Clinical inertia to insulin initiation and intensification in the UK: A focused literature review

Tirzepatide Improved Health-Related Quality of Life Compared with Insulin Lispro in Basal Insulin-Treated Adults with Type 2 Diabetes and Inadequate Glycaemic Control: A Randomised Controlled Phase 3b Trial (SURPASS-6)

INTRODUCTION

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who require intensification of basal insulin therapy need treatment options that can improve their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and translate into better outcomes. These analyses compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with T2D receiving tirzepatide or insulin lispro.

METHODS

The randomised, open-label, multinational, phase 3b SURPASS-6 trial (NCT04537923) was conducted at 135 medical research centres and hospitals in 15 countries and compared two recommended treatment intensification strategies in people with T2D and inadequate glycaemic control on basal insulin: addition of once-weekly tirzepatide versus addition of prandial insulin lispro. Randomisation was stratified by country, baseline glycated haemoglobin level and metformin use. PROs were measured using the Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2) acute form (secondary outcome), EQ-5D-5L, Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living (APPADL) questionnaire and Impact of Weight on Self-Perceptions (IW-SP) questionnaire (tertiary/exploratory outcomes). PROs were compared for the tirzepatide-pooled dose group (5, 10 and 15 mg) and each tirzepatide dose group versus insulin lispro at 52 weeks using the modified intention-to-treat efficacy analysis set.

RESULTS

Between 19 October 2020 and 01 November 2022, 2267 people were assessed and 1428 participants with T2D were randomised. At 52 weeks, participants in the tirzepatide-pooled group had statistically significant improved scores across all SF-36v2 domains and both component summary scores compared with insulin lispro-treated participants (p < 0.05), with the largest differences observed in the general health, vitality and mental health domains. Statistically significant improved APPADL and IW-SP total scores, as well as EQ visual analogue scale and EQ-5D-5L index scores (after adjustment for baseline scores), were observed in tirzepatide-pooled participants compared with insulin lispro-treated participants.

CONCLUSIONS

In adult patients with T2D and inadequate glycaemic control with basal insulin, tirzepatide treatment was associated with greater improvements in HRQoL than prandial insulin therapy in addition to clinically significant improvements in glycaemic and body weight-related parameters.

Insulin Inertia Among People With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in Qatar: The INERT-Q Study

BACKGROUND

Achieving and maintaining adequate glycaemic control is critical to reduce diabetes-related complications. Therapeutic inertia is one of the leading causes of suboptimal glycaemic control.

AIM

To assess the degree of inertia in insulin initiation and intensification in people with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM-2).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective longitudinal cohort study and followed DM-2 2 years before and 2 years after the start of insulin. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who achieved glycaemic targets (HBA1c ≤ 7.5%) at 6th month, 1st year and 2nd year.

RESULTS

We included 374 predominantly male subjects (62%). The mean age was 55.3 ± 11.3 years, the mean duration of DM-2 was 12.0 ± 7.3 years, 64.4% were obese, 47.6% had a microvascular disease, and 24.3% had a macrovascular disease. The mean HBA1c at -2nd year and -1st year was 9.2 ± 2.1% and 9.3 ± 2.0%, respectively. The mean HbA1C at the time of insulin initiation was 10.4 ± 2.1%. The mean HBA1c at 6th month, 12th month and 2nd year was 8.5 ± 1.8%, 8.4 ± 1.8% and 8.5 ± 1.7%, respectively. The proportion of subjects who achieved HBA1c targets at 6th month, 12th month and 2nd year was 32.9%, 31.0% and 32.9%, respectively. Multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that achieving HBA1c targets at 6th month and 1st year increases the odds of achieving HBA1c targets at 2nd year (OR 4.87 [2.4-9.6] p < 0.001) and (OR 6.2 [3.2-12.0], p < 0.001), respectively.

CONCLUSION

In people with DM-2, there was an alarming delay in starting and titrating insulin. The reduction in HBA1c plateaued at 6th month. Earlier initiation and intensification of insulin therapy are critical to achieving glycaemic targets. More studies are needed to examine the causes of therapeutic inertia from physicians', patients' and systems' points of view.

Evaluation of a Digital Health Tool for Titration of Basal Insulin in People With Type 2 Diabetes: Rationale and Design of a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Optimal insulin titration is essential in helping people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) to achieve adequate glycemic control. Barriers of people with diabetes to implementation of titration include lack of self-efficiency and self-management skills, increased diabetes-related distress, low treatment satisfaction, poor well-being, as well as concerns about hypoglycemia and insulin overdose. My Dose Coach is a digital health tool for optimizing titration of basal insulin that combines a smartphone app for patients with T2DM and a Web portal for healthcare professionals.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized controlled parallel study conducted in approximately 50 centers in Germany that are specialized in the treatment of diabetes. Patients in the intervention group will use the titration app and will be registered on the Web portal by their treating physician. Control group patients will continue their current basal insulin titration without using the app. The primary outcome is the mean change in HbA1c levels at the 12-week follow-up. The secondary outcome measures include patient-reported outcomes such as diabetes-related distress, self-management, empowerment, self-efficacy, treatment satisfaction, and psychological well-being as well as fasting blood glucose values.

CONCLUSION

This digital health tool has been previously implemented in several independent pilot studies. The findings from this multicenter randomized controlled trial can provide further evidence supporting the effectiveness of this tool in patients with T2DM and serve as a basis for its clinical integration.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Register for Clinical Studies-DRKS-ID: DRKS00024861.

Real-world glycated haemoglobin changes among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients treated with a maintenance dose of 7 mg or 14 mg of oral semaglutide

AIM

To describe the change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) among patients with type 2 diabetes following treatment with a 7 or 14 mg maintenance dose of oral semaglutide.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This retrospective, claims-based study included adult patients with type 2 diabetes with a pre-index HbA1c of ≥7%, initiating treatment with oral semaglutide between 1 November 2019 and 30 June 2020; the patients had continuous health plan enrolment for ≥12 months before (pre-index) and ≥6 months following (post-index) the date of the first oral semaglutide claim (index). Patients were required to have a maintenance dose of 7 or 14 mg. Pre-index demographic and clinical characteristics were captured, as were doses at initiation and prescriber specialty. The change in HbA1c between the latest post-index and pre-index HbA1c measurements was calculated among all patients and among those with ≥90 days of continuous treatment (persistent patients).

RESULTS

This study included 520 patients, most of whom had a complex medical history, experienced a range of comorbidities and received an average of 11.5 different classes of medications during the pre-index period. The mean HbA1c reduction during the 6-month post-initiation period was 1.2% (p < .001) for all patients and 1.4% (p < .001) for persistent patients.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world study, patients with a pre-index HbA1c ≥7% who initiated treatment with oral semaglutide with a 7 or 14 mg maintenance dose had significantly lower HbA1c levels following treatment.

Expert Consensus on Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor-Based Therapies in the Modern Era of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Management in India

India has a high prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with unique clinical characteristics compared to other populations. Despite advancements in diabetes therapy, a significant number of patients in India still experience poor glycemic control and complications. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors continue to be an important component of T2DM treatment due to their favorable efficacy and tolerability profile. Given the current scenario, there is a need to revisit the role of DPP-4 inhibitors in T2DM management in Indian patients. This consensus paper aims to provide guidance on the utilization of DPP-4 inhibitors in T2DM management from an Indian perspective. A consensus group of 100 experts developed recommendations based on an extensive literature review and discussions. The expert group emphasized the importance of timely glycemic control, combination therapy, and targeting the underlying pathophysiology of T2DM. The combinations of DPP-4 inhibitors with metformin and/or sodium-glucose transport protein-2 inhibitors are rationalized in this paper, considering their complementary mechanisms of action. This paper provides valuable insights for clinicians in optimizing the management of T2DM in the Indian population with the use of DPP-4 inhibitors and proposes an algorithm for selecting DPP-4 inhibitor-based therapies.

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.

Basal Insulin Initiation in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using Administrative Health Data in Alberta, Canada

OBJECTIVES

Pharmacologic treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) follows a stepwise approach. Typically, metformin monotherapy is first-line treatment, followed by other noninsulin antihyperglycemic agents (NIAHAs) or progression to insulin if glycated hemoglobin (A1C) targets are not achieved. We aimed to describe real-world patterns of basal insulin initiation in people with T2DM, and A1C not at target despite treatment with at least 2 NIAHAs.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using administrative health data from Alberta, Canada, among adults with T2DM, indexed on the first test with 7.0% < A1C < 9.5% (April 1, 2011 to March 31, 2019), with at least 2 previous NIAHAs but no insulin. Kaplan-Meier (KM) methodology was used to analyze time to basal insulin initiation, with stratification by index A1C. Annual patient status was categorized into 5 groups: basal insulin initiation, death, NIAHA intensification, no change in therapy (subgroups of A1C <7.1% and A1C ≥7.1% [clinical inertia]), or discontinuance.

