To systematically review evidence on the effect of fixed-ratio combinations on adherence in people with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Systematic searches were conducted using MEDLINE and EMBASE in March 2023. Standardised screening, data extraction and risk of bias assessment were conducted. All review procedures were conducted independently by two reviewers. Eligible studies assessed the effect of fixed-ratio combinations on adherence in people with type 2 diabetes. Narrative synthesis was conducted to analyse findings.

RESULTS

A total of 488 records were identified, of which 37 proceeded to full-text screening and 7 - each representing a unique study - were included in the systematic review. Among the included studies, 3 were randomised controlled trials and 4 were cohort studies. Following narrative synthesis, it was shown that fixed-ratio combinations improved patient satisfaction and treatment adherence.

CONCLUSIONS

Available evidence supports a benefit for fixed-ratio combinations on patient satisfaction and treatment adherence in people with type 2 diabetes.

De-Intensification from Basal-Bolus Insulin Therapy to Liraglutide in Type 2 Diabetes: Predictive Value of Mean Glycaemia during Fasting Test

BACKGROUND

Successful conversion from insulin therapy to glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) with basal insulin in well-controlled patients has already been demonstrated. However, the data concerning individuals with poor glycaemic control are scarce. The aim of this work was to assess the success rate of insulin therapy to liraglutide transition in poorly controlled diabetes in a real-world clinical setting and to define predictors of success. We are the first to present the method of a fasting test as a way to identify the patients at higher risk of failure after treatment de-intensification.

METHODS

The retrospective observational study analyzed data of 62 poorly controlled obese diabetic patients on high-dose insulin therapy, who were subjected to a 72 h fasting test during hospitalization and subsequently switched to liraglutide ± basal insulin therapy. During the fasting, all antidiabetic treatment was discontinued. Patients were classified as responders if they remained on GLP-1RA treatment after 12 months. Non-responders restarted the basal-bolus insulin (BBI) regimen. Development of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight in both groups, alongside with parameters associated with the higher risk of return to the BBI regimen, were analyzed.

RESULTS

A total of 71% of patients were switched successfully (=responders). Responders had more significant improvement in HbA1c (-6.4 ± 19.7 vs. -3.4 ± 22.9 mmol/mol) and weight loss (-4.6 ± 7.1 vs. -2.5 ± 4.0). Statistically significant difference between groups was found in initial HbA1c (75.6 ± 17.9 vs. 90.5 ± 23.6; p = 0.04), total daily dose of insulin (67.6 ± 36.4 vs. 90.8 ± 32.4; p = 0.02), and mean glycaemia during the fasting test (6.9 ± 1.7 vs. 8.6 ± 2.2 mmol/L; p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms that therapy de-intensification in poorly controlled patients with a BBI regimen is possible. Higher baseline HbA1c, total daily insulin dose, and mean glucose during fasting test are negative predictive factors of successful therapy de-escalation.

Therapeutic Inertia in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review

Adequate glycemic control is key to prevent morbi-mortality from type 2 diabetes (T2D). Despite the increasing availability of novel, effective, and safe medications for the treatment of T2D, and periodically updated guidelines on its management, the overall rate of glycemic goal attainment remains low (around 50%) and has not improved in the past decade. Therapeutic inertia (TI), defined as the failure to advance or de-intensify medical therapy when appropriate to do so, has been identified as a central contributor to the lack of progress in the rates of HbA1c goal attainment. The time to treatment intensification in patients not meeting glycemic goals has been estimated to be between 1 and 7 years from the time HbA1c exceeded 7%, and often, even when an intervention is carried out, it proves insufficient to achieve glycemic goals, which led to the concept of intensification inertia. Therefore, finding strategies to overcome all forms of TI in the management of T2D is a fundamental initiative, likely to have an enormous impact in health outcomes for people with T2D. There are several factors that have been described in the literature leading to TI, including clinician-related, patient-related, and healthcare system-related factors, which are discussed in this review. Likewise, several interventions addressing TI had been tested, most of them proving limited efficacy. Within the most effective interventions, there appear to be two common factors. First, they involve a team-based effort, including nurses, pharmacists, and diabetes educators. Second, they were built upon a framework based on results of qualitative studies conducted in the same context where they were later implemented, as will be discussed in this article. Given the complex nature of TI, it is crucial to use a research method that allows for an in-depth understanding of the phenomenon. Most of the literature on TI is focused on quantitatively describing its consequences; unfortunately, however, not many study groups have undertaken qualitative studies to deeply investigate the drivers of TI in their diverse contexts. This is particularly true in the United States, where there is an abundance of publications exploring the effects of different strategies to overcome TI in type 2 diabetes, but a severe shortage of qualitative studies aiming to truly understand the phenomenon.

