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

Intranasal delivery of glucagon-like peptide-1 to the brain for obesity treatment: opportunities and challenges

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), approved by the US FDA for obesity treatment, are typically administered subcutaneously, an invasive method leading to suboptimal patient adherence and peripheral side effects. Additionally, this route requires the drug to cross the restrictive blood-brain barrier (BBB), limiting its safety and effectiveness in weight management and cognitive addiction disorders. Delivering the drug intranasally could overcome these drawbacks.

AREAS COVERED

This review summarizes GLP-1 RAs used as anti-obesity agents, focusing on the intranasal route as a potential pathway to deliver these biomolecules to the brain. It also discusses strategies to overcome challenges associated with nasal delivery.

EXPERT OPINION

Nose-to-brain (N2B) pathways can address limitations of the subcutaneous route for GLP-1 RAs. However, peptide delivery to the brain is challenging due to nasal physiological barriers and the drug's physicochemical properties. Innovative approaches, such as cell permeation enhancers, mucoadhesive systems, and nanocarriers in nasal formulations, along with efficient drug delivery devices, show promising preclinical results. Despite this, successful preclinical data does not guarantee clinical effectiveness, highlighting the need for comprehensive clinical investigations to optimize formulations and fully utilize the nose-to-brain interface for peptide delivery.

Safety and Effectiveness of Dulaglutide in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Korean Real-World Post-Marketing Study

BACKGRUOUND

To investigate the real-world safety and effectiveness of dulaglutide in Korean adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

This was a real-world, prospective, non-interventional post-marketing safety study conducted from May 26, 2015 to May 25, 2021 at 85 Korean healthcare centers using electronic case data. Data on patients using dulaglutide 0.75 mg/0.5 mL or the dulaglutide 1.5 mg/0.5 mL single-use pens were collected and pooled. The primary objective was to report the frequency and proportion of adverse and serious adverse events that occurred. The secondary objective was to monitor the effectiveness of dulaglutide at 12 and 24 weeks by evaluating changes in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c ), fasting plasma glucose, and body weight.

RESULTS

Data were collected from 3,067 subjects, and 3,022 subjects who received ≥1 dose (of any strength) of dulaglutide were included in the safety analysis set (53% female, mean age 56 years; diabetes duration 11.2 years, mean HbA1c 8.8%). The number of adverse events reported was 819; of these, 68 (8.3%) were serious adverse events. One death was reported. Adverse events were mostly mild in severity; 60.81% of adverse events were considered related to dulaglutide. This study was completed by 72.73% (2,198/3,022) of subjects. At 12/24 weeks there were significant (P<0.0001) reductions from baseline in least-squares mean HbA1c (0.96%/0.95%), fasting blood glucose (26.24/24.43 mg/dL), and body weight (0.75/1.21 kg).

CONCLUSION

Dulaglutide was generally well tolerated and effective in real-world Korean individuals with T2DM. The results from this study contribute to the body of evidence for dulaglutide use in this population.

Effect of tirzepatide on glycaemic control and weight loss compared with other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIM

To compare the therapeutic effects of glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP)/ glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) or GLP-1RAs in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed, MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to July 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared GLP-1RAs or GIP/GLP-1RAs in Japanese patients with T2D were selected. A network meta-analysis was conducted to indirectly compare the treatments, focusing on efficacy in reducing glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and body weight (BW).

RESULTS

A total of 18 RCTs were included in this analysis. Tirzepatide 15 mg showed the most significant reduction in HbA1c levels and BW compared with subcutaneous semaglutide 1.0 mg and oral semaglutide 14 mg (HbA1c: mean difference [95% confidence interval] -0.52 [-0.96; -0.08] and - 1.23 [-1.64; -0.81]; BW: -5.07 [-8.28; -1.86] and -6.84 [-8.97; -4.71], respectively). Subcutaneous semaglutide showed a superior reduction in HbA1c compared with oral semaglutide. Both subcutaneous and oral semaglutide were more effective than conventional GLP-1RAs, such as dulaglutide, liraglutide and lixisenatide.

CONCLUSIONS

Among Japanese patients with T2D, tirzepatide showed the greatest effectiveness in reducing HbA1c levels and inducing weight loss. The study provides evidence to guide GLP-1RA treatment strategies in Japanese patients with T2D.

Clinical Characteristics Associated with Adherence and Persistence in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Treated with Dulaglutide

Aims

This study is aimed at identifying clinical characteristics associated with adherence and persistence in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with dulaglutide.

Materials and Methods

This retrospective observational cohort study used the Common Data Model at Seoul National University Hospital, Seoul, South Korea. Eligible subjects were followed for one year. Multivariate logistic and linear regressions were used to identify the factors associated with categorical (i.e., adherence status and continuation status) and continuous (i.e., proportion of days covered, or PDC, and treatment duration) outcome measures, respectively. Subgroup analysis was conducted involving patients at high cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk (i.e., having ≥2 identifiable risk factors).