RESULTS

The cohort included 14,083 individuals. The KM cumulative probability of initiating basal insulin was 7.7% (95% confidence interval [CI] 7.3% to 8.2%) at 1 year, increasing to 43.1% (95% CI 42.1% to 44.1%) at 8 years of follow-up. Higher A1C levels were associated with greater proportions of basal insulin initiation. By year 8, proportions with NIAHA intensification and clinical inertia were 12.1% and 19.3%, respectively, relative to year 7.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite current clinical practice guidelines recommending achieving A1C targets within 6 months, less than half of the individuals with T2DM and clear indications for basal insulin initiated treatment within 8 years. Efforts to reduce delays in basal insulin initiation are needed.

Journey Through Healthcare of People With Complications of Type 2 Diabetes: A Qualitative Study of Lived Experiences

Background

Despite its overall good performance, the Belgium healthcare system scores less well in providing equal access to healthcare compared to other European countries. This increases the risk of people worse off to receive late diagnosis and to get complications of chronic diseases.

Methods

This study aims to achieve a deeper understanding of how people with complications of a chronic disease - diabetes type 2 - experience care in the Belgium health system through semi-structured interviews with extreme case study sampling of people with advanced diabetes, and inductive analysis.

Results

The results show that most respondents were diagnosed late in the course of their disease. There are variations in treatment and type of provider. People appreciate the personal and long-lasting contact with a medical doctor, while the contact with and role of paramedical providers was less recognized. Disease management has a significant impact on their financial budget and some respondents experienced barriers to obtain additional financial support.

Discussion

Non-medical costs are not reimbursed, presenting a high burden to people. Self-management is tedious and hampered by other worries that people may have, such as financial constraints and coping with important life events. To conclude this study highlighted the need to improve diabetes screening. We suggest to enhance the role of paramedical professionals, integrate a social care worker, reduce financial constraints, and increase health literacy through more patient-centered, goal-oriented care.

Current barriers to initiating insulin therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes

Insulin is an essential drug in the treatment of diabetes, often necessary for managing hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). It should be considered in cases of severe hyperglycemia requiring hospitalization, after the failure of other treatments, in advanced chronic kidney disease, liver cirrhosis, post-transplant diabetes, or during pregnancy. Moreover, in specific patient subgroups, early initiation of insulin is crucial for hyperglycemia control and prevention of chronic complications. Clinical guidelines recommend initiating insulin when other treatments fail, although there are barriers that may delay its initiation. The timing of initiation depends on individual patient characteristics. Typically, insulinization starts by adding basal insulin to the patient's existing treatment and, if necessary, progresses by gradually introducing prandial insulin. Several barriers have been identified that hinder the initiation of insulin, including fear of hypoglycemia, lack of adherence, the need for glucose monitoring, the injection method of insulin administration, social rejection associated with the stigma of injections, weight gain, a sense of therapeutic failure at initiation, lack of experience among some healthcare professionals, and the delayed and reactive positioning of insulin in recent clinical guidelines. These barriers contribute, among other factors, to therapeutic inertia in initiating and intensifying insulin treatment and to patients' non-adherence. In this context, the development of once-weekly insulin formulations could improve initial acceptance, adherence, treatment satisfaction, and consequently, the quality of life for patients. Currently, two once-weekly basal insulins, insulin icodec and basal insulin BIF, which are in different stages of clinical development, may help. Their longer half-life translates to lower variability and reduced risk of hypoglycemia. This review addresses the need for insulin in T2DM, its positioning in clinical guidelines under specific circumstances, the current barriers to initiating and intensifying insulin treatment, and the potential role of once-weekly insulin formulations as a potential solution to facilitate timely initiation of insulinization, which would reduce therapeutic inertia and achieve better early control in people with T2DM.

Insulin initiation in patients with type 2 diabetes is often delayed, but access to a diabetes nurse may help-insights from Norwegian general practice

Objective: We opted to study how support staff operational capacity and diabetes competences may impact the timeliness of basal insulin-initiation in general practice patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).Design/Setting/Outcomes: This was an observational and retrospective study on Norwegian primary care patients with T2D included from the ROSA4-dataset. Exposures were (1) support staff size, (2) staff size relative to number of GPs, (3) clinic access to a diabetes nurse and (4) share of staff with diabetes course (1 and 2 both relate to staff operational capacity, whereas 3 and 4 are both indicatory of staff diabetes competences). Outcomes were 'timely basal insulin-initiation' (primary) and 'attainment of HbA1c<7%' after insulin start-up (secondary). Associations were analyzed using multiple linear regression, and directed acyclic graphs guided statistical adjustments.Subjects: Insulin naïve patients with 'timely' (N = 294), 'postponed' (N = 219) or 'no need of' (N = 3,781) basal insulin-initiation, respectively.Results: HbA1c [median (IQR)] increased to 8.8% (IQR, 8.0, 10.2) prior to basal insulin-initiation, which reduced HbA1c to 7.3 (6.8-8.1) % by which only 35% of the subjects reached HbA1c <7%. Adjusted risk of 'timely basal insulin-initiation' was more than twofold higher if access to a diabetes nurse (OR = 2.40, [95%CI, 1.68, 3.43]), but related only vaguely to staff size (OR = 1.01, [95%CI, 1.00, 1.03]). No other staff factors related significantly to neither the primary nor the secondary outcome.Conclusion: In Norwegian general practice, insulin initiation in people with T2D may be affected by therapeutic inertia but access to a diabetes nurse may help facilitating more timely insulin start-up.

Study protocol: glycaemic outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes initiating continuous glucose monitoring: the 2GO-CGM study

Purpose

Improving glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes (T2D) is essential to reducing social and health-economic burden of diabetes-related complications. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) has been established as beneficial in improving glycaemic control and reducing hypoglycaemia in people with type 1 diabetes, however data in T2D is limited. This study has been designed to assess the effect of initiating real-time CGM (rtCGM) on glycaemic control in a high-risk population of adults with T2D. Secondary objectives are to assess the cost-effectiveness and safety of rtCGM, and the effects of rtCGM on diet/lifestyle and the burden of diabetic complications, including cardiovascular risk.

Methods

This multicentre randomised controlled trial (RCT) will be conducted at three sites in New Zealand (Waikato, Christchurch and Dunedin). Eighty adults with T2D on insulin with suboptimal glycaemic control (HbA1c > 8.0% or 64 mmol/mol) will be randomised 1:1 to rtCGM or routine care with self-monitoring of blood glucose levels (SMBG) for three months. This intervention phase will be followed by a three-month continuation phase where SMBG group crossover to use rtCGM. Participants will then be invited to join the extension phase with continued use of rtCGM for a further 12 months. During the extension phase, both groups will independently titrate their insulin under the remote supervision of prescribing diabetes nurse specialists following an insulin titration algorithm. The primary outcome of the study is time in target glucose range (3.9-10 mmol/L or 70-180 mg/dL; TIR). Secondary outcomes include CGM metrics as per consensus statement recommendations, and HbA1c. Additional planned analyses include cardiovascular risk profile, incremental cost-effectiveness analyses, dietary patterns, and qualitative analyses.

Trial registration number

The trial was registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621000889853) on 8 July 2021 and the World Health Organisation International Clinical Trial Registry Platform (Universal Trial Number U1111-1264-5822).

Efficacy of Insulin Titration Driven by SMS in Improving Glycemic Control in People with Type 2 Diabetes

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy of the self-management of insulin titration based on information received by the Short Message Service (SMS).

METHODS

A case-control study including 59 subjects in each arm with 16 weeks of follow-up was performed. The inclusion criteria were: (1) Subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D) under basal insulin treatment; (2) Suboptimal glycemic control: HbA1c ≥ 7.5% and fasting capillary blood glucose (FCBG) > 140 mg/dL (>3 times per week). Subjects were invited to use an insulin titration service based on SMS feedback aimed at optimizing glycemic control depending on fasting blood glucose levels. Psychological aspects were evaluated in the interventional group by means of validated questionnaires (DDS, HADS and SF-12).

RESULTS

The intervention group achieved a lower mean FCBG (126 mg/dL ± 34 vs. 149 mg/dL ± 46, p = 0.001) and lower HbA1c (7.5% ± 1.3 vs. 7.9% ± 0.9, p = 0.021) than the control group. In addition, the intervention group showed a significant improvement in psychological aspects related to Emotional Burden (p = 0.031), Regimen Distress (p < 0.001), Depression (p = 0.049) and Mental Health (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

The SMS-guided titration was effective in terms of improving glucometric parameters in comparison with the standard of care and improved significant psychological aspects-mainly, the stress associated with insulin treatment.

Use of smartphone application versus written titration charts for basal insulin titration in adults with type 2 diabetes and suboptimal glycaemic control (My Dose Coach): multicentre, open-label, parallel, randomised controlled trial

Background

The majority of people with type 2 diabetes who require insulin therapy use only basal insulin in combination with other anti-diabetic agents. We tested whether using a smartphone application to titrate insulin could improve glycaemic control in people with type 2 diabetes who use basal insulin.