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.

Simplification of Complex Insulin Regimens with IdegLira in People with Type 2 Diabetes: Literature Review and Clinical Recommendations

INTRODUCTION

This study developed a simple algorithm based on clinical results described in medical literature and which allows one to simplify complex insulin regimes with IdegLira to avoid adverse events related to the complexity of some insulin treatments.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature that allowed us to identify studies that evaluated the clinical result of simplifying complex insulin regimes. The authors reviewed the common factors these simpler regimes had, including the type of patients who used them.

RESULTS

We found nine clinical studies published between 2017 and 2022, eight performed in Europe and one in Latin America. The monitoring time of the studies ranged between 3 and 18 months. The size of the study populations was between 61 and 611 patients (the latter was in five countries). In all studies, HbA1c decreased by 0.6-1.7% and the weight decreased by 0.1-3.11 kg.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the findings of these studies, we made some recommendations for clinical practice to simplify treatment. The results of these studies support an algorithm that simplifies the treatment of complex insulin regimens.

Switching from Multiple Insulin Injections to a Fixed Combination of Degludec and Liraglutide in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Results from the Simplify Study After 6 Months

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of switching from basal bolus insulin treatment (BBIT) to a fixed combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had preserved insulin secretion but inadequate glucose control. The study also aimed to assess the feasibility of implementing this therapeutic approach in common clinical practice settings.

METHODS

This was a non-randomized, open-label, multicenter, prospective, single-arm study involving 234 patients with T2DM who were receiving BBIT. Inclusion criteria were duration of diabetes mellitus > 60 months, stable total daily dose of insulin (TDDI) ranging from > 20 to < 70 IU/day (approx. > 0.3 to < 0.7 IU/kg body weight/day), C-peptide levels > 10% above the lower limit, HbA1c levels > 7% and < 10% (Diabetes Control and Complications Trial), and body mass index > 25 kg/m². The primary endpoints were changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight at week 28 after treatment switching. Secondary endpoints included changes in the 7-point glycemic profile, hypoglycemia frequency, blood pressure, blood lipids, liver enzymes, insulin dose, and a patient questionnaire focusing on treatment satisfaction, concerns and impact on daily activities. A subgroup of 55 patients underwent continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) with the evaluation of CGM-derived parameters, such as time in range (TIR), time above range (TAR), time below range (TBR), hypoglycemia, and glucose variability.

RESULTS

A significant decrease in HbA1c (8.6% vs. 7.6%; p < 0.0001) and body weight (97.8 vs. 94.0 kg; p < 0.0001) was observed at week 28 after treatment switching. Significant improvements were also seen in all measurements of the 7-point glycemic profile (p < 0.0001), reduction in the number of hypoglycemia episodes per patient, and the proportion of patients with at least one hypoglycemia event (p < 0.001). Furthermore, there was a significant decrease in daily insulin dose (55.6 vs. 32.7 IU/day; p < 0.0001), as well as improvements in blood pressure, blood lipids, and liver enzymes (gamma glutamyl transferase and alanine aminotransferase). The subgroup of patients who underwent CGM showed a significant increase in TIR (57.9% vs. 69.0%; p < 0.01) and a decrease in TAR (40.1% vs. 28.8%; p < 0.01), while TBR, hypoglycemia (number of episodes per patient and proportion of patients), and glucose variability did not change significantly.

