Combination therapy with insulin glargine plus metformin but not insulin glargine plus sulfonylurea provides similar glycemic control to triple oral combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with dual oral agent therapy

Response to insulin glargine 100 U/mL treatment in newly-defined subgroups of type 2 diabetes: Post hoc pooled analysis of insulin-naïve participants from nine randomised clinical trials

AIMS

To assess insulin glargine 100 U/mL (IGlar-100) treatment outcomes according to newly-defined subgroups of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

Insulin-naïve T2DM participants (n = 2684) from nine randomised clinical trials initiating IGlar-100 were pooled and assigned to subgroups "Mild Age-Related Diabetes (MARD)", "Mild Obesity Diabetes (MOD)", "Severe Insulin Resistant Diabetes (SIRD)", and "Severe Insulin Deficient Diabetes (SIDD)", according to age at onset of diabetes, baseline HbA1c, BMI, and fasting C-peptide using sex-specific nearest centroid approach. HbA1c, FPG, hypoglycemia, insulin dose, and body weight were analysed at baseline and 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Subgroup distribution was MARD 15.3 % (n = 411), MOD 39.8 % (n = 1067), SIRD 10.5 % (n = 283), SIDD 34.4 % (n = 923). From baseline HbA1c 8.0-9.6% adjusted least square mean reductions after 24 weeks were similar between subgroups (1.4-1.5 %). SIDD was less likely to achieve HbA1c < 7.0 % (OR: 0.40 [0.29, 0.55]) than MARD. While the final IGlar-100 dose (0.36 U/kg) in MARD was lower than in other subgroups (0.46-0.50 U/kg), it had the highest hypoglycemia risk. SIRD had lowest hypoglycemia risk and SIDD exhibited greatest body weight gain.

CONCLUSIONS

IGlar-100 lowered hyperglycemia similarly in all T2DM subgroups, but level of glycemic control, insulin dose, and hypoglycemia risk differed between subgroups.

Network meta-analysis of glucose-lowering drug treatment regimens with the potential risk of hypoglycemia in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in terms of glycemic control and severe hypoglycemia

Insulin and its secretagogues are essential for some patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) to maintain good glycemic control (GC), but severe hypoglycemia (SH) is a concern. This network meta-analysis aimed to find optimal glucose-lowering drug treatment regimens in terms of GC and SH in T2D patients. MEDLINE and EMBASE were used to identify trials that compared two or more treatments including insulins and/or sulfonylurea or glinides and that examined both GC and SH. Treatment hierarchy was expressed as the surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) probabilities. We identified 137 eligible trials comprising 42 treatments. The use of insulins and non-insulin glucose-lowering agents except for sulfonylurea or glinide had a higher SUCRA than insulins only for hemoglobin A1c (A1C) (p = 0.01) changes and achievement of A1C < 7.0% (p = 0.02) or A1C ≤ 6.5% (p = 0.002). The use of sulfonylurea or glinide and other non-insulin glucose-lowering agents resulted in a lower SUCRA for SH than insulins only when trials were analyzed for A1C change (p = 0.06) and achievement of A1C < 7.0% (p = 0.004) or A1C ≤ 6.5% (p = 0.004). Cluster analysis indicated that premixed insulin plus glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (Mix-ins + GLP1) belonged to the high-efficacy category for GC and glinide plus thiazolidinedione (glinide + TZD) belonged to the relatively high-efficacy category for GC among several high-safety categories regarding SH. In T2D patients, clinicians should consider appropriate combinations of non-insulin glucose-lowering agents (especially glinide + TZD) for reducing SH risk before switching to insulin therapies. If switching, they should be willing to add non-insulin glucose-lowering agents (especially, Mix-ins + GLP1) to insulins to further improve GC.

Distribution and characteristics of newly-defined subgroups of type 2 diabetes in randomised clinical trials: Post hoc cluster assignment analysis of over 12,000 study participants

AIMS

Newly-defined subgroups of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have been reported from real-world cohorts but not in detail from randomised clinical trials (RCTs).

METHODS

T2DM participants, uncontrolled on different pre-study therapies (n = 12.738; 82 % Caucasian; 44 % with diabetes duration > 10 years) from 14 RCTs, were assigned to new subgroups according to age at onset of diabetes, HbA1c, BMI, and fasting C-peptide using the nearest centroid approach. Subgroup distribution, characteristics and influencing factors were analysed.