Results

A total of 236 patients were included. Increase in age and estimated glomerular filtration rate significantly increased the likelihood of adherence and treatment continuation. In contrast, baseline obesity and baseline use of sulfonylurea and insulin significantly reduced the likelihood of continuing dulaglutide. Similarly, increase in age, switching dulaglutide dose, and baseline neuropathy significantly increased PDC and treatment duration. None of the adherence or persistence outcome measures were significantly different between patients at high CVD risk and their matched controls. Baseline hypertension and the higher baseline LDL-C level significantly increased the likelihood of adherence in patients at high CVD risk.

Conclusion

Clinical characteristics of dulaglutide users that could have affected their adherence and persistence were identified. Physicians treating T2DM patients with dulaglutide can refer to those clinical characteristics identified in this study to optimize the adherence and persistence to dulaglutide.

Real-World Efficacy of Glucagon-like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonist, Dulaglutide, on Metabolic Parameters in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Longitudinal Study

The glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) dulaglutide has been shown to improve body weight and glycemic control and reduce major cardiovascular (CV) events. In Japan, dulaglutide is used at a fixed dose of 0.75 mg, which is lower than that in Europe and North America. However, the reports of real-world efficacy on metabolic parameters in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) are limited. This study aimed to examine the real-world efficacy of GLP-1RA dulaglutide on metabolic parameters in Japanese patients with T2DM. We retrospectively selected patients with T2DM who had been prescribed dulaglutide continuously for 12 months or longer between September 2015 and December 2020 and compared metabolic parameters at baseline with the data at 12 months after the start of dulaglutide. One hundred twenty-one patients were enrolled in this study. The 12-month dulaglutide treatment reduced body weight by 1.7 kg and hemoglobin A1c by 1.1%. Significant improvements were also observed in serum high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), triglyceride (TG) and non-HDL-C. The change in HbA1c during dulaglutide treatment was significantly correlated with the changes in HDL-C (R = −0.236, p = 0.013), LDL-C (R = 0.377, p = 0.005) and non-HDL-C (R = 0.415, p < 0.001). The improvements in HbA1c, HDL-C, TG and non-HDL-C were greater in patients concurrently treated with SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) at baseline. In conclusion, the treatment with dulaglutide has beneficial effects on multiple CV risk factors in Japanese patients with T2DM.

Pharmacological Support for the Treatment of Obesity-Present and Future

Obesity is a growing civilization problem, associated with a number of negative health consequences affecting almost all tissues and organs. Currently, obesity treatment includes lifestyle modifications (including diet and exercise), pharmacologic therapies, and in some clinical situations, bariatric surgery. These treatments seem to be the most effective method supporting the treatment of obesity. However, they are many limitations to the options, both for the practitioners and patients. Often the comorbidities, cost, age of the patient, and even geographic locations may influence the choices. The pharmacotherapy of obesity is a fast-growing market. Currently, we have at our disposal drugs with various mechanisms of action (directly reducing the absorption of calories-orlistat, acting centrally-bupropion with naltrexone, phentermine with topiramate, or multidirectional-liraglutide, dulaglutide, semaglutide). The drugs whose weight-reducing effect is used in the course of the pharmacotherapy of other diseases (e.g., glucose-sodium cotransporter inhibitors, exenatide) are also worth mentioning. The obesity pharmacotherapy is focusing on novel therapeutic agents with improved safety and efficacy profiles. These trends also include an assessment of the usefulness of the weight-reducing properties of the drugs previously used for other diseases. The presented paper is an overview of the studies related to both drugs currently used in the pharmacotherapy of obesity and those undergoing clinical trials, taking into account the individual approach to the patient.

The Efficacy of Treatment Intensification by Quadruple Oral Therapy Compared to GLP-1RA Therapy in Poorly Controlled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients: A Real-world Data Study

We compared the glycemic efficacy of treatment intensification between quadruple oral antidiabetic drug therapy and once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA)-based triple therapy in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus refractory to triple oral therapy. For 24 weeks, changes in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline were compared between the two treatment groups. Of all 96 patients, 50 patients were treated with quadruple therapy, and 46 were treated with GLP-1RA therapy. Reductions in HbA1c for 24 weeks were comparable (in both, 1.1% reduction from baseline; P=0.59). Meanwhile, lower C-peptide level was associated with a lower glucose-lowering response of GLP-1RA therapy (R=0.3, P=0.04) but not with quadruple therapy (R=-0.13, P=0.40). HbA1c reduction by GLP-1RA therapy was inferior to that by quadruple therapy in the low C-peptide subgroup (mean, -0.1% vs. -1.3%; P=0.04). Treatment intensification by switching to quadruple oral therapy showed similar glucose-lowering efficacy to weekly GLP-1RA-based triple therapy. Meanwhile, the therapeutic response was affected by C-peptide levels in the GLP-1RA therapy group but not in the quadruple therapy group.

Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide compared with the first-line hypoglycemic drugs in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To assess the efficacy and safety of dulaglutide in the treatment of Asian type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), along with first-line hypoglycemic drugs. Systematic review and meta-analysis. Cochrane Library, Pubmed, Embase, and www.clinicaltrials.gov databases were searched from inception to September 27, 2022. The studies evaluating adults (≥ 18 years) undergoing dulaglutide (0.75 mg and 1.5 mg) and first-line hypoglycemic drugs were considered. There were only English languages. We used Stata 12.0 software to detect the risk of bias. 4 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), and 1 observational study. Both dulaglutide 0.75 mg dose group and 1.5 mg dose group could significantly reduce HbA1c [Dulaglutide 0.75 mg: WMD = - 0.20, 95% CI (- 0.28, - 0.11), P < 0.0001; Dulaglutide 1.5 mg: WMD = - 0.49, 95% CI (- 0.67, - 0.30), P < 0.0001] in Asian T2DM patients. In reducing fasting blood glucose (FBG) level, there was no significant difference observed in 2 dose groups. The body weight of patients in both dulaglutide dose groups was significantly reduced. In safety, the incidence of adverse events in the dulaglutide 0.75 mg dose group was slightly higher than that in the first-line drug group, but there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of adverse events between the 1.5 mg dose group and the first-line drug group. Furthermore, the incidences of hypoglycemic events in both groups were higher than that in the first-line drug group. Two doses of dulaglutide showed better efficacy for Asian T2DM patients, but patients should be vigilant about the occurrence of hypoglycemia and gastrointestinal discomfort. However, more number and better quality of RCTs are suggested to confirm long-term safety and efficacy.

The effectiveness of coenzyme Q10, vitamin E, inositols, and vitamin D in improving the endocrine and metabolic profiles in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: a network Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This research evaluated the efficacy of oral nutritional agents including CoQ10, vitamin E, inositols and vitamin D on androgen-associated hormones, glycolipid metabolism and body weight in women with PCOS.

METHOD

A multi-database search was performed from inception to December 2020. Using multi-variate random effects method, a NMA was conducted by synthesizing data pooled from RCTs. It was registered with PROSPERO (registration number CRD42021230292).

RESULTS

Twenty-three RCTs and 1291 participants were included. Based on NMA, CoQ10, vitamin E, CoQ10 combined with vitamin E, and inositols were successful in decreasing TT as compared with PA; vitamin E was superior to other agents. Vitamin E and inositols were successful in increasing SHBG levels; inositols were stronger than vitamin E. CoQ10 alone or combined with vitamin E, and inositols were successful in decreasing HOMA-IR. Inositols had the best results among included nutraceuticals to ameliorate HOMA-IR, FBG, FINS, TG, TC, and LDL-C and correlated to improvements in BMI. There was no significant difference between the CoQ10 or vitamin E group and the PA group in ameliorating lipid metabolism, and vitamin D had no positive effects in ameliorating hyperandrogenism, BMI, glycolipid metabolism profiles compared with PA.

CONCLUSION

For women with PCOS, inositols supplementation have some certain advantages in increasing SHBG and improving glycolipid metabolism when compared with nutraceuticals like CoQ10, vitamin E, vitamin D. Besides, vitamin E may be a better option in reducing TT and increasing SHBG. CoQ10 alone or combined with vitamin E can be helpful in decreasing HOMA-IR as well.

Hypoglycemia following the use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: a real-world analysis of post-marketing surveillance data

Background

Recent evidence has emerged concerning hypoglycemia following the application of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs). Nevertheless, few real-world investigations have been performed to determine the clinical characteristics, onset, and outcomes of hypoglycemia associated with different GLP-1RAs. This study aimed to compare and assess the relationship between various GLP-1RAs and hypoglycemia in a large population based on updated data from the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS).

Methods

Bayesian and disproportionality analyses were applied to data mining in order to investigate suspected cases of hypoglycemia following various GLP-1RAs using the FAERS data between January 2004 and September 2020. We also evaluated the onset time, fatality risks, and hospitalization proportions of GLP-1RA-related hypoglycemia.

Results

We identified 1,164 GLP-1RA-associated hypoglycemia cases, which seemed to affect more middle-aged patients than elderly ones. Also, females were more affected than males. Lixisenatide demonstrated a stronger association with hypoglycemia compared to other GLP-1RAs, according to the highest reporting odds ratio (ROR) (28.03, 95% confidence interval =15.92, 49.32), empirical Bayes geometric mean [26.00, 95% confidence interval (CI): 16.20], and proportional reporting ratio (PRR) (26.01, χ²=313.37). The median time to hypoglycemia onset was 5 days (interquartile range, 0–67.75 days) following GLP-1RA treatment. In general, GLP-1RA-associated hypoglycemia resulted in fatality and hospitalization proportions of 3.53% and 56.08%, respectively.

