Combining basal insulin analogs with glucagon-like peptide-1 mimetics

Glycemic and Cost Outcomes among Hispanic/Latino People with Type 2 Diabetes in the USA Initiating Dulaglutide versus Basal Insulin: a Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Optimal glycemic management after diabetes onset remains a challenge in Hispanic/Latino adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D), often resulting in poor health outcomes and higher rates of diabetes-related complications. The aim of this study was to examine and compare demographic and clinical characteristics, glycemic outcomes, health care resource utilization (HCRU), and costs among injection-naïve Hispanic/Latino adults with T2D initiating dulaglutide or basal insulin.

METHODS

This retrospective, observational study used administrative claims data from the Optum Research Database. Hispanic/Latino adults with T2D were assigned to dulaglutide or basal insulin cohorts on the basis of pharmacy claims and were propensity-score matched on demographic and baseline characteristics. Measures of glycemic management included 12 month follow-up glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and change in HbA1c from baseline. Follow-up all-cause and diabetes-related HCRU and costs, including costs per 1% change in HbA1c, were compared between cohorts.

RESULTS

The final propensity-score matched sample included 2872 patients: 1436 patients in each cohort. Mean (SD) reduction in HbA1c from baseline to 12 month follow-up was greater in the dulaglutide cohort compared with the basal insulin cohort [-1.40% (1.88) versus -0.92% (2.07); p < 0.001]. The dulaglutide cohort had significantly lower proportions of patients with ≥ 1 all-cause and diabetes-related outpatient visits, emergency room visits, and inpatient stays compared with the basal insulin cohort (p < 0.05). The dulaglutide cohort had significantly lower all-cause total costs per 1% HbA1c reduction than the basal insulin cohort ($13,768 versus $19,128; p < 0.001). Diabetes-related costs per 1% reduction were numerically lower for the dulaglutide cohort, but the difference was not statistically significant ($9737 versus $11,403; p = 0.081).

CONCLUSIONS

Dulaglutide demonstrated better glycemic outcomes and lower all-cause costs per 1% HbA1c reduction among Hispanic/Latino adults compared with those initiating basal insulin. Our real-world findings in the Hispanic/Latino population were consistent with results obtained from the overall population and confirm the glycemic benefits of dulaglutide observed in clinical settings.

Natural Bridged Bicyclic Peptide Macrobiomolecules from Celosia argentea and Amanita phalloides

Bridged peptide macrobicycles (BPMs) from natural resources belong to types of compounds that are not investigated fully in terms of their formation, pharmacological potential and stereo-chemical properties. This division of biologically active congeners with multiple circular rings, has merits over other varieties of peptide molecules. BPMs form one of the most hopeful grounds for establishment of drugs because of their close resemblance and biocompatibility to proteins, and these bio-actives are debated as feasible realistic tools in diverse biomedical applications. Despite huge potential, poor metabolic stability and cell permeability limit the therapeutic success of macrocyclic peptides. In this review, we have comprehensively explored major bicyclic peptides sourced from plants and mushrooms including βs-leucyl-tryptophano-histidine bridged and tryptophano-cysteine bridged peptide macrobicycles. The unique structural features, structure activity relationship, synthetic routes, bioproperties and therapeutic potential of the natural BPMs are also discussed.

Current Progress in Pharmacogenetics of Second-Line Antidiabetic Medications: Towards Precision Medicine for Type 2 Diabetes

Precision medicine is a scientific and medical practice for personalized therapy based on patients’ individual genetic, environmental, and lifestyle characteristics. Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics are also rapidly developing and expanding as a key element of precision medicine, in which the association between individual genetic variabilities and drug disposition and therapeutic responses are investigated. Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a chronic metabolic disorder characterized by hyperglycemia mainly associated with insulin resistance, with the risk of clinically important cardiovascular, neurological, and renal complications. The latest consensus report from the American Diabetes Association and European Association for the Study of Diabetes (ADA-EASD) on the management of T2D recommends preferential use of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, and some dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors after initial metformin monotherapy for diabetic patients with established atherosclerotic cardiovascular or chronic kidney disease, and with risk of hypoglycemia or body weight-related problems. In this review article, we summarized current progress on pharmacogenetics of newer second-line antidiabetic medications in clinical practices and discussed their therapeutic implications for precision medicine in T2D management. Several biomarkers associated with drug responses have been identified from extensive clinical pharmacogenetic studies, and functional variations in these genes have been shown to significantly affect drug-related glycemic control, adverse reactions, and risk of diabetic complications. More comprehensive pharmacogenetic research in various clinical settings will clarify the therapeutic implications of these genes, which may be useful tools for precision medicine in the treatment and prevention of T2D and its complications.

THE EFFECT OF EXENATIDE THERAPY IN PREVIOUSLY INSULIN-TREATED TYPE 2 DIABETIC PATIENTS

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of multiple daily injection (MDI) treatment replaced by Exenatide BID as compared with continuation of MDI.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 140 patients with type 2 diabetes, taking metformin and multiple daily insulin injections, were randomized to exenatide or insulin group that continued their insulin treatment. Patients were followed-up for 16 weeks. Blood glucose profiles, BMI, waist circumference, HbA1C, serum lipids and side effects were assesssed at weeks 0,12 and 16.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the two groups with respect to baseline parameters. Glycemic control was similar between the two groups. The mean changes in HbA1C in exenatide group were -0.66±0.63% and in insulin group -0.74±0.92 % (p=0.594). In exenatide group, 59.6 % of patients and in insulin group 85.71 % of patients had maintained or improved glycemic control at the end of the study. In insulin group, insulin requirement increased 5.86 ± 4.46 units/day. Body weight and waist circumference decreased significantly in exenatide treatment group with respect to insulin group (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Substituting exenatide for insulin might be an option in insulin-treated, type 2 diabetic patients having obesity, and poor glycemic control. However, patients with longer duration of diabetes and insulin treatment and with lower C-peptide levels might not benefit from exenatide therapy.