RESULTS

In both, pooled and single RCTs, "mild-obesity related diabetes" predominated (45 %) with mean BMI of 35 kg/m². "Severe insulin-resistant diabetes" was found least often (4.6 %) and prevalence of "mild age-related diabetes" (23.9 %) was mainly influenced by age at onset of diabetes and age cut-offs. Subgroup characteristics were widely comparable to those from real-world cohorts, but all subgroups showed higher frequencies of diabetes-related complications which were associated with longer diabetes duration. A high proportion of "severe insulin-deficient diabetes" (25.4 %) was identified with poor pre-study glycaemic control.

CONCLUSIONS

Classification of RCT participants into newly-defined diabetes subgroups revealed the existence of a heterogeneous population of T2DM. For future RCTs, subgroup-based randomisation of T2DM will better define the target population and relevance of the outcomes by avoiding clinical heterogeneity.

Glycemic control in newly insulin-initiated patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A retrospective follow-up study at a university hospital in Ethiopia

Background

Though many trials had examined the effectiveness of taking insulin with or without oral agents, there are limited real-world data, particularly among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the resource limited settings. This study aimed to examine level of glycemic control among patients with T2DM after initiation of insulin and factors associated with poor glycemic control.

Methods

An analysis of retrospective medical records of patients with T2DM who initiated insulin due to uncontrolled hyperglycemia by oral agents was conducted from 2015–2020 in the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital. Difference in median fasting plasma glucose (FPG) before and after insulin initiations was examined by a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Kruskal Wallis test was performed to explore difference in the median level of FPG among treatment groups. A logistic regression model was also used to identify associated factors of poor glycemic control after insulin initiation. Statistical significance was declared at p < 0.05.

Results

Of 424 enrolled patients with T2DM, 54.7% were males and the mean age was 59.3±9.3 years. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed that there was significant deference in FPG before and after insulin initiation (P < 0.001). A declining trend of blood glucose was observed during the 1-year follow-up period of post-initiation. However, majority of the participants did not achieve target glucose levels. Participants who had higher FPG and systolic blood pressure (SBP) before insulin initiation were found more likely to have poor glycemic control after insulin initiation. Similarly, patients who received atorvastatin compared with simvastatin were found to have poor glycemic control in the post-period of initiation (P = 0.04). Premixed insulin was associated with a lower likelihood of poor glycemic control than neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Following insulin initiation, a significant change in glycemic level and declining trend of FPG was observed during a 1-year follow-up period. However, the majority of patients still had a poorly controlled glycemic level. Appropriate management focusing on predictors of glycemic control would be of a great benefit to achieve glycemic control.

Effectiveness and safety of basal insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with or without metformin observed in a national cohort in China

BACKGROUND

Though many randomized control trials had examined the effectiveness and safety of taking insulin therapy with or without metformin, there are limited real-world data, especially among Chinese type 2 diabetes patients initiating basal insulin (BI) with uncontrolled hyperglycemia by oral agents. This study was designed to assess the effectiveness and safety of BI therapy combined with or without metformin in a real-world national cohort study.

METHODS

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus who initiated BI treatment due to uncontrolled hyperglycemia (HbA1c≥7 %) by oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) were recruited in Chinese real-world settings between 2011 and 2013. A total of 12,358 patients initiated BI without bolus insulin and completed a 6-month follow-up were selected as the study population and divided into BI with metformin or BI without metformin group based on whether metformin was simultaneously prescribed or not at baseline. Propensity score adjustment was used to balance baseline covariates between two groups. A sub-analysis was also conducted among 8,086 patients who kept baseline treatment regimen during the follow-up. Outcomes were HbA1c, hypoglycemia, weight gain and insulin dose in two groups.

RESULTS

53.6 % (6,621 out of 12,358) patients initiated BI therapy concomitant with metformin. After propensity score adjustment, multivariate regression analysis controlled with number of OADs, total insulin dose, physical activity and diet consumption showed that BI with metformin group had a slightly higher control rate of HbA1c <7.0 % (39.9 % vs. 36.4 %, P = 0.0011) at 6-month follow-up, and lower dose increment from baseline to 6-month (0.0064 vs. 0.0068 U/day/kg, P = 0.0035). The sub-analysis with patients remained at same BI therapy further showed that BI with metformin group had higher HbA1c control rate (47.9 % vs. 41.9 %, P = 0.0001), less weight gain (-0.12 vs. 0.15 kg P = 0.0013), and lower dose increment during 6-month follow-up (0.0033 vs. 0.0037 U/day/kg, P = 0.0073) when compared with BI without metformin group.

CONCLUSIONS

In alliance with current guidelines, the real-world findings also support the insulin initiation together with metformin. Continuous patients' education and clinicians training are needed to improve the use of metformin when initiating BI treatment.