Conclusions

By analyzing the FAERS data, we outlined the association between hypoglycemia and different GLP-1RAs in greater detail in terms of clinical features, onset, and outcomes. Among all six GLP-1RAs, lixisenatide demonstrated the strongest association with hypoglycemia while no relationship between albiglutide and hypoglycemia was observed. Attention should be given to GLP-1RAs when used in patients with high risks of hypoglycemia.

Switching from insulin to dulaglutide therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes: A real-world data study

AIM

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) who require injectable therapy have been conventionally treated with insulin. A glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist was recently recommended as first-line injectable treatment, but few studies have investigated the effects of switching from insulin to dulaglutide. This study investigated the clinical efficacy and parameters affecting responses to dulaglutide as an alternative to insulin in patients with T2DM in a real-world clinical setting.

METHODS

Ninety-eight patients with T2DM who were switched from insulin to dulaglutide therapy were retrospectively evaluated. Changes in HbA1c concentrations were assessed after 6 months of consistent treatment with dulaglutide. Multiple linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate parameters affecting the response to dulaglutide treatment.

RESULTS

After treatment with dulaglutide for 6 months, patients experienced changes in HbA1c of -0.95% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.30% to -0.59%, P < 0.001) and in body weight of -1.75 kg (95% CI: -2.42 to -1.08 kg, P < 0.001). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that higher baseline HbA1c was significantly associated with a greater reduction in HbA1c. The most frequent adverse events were gastrointestinal symptoms.

CONCLUSION

Switching from insulin to dulaglutide can lead to significant improvement in HbA1c levels and body weight ​reduction in T2DM patients over 6 months. Higher baseline HbA1c is associated with a better clinical response to dulaglutide.

Contemporary Classification of Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists (GLP1RAs)

This communication provides a contemporary classification of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1RAs) based on indication, route, and frequency of administration, which could support a person-centric approach to treatment choice. It includes all recently developed GLP1RAs as well as those in advanced stages of clinical study. Keeping pace with current trends in pharmacology and metabolic medicine, it attempts to bring clarity and simplicity to a complex spread of information.

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

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

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

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSIONS

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

Metformin monotherapy for adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Worldwide, there is an increasing incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Metformin is still the recommended first-line glucose-lowering drug for people with T2DM. Despite this, the effects of metformin on patient-important outcomes are still not clarified.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of metformin monotherapy in adults with T2DM.

SEARCH METHODS

We based our search on a systematic report from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and topped-up the search in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, WHO ICTRP, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Additionally, we searched the reference lists of included trials and systematic reviews, as well as health technology assessment reports and medical agencies. The date of the last search for all databases was 2 December 2019, except Embase (searched up 28 April 2017).

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with at least one year's duration comparing metformin monotherapy with no intervention, behaviour changing interventions or other glucose-lowering drugs in adults with T2DM.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors read all abstracts and full-text articles/records, assessed risk of bias, and extracted outcome data independently. We resolved discrepancies by involvement of a third review author. For meta-analyses we used a random-effects model with investigation of risk ratios (RRs) for dichotomous outcomes and mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes, using 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for effect estimates. We assessed the overall certainty of the evidence by using the GRADE instrument.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 18 RCTs with multiple study arms (N = 10,680). The percentage of participants finishing the trials was approximately 58% in all groups. Treatment duration ranged from one to 10.7 years. We judged no trials to be at low risk of bias on all 'Risk of bias' domains. The main outcomes of interest were all-cause mortality, serious adverse events (SAEs), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), cardiovascular mortality (CVM), non-fatal myocardial infarction (NFMI), non-fatal stroke (NFS), and end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Two trials compared metformin (N = 370) with insulin (N = 454). Neither trial reported on all-cause mortality, SAE, CVM, NFMI, NFS or ESRD. One trial provided information on HRQoL but did not show a substantial difference between the interventions. Seven trials compared metformin with sulphonylureas. Four trials reported on all-cause mortality: in three trials no participant died, and in the remaining trial 31/1454 participants (2.1%) in the metformin group died compared with 31/1441 participants (2.2%) in the sulphonylurea group (very low-certainty evidence). Three trials reported on SAE: in two trials no SAE occurred (186 participants); in the other trial 331/1454 participants (22.8%) in the metformin group experienced a SAE compared with 308/1441 participants (21.4%) in the sulphonylurea group (very low-certainty evidence). Two trials reported on CVM: in one trial no CVM was observed and in the other trial 4/1441 participants (0.3%) in the metformin group died of cardiovascular reasons compared with 8/1447 participants (0.6%) in the sulphonylurea group (very low-certainty evidence). Three trials reported on NFMI: in two trials no NFMI occurred, and in the other trial 21/1454 participants (1.4%) in the metformin group experienced a NFMI compared with 15/1441 participants (1.0%) in the sulphonylurea group (very low-certainty evidence). One trial reported no NFS occurred (very low-certainty evidence). No trial reported on HRQoL or ESRD. Seven trials compared metformin with thiazolidinediones (very low-certainty evidence for all outcomes). Five trials reported on all-cause mortality: in two trials no participant died; the overall RR was 0.88, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.39; P = 0.57; 5 trials; 4402 participants). Four trials reported on SAE, the RR was 0,95, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.09; P = 0.49; 3208 participants. Four trials reported on CVM, the RR was 0.71, 95% CI 0.21 to 2.39; P = 0.58; 3211 participants. Three trial reported on NFMI: in two trials no NFMI occurred and in one trial 21/1454 participants (1.4%) in the metformin group experienced a NFMI compared with 25/1456 participants (1.7%) in the thiazolidinedione group. One trial reported no NFS occurred. No trial reported on HRQoL or ESRD. Three trials compared metformin with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (one trial each with saxagliptin, sitagliptin, vildagliptin with altogether 1977 participants). There was no substantial difference between the interventions for all-cause mortality, SAE, CVM, NFMI and NFS (very low-certainty evidence for all outcomes). One trial compared metformin with a glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue (very low-certainty evidence for all reported outcomes). There was no substantial difference between the interventions for all-cause mortality, CVM, NFMI and NFS. One or more SAEs were reported in 16/268 (6.0%) of the participants allocated to metformin compared with 35/539 (6.5%) of the participants allocated to a glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue. HRQoL or ESRD were not reported. One trial compared metformin with meglitinide and two trials compared metformin with no intervention. No deaths or SAEs occurred (very low-certainty evidence) no other patient-important outcomes were reported. No trial compared metformin with placebo or a behaviour changing interventions. Four ongoing trials with 5824 participants are likely to report one or more of our outcomes of interest and are estimated to be completed between 2018 and 2024. Furthermore, 24 trials with 2369 participants are awaiting assessment.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is no clear evidence whether metformin monotherapy compared with no intervention, behaviour changing interventions or other glucose-lowering drugs influences patient-important outcomes.