CONCLUSION

The results of this study suggest that switching from BBIT to IDegLira in patients with T2DM and preserved insulin secretion can simplify treatment without compromising glycemic control. The switch to IDegLira was associated with significant improvements in various glucose control parameters, including HbA1c, glycemic profile, hypoglycemia, insulin doses, and CGM-derived parameters TIR and TAR. Additionally, it led to significant reductions in body weight, blood pressure, lipid profile, and liver enzyme levels. Switching to IDegLira may be considered a safe and beneficial approach in clinical practice settings, offering metabolic and individual advantages.

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.

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

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, a multidisciplinary 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.

One-year safety and efficacy results of insulin treatment simplification with IDegLira in type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

This study aimed to investigate the sustained safety and efficacy of insulin treatment simplification with IDegLira in patients with type 2 diabetes and an HbA1c ≤ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) during a 12-month follow-up.

METHODS

Seventy-two adults with type 2 diabetes and an HbA1c ≤ 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) treated with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) participated in the trial (age 63.8 ± 9.5 years, HbA1c 6.4 ± 0.7%, [46 ± 8 mmol/mol] body weight 92.95 ± 18.83 kg, total daily insulin dose: 43.21 ± 10.80 units; mean ± SD). Previous insulins were stopped, and once daily IDegLira was started. IDegLira was titrated by the patients to achieve a self-measured prebreakfast plasma glucose concentration of ≥5 mmol/L to ≤6 mmol/L.

RESULTS

After 12 months, good glycaemic control was maintained, while body weight decreased significantly. Mean HbA1c changed to 6.2 ± 0.8% (44 ± 9 mmol/mol) (p = .109) and body weight changed by -3.89 kg to 89.06 ± 18.61 kg (p < .0001). The simplified treatment was safe and well-tolerated. Percentage of patients experiencing at least one episode of hypoglycaemia was 49% during the month before simplification and 17% during the last 3 months of the follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Insulin treatment simplification with IDegLira in selected patients with type 2 diabetes is safe, maintains adequate glycaemic control and is associated with weight loss over 12 months.

Initiation of the Fixed Combination IDegLira in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes on Prior Injectable Therapy: Insights from the EASY French Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Combining basal insulin (BI) with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) is recognized as a relevant option to optimize glucose control in type 2 diabetes (T2D). The EASY real-world study aimed to evaluate the modalities of initiation and the effectiveness of the insulin Degludec plus Liraglutide (IDegLira) fixed-ratio combination in the French health care system.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis included all patients with T2D and prior injectable therapy (GLP1-RA and/or insulin) who started treatment with IDegLira from September 2016 to December 2017 in 11 French diabetes centers. Baseline characteristics, reasons for IDegLira initiation, and modes of implementation were collected from the medical records. Changes in HbA_1c and body weight were determined in patients with available follow-up data (nearest 6-month visit).

RESULTS

IDegLira was initiated in 629 patients previously treated with GLP-1RA alone (11.6%), insulin alone (31.5% including 16.5% with BI and 14.9% with multiple daily injections [MDI]) or a free combination of GLP-1RA and insulin (56.9% including 44.8% with BI and 12.1% with MDI), associated or not with oral agents. IDegLira starting dose (mean of 29 ± 11 dose steps) most often exceeded the recommended dose, and was significantly correlated with prior BI but not GLP-1RA dosage. At initiation, mean age, body mass index (BMI) and HbA_1c were 60.1 ± 10.2 years, 33.4 ± 6.2 kg/m² and 8.8 ± 1.7%, respectively. In 461 patients with available follow-up (median 178 days), HbA_1c decreased in all subgroups submitted to treatment intensification (- 1.7 ± 1.8% [p < 0.0001], - 1.2 ± 1.8% [p < 0.001] and - 0.8 ± 1.8% [p = 0.0026] in patients with prior GLP-1RA, BI or MDI therapy, respectively) but also in those switching from BI and GLP-1RA free combination (- 0.2 ± 0.9%, p = 0.0419). Significant body weight gain occurred in patients previously treated with GLP-1RA alone (+ 1.5 ± 5.8 kg, p = 0.0572) or combined to BI (+ 1.0 ± 3.1 kg, p < 0.0001) while those on BI (- 1.4 ± 4.6 kg, p = 0.0139) or MDI (- 1.4 ± 5.0 kg, p = 0.0484) experienced weight loss.