All-cause mortality and cardiovascular safety of basal insulin treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

AIM

To evaluate the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality, acute myocardial infarction, and stroke associated with insulin treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) was performed. EMBASE, Cochrane, and PubMed databases were searched for RCTs reporting mortality or cardiovascular events and comparing basal insulin to any treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes. Data were summarized with Mantel-Haenzel relative risk (RR). Trial sequential analysis (TSA) was used to evaluate the reliability of the results considering a 20% relative risk difference between treatments. PROSPERO Registry: CRD42018087336.

RESULTS

In total, 2351 references were identified, and 26 studies (24348 patients) were included. Most studies evaluated glargine insulin (69%), compared insulin to GLP-1 analogs (57%), and evaluated add-on therapy with metformin (77%). Insulin was not associated with increased all-cause mortality (RR 0.99; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.06), cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.01; 95% CI 0.91-1.13), myocardial infarction (RR 1.02; 95% CI 0.92-1.15), or stroke (RR 0.87; 95% CI 0.68-1.12). Insulin treatment increased severe hypoglycemia risk (RR 2.98; 95% CI 2.47-3.61). All analyses had low statistical heterogeneity. TSA confirmed these findings: optimal sample size (myocardial infarction), futility boundary (all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, and stroke) and harm boundary (hypoglycemia) were reached.

CONCLUSION

Treatment with basal insulin of patients with type 2 diabetes does not increase the risk of cardiovascular events or death. Despite the increased risk of hypoglycemia, these findings reinforce that insulin is a safe option in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

The influence of spatial distribution on add-on therapy of designed Ca-Alg/CS MEMs system

To improve the efficacy and reduce the systemic toxicity of the diabetes mellitus, herewith, we developed a novel microparticles-embedded microcapsules (MEMs) system, synthesized from calcium alginate/chitosan (Ca-Alg/CS), by emulsion gelation using a high voltage electrostatic droplet generator. In our study, we selected two antidiabetic drugs insulin (INS) and metformin (MET) as model drugs to investigate different spatial distribution appropriate of MEMs system. Characterization based on particle size and morphology, encapsulation efficiency and drug loading, as well as drug delivery properties were carried out on the MEMs system. Typical multi-chamber structure was shown by SEM and the optical spectra. The average diameters of microparticles and Ca-Alg/CS MEMs were 2100 nm and 410 μm, respectively. Insulin and MET were embedded into MEMs via electrostatic reaction according to FT-IR spectra. Moreover, drug loading and encapsulation efficiency of INS were higher than that of MET in this system when drugs were loaded alone or together. More importantly, this system has potential for orderly drug release and well sustained release when MET in the inner and INS in the outer space could be applied as a combination therapy for diabetes. The obtained in vivo experimental data on diabetes rats has shown that the designed MEMs system resulted in a higher hypoglycemic effect within add-on therapy.

Effects of age, gender, and body mass index on efficacy and hypoglycaemia outcomes across treat-to-target trials with insulin glargine 100 U/mL added to oral antidiabetes agents in type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To analyse the effects of patient characteristics and different oral antidiabetes drug (OAD) use on standardised clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes patients initiating insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patient-level data from 16 randomized, treat-to-target clinical trials that added Gla-100 to existing metformin (MET), sulfonylurea (SU) or metformin plus sulfonylurea (MET+SU) treatment in insulin-naïve patients inadequately controlled by oral therapy were analysed and patients were followed for ≥24 weeks. Change in glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to week 24, other glycaemic endpoints and incidence of hypoglycaemia (overall, nocturnal, and severe) were analysed by age (<65 vs ≥65 years), gender (male vs female), body mass index (BMI; <25 vs ≥25 to <30 vs >30 kg/m² ) and concomitant OAD (MET vs SU vs MET+SU).

RESULTS

At baseline, the overall population (N = 3188) had a mean age of 57.7 years, BMI of 30.5 kg/m² , HbA1c of 8.7%, fasting plasma glucose of 192 mg/dL, and 52.7% were male. Younger and older patients had similar HbA1c reductions with Gla-100 and a similar risk of hypoglycaemia. Females and patients with BMI <25 kg/m² were less likely to achieve HbA1c targets and more likely to experience hypoglycaemia, regardless of concomitant OAD. Adding Gla-100 to SU therapy (alone or in combination with MET) increased hypoglycaemia risk across all analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that female patients with type 2 diabetes and normal-weight patients treated with Gla-100 and MET ± SU are less likely to achieve glycaemic targets and, therefore, may require more clinical attention. Addition of Gla-100 to SU regimens may increase hypoglycaemia risk irrespective of age, gender, or BMI.