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

OBJECTIVES

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Economic Evaluation of Dulaglutide vs Traditional Therapies: Implications of the Outcomes of the Rewind Study

Background

Diabetes represents a relevant public health problem worldwide due to its growing prevalence and socioeconomic burden, principally due to the development of macrovascular and microvascular complications as well as to the continuous launch of new and even more expensive drugs. The aim of our study is to evaluate the economic impact of dulaglutide, a weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist, on the treatment of diabetic patients as an alternative to both high dose sulphonylureas and insulin basalization at the failure of oral therapies alone. We carried out a cost-effectiveness analysis developed considering the economic implications of recent clinical studies regarding cardiovascular risk drug effects and especially of REWIND studies outcomes, focusing on the impact of weight changes on HRQoL.

Material and Method

In our analysis, we have applied the cost-utility technique to the above reported clinical outcomes and compared the global costs of dulaglutide versus sulfonylurea or basal insulin, all in add-on with metformin. We have chosen gliclazide, as a sulfonylurea and Abasaglar^®, the less expensive among basal insulin analogues. Abasaglar was titrated to 20 IU, corresponding to the mean dosage used in the treatment of type II diabetic patients. The model aims to estimate total direct costs related to the above-reported treatments and find out the real gap in costs between dulaglutide, the apparently cheaper gliclazide and basal insulin glargine (IGlargine) based on the Italian National Healthcare System (INHS).

Results

The total cost of dulaglutide has resulted in €859.66 higher than gliclazide (€1,579.73 vs €720.07) and basal insulin, although less significantly, reporting a difference of €396.54 (€1,579.73 vs 1,183.19). Except for the purchase cost, dulaglutide has reported reduced costs compared to insulin IGlargine and gliclazide. Dulaglutide showed lower self-monitoring blood glucose and hypoglycaemia costs, a significant reduction in costs related to cardiovascular complications, as well as savings in costs in other drugs. Dulaglutide can be considered a cost-effective antidiabetic therapy, due to the positive impact on the quality of life induced by weight reduction, despite the higher annual cost per patient, mainly influenced by drug purchase cost.

Discussion and Conclusion

In this cost-utility analysis, dulaglutide has shown to be a cost-effective treatment option from the Italian healthcare system perspective as add-on therapy to metformin in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus. Study findings can provide stakeholders valuable evidence to support the adoption of this cost-effective second- or third-line therapy compared to gliclazide or basal insulin glargine. Dulaglutide cost-effectiveness has been particularly evident in the comparison with basal insulin glargine, indicating that, in patients who have treatment indication, this therapy may be preferred to basalization avoiding related complications and costs.