Methods

This was a 12-week, multicentre, open-label, parallel, randomised controlled trial conducted in 36 diabetes practices in Germany. Eligible participants had type 2 diabetes, a BMI ≥25.0 kg/m2, were on basal insulin therapy or were initiating basal insulin therapy, and had suboptimal glycaemic control (HbA1c >7.5%; 58.5 mmol/mol). Block randomisation with 1:1 allocation was performed centrally. Participants in the intervention group titrated their basal insulin dose using a smartphone application (My Dose Coach) for 12 weeks. Control group participants titrated their basal insulin dose according to a written titration chart. The primary outcome was the baseline-adjusted change in HbA1c at 12 weeks. The intention-to-treat analysis included all randomised participants.

Results

Between 13 July 2021 and 21 March 2022, 251 study participants were randomly assigned (control group: n = 123; intervention group: n = 128), and 236 completed the follow-up phase (control group: n = 119; intervention group: n = 117). Regarding the HbA1c a model-based adjusted between-group difference of -0.31% (95% CI: 0.01%-0.69%; p = 0.0388) in favour of the intervention group was observed. There were 30 adverse events reported: 16 in the control group, 14 in the intervention group. Of these, 15 adverse events were serious. No event was considered to be related to the investigational device.

Interpretation

Study results suggest that utilizing this digital health smartphone application for basal insulin titration may have resulted in a comparatively greater reduction in HbA1c levels among individuals with type 2 diabetes, as compared to basal insulin titration guided by a written titration schedule. No negative effect on safety outcomes was observed.

Funding

Sanofi-Aventis Deutschland GmbH.

Magnitude and predictors of poor glycemic control in patients with diabetes at Jimma Medical Center, Ethiopia

Despite the development of new medications over the past decade to aid in the control of blood glucose, most diabetic patients often do not reach recommended glycemic targets of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1C) < 7% in daily clinical practice because of many contributing factors. This study was designed to assess the magnitude and predictors of poor glycemic control among adult diabetic patients on ambulatory chronic care follow-up at Jimma Medical Center. A cross sectional study was conducted on 307 adult diabetic patients between January 2 and April 30, 2022. Representative samples were selected using a systematic random sampling technique. Predictors of poor glycemic control were assessed using a binary and multi variable logistic regression. Data analysis was performed using Statistical Package for Social Science version 25 and R in the R studio environment. A total of 307 adult diabetic patients were included in the study making a response rate of 93%. Out of 307 adult diabetic patients, majority (62.5%) were males. Mean age of the patients was 48.91 ± 15.68 years. The majority, 221 (72%), of patients had poor glycemic control. Non-adherence of patients to medications (AOR = 3.36, 95% CI 1.16-9.72, p = 0.04), no formal education (AOR = 3.84, 95% CI (1.06-13.93, p = 0.04), therapeutic inertia (AOR = 3.16, 95% CI 1.61-6.20, p = 0.001) and poor diabetic knowledge (AOR = 4.79, 95% CI 1.56-14.68, p = 0.006) were found to be independent predictors of poor glycemic control. Nearly three fourth of diabetic patients in the present study had poor glycemic control and were at higher risk of developing diabetic complications or already developed it. These results highlight the need for appropriate management of patients focusing on adherence to medications, education, therapeutic inertia and diabetic knowledge to maintain good glycemic control and improve adverse outcomes of the disease in this study setting.

The Wedding Bells Sound Really Good! iGlarLixi Fixed-Ratio Combination in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review

iGlarLixi is a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. iGlarLixi has proven clinical benefits in terms of glycemia, weight control, and safety, defined by the risk of hypoglycemia. It simultaneously targets many pathophysiologic abnormalities which are at the root of type 2 diabetes and thus presents a complementary mode of action. Finally, it may also address diabetes treatment burden, and, by decreasing the complexity of treatment, it may improve patient adherence and persistence and fight against clinical inertia. This article reviews the results of major randomized controlled trials in people with type 2 diabetes that compared iGlarLixi to other therapeutic regimens, representing different intensification strategies, such as basal supported oral therapy, oral antidiabetic drugs, and a combination of the latter with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists. Moreover, as a supplement to randomized trials, data from real-world evidence have also been included.

Weekly Icodec versus Daily Glargine U100 in Type 2 Diabetes without Previous Insulin

BACKGROUND

Insulin icodec is an investigational once-weekly basal insulin analogue for diabetes management.

METHODS

We conducted a 78-week randomized, open-label, treat-to-target phase 3a trial (including a 52-week main phase and a 26-week extension phase, plus a 5-week follow-up period) involving adults with type 2 diabetes (glycated hemoglobin level, 7 to 11%) who had not previously received insulin. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive once-weekly insulin icodec or once-daily insulin glargine U100. The primary end point was the change in the glycated hemoglobin level from baseline to week 52; the confirmatory secondary end point was the percentage of time spent in the glycemic range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter (3.9 to 10.0 mmol per liter) in weeks 48 to 52. Hypoglycemic episodes (from baseline to weeks 52 and 83) were recorded.

RESULTS

Each group included 492 participants. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two groups. The mean reduction in the glycated hemoglobin level at 52 weeks was greater with icodec than with glargine U100 (from 8.50% to 6.93% with icodec [mean change, -1.55 percentage points] and from 8.44% to 7.12% with glargine U100 [mean change, -1.35 percentage points]); the estimated between-group difference (-0.19 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.36 to -0.03) confirmed the noninferiority (P<0.001) and superiority (P = 0.02) of icodec. The percentage of time spent in the glycemic range of 70 to 180 mg per deciliter was significantly higher with icodec than with glargine U100 (71.9% vs. 66.9%; estimated between-group difference, 4.27 percentage points [95% CI, 1.92 to 6.62]; P<0.001), which confirmed superiority. Rates of combined clinically significant or severe hypoglycemia were 0.30 events per person-year of exposure with icodec and 0.16 events per person-year of exposure with glargine U100 at week 52 (estimated rate ratio, 1.64; 95% CI, 0.98 to 2.75) and 0.30 and 0.16 events per person-year of exposure, respectively, at week 83 (estimated rate ratio, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.02 to 2.61). No new safety signals were identified, and incidences of adverse events were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Glycemic control was significantly better with once-weekly insulin icodec than with once-daily insulin glargine U100. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; ONWARDS 1 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04460885.).

[Unmet needs in the therapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus. How can barriers to insulin therapy be overcome?]

According to the current treatment guidelines, the therapy of type 2 diabetes mellitus should follow a stepwise therapy adjustment and intensification approach as soon as blood glucose control is no longer achieved with preceding diabetes treatment. However, clinical practice shows that the recommended steps for therapy escalation are often not followed, and treatment intensification is delayed. Especially the initiation with insulin and its intensification is often considerably delayed, even though the patient has high blood glucose levels, remaining above target even for years. In addition, treatment adherence is often lower with insulin therapy than with other antidiabetic treatment. This is problematic in terms of the risks for morbidity and mortality due to microvascular and macrovascular complications. The phenomenon known as therapeutic inertia occurs mainly with chronic diseases. The reasons thereof are complex and can be related to the person with diabetes and/or the healthcare professional. Main reasons are the frequency of insulin injections and a rigid treatment regimen, which are perceived as inconvenient and restrictive. Also, the complexity of insulin treatment, the required training, and its negative image of insulin as "last option" are negatively perceived. Results from surveys show that patients and physicians would prefer injections to be administered less frequently. Experience with once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1-RA) has been encouraging in terms of efficacy, adherence, and patient satisfaction. Intensive research is currently being conducted on novel insulin analogues with once-weekly application.

Device-supported automated basal insulin titration in adults with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Technological advances make it possible to use device-supported, automated algorithms to aid basal insulin (BI) dosing titration in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Methods

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials were performed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and quality of life of automated BI titration versus conventional care. The literature in Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane databases from January 2000 to February 2022 were searched to identify relevant studies. Risk ratios (RRs), mean differences (MDs), and their 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using random-effect meta-analyses. Certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations (GRADE) approach.

Findings

Six of the 7 eligible studies (889 patients) were included in meta-analyses. Low- to moderate-quality evidence suggests that patients who use automated BI titration versus conventional care may have a higher probability of reaching a target of HbA_1c <7.0% (RR, 1.82 [95% CI, 1.16-2.86]); and a lower level of HbA_1c (MD, -0.25% [95% CI, -0.43 to -0.06%]). No statistically significant differences were detected between the two groups in fasting glucose results, incidences of hypoglycemia, severe or nocturnal hypoglycemia, and quality of life, with low to very low certainty for all the evidence.

Interpretation

Automated BI titration is associated with small benefits in reducing HbA_1c without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia. Future studies should explore patient attitudes and the cost-effectiveness of this approach.