The use of lipid-lowering therapy and effects of antihyperglycaemic therapy on lipids in subjects with type 2 diabetes with or without cardiovascular disease: a pooled analysis of data from eleven randomized trials with insulin glargine 100 U/mL

BACKGROUND

Dyslipidaemia is a major contributor to the increased risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to characterize the extent of lipid-lowering therapy use and its impact on lipid and glycaemic outcomes in people with T2D uncontrolled on oral agents who were enrolled in insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100) randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

A post hoc patient-level pooled analysis of eleven RCTs (≥24 weeks' duration) comparing Gla-100 (±oral antidiabetes drugs [OADs]) with OADs alone in people with T2D was performed. Baseline and Week 24 or study endpoint lipid status (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C], high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C], non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [non-HDL-C] and triglycerides) and indices of glycaemic control (glycosylated haemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose [FPG]) were examined in patient groups according to treatment received and CVD status. Lipid-lowering therapy was provided at the discretion of physicians at baseline and throughout the studies.

RESULTS

Of the 4768 participants included in the analysis, 41% (n = 1940) received lipid-lowering therapy. Only 51% of participants with CVD (1885/3672) were treated with lipid-lowering therapy; these participants had significantly lower levels of LDL-C, HDL-C and non-HDL-C, and higher levels of triglycerides versus patients not treated with lipid-lowering therapy at baseline and study endpoint (P < 0.001 for all). Antihyperglycaemia therapy resulted in decreases in glycosylated haemoglobin (-1.4 to -1.6%) and FPG (-68.9 to -75.3 mg/dL) at Week 24. Furthermore, slight improvements in non-HDL-C (-3.9 to -9.1 mg/dL) and triglyceride levels (-25.8 to -51.2 mg/dL) were observed. Similar changes were seen irrespective of lipid-lowering therapy or CVD status.

CONCLUSIONS

In a T2D cohort included in Gla-100 clinical studies, many participants with T2D and CVD did not receive lipid-lowering therapy, and for most categories of lipid the levels were outside the optimal range. Even in patients treated with antihyperglycaemic therapy but not lipid-lowering therapy, there were modest improvements in non-HDL-C and triglyceride levels in all participants with T2D and CVD. There is a need for increased implementation of guideline recommendations such as American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association for the management of dyslipidaemia in patients with T2D.

Treat-to-target trials in diabetes

Treat-to-target is a therapeutic concept that considers well defined and specific physiologic targets as aims in controlling the pathophysiology of the disease. It has been widely used in diseases that pathophysiology includes, chronic metabolic and physiological disturbances, namely rheumatic conditions, vascular medicine and diabetes. In diabetes, the availability of "gold-standard" quantitative measures like fasting plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin make the application of treat-to-target trials especially pertinent. Treatment modalities which have used single therapeutic agents or combinations or in combination with a variety of titration algorithms and implementation protocols have broadened our understanding of diabetes management with specific reference to insulin initiation and maintenance. Treat-to-target trials have been used to investigate a wide variety of questions including efficacy, safety, effect of treatment on comorbidities and patient satisfaction, ideal mechanisms to implement insulin initiation etc. A more generalized acceptance and implementation of treat-to-target trials may finally revolutionize diabetes management by combining aspects of individual care with standard treatment protocols.

Treat-to-target insulin titration algorithms when initiating long or intermediate acting insulin in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Until recently, titration of insulin in type 2 diabetes clinical trials was typically left up to the investigator's discretion with a simple statement of the target ranges for glucose. In type 2 diabetes trials the average glycemic control achieved was usually less than desirable. Since then a number of trials have been conducted and reported utilizing various algorithms under various conditions. The objective of this article is to provide a review of the evidence to date.

METHODS

In addition to studies already identified through work in the area, the literature was searched using PubMed with the search words "insulin and titration" and subsequently "insulin and algorithm" from which studies starting insulin therapy using insulin titration algorithms in type 2 diabetes were selected.

RESULTS

The different algorithms and achieved results for glycemic control and hypoglycemia, as well as factors appearing to impact the results, are reviewed.

CONCLUSION

The recent introduction of rigorously implemented insulin titration algorithms when adding on basal insulin to oral drugs in inadequately treated type 2 diabetes patients has led to better average glycemic control with little risk of severe hypoglycemia, as long as the morning fasting plasma glucose target is not lower than 100 mg/dl. Insulin titration algorithms have undergone and continue evolution in the direction of increased patient control.