Efficacy and Safety of Dulaglutide Compared to Liraglutide: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes mellitus has been always one of the most prevalent chronic diseases in the last decades. There exist a wide range of pharmacological agents for controlling this disease. However, these agents fare differently in terms of efficacy and safety. Hence, the aim of this study was to compare dulaglutide and liraglutide, two glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, in terms of efficacy and safety, drawing on a systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out in January 2018. The articles were evaluated by two independent investigators and their quality was evaluated using Jadad scale and the Cochrane Collaboration’s tools. Finally, the eligible articles entered the study. HbA1c and FBS were considered as efficacy outcomes. Safety profile was evaluated based on several outcomes such as serious side effects and vital signs. Three articles met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results indicated that the mean difference (MD) of HbA1c reduction was -0.10% (95% CI, -0.20% to -0.01%, P=0.03) in the patients who received dulaglutide in comparison with the patients who received liraglutide. In addition, dulaglutide was safer than liraglutide in terms of gastrointestinal problems (RR=0.85, 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99, P=0.04, I²=55%) and heart rate (RR=-1.14, 95% CI, -1.90 to -0.38, P=0.003, I²=0%). Once-weekly dulaglutide showed a further reduction in HbA1c compared to once-daily liraglutide. However, comparisons between these regimens indicated no significant difference between groups in either FBS reduction or safety profile. Similarly, no statistically significant difference was observed in treatment discontinuation, hypoglycemia events, and vital signs.

Consensus Recommendations on GLP-1 RA Use in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: South Asian Task Force

The advent of incretin mimetics such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) has enriched the armamentarium for diabetes management owing to their glycaemic as well as extra-glycaemic benefits. The approval status and availability of this class of drugs vary widely across the globe. Being a relatively newer class of drug with numerous benefits, several national and international guidelines are working towards addressing clinical questions pertaining to the optimal use of GLP-1 RAs for the management of diabetes. Although the newer class of drugs are associated with significant benefits such as patient-centric approach, these drugs demand the providers to be vigilant and knowledgeable about the medication. The South Asian population is at higher risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) because of their genetic predisposition and lifestyle changes. Hence, prevention and management of T2DM and its associated complications in this population are of paramount importance. The current report aims to present an overview of current knowledge on GLP-1 RAs based on pragmatic review of the available clinical evidence. In addition, this report is a consensus of expert endocrinologists representing South Asian countries including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and the Maldives on essential recommendations related to the use of GLP-1 RAs in a real-world scenario.

Determination of Electroacupuncture Effects on circRNAs in Plasma Exosomes in Diabetic Mice: An RNA-Sequencing Approach

circRNAs are involved in diabetes mellitus pathogenesis. Electroacupuncture (EA) is an effective therapeutic strategy for diabetes mellitus. However, whether the mechanism of action of EA on diabetes mellitus is related to altered circRNAs is unclear. The aim of this study was to reveal the effect of EA on circRNA expression in plasma exosomes and the underlying signaling pathway in mice with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). In total, 10 mice were randomly categorized into a normal group and 20 mice were used for the T2DM model preparation and randomly divided into the model and model + EA groups. Mice in the model + EA group were administered EA treatment. Changes in the fasting blood glucose (FBG) level and islet structure were evaluated. Plasma exosomes were subjected to RNA sequencing, and then bioinformatics analysis and real-time quantitative PCR (qPCR) verification were performed. EA treatment reduced the FBG level, preserved the islet structure, and reduced the islet β cell apoptotic rate in T2DM mice. After EA treatment, 165 differentially expressed circRNAs were found. GO and KEGG analyses revealed that thyroid hormone signaling was actively regulated by EA. circRNA/miRNA interaction analysis revealed mmu-mir-7092-3p to be closely associated with circINPP4B, suggesting that the phosphatidylinositol signaling pathway may be affected by EA. qPCR confirmed that 12 circRNAs had significant differences. These findings suggested that EA intervention can significantly protect islet function and improve the FBG level in T2DM, possibly via regulation of thyroid hormone and phosphatidylinositol signaling.

Change in HbA1c Across the Baseline HbA1c Range in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Receiving Once-Weekly Dulaglutide Versus Other Incretin Agents

INTRODUCTION

This exploratory post hoc analysis investigated the relative changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with dulaglutide versus active comparators across a continuous range of baseline HbA_1c values using data from three phase III randomised controlled trials.

METHODS

Data from patients receiving once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 and 1.5 mg, once-daily sitagliptin 100 mg, once-daily liraglutide 1.8 mg or twice-daily exenatide 10 μg in the intent-to-treat populations in the AWARD-5, AWARD-6 and AWARD-1 trials were analysed using last observation carried forward analysis of covariance. Starting with the predefined statistical model from each study, the type of association between HbA_1c baseline and change at 26 weeks was modelled. Consistency of treatment effect was assessed via treatment-by-baseline HbA_1c interaction terms.

RESULTS

Improvements in HbA_1c occurred in all treatment groups across the entire baseline HbA_1c range. The relationship between HbA_1c baseline and magnitude of change was linear in all treatment groups, with greater reductions in patients with higher baseline HbA_1c values. Across the continuum of baseline HbA_1c values, patients treated with dulaglutide 1.5 mg achieved a similar mean HbA_1c reduction to patients receiving liraglutide 1.8 mg and a greater reduction than patients receiving twice-daily exenatide or sitagliptin. In AWARD-5, the treatment-by-baseline HbA_1c interaction P value (0.001) demonstrated progressively greater HbA_1c reduction in dulaglutide-treated compared with sitagliptin-treated patients as baseline HbA_1c increased.