Funding

Sponsored by the Chinese Geriatric Endocrine Society.

COMBINSI (COMBat to INSufficient Insulin therapy) - A Portuguese project in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Inadequate glycemic control in type 2 diabetes (T2D) increases the risk of diabetes-related complications. Insulin initiation is often delayed for several years. This study aims to estimate the adequacy of insulin therapy prescription to people living with T2D in a primary care setting.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a cross-sectional study based on adults with T2D in a Portuguese local health unit between January 2019 and January 2020. Subjects under insulin therapy were compared with non-insulin-treated subjects with Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥9% regarding clinical and demographic characteristics. The proportion of insulin-treated subjects in both of these groups was defined as insulin therapy index.

RESULTS

Our study included 13,869 adults living with T2D, among whom 11.5% were treated with insulin therapy and 4.1% had HbA1c ≥ 9% and were not under insulin therapy. Insulin therapy index was 73.9%. When comparing with non-insulin-treated subjects with HbA1c ≥ 9%, insulin-treated subjects were significantly older (75.8 vs 66.2 years p < 0.001), had lower HbA1c (8.3 vs 10.3% p < 0.001), lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (66.4 vs 74.0 ml/min/1.73 m²p < 0.001), lower LDL-cholesterol (87.1 vs 105.8 mg/dl), and higher rates of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (32.7 vs 16.7% p < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Insulin therapy is underprescribed in T2D, with over 1-in-4 people living with T2D not being prescribed insulin despite deficient glycemic control. These findings highlight the need for insulin therapy when glycemic control is inadequate under other interventions.

Fixed-ratio Combinations (basal Insulin Plus GLP-1RA) In Type 2 Diabetes. an Analytical Review Of Pivotal Clinical Trials

In type 2 diabetes, therapeutic failure to the oral anti diabetics is frequent, the use of schemes with basal insulin or with multiple doses of insulin (basal insulin and short-acting insulins) are a widely accepted way to intensify therapy. The use of GLP-1 receptor agonists is another intensification strategy. The fixedratio combinations with molecules such as insulin degludec + liraglutide, and insulin glargine + lixisenatide have proven useful in intensifying treatment of individuals with type 2 diabetes. The purpose of this review was to evaluate and analyze the results of pivotal studies with both fixed-ratio combinations in individuals with type 2 diabetes, finding that, they are capable of achieving better glycemic control when compared with each of its components separately (with a lower risk of hypoglycemia vs basal insulin and lower risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects vs GLP-1 receptor agonists) in various clinical scenarios, especially in individuals who do not achieve control with oral antidiabetics or who do not achieve control with basal insulin (associated with oral antidiabetics) or in those under management with GLP-1RA plus oral antidiabetics.

Initiation of iGlarLixi Versus Basal-Bolus Insulin in Adults With Type 2 Diabetes Advancing From Basal Insulin Therapy: The SoliComplex Real-World Study

Background

When type 2 diabetes is suboptimally controlled with basal insulin, prandial insulin injections are commonly added (i.e., a basal-bolus insulin regimen), which can increase treatment burden and hypoglycemia risk. The once-daily injectable iGlarLixi is an alternative treatment.

Methods

This retrospective analysis of the U.S. Optum Clinformatics database compared outcomes in adults (≥18 years of age) with type 2 diabetes who previously received basal insulin and were newly initiated on iGlarLixi or basal-bolus insulin therapy. Cohorts were propensity score-matched in a 1:1 ratio on baseline characteristics, and imbalances were adjusted in multivariate analyses. Subgroup analyses were performed for people ≥65 years of age and those with a baseline A1C ≥9%. The primary end point was persistence with therapy at 12 months in the overall population. Secondary end points were treatment adherence, health care resource utilization (HCRU), costs, any hypoglycemia, and A1C change at 12 months.

Results

Cohorts each comprised 1,070 participants. Treatment persistence at 12 months was statistically significantly higher for iGlarLixi versus basal-bolus insulin therapy (43.7 vs. 22.3%, hazard ratio 0.51, 95% CI 0.46-0.57, adjusted P <0.001). Adherence was numerically higher for iGlarLixi, and hypoglycemia events, HCRU, and costs were numerically lower for iGlarLixi. A1C reduction from baseline was slightly greater for basal-bolus insulin. Results for both subgroups (≥65 years of age and baseline A1C ≥9%) were similar to those of the overall population.

Conclusion

In this observational study, initiation of once-daily iGlarLixi versus basal-bolus insulin was associated with higher persistence, lower hypoglycemia, and similar A1C reduction without increasing HCRU or costs regardless of age or A1C. iGlarLixi could be an alternative to basal-bolus insulin, particularly for older adults with type 2 diabetes who require treatment simplification with lower hypoglycemia risk.

Transparent machine learning suggests a key driver in the decision to start insulin therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

The objective of this study is to establish a predictive model using transparent machine learning (ML) to identify any drivers that characterize therapeutic inertia.

METHODS

Data in the form of both descriptive and dynamic variables collected from electronic records of 1.5 million patients seen at clinics within the Italian Association of Medical Diabetologists between 2005-2019 were analyzed using logic learning machine (LLM), a "clear box" ML technique. Data were subjected to a first stage of modeling to allow ML to automatically select the most relevant factors related to inertia, and then four further modeling steps individuated key variables that discriminated the presence or absence of inertia.

RESULTS

The LLM model revealed a key role for average glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) threshold values correlated with the presence or absence of insulin therapeutic inertia with an accuracy of 0.79. The model indicated that a patient's dynamic rather than static glycemic profile has a greater effect on therapeutic inertia. Specifically, the difference in HbA1c between two consecutive visits, what we call the HbA1c gap, plays a crucial role. Namely, insulin therapeutic inertia is correlated with an HbA1c gap of <6.6 mmol/mol (0.6%), but not with an HbA1c gap of >11 mmol/mol (1.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

The results reveal, for the first time, the interrelationship between a patient's glycemic trend defined by sequential HbA1c measurements and timely or delayed initiation of insulin therapy. The results further demonstrate that LLM can provide insight in support of evidence-based medicine using real world data.

Early intervention and intensive management of patients with diabetes, cardiorenal, and metabolic diseases

Increasing rates of obesity and diabetes have driven corresponding increases in related cardiorenal and metabolic diseases. In many patients, these conditions occur together, further increasing morbidity and mortality risks to the individual. Yet all too often, the risk factors for these disorders are not addressed promptly in clinical practice, leading to irreversible pathologic progression. To address this gap, we convened a Task Force of experts in cardiology, nephrology, endocrinology, and primary care to develop recommendations for early identification and intervention in obesity, diabetes, and other cardiorenal and metabolic diseases. The recommendations include screening and diagnosis, early interventions with lifestyle, and when and how to implement medical therapies. These recommendations are organized into primary and secondary prevention along the continuum from obesity through the metabolic syndrome, prediabetes, diabetes, hypertension, dyslipidemia, nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and atrial fibrillation, chronic kidney disease (CKD), and heart failure (HF). The goal of early and intensive intervention is primary prevention of comorbidities or secondary prevention to decrease further worsening of disease and reduce morbidity and mortality. These efforts will reduce clinical inertia and may improve patients' well-being and adherence.

Predictors of success and failure in achieving glycemic control targets in patients with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin: review of the real-world evidence studies

Basal insulin (BI) is the main therapeutic option for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who have not reached glycemic targets on oral antidiabetic drugs and/or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. The results of epidemiological studies indicate that the majority of patients with T2D do not achieve the targeted parameters of glycemic control on BI in the real-world settings. In this review the results of real-world evidence studies assessing predictors of success or failure of BI therapy in patients with T2D are we summarized. A number of studies have demonstrated that delayed initiation of insulin therapy with a high level of glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at the start of the treatment reduces achieving glycemic control targets on BI. Hypoglycemia in the first weeks or months of BI treatment may reduce the adherence and persistence to treatment and likelihood of achieving treatment targets. In real-world evidence studies, glargine 300 U/mL and degludec, the long-acting second-generation insulin analogues, have shown greater potential in reduction of HbA1c levels with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia compared to other BIs. In the DUNE, ATOS, and some others studies, a lack of insulin dose titration in newly initiated BI users and those who needed treatment intensification was demonstrated. Poor treatment adherence and persistence (missed injections, incorrect dose selection, and temporary or permanent discontinuation of insulin therapy), deviations in insulin injection technique, and formation of lipohypertrophy at the injection sites are also common problems that prevent good glycemic control in these patients. Therefore, patient education with a focus on injection technique, dose titration and prevention of hypoglycemia, as well as the use of the second-generation BI analogs, increases the chances for achieving glycemic control targets in patients with T2D who initiate or need to intensify BI therapy.