CONCLUSIONS

While providing new information on the use of IDegLira in the French healthcare system, these data confirm the effectiveness of this fixed-ratio combination in the management of T2D.

Real-world effectiveness of IDegLira compared with intensified conventional insulin therapy in adults with type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

IDegLira is a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide with proven efficacy against simpler regimens and non-inferiority against basal-bolus insulin therapy. However, the evaluation of its real-world effectiveness is hindered by technical issues and requires further exploration. Thus we aimed to compare effectiveness of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus intensified conventional insulin therapy (ICT) for type 2 diabetes in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study from an outpatient clinic in Hungary included people who initiated IDegLira due to inadequate glycaemic control (HbA1c > 7.0% [53.0 mmol/mol]) with oral and/or injectable antidiabetic drugs. Data were compared with a historical cohort who initiated ICT. Outcomes included HbA1c, body weight, and hypoglycaemia differences over 18 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

Data were included from 227 and 72 people who initiated IDegLira and ICT, respectively. Estimated mean difference (MD) in HbA1c at 18 months favoured IDegLira versus ICT (MD 0.60, 95% CI 0.88-0.32 [MD 6.6 mmol/mol, 95% CI 9.6-3.5]). More people reached target HbA1c ≤7.0% (53.0 mmol/mol) with IDegLira than ICT (odds ratio 3.36, 95% CI 1.52-7.42). IDegLira treatment was associated with weight loss compared with gain for ICT (MD 6.7 kg, 95% CI 5.0-8.5). The hazard ratio for hypoglycaemia comparing IDegLira with ICT was 0.18 (95% CI 0.08-0.49).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with IDegLira over 18 months resulted in greater HbA1c reductions, weight loss versus gain, and a lower rate of hypoglycaemia versus ICT in people with type 2 diabetes.

Transitioning from basal-bolus or premix insulin therapy to a combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in people with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Two fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) are available for once-daily use in adults with type 2 diabetes. We aimed to review the clinical evidence for the efficacy and safety of changing treatment from a basal-bolus insulin (BBI) regimen or a premix insulin to these combination treatments (fixed-ratio or loose) and provide expert opinion on the practicalities of making such a change.

METHODS

Relevant clinical and trial evidence and general review articles were identified through a literature review of ProQuest (comprising BIOSIS Previews®, Current Contents® Search, Embase® and MEDLINE®) for articles published between 2009 and 2021.

RESULTS

We identified nine articles reporting the results of FRCs, and seven articles reporting results of loose combinations of basal insulin and GLP-1RAs, in people who transitioned treatment from BBI or premix regimens. In most trials, combination treatment led to improved or equivalent glycaemic control, and a reduction in body weight or BMI, versus the original regimens. Some trials reported a reduction in total insulin dose. A few trials reported reduced or unchanged hypoglycaemia rates, or increased patient satisfaction, with combination therapy where these endpoints were examined. We provide guidance on transitioning of treatment and the patient types most likely to benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

In people not achieving glycaemic control with BBI or premix insulin regimens, an FRC or loose combination of basal insulin and GLP-1RA may improve control, decrease the risk of body weight gain or hypoglycaemia and reduce the complexity of treatment.

Expert Panel Guidance and Narrative Review of Treatment Simplification of Complex Insulin Regimens to Improve Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes

Given the progressive nature of type 2 diabetes (T2D), most individuals with the disease will ultimately undergo treatment intensification. This usually involves the stepwise addition of a new glucose-lowering agent or switching to a more complex insulin regimen. However, complex treatment regimens can result in an increased risk of hypoglycaemia and high treatment burden, which may impact negatively on both therapeutic adherence and overall quality of life. Individuals with good glycaemic control may also be overtreated with unnecessarily complex regimens. Treatment simplification aims to reduce individual treatment burden, without compromising therapeutic effectiveness or safety. Despite data showing that simplifying therapy can achieve good glycaemic control without negatively impacting on treatment efficacy or safety, it is not always implemented in clinical practice. Current clinical guidelines focus on treatment intensification, rather than simplification. Where simplification is recommended, clear guidance is lacking and mostly focused on treatment of the elderly. An expert, multidisciplinary panel evaluated the current treatment landscape with respect to guidance, published evidence, recommendations and approaches regarding simplification of complex insulin regimens. This article outlines the benefits of treatment simplification and provides practical recommendations on simplifying complex insulin treatment strategies in people with T2D using illustrative cases.