CONCLUSION

Our results suggest that dulaglutide is an appropriate therapeutic option for patients with T2DM across a wide range of baseline HbA_1c values, including those with poor metabolic control.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company. Plain language summary available for this article.

Dulaglutide as an Add-on to Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes; Clinical Efficacy and Parameters Affecting the Response in Real-World Practice

PURPOSE

For patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) who remain above their glycemic target on insulin therapy, a combination of insulin and a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist has been recommended. However, few studies have been conducted to determine the clinical efficacy and parameters affecting the response to this combination in a real-world setting. This study aimed to investigate the clinical efficacy and parameters affecting the glycemic response to dulaglutide as an add-on to insulin therapy for T2DM in a real-world clinical setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective study was performed in 120 patients with T2DM who had initiated dulaglutide as an add-on to insulin therapy between January 2017 and December 2018. After 6 months of treatment, the change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) was evaluated. Multiple linear regression analysis was used to determine the parameters affecting the therapeutic response to dulaglutide.

RESULTS

The mean age of the patients was 55.1 years and 57.5% were male. The mean baseline HbA1c, body mass index, and duration of diabetes were 9.1%, 27.5 kg/m², and 17.2 years, respectively. The change in HbA1c between baseline and 6 months was -0.97% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.28 to -0.66%, P<0.001), the change in body weight was -2.05 kg (95% CI: -2.93 to -1.17 kg, P<0.001), and the change in total daily insulin dose was -11.67 IU (95% CI: -14.55 to -8.78 IU, P<0.001). In multiple linear regression analysis, higher baseline HbA1c was associated with a greater reduction in HbA1c. The most frequent adverse events were gastrointestinal symptoms, but these were well-tolerated.

CONCLUSION

Dulaglutide treatment in combination with insulin resulted in a significant improvement in HbA1c and body weight over a 6-month period in a real-world clinical setting. Higher baseline HbA1c was associated with a good clinical response.

Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in East-Asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double-blind, randomized, parallel-arm, active comparator, phase III trial

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide 1.5 and 0.75 mg with glimepiride in East-Asian patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this phase III, multinational, multicentre, double-blind, randomized, parallel-arm, 26-week study, patients with inadequate glycaemic control were randomized 1:1:1 to once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 or 0.75 mg or daily glimepiride (1-3 mg/d). The primary endpoint was assessment of the non-inferiority of dulaglutide (1.5 mg), as measured by change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), compared with glimepiride using a 0.4% non-inferiority margin.

RESULTS

A total of 737 patients were randomized (dulaglutide 1.5 mg, n = 244; dulaglutide 0.75 mg, n = 248; glimepiride, n = 245). At week 26, both doses of dulaglutide were non-inferior and also superior to glimepiride for HbA1c reduction from baseline with a least squares mean difference of -6.34 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval [CI] -8.31, -4.26) or -0.58% (95% CI -0.76, -0.39) for dulaglutide 1.5 mg and -3.50 mmol/mol (95% CI -5.47, -1.42) or -0.32% (95% CI -0.50, -0.13) for dulaglutide 0.75 mg (P < .001). A greater proportion of patients in the dulaglutide 1.5 mg group achieved the HbA1c target of <53 mmol/mol (<7.0%) compared with the glimepiride group (74.1% vs 57.4%; P < .001). The mean body weight decreased (P < .005) and total hypoglycaemia rates were lower (P < .001) in the dulaglutide groups compared with the glimepiride group. The most common drug-related adverse events in both dulaglutide groups (≥5% of patients) included diarrhoea, nausea, increased lipase, decreased appetite, abdominal distension and vomiting.

CONCLUSIONS

Dulaglutide (both doses) demonstrated superior glycaemic control vs glimepiride, with a favourable tolerability and safety profile in East-Asian patients with T2D.

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly Semaglutide for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Semaglutide, a newly once-weekly glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, has showed a favorable effect on glycaemic control and weight reduction in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of semaglutide in T2DM.

Methods: A comprehensive searching was performed for Phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which reported the efficacy and safety data of semaglutide and other therapies. The efficacy data expressed as weight mean difference (WMD) and the safety data expressed as risk ratios (RRs) were calculated by employing random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed through I² test, and subgroup analyses were performed by different control groups, dosage of semaglutide, and durations of follow up.