Reconsidering the role of glycaemic control in cardiovascular disease risk in type 2 diabetes: A 21st century assessment

It is well known that the multiple factors contributing to the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes (T2D) confer an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Although the relationship between hyperglycaemia and increased microvascular risk is well established, the relative contribution of hyperglycaemia to macrovascular events has been strongly debated, particularly owing to the failure of attempts to reduce CVD risk through normalizing glycaemia with traditional therapies in high-risk populations. The debate has been further fuelled by the relatively recent discovery of the cardioprotective properties of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Further, as guidelines now recommend individualizing glycaemic targets, highlighting the importance of achieving glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) goals safely, the previously observed negative influences of intensive therapy on CVD risk might not present if trials were repeated using current-day treatments and individualized HbA1c goals. Emerging longitudinal data illuminate the overall effect of excess glucose, the impacts of magnitude and duration of hyperglycaemia on disease progression and risk of CVD complications, and the importance of glycaemic control at or early after diagnosis of T2D for prevention of complications. Herein, we review the role of glucose as a modifiable cardiovascular (CV) risk factor, the role of microvascular disease in predicting macrovascular risk, and the deleterious impact of therapeutic inertia on CVD risk. We reconcile new and old data to offer a current perspective, highlighting the importance of effective, early treatment in reducing latent CV risk, and the timely use of appropriate therapy individualized to each patient's needs.

Type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes accounts for nearly 90% of the approximately 537 million cases of diabetes worldwide. The number affected is increasing rapidly with alarming trends in children and young adults (up to age 40 years). Early detection and proactive management are crucial for prevention and mitigation of microvascular and macrovascular complications and mortality burden. Access to novel therapies improves person-centred outcomes beyond glycaemic control. Precision medicine, including multiomics and pharmacogenomics, hold promise to enhance understanding of disease heterogeneity, leading to targeted therapies. Technology might improve outcomes, but its potential is yet to be realised. Despite advances, substantial barriers to changing the course of the epidemic remain. This Seminar offers a clinically focused review of the recent developments in type 2 diabetes care including controversies and future directions.

Effects of semaglutide on cardiovascular risk factors and eating behaviors in type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Aim of the present study was to evaluate the impact of once-weekly semaglutide on different end-points indicative of metabolic control, cardiovascular risk, dietary behavior, and treatment satisfaction in T2DM.

METHODS

This was a retrospective observational study conducted in a diabetes clinic. Changes in HbA1c, fasting blood glucose (FBG), weight, blood pressure, lipid profile, and number of antihypertensive drugs at 32 weeks (T1) after the first prescription of semaglutide (T0) were analyzed. Furthermore, at T1 patients were asked to fill-in the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) and the Control of Eating Questionnaire (COEQ).

RESULTS

Overall, 104 patients were identified (mean age 63.6 ± 10.4 years, 58.7% men, diabetes duration 12.7 ± 8.7 years). After 32 weeks of treatment with semaglutide, HbA1c levels were reduced by 1.38%, FBG by - 56.53 mg/dl, weight by 6.03 kg. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure, total, HDL-, LDL-, and non -HDL cholesterol, and triglycerides significantly improved. The number of glucose-lowering and antihypertensive drugs also decreased. At T1, DTSQ score was 32.23 ± 1.44, whereas COEQ indicated low levels of hunger and good control of eating.

CONCLUSIONS

The study documented benefits of semaglutide on metabolic control and multiple CV risk factors, simplification of therapeutic schemes and high satisfaction with diabetes treatment, and eating behaviors indicative of healthy diet and reduced food intake.

Barriers and Facilitators to the Initiation of Injectable Therapies for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Mixed Methods Study

INTRODUCTION

Initiation of injectable therapies in type 2 diabetes (T2D) is often delayed, however the reasons why are not fully understood.

METHODS

A mixed methods study performed in sequential phases. Phase 1: focus groups with people with T2D (injectable naïve [n = 12] and experienced [n = 5]) and healthcare professionals (HCPs; nurses [n = 5] and general practitioners (GPs) [n = 7]) to understand their perceptions of factors affecting initiation of injectables. Phase 2: video-captured GP consultations (n = 18) with actor-portrayed patient scenarios requiring T2D treatment escalation to observe the initiation in the clinical setting. Phase 3: HCP surveys (n = 87) to explore external validity of the themes identified in a larger sample.

RESULTS

Focus groups identified patients' barriers to initiation; fear, lack of knowledge and misconceptions about diabetes and treatment aims, concerns regarding lifestyle restrictions and social stigma, and feelings of failure. Facilitators included education, good communication, clinician support and competence. HCP barriers included concerns about weight gain and hypoglycaemia, and limited consultation time. In simulated consultations, GPs performed high-quality consultations and recognised the need for injectable initiation in 9/12 consultations where this was the expert recommended option but did not provide support for initiation themselves. Survey results demonstrated HCPs believe injectable initiation should be performed in primary care, although many practitioners reported inability to do so or difficulty in maintaining skills.

CONCLUSION

People with T2D have varied concerns and educational needs regarding injectables. GPs recognise the need to initiate injectables but lack practical skills and time to address patient concerns and provide education. Primary care nurses also report difficulties in maintaining these skills. Primary care HCPs initiating injectables require additional training to provide practical demonstrations, patient education and how to identify and address concerns. These skills should be concentrated in the hands of a small number of primary care providers to ensure they can maintain their skills.

Use of Concurrent Anti-diabetes Medications in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes in Clinical Practice in the United States

PURPOSE

This report describes the use of combination therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had been initially prescribed metformin in the United States.

METHODS

Retrospective claims data from a de-identified database were used to identify individuals aged ≥18 years with ≥1 claim for a metformin-containing regimen dated between January 1, 2018, and December 31, 2018. Demographics, insurance type, and prescriber type were compared among subgroups receiving two (dual) or three or more (triple+) anti-diabetes therapies. All analyses were descriptive; no formal comparisons were conducted.

FINDINGS

Data from 353,062 patients were included. Demographic and other baseline characteristics were similar between the groups receiving dual or triple+ therapy (n = 213,871 and 139,191, respectively). A small age difference was observed between patients receiving dual versus triple+ therapy (mean [SD], 66.5 [11.8] and 65.8 [10.8] years, respectively). Mean (SD) glycosylated hemoglobin levels were lower among patients receiving dual therapy versus triple+ therapy: 7.6% (1.7) versus 8.0% (1.7). The most frequent combination was metformin plus a sulfonylurea (33.4%). The percentage receiving combination therapy with newer treatments was relatively low, and slightly greater in younger patients. Total health care costs were similar with dual and triple+ therapies.

IMPLICATIONS

The current descriptive analysis demonstrated generally similar features, with regard to the evaluated factors, in cohorts receiving dual versus triple+ T2DM therapy. However, differences between unmeasured factors could exist and require further evaluation. These findings, based on data from a cohort of patients from clinical practice who had initially been prescribed metformin, provide a useful snapshot of current prescribing practices and can be used to inform future research and evidence-based policy decisions.

Treatment-Related Attributes of Diabetes Therapies and How People with Type 2 Diabetes Report Their Impact on Indicators of Medication-Taking Behaviors

Purpose

Understanding the treatment-related attributes influencing medication-taking behaviors in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is important for delivery of patient-centered care. This review aimed to identify and summarize studies in which people with T2D (PwD) directly indicated the treatment-related attributes associated with medication-taking behaviors or intentions.

Materials and Methods

EMBASE and PubMed were searched for studies (Jan 2005-May 2021) reporting the link between PwD-expressed diabetes treatment-related attributes and the decision to initiate, adhere to, or discontinue a T2D medication. Eligible studies reported attributes associated with oral antidiabetes drugs or injectables (not insulin). Studies not explicitly exploring the link between attributes and indicators of behaviors (eg most discrete-choice experiments [DCE] and those interrogating electronic medical records or claims databases) were excluded, as were studies where the link between attribute and behavior came from anyone but the PwD.

Results

Of the 6464 studies identified, 16 were included. Studies were conducted across multiple countries; the USA was most represented (n = 8 studies). The impact of treatment attributes was described on indicators of initiation (n = 3), adherence (n = 12), and discontinuation (n = 4). Some studies evaluated multiple behaviors. PwD perspectives were solicited by structured questionnaires (n = 10), qualitative approaches (n = 4), or DCE explicitly exploring the link to medication-taking behaviors (n = 2). Closed- (n = 9) and open-ended questions (n = 7) were employed. Across studies, several factors including glycemic efficacy (n = 9), weight change (n = 9), dosing frequency (n = 9), hypoglycemia (n = 8), gastrointestinal adverse events (n = 8), regimen complexity (n = 6), route of administration (n = 3), and cardiovascular risk (n = 1) were reported as influencing behaviors, being motivators or barriers to initiation, adherence, or discontinuation.

Conclusion

Several attributes influence how PwD take their medications. Insights gained directly from PwD have the potential to assist stakeholders in making more informed, patient-centered, treatment decisions, thus choosing and managing medications that PwD are comfortable initiating and persisting with over the longer term.