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical 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, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SPPC), 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, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Short-Term Effectiveness and Reduction in Insulin Requirements in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With IdegLira in a Real-World Setting

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic, highly prevalent disease with a significant impact on health. Appropriate treatment requires effective and timely escalation to achieve metabolic control. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of IDegLira on adults with T2DM previously treated with oral antidiabetics and/or insulin in a real-life setting.

METHODS

An observational study in a real-world setting was conducted. Patients were selected from the outpatient clinic of two centers dedicated to specialized diabetes care. Main outcomes were HbA1c, body weight, insulin dose changes, hypoglycemia, and other adverse events.

RESULTS

67 T2DM patients treated with IDegLira were monitored between 3 and 7 months. At the end of foll ow-up, the median change in HbA1c was -1.05% (CI95% -1.45, -0.65), and a decrease in insulin requirement was also observed (mean difference -10 TDD units (CI95% - 17 to -2.5). No treatment discontinuation was reported, hypoglycemia events were reported in 3 patients at the end of follow-up versus 8 patients at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-life study shows the effectiveness in glycemic control of IDegLira use in T2DM patients who do not achieve goals with other therapies, with an adequate safety profile. The findings need to be confirmed with evaluation of therapeutic results in larger cohorts.

An update on the safety of insulin-GLP-1 receptor agonist combinations in type 2 diabetes mellitus

INTRODUCTION

Recent development of novel antidiabetic drugs with proven cardiovascular (CV) and renal benefit and positive effect on body weight enable to take a more complex approach toward the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Fixed-ratio combinations of insulin-GLP-1 receptor agonist (FRC) utilize complementary mechanisms of action of their individual components and address multiple pathologies linked with T2DM at the same time.

AREAS COVERED

There are currently three FRCs on the market: iGlarLixi (glargine and lixisenatide in 2 different formulations) and IDegLira (degludec and liraglutide). We provide an up-to-date review on the rationale for the use of FRCs and their current position in the management of T2DM. We discuss the available evidence from randomized controlled trials, post hoc analyses, indirect comparative studies and real-world data on their effect on glycemic control, risk of hypoglycemia, body weight, CV safety, and their safety profile.

EXPERT OPINION

FRCs represent an efficacious option for treatment intensification from basal insulin or even the first insulin-based therapy in T2DM. Their excellent glucose-lowering efficacy is complemented with lower risk of hypoglycemia in comparison to basal insulin, neutral effect on body weight and the lower risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects in comparison to GLP-1 receptor agonists.

Simplification of complex insulin regimens using canagliflozin or liraglutide in patients with well-controlled type 2 diabetes: A 24-week randomized controlled trial

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

We investigated the potential use of canagliflozin, in comparison with liraglutide, as an alternative to bolus insulin in patients with well-controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving multiple daily insulin injection therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In 40 patients, with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels <7.5% controlled by multiple daily insulin injection therapy, all bolus insulin was randomly switched to canagliflozin (100 mg/day) or liraglutide (0.3-0.9 mg/day) for 24 weeks. Basal insulin was continued with dose adjustment according to a predefined algorithm. The end-points were the change in the HbA1c level, glycemic variability assessed by continuous glucose monitoring, body mass index, insulin dose, quality of life (QOL) and safety assessments. Factors influencing the changes in QOL were also assessed using a simple regression analysis.

RESULTS

The change in HbA1c from baseline was comparable between the treatments. Both treatments maintained the HbA1c level to the baseline levels with stable glucose variability and no severe hypoglycemia for 24 weeks, decreased total insulin dose, and significantly increased the QOL score. The change in QOL was significantly associated with injection frequency.

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with well-controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus, under the support of basal insulin, complex insulin regimens can be simplified by replacing all bolus insulin with once-daily canagliflozin or liraglutide, which improves patients' QOL.