Efficacy and safety of insulin-GLP-1 receptor agonists combination in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Attaining optimal glycemic targets in patients with type 2 diabetes is often hard and compromised by the shortcomings of the several treatments. Areas covered: When glycemic levels are not adequately controlled, an association of GLP-1 receptor agonists and insulin therapy can be adopted. In order to assess the benefit/risk profile of this combination therapy, a literature search of randomized clinical trials was performed.Eighteen trials matched the inclusion criteria. In 10 studies, GLP-1 receptor agonists were added on to an existing regimen, whereas insulin added to an existing GLP-1 receptor agonists regimen occurred in 2 studies. Six studies compared GLP-1 receptor agonists with short acting insulin as a treatment strategy to intensify basal insulin therapy. Expert opinion: Clinical trials herein reviewed demonstrated the safety and the efficacy of combining GLP-1 receptor agonists with basal insulin, with most studies showing equal or slightly superior efficacy, as compared with the addition of prandial insulin, associated with weight loss and less hypoglycemia.

Is there a justification for classifying GLP-1 receptor agonists as basal and prandial?

Several GLP-1 receptor agonists are currently available for treatment of type 2 diabetic patients. Based on their pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic profile, these drugs are classified as short-acting GLP-1 receptor agonists (exenatide and lixisenatide) or long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonists (exenatide-LAR, liraglutide, albiglutide, and dulaglutide). In clinical practice, they are also classified as basal or prandial GLP-1 receptor agonists to differentiate between patients who would benefit more from one or another based on characteristics such as previous treatment and the predominance of fasting or postprandial hyperglycemia. In the present article we examine available data on the pharmacokinetic characteristics of the various GLP-1 agonists and compare their effects with respect to the main parameters used to evaluate glycemic control. The article also analyzes whether the differences between the different GLP-1 agonists justify their classification as basal or prandial.

Type 2 Diabetes, Hypoglycemia, and Basal Insulins: Ongoing Challenges

Hypoglycemia in people with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes can be a limiting factor for management and a barrier to optimizing glycemic control. Even mild episodes of hypoglycemia can affect an individual's quality of life, and fear of hypoglycemia can lead to underinsulinization. This article explores the prevalence and consequences of hypoglycemia in people with type 2 diabetes with a focus on those who use basal insulins, offering strategies for prevention and management. It also discusses the benefits and challenges associated with new basal insulins, and their potential role in reducing hypoglycemia risk.

Hypoglycemia and diabetes: increased need for awareness

Hypoglycemia is an abnormally low plasma glucose concentration that may expose individuals to potential harm. It is associated with treatment of type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes. Diabetes-related hypoglycemia may result in various complications, reduced quality of life, and increased costs. Hypoglycemia, therefore, impacts patient management and must be considered by primary healthcare practitioners at the forefront of diabetes care. This paper reviews the impact of hypoglycemia on patients and healthcare practitioners in the clinical setting. Recognizing hypoglycemia and its risk factors and identifying high-risk patients can assist with prevention and management. Prevention rather than treatment of hypoglycemia is preferable by individualizing glycemic goals, considering hypoglycemia risk factors, and continuing professional support. Education of patients and healthcare practitioners is also a key factor in hypoglycemia prevention. Although several newer-generation therapies and treatment strategies for type 2 diabetes have a lower risk of hypoglycemia than established agents, long-term safety data are currently lacking. Thus, choice of therapy is important, with hypoglycemic risk varying according to drug selection.

Addition of exenatide BID to insulin glargine: a post-hoc analysis of the effect on glycemia and weight across a range of insulin titration

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

In a 30 week, double-blind, randomized, controlled Phase 3 study in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, the addition of fixed-dose exenatide twice daily (BID) to titrated insulin glargine resulted in significant glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) lowering and weight loss without increased hypoglycemia risk versus titrated insulin glargine alone. Because individualized insulin titration contributed to these results, this post-hoc analysis examined the results in the context of the degree of insulin titration that occurred.

METHODS

Subjects on pre-existing insulin glargine (with or without oral antidiabetes agents) were randomized to placebo (n = 123) or exenatide BID (n = 138; 5 µg for 4 weeks, then 10 µg ongoing). Insulin glargine was titrated in both arms per the Treat-to-Target algorithm. Tertiles (T1, T2, T3) were based on change in insulin dose from baseline to endpoint. Change in HbA(1c), hypoglycemia risk, and weight gain were assessed per insulin dose tertile.

RESULTS

The population comprised adult patients (mean age = 59 y) with type 2 diabetes and an HbA(1c) level between 7.0% and 10.5% (mean HbA(1c) = 8.4%). Insulin titration ranged from modest reductions in T1 to substantial increases in T3. Greater improvements in HbA1c were demonstrated with