Trends in glycemic control, cardiovascular risk factors and chronic complications of type 2 diabetes, 2012-2016, in a healthcare area of Barcelona

AIMS

This study aimed to analyse the evolution of the metabolic control, cardiovascular risk factors and chronic complications in a Type 2 Diabetes (T2D) population in a healthcare area of Barcelona.

METHODS

We carried out a comparative study of T2D patients (20.457) between 2012 and 2016 (data recorded in the "Electronic Clinical-Station in Primary Care") concerning: age, gender, body mass index (BMI), arterial blood pressure (BP), HbA1c, LDL-Cholesterol, smoking, heart failure (HF), micro and macrovascular complications.

RESULTS

Average HbA1c was 6.9 % in 2012 and 7 % in 2016 (Non significant differences)(NS). In 2012, 57.9 % of patients presented proper glycaemic control, 42.8 % LDL-Cholesterol < 100 mg/dL and 76.9 % BP < 140/90 while in 2016 it was 61.2 % (NS), 59.2 % (p = 0.001) and 82.9 % (p = 0.016) respectively. No changes were found in BMI or active smoking. Significant increases were found in the prevalence of microvascular complications, HF and peripheral vasculopathy (PV). Patients with vascular diseases (PVD) and adequate metabolic control increased from 57.5 % to 62.7 % (p = 0.006). Albuminuria > 30 mg/g were more frequent among PVD.

CONCLUSIONS

Between 2012 and 2016 it was observed that, amongst our study population, glycaemic control was steady and cholesterol and BP levels were improved, while there was a significant increase of diabetic complications, HF and PV.

Preclinical Characterization of LY3209590, a Novel Weekly Basal Insulin Fc-fusion Protein

The benefit of once-weekly basal insulin is less frequent dosing, which has the potential to reduce the barrier to injection therapy and impact patient activation, adherence/compliance, quality of life, and outcomes. Basal Insulin Fc (BIF, LY3209590, or insulin efsitora alfa) is a once-weekly basal insulin in clinical testing for type 1 and type 2 diabetes mellitus. BIF is comprised of a novel single-chain variant of insulin fused to a human IgG2 Fc domain using a peptide linker. The in vitro binding affinity of BIF for the human insulin receptor (IR) was two orders of magnitude weaker relative to human insulin. BIF stimulated IR phosphorylation in cells with reduced potency, yet full agonism, and exhibited a significantly faster dephosphorylation kinetic profile than human insulin or AspB10 insulin. BIF stimulated de novo lipogenesis in 3T3-L1 adipocytes and cell proliferation in SAOS-2 and H4IIE cells with {greater than or equal to}70-fold reduction in in vitro potency compared to human insulin. BIF possessed markedly reduced binding to hIGF-1R making definitive measurements unattainable. In vivo pharmacology studies using streptozotocin-treated diabetic rats demonstrated a significant decrease in blood glucose compared to vehicle-treated animals 24h post-injection, persisting through 336h following subcutaneous administration. In streptozotocin-treated rats, BIF reached T_max at 48h and possessed a clearance rate of ~0.85 mL/hr/kg, with a t_1/2 of ~120h following subcutaneous administration. These results demonstrate BIF has an in vitro pharmacological profile similar to native insulin, with significantly reduced potency and an extended time-action profile in vivo that supports QW dosing in humans. Significance Statement BIF is a novel basal insulin Fc-fusion protein designed for once-weekly dosing. In this study we demonstrate that BIF has an in vitro pharmacological profile similar to human insulin, but with weaker potency across assays for IR binding and activity. BIF has a PD and PK profile in STZ-treated rats supportive of weekly dosing in humans.

How use of continuous glucose monitoring can address therapeutic inertia in primary care

A significant proportion of individuals with diabetes have suboptimal glycemic management. Studies have shown that persistent hyperglycemia significantly increases the risks for both acute and long-term microvascular and macrovascular complications of diabetes. A key contributor to suboptimal glycemic management is therapeutic inertia in which clinicians delay intensifying therapy when patients are not meeting their glycemic goals. During the past five years, an increasing number of individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D) and insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (T2D) have adopted use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) for daily measurement of glucose levels. As demonstrated in numerous clinical trials and real-world observational studies, use of CGM improves glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and reduces the occurrence and severity of hypoglycemia. However, for primary care clinicians who are unfamiliar with using CGM, integrating this technology into clinical practice can be daunting. In this article, we discuss the benefits and rationale for using CGM compared with traditional blood glucose monitoring (BGM), review the evidence supporting the clinical value of CGM in patients with T1D and T2D, and describe how use of CGM in primary care can facilitate appropriate and more timely therapy adjustments.

The long-term cost-effectiveness of oral semaglutide versus empagliflozin and dulaglutide in Portugal

BACKGROUND

Oral semaglutide is a novel glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analog that has been associated with improvements in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight versus sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor empagliflozin and injectable GLP-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide in the PIONEER 2 clinical trial and in a recent network meta-analysis (NMA), respectively. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of oral semaglutide 14 mg versus empagliflozin 25 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg for the treatment of type 2 diabetes from a healthcare payer perspective in Portugal.

METHODS

In two separate analyses, outcomes were projected over patients' lifetimes using the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (v9.0), discounted at 4% per annum. Clinical data were sourced from the PIONEER 2 trial and the NMA for the comparisons versus empagliflozin and dulaglutide, respectively. Patients were assumed to receive initial therapies until HbA1c exceeded 7.5%, then treatment-intensified to solely basal insulin therapy. Costs were accounted from a National Healthcare Service perspective in Portugal and expressed in 2021 euros (EUR). Utilities were taken from published sources.

RESULTS

Oral semaglutide 14 mg was associated with improvements in life expectancy of 0.10 and 0.03 years, and quality-adjusted life expectancy of 0.11 and 0.03 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), versus empagliflozin 25 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg, respectively. Improved clinical outcomes were due to a reduced cumulative incidence and increased time to onset of diabetes-related complications with oral semaglutide. Total costs were projected to be EUR 2548 and EUR 814 higher with oral semaglutide versus empagliflozin and dulaglutide, with higher acquisition costs partially offset by cost savings from avoidance of diabetes-related complications. Oral semaglutide 14 mg was therefore associated with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of EUR 23,571 and EUR 23,927 per QALY gained versus empagliflozin 25 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a willingness-to-pay threshold of EUR 30,000 per QALY gained, oral semaglutide 14 mg was considered cost-effective versus empagliflozin 25 mg and dulaglutide 1.5 mg for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in Portugal.

Continuous Glucose Monitoring With Low-Carbohydrate Nutritional Coaching to Improve Type 2 Diabetes Control: Randomized Quality Improvement Program

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally, with adverse health consequences largely related to hyperglycemia. Despite clinical practice guideline recommendations, effective pharmacotherapy, and interventions to support patients and providers, up to 60% of patients diagnosed with T2DM are estimated to have hemoglobin A_1c (HbA_1c) levels above the recommended targets owing to multilevel barriers hindering optimal glycemic control.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to compare changes in HbA_1c levels among patients with suboptimally controlled T2DM who were offered the opportunity to use an intermittently viewed continuous glucose monitor and receive personalized low-carbohydrate nutrition counseling (<100 g/day) versus those who received usual care (UC).

METHODS

This was a 12-month, pragmatic, randomized quality improvement program. All adult patients with T2DM who received primary care at a university-affiliated primary care clinic (N=1584) were randomized to either the UC or the enhanced care (EC) group. Within each program arm, we identified individuals with HbA_1c >7.5% (58 mmol/mol) who were medically eligible for tighter glycemic control, and we defined these subgroups as UC-high risk (UC-HR) or EC-HR. UC-HR participants (n=197) received routine primary care. EC-HR participants (n=185) were invited to use an intermittently viewed continuous glucose monitor and receive low-carbohydrate nutrition counseling. The primary outcome was mean change in HbA_1c levels from baseline to 12 months using an intention-to-treat difference-in-differences analysis comparing EC-HR with UC-HR groups. We conducted follow-up semistructured interviews to understand EC-HR participant experiences with the intervention.

RESULTS

HbA_1c decreased by 0.41% (4.5 mmol/mol; P=.04) more from baseline to 12 months among participants in the EC-HR group than among those in UC-HR; however, only 61 (32.9%) of 185 EC-HR participants engaged in the program. Among the EC-HR participants who wore continuous glucose monitors (61/185, 32.9%), HbA_1c was 1.1% lower at 12 months compared with baseline (P<.001). Interviews revealed themes related to EC-HR participants' program engagement and continuous glucose monitor use.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with suboptimally controlled T2DM, a combined approach that includes continuous glucose monitoring and low-carbohydrate nutrition counseling can improve glycemic control compared with the standard of care.