Simplification of complex insulin therapy: a story of dogma and therapeutic resignation

The combination of rapid-acting plus long-acting insulins has been the cornerstone of therapy of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and has also become the gold standard of insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes (T2DM). A significant proportion of T2DM patients are overtreated, with potential harms of insulin therapy exceeding its benefits. Treatment simplification aims to decrease the complexity of insulin regimens, including, but not limited to fewer administration times and fewer blood glucose checks. Few small studies in T2DM patients with good glycemic control have shown that glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) or sodium-glucose cotrasporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors can be a safe and effective alternative to bolus insulin, if basal insulin administration is continued. Two larger and controlled trials have thrown some light about simplification of complex insulin regimens in patients with T2DM and poor glycemic control. Although different in their design (randomized controlled trial versus pragmatic trial), their results provide evidence that it is possible to switch from a basal bolus insulin regimen to a combination of basal insulin plus either a GLP-1RA or a daily gliflozin pill, with same or better glycemic control, less injections, less insulin doses, less hypoglycemia and increased satisfaction of therapy. The dogma about the untouchability of basal bolus insulin regimen has been confuted.

Deintensification of basal-bolus insulin after initiation of GLP-1RA in patients with type 2 diabetes under routine care

AIMS

We evaluated de-intensification of basal-bolus insulin (BBI) after initiation of a GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) under routine care.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter study conducted at outpatient clinics in North-East Italy collected data on patients with T2D on BBI who initiated a GLP-1RA. Patients were divided according to whether they de-intensified BBI at the end of observation by stopping prandial insulin.

RESULTS

We included 425 patients with mean age of 61.3 years and 13 years of diabetes duration. Baseline HbA1c was 8.6% and BMI was 35.5 kg/m². After 14 months. 58.6% of patients de-intensified BBI after initiating GLP-1RA: they were younger, had a shorter disease duration, lower HbA1c and insulin dose, and less frequent microangiopathy than those who continued BBI. A probability estimation based on these variables was validated in an independent cohort of 40 patients. Body weight improved in both groups, but HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose significantly declined only among patients who de-intensified BBI. Patients who de-intensified BBI and persisted on GLP-1RA at the last observation (80.7%) had greater HbA1c reductions.

CONCLUSION

Under routine care, GLP-1RA initiation frequently allowed discontinuing BBI, especially among patients with shorter disease duration, lower insulin requirement, and better glucose control.

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.

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.

Impact of Medication Regimen Simplification on Medication Adherence and Clinical Outcomes in Patients with Long-Term Medical Conditions

BACKGROUND

This study aims to identify interventions used to reduce medication regimen complexity and to assess their impact on medication adherence and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted using pre-defined search terms in three scientific databases, including ScienceDirect, ProQuest and MEDLINE. Original research articles published in English between 2009 and 2020 that assessed the impact of medication regimen simplification on medication adherence in patients with long-term medical conditions were eligible for inclusion. Review articles, meta-analysis studies and conference proceedings were excluded. Data charting was done in an iterative process using a study-specific extraction form.

RESULTS

Of the 684 studies identified through initial searches, 17 studies were included in the review. Nine studies involved simplification of medication regimen related to HIV, while three studies focused on patients with diabetes with or without coronary artery disease. The remaining five studies included medications used among elderly patients or medications related to hypertension, psychiatric disorders, glaucoma and kidney diseases. Three medication regimen simplification strategies were identified; fixed-dose combination (n = 7), once-daily dosing (n = 4) and the combination of both fixed-dose and once-daily dosing (n = 6). Overall, most of the regimen simplification strategies (14 out of 17) were found to be useful in improving medication adherence. There was no assessment of clinical outcomes in four out of 17 studies. Furthermore, more than half of the studies that assessed clinical outcomes did not show any additional impact on clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The findings suggest that there was an equal utilization of the three main approaches of regimen simplifications; fixed-dose combination, once-daily dosing and a combination of both. Overall, most of the regimen simplification strategies were found to be effective in improving medication adherence. However, the associated improvement in medication adherence did not extend to improvement in the clinical outcomes.