Results: 9 RCTs including 9,773 subjects met the inclusion criteria. For efficacy, compared with other therapies, semaglutide resulted in a significant reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin (weight mean difference, WMD: −0.93%, 95% CI: −1.24 to −0.62, P < 0.001), fasting plasma glucose (WMD: −1.15 mmol/L, 95% CI: −1.67 to −0.63, P < 0.001), mean self-monitoring of plasma glucose (WMD: −1.19 mmol/L, 95% CI: −1.68 to −0.70, P < 0.001), body weight (WMD: –3.47 kg, 95% CI: −3.96 to −2.98, P < 0.001), body mass index (WMD: –1.25 kg/m², 95% CI: −1.45 to −1.04, P < 0.001), systolic blood pressure (WMD: −2.55 mmHg, 95% CI: −3.22 to −1.88, P < 0.001), with the exception of negative result of diastolic blood pressure (WMD: −0.29 mmHg, 95% CI: −0.65 to 0.07, P = 0.113) and increased impact on pulse rate (WMD: −2.21, 95% CI: 1.54 to 2.88, P < 0.001). The results were consistent across the key subgroups. For safety, semaglutide did not increase the risk of any adverse events, hypoglycemia and pancreatitis, but induced a higher risk of gastrointestinal disorders when compared with other therapies (RR: 1.98, 95%CI: 1.49 to 2.62, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Semaglutide was effective and acceptable in patients with T2DM except for a high risk of gastrointestinal disorders. The capacity of glycaemic and body weight control of semaglutide appeared more effective than other add-on therapies including other GLP-1 receptor agonists of exenatide release and dulaglutide.

Efficacy and safety profile of once-weekly dulaglutide in type 2 diabetes: a report on the emerging new data

Dulaglutide is a once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, which has been on the market in the USA since 2014. Dulaglutide has performed well in head-to-head studies against metformin, glargine, and sitagliptin, where its A1c lowering ranged from -0.78% to -1.64% over 52-104 weeks, and it consistently outperformed each of these agents. As an add-on therapy, dulaglutide provided additional A1c lowering of -1.4% to -1.44% over monotherapy with glimepiride or glargine at 24 and 28 weeks, respectively. Dulaglutide outperformed exenatide when added to a regimen of metformin with pioglitazone as well as glargine when added to a regimen of metformin with glimepiride. Dulaglutide was shown to be non-inferior to liraglutide when added to metformin. In all AWARD studies other than when compared to liraglutide, dulaglutide at full strength resulted in significantly more patients achieving their A1c goal. Recent class-wide meta-analyses indicate that the incidence of commonly experienced gastrointestinal (GI) side effects is dose dependent, and nausea and vomiting are less common in longer-acting agents such as dulaglutide, but diarrhea may be more common. Pooled data have shown no increased risk of serious side effects such as pancreatitis or neoplasm with the use of dulaglutide. Given the evidence supporting liraglutide's cardiovascular benefits, the highly anticipated REWIND trial will have a significant impact on the future place in the therapy of dulaglutide.

The efficacy and safety of liraglutide added to metformin in patients with diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) receptor agonist, has showed favorable effects in the glycaemic control and weight reduction in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The meta-analysis was to compare the efficacy and safety of liraglutide added to metformin with other treatments in patients with T2DM. A systematic literature search on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and the Cochrane library databases were performed. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of patients with T2DM who received the combination treatment of liraglutide and metformin. Pooled estimates were performed using a fixed-effects model or random-effects model. A total of nine RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Compared with control (placebo, sitagliptin, glimepiride, dulaglutide, insulin glargine, and NPH), liraglutide in combination with metformin resulted in significant reductions in HbA1c, bodyweight, FPG, and PPG, and similar reductions in SBP, and DBP. Moreover, liraglutide combined with metformin did not increase the risk of hypoglycemia, but induced a higher incidence of gastrointestinal disorders. In conclusion, this meta-analysis confirmed the use of liraglutide as add-on to metformin appeared to be effective and safe for patients with T2DM. However, considering the potential limitations in this study, more large-scale, well-conducted RCTs are needed to identify our findings.

Investigational glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists for the treatment of obesity

INTRODUCTION

Obesity is a worldwide problem predisposing to type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), hypertension, cardiovascular disease, cancer and other comorbidities. Lifestyle modification is the first line intervention but adjunctive pharmacotherapy is often required. The GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) were developed primarily for T2DM and they also reduce body weight. Liraglutide was approved for the treatment of obesity and other GLP-1RAs are likely to be suitable for this indication.

AREAS COVERED

This review describes the GLP-1RAs that have been approved for the treatment of T2DM as potential candidates for the treatment of obesity and the new agents currently under development which may have advantages in patient adherence.

EXPERT OPINION

The GLP-1RAs offer a welcome addition to obesity pharmacotherapy. They appear to be free of serious adverse effects although uncertainty remains about possible risks of pancreatitis and neoplasms. However, they have frequent gastrointestinal side effects, particularly nausea, which limits their tolerability. Cardiovascular outcome studies in T2DM support their use and this is likely to increase in both T2DM and obesity. Other GLP-1RAs which can be given by subcutaneous injection once weekly or less frequently or by oral administration would have advantages especially if nausea is less frequent than with liraglutide.