Individualized HbA1c Goals, and Patient Awareness and Attainment of Goals in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Real-World Multinational Survey

Aims

While glycemic control is key in effective type 2 diabetes mellitus management, many patients fail to reach their individualized glycemic goal. This analysis aimed to describe a real-world picture of diabetes management: individualized hemoglobin A_1c (HbA_1c) goals, rate of goal attainment, HbA_1c at each line of therapy, and patient awareness of their glycemic goal. Secondly, we aimed to understand physician satisfaction with HbA_1c amongst patients aware vs. those unaware of HbA_1c goal.

Methods

Analysis of physicians and the next ten consulting patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus conducted in Europe and the USA including medical record data abstraction/assessment by physicians, a patient-reported survey and a physician survey. Patients were diagnosed for 3 months or more with a known current and target HbA_1c. For the sub-analysis assessment of patient awareness of HbA_1c goal, in addition to the above, these patients had to have completed a patient-reported questionnaire and answer the question on awareness of HbA_1c goal.

Results

A total of 730 physicians provided data on 8794 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus; 5331 patients were eligible for this analysis. Overall, mean (standard deviation, SD) individualized HbA_1c goal was 6.8% (0.68%). Of eligible patients, 39.1% met their HbA_1c goal; of 60.9% of patients not reaching their HbA_1c goal, the mean distance from individualized HbA_1c goal was 0.9% (SD 1.0%). Physicians progressed patients’ antihyperglycemic therapy when HbA_1c was 8% or higher. Among 2560 patients who were included in the sub-analysis assessing the effect of patient awareness of their HbA_1c goal on multiple parameters, 70.5% were aware of their HbA_1c goal; mean HbA_1c goal was 6.8% (0.7%) and current mean HbA_1c value 7.1% (1.2%). A total of 949 patients in the sub-analysis (39.2%) achieved their goal; achieving HbA_1c goal was not related to knowledge of goal. Patients aware of their HbA_1c goal were slightly more adherent to their antihyperglycemic medication. They also were prescribed more antihyperglycemic agents, more often on a later therapy line receiving a GLP-1 receptor agonist, SGLT2i, or insulin, and more often tested their blood glucose levels than patients who were unaware. Physicians were not satisfied with the current blood glucose level of one third of their patients, believing that more of those who were aware of their HbA_1c goal could achieve better glucose control (32.4% of aware vs. 28.2% of unaware patients; p = 0.003).

Conclusions

Our results showed that the proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus achieving their goals for glycemic control was suboptimal when compared to current guideline criteria, with only about 40% of patients achieving their individualized HbA_1c goal. Treatment intensification was often delayed until HbA_1c was 8% and higher. Patients aware of their HbA_1c goal were slightly more adherent to their antihyperglycemic medication; however, awareness of HbA_1c goal did not enhance goal attainment. This highlights the need for a holistic approach to diabetes management, involving patient education, and patient–physician communication and partnership.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01985-3.

Blood glucose may be another index to initiate insulin treatment besides glycated hemoglobin A1c after oral antidiabetic medications failure for glycemic control: A real-world survey

OBJECTIVE

The inertia of insulin initiation is a barrier to achieving glycemic control when oral antidiabetic drugs fail to control glucose during the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Insulin initiation is usually based on glycated hemoglobin A1c (A1C). To investigate whether there is another index for insulin initiation besides A1C, we conducted a cross-sectional survey in the real world.

METHODS

We conducted a multicenter cross-section survey with a total of 1034 T2D patients. All patients, at the time of the survey, decided to initiate insulin therapy due to failure of controlling glucose using only oral antidiabetic drugs. We analyzed the differences of blood glucose between patients who were tested for A1C and those who were not.

RESULTS

666 (64.4%) patients were tested A1C and 368 (35.6%) were not. Neither fasting blood glucose (FBG) (12.0 ± 2.9 vs 12.3 ± 2.9 mmol/L, t = 1.494, P = 0.135) nor postprandial blood glucose (PBG) (18.4 ± 4.8 vs 17.9 ± 4.8 mmol/L, t = 1.315, P = 0.189) were significantly different between patients with and without A1C.

CONCLUSION

Our results demonstrated that initiating insulin based on FBG or PBG is a common clinical practice, at least in China; moreover, since it is easier to obtain than A1C, it can be a simple and effective way to overcome clinical inertia for initiating insulin.

Weight Change and the Association with Adherence and Persistence to Diabetes Therapy: A Narrative Review

PURPOSE

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) medication adherence is poor and is impacted by individual drug characteristics. Treatment-associated weight change can affect medication-taking behavior. This review aimed to explore weight change on T2D therapy and consider its impact on adherence and discontinuation.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE (2005 to September 2020), and among recent congress abstract books for studies providing data on medication adherence or discontinuation and weight change in people with T2D (PwD).

RESULTS

Nine studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified from 9188 bibliographic records. All three studies exploring weight change and discontinuation reported weight loss to be associated with higher persistence. Seven studies of varying design explored weight change and adherence. Four reported absolute weight change (kg) and adherence: one pooled data from different diabetes medications and demonstrated that self-reported adherence was significantly associated with weight loss; however, three studies found that weight change in adherent PwD was in the direction of the known weight profile (loss/gain) of the evaluated drug. Categorical weight loss (≥3%) and adherence were reported in two studies: one reported that numerically more adherent versus non-adherent PwD lost ≥3% weight regardless of the drug's weight profile, the other showed that early weight loss with a glucagon-like peptide-1 agonist was significantly associated with better adherence. One study reported adherence by categorical weight change; as weight loss increased, adherence scores improved, regardless of drug type.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest that discontinuation rates may be lower in PwD who lose as compared to those who gain weight on T2D treatment. The evidence base on adherence and weight change is more challenging to interpret due to the range of study designs. Given the importance of weight control in T2D, further research exploring the individual's treatment, weight journey, and behaviors over time should be undertaken.

Insulin degludec/liraglutide versus its monotherapy on T2D patients: A lifetime cost-utility analysis in China

Introduction: IDegLira (brand name Xultophy) is a novel fixed ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide for type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients. This study aimed to investigate the lifetime cost-effective value of IDegLira compared with its single component (Degludec or Liraglutide) and to explore the suitable annual cost of IDegLira if necessary. Methods: UKPDS OM2 was applied to determine the long-term quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and total costs. The efficacy data that were inputted into the model were synthesized from 6 randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that directly assessed the clinical benefit of IDegLira and its components in the treatment of uncontrolled T2D patients. The economic results were examined by one-way sensitivity analysis (OSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA). Further price reduction of IDegLira was investigated by binary search. Results: The IDegLira, IDeg, and Lira yielded 11.79 QALYs, 11.62 QALYs, and 11.73 QALYs and total cost of $20281.61, $3726.76, and $11941.26, respectively. The incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) of IDegLira versus IDeg was $99464.12/QALYs, and the ICUR of IDegLira versus Lira was $143348.26/QALYs, which indicated that IDegLira was not a cost-effective therapy for T2D patients compared with its components at the current price from a Chinese national healthcare system perspective. Base case results were robust to OSA and PSA. A further binary search showed that IDegLira appears to only be cost-effective if the annual cost of IDegLira is decreased by 58% when IDeg is considered as a reference, or by 30.57% when Lira is considered as a reference. Conclusion: In conclusion, IDegLira appears to not be cost-effective when compared with the current prices of IDeg or Lira for T2D patients in China. However, after the binary search, IDegLira appears to only be cost-effective if the annual cost of IDegLira is decreased 58% when IDeg is considered as a reference, or by 30.57% when Lira is considered as a reference.

Where to Initiate Basal Insulin Therapy: Inpatient or Outpatient Department? Real-World Observation in China

BACKGROUND

This study aims to compare the effectiveness of initiating insulin therapy in inpatient and outpatient settings during a 6-month follow-up period among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in real-world settings.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The study was based on the ORBIT study, a real-world observational study which recruited patients with inadequate glycemic control by oral antidiabetic drugs (OAD) and initiated basal insulin (BI). We compare difference in initiation and evolution of insulin therapy and glycemic control after six months were compared between patients initiating basal insulin in the inpatient department (inpatient initiators) and those starting in outpatient (outpatient initiators) among participants without rehospitalization during the six months follow-up.

RESULTS

Among all 18,995 participants in the ORBIT study, 56.0% were inpatient initiators and 44.0% outpatient. We conducted in-depth analysis among 14,860 patients without rehospitalization, 8129 inpatient initiators and 6731 outpatient initiators. (1) Inpatient initiators had lower insulin therapy persistence during six months (64.2%) than outpatient ones (78.6%) (p<0.001), which was mainly explained by more therapy switches from basal-bolus regimen to other therapies among inpatient initiators (50.1%) than that among outpatient initiators (37.5%) (p<0.001). (2) Inpatient initiation had a higher proportion of people achieving glucose targets (HbA1c <7%) than outpatient initiation. However, the benefit of inpatient initiation versus outpatient initiation was mainly observed among patients persisting with the initial insulin therapies (46.3% vs 39.5% p<0.001), rather than those nonpersistent (37.3% vs 36.2%, p=0.723). (3) Among patients with HbA1c <9%, taking only one OAD and without complications at baseline, inpatient insulin initiation did not show a higher proportion of people achieving glucose target than outpatient initiation (adjusted odds ratio=0.96, 95% CI: 0.76-1.21).

CONCLUSION

For patients with HbA1c ≥9%, who were taking more than one OAD and had complications at baseline, initiating insulin treatment during hospitalization has a higher proportion of people achieving glucose target than that in the outpatient department, but the premise is that the initial therapy is acceptable and can be maintained after discharge. Patient-centered approach with co-agreed decision-making to select a suitable insulin regimen should be strengthened.

Anti-Hyperglycemic Medication Adherence and Health Services Utilization in People with Diabetes: A Longitudinal Study of Alberta's Tomorrow Project

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the long-term (>2 years) relationship between the time-varying drug adherence and healthcare utilization for patients with diabetes.

OBJECTIVE

To characterize the relationship between time-varying anti-hyperglycemic medication adherence and healthcare utilization in patients with diabetes, using data from Alberta's Tomorrow Project, a population-based cohort study in Alberta, Canada.

METHODS

Incident cases of diabetes with at least 24 months of follow-up were included in the study. Anti-hyperglycemic drug adherence was measured by proportion of days covered (PDC) in the past 12 months for each year after diagnosis. The rate of healthcare utilization was assessed for the subsequent 12 months, 36 months and 60 months. A time-varying, negative binomial generalized estimating equation model was used to examine the association between medication adherence and healthcare utilization.

RESULTS

Among 2155 incident cases of diabetes, average age at diagnosis was 59.6±9.3, 51.0% were female and average duration of follow-up was 7.3±3.7 (range, 2.0-16.2) years. The proportion of patients taking anti-hyperglycemic medications was 47.6% during the first year of diagnosis, which increased to 77.3% by the end of follow-up. Compared to adherent patients (PDC≥0.8), non-adherent patients (PDC<0.8) had substantially higher rate of all-cause hospitalization [incident rate ratio, IRR=1.48 (1.22-1.79), ED visits [1.30 (1.15-1.47)] and GP visits [1.17 (1.08-1.27)] in the subsequent 12 months. However, these associations became weaker with longer follow-up [eg, IRR=1.18 (0.98-1.39) and 1.05 (0.94-1.18) for all-cause hospitalization in the subsequent 36 and 60 months, respectively].

CONCLUSION

Poor adherence among diabetic patients was associated with substantially higher rate of healthcare utilization in the short term (eg, 12 months); however, this association weakened over a longer period (eg, 36-60 months).

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.

Novel Drugs for Diabetes Therapy

Since the first use of insulin 100 years ago, there have been marked improvements in diabetes therapy including, but not limited to, the development of oral antidiabetic agents (OADs), incretin mimetics and insulin analogues. Still, there are substantial shortcomings in diabetes therapy: the blood-glucose lowering effect of OADs is often limited, incretin mimetics often induce gastrointestinal side effects and insulins still induce hypoglycaemia and weight gain in many patients.This review evaluates on-going developments of antidiabetic drugs for their potential for future therapy focussing on injectable therapies. Recent data from dual agonists, in particular tirzepatide, a combination of GIP- and GLP-1 receptor agonists, show unprecedented reductions in HbA1c, body weight and cardiovascular risk factors. Once-weekly administrations of incretin mimetics open up the potential of a combination with once-weekly insulins that have been shown to have low peak-to-trough fluctuations. Eventually, it might be feasible to administer incretins and insulins (combinations) orally. While this has already been achieved for incretins, there are still some challenges for the oral application of insulin. Nevertheless, many promising data of novel antidiabetic drugs clearly indicate that therapy of people with diabetes will become easier, safer and more efficacious in the next years.

Efficacy and Safety of Self-Titration Algorithms of Insulin Glargine 300 units/mL in Individuals with Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (The Korean TITRATION Study): A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

To compare the efficacy and safety of two insulin self-titration algorithms, Implementing New Strategies with Insulin Glargine for Hyperglycemia Treatment (INSIGHT) and EDITION, for insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) in Korean individuals with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

In a 12-week, randomized, open-label trial, individuals with uncontrolled T2DM requiring basal insulin were randomized to either the INSIGHT (adjusted by 1 unit/day) or EDITION (adjusted by 3 units/week) algorithm to achieve a fasting self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in the range of 4.4 to 5.6 mmol/L. The primary outcome was the proportion of individuals achieving a fasting SMBG ≤5.6 mmol/L without noct urnal hypoglycemia at week 12.

RESULTS

Of 129 individuals (age, 64.1±9.5 years; 66 [51.2%] women), 65 and 64 were randomized to the INSIGHT and EDITION algorithms, respectively. The primary outcome of achievement was comparable between the two groups (24.6% vs. 23.4%, P=0.876). Compared with the EDITION group, the INSIGHT group had a greater reduction in 7-point SMBG but a similar decrease in fasting plasma glucose and glycosylated hemoglobin. The increment of total daily insulin dose was significantly higher in the INSIGHT group than in the EDITION group (between-group difference: 5.8±2.7 units/day, P=0.033). However, body weight was significantly increased only in the EDITION group (0.6±2.4 kg, P=0.038). There was no difference in the occurrence of hypoglycemia between the two groups. Patient satisfaction was significantly increased in the INSIGHT group (P=0.014).

CONCLUSION

The self-titration of Gla-300 using the INSIGHT algorithm was effective and safe compared with that using the EDITION algorithm in Korean individuals with uncontrolled T2DM (ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT03406663).

Effects of empagliflozin on insulin initiation or intensification in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease: Findings from the EMPA-REG OUTCOME trial

AIM

To evaluate the effects of empagliflozin versus placebo on subsequent insulin initiation or dosing changes in a large cardiovascular outcomes trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In EMPA-REG OUTCOME, 7020 patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease received empagliflozin 10 mg, 25 mg, or placebo. Median follow-up was 3.1 years. After 12 weeks of treatment, changes in background antihyperglycaemic therapy were permitted. Among insulin-naïve patients, we assessed the effects of pooled empagliflozin arms versus placebo on time to initiation of insulin. Among insulin-treated patients, we assessed effects on time to an increase or decrease in insulin dose of more than 20%.

RESULTS

In 3633 (52%) participants not treated with insulin at baseline, empagliflozin reduced new use of insulin versus placebo by 60% (7.1% vs. 16.4%; adjusted HR 0.40 [95% CI 0.32-0.49]; P < .0001). In 3387 (48%) patients using insulin at baseline, empagliflozin reduced the need for a greater than 20% insulin dose increase by 58% (14.4% vs. 29.3%; adjusted HR 0.42 [95% CI 0.36-0.49]; P < .0001) and increased the proportion achieving sustained greater than 20% insulin dose reductions without subsequent increases in HbA1c compared with placebo (9.2% vs. 4.9%; adjusted HR 1.87 [95% CI: 1.39-2.51]; P < .0001). Sensitivity analyses confirmed consistent findings when insulin dose changes of more than 10% or more than 30% were considered.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, empagliflozin markedly and durably delays insulin initiation and substantial increases in insulin dose, while facilitating sustained reductions in insulin requirements over time.

ARISE-a prospective, non-interventional, single-arm study assessing clinical parameters associated with the use of insulin degludec/insulin aspart in patients with type 2 diabetes in real-world settings: rationale and design

PURPOSE

IDegAsp, a co-formulation of long-acting basal (insulin degludec) and rapid-acting bolus (insulin aspart) insulin, provides separate prandial and basal glucose-lowering effects with relatively low risk of hypoglycaemia. Its efficacy and safety have been investigated in a large clinical trial programme (BOOST). We present the rationale and design of the ARISE study, which aims to assess glycaemic control and other clinical parameters associated with IDegAsp use in real world.

METHODS

ARISE is a ~26-wk-long, prospective, non-interventional, single-arm study of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiating IDegAsp treatment. Approximately 1112 patients with T2D aged ≥18 years previously on anti-hyperglycaemic drugs except IDegAsp will be enroled across six countries from 15 Aug 2019 to 12 Nov 2020. IDegAsp treatment will be initiated at the physicians' discretion and as per the local label. Key exclusion criteria include previous participation, or previous IDegAsp treatment. The primary and secondary endpoints are change in HbA_1c from baseline (wk 0) to study end (wk 26-36) and the proportion of patients achieving the target HbA_1c level of <7% at the study end, respectively. A mixed model for repeated measurements will analyse the primary endpoint.

CONCLUSION

Between-country differences in the prescription patterns of glucose-lowering agents in people with T2D warrant examination of their clinical use in different geographical settings. The ARISE study is designed to assess the clinical use of IDegAsp from real world in six different countries. Findings from the ARISE study will supplement those of previous randomised controlled studies by establishing real-world evidence of IDegAsp use in the participating countries.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04042441. Registered 02 August 2014, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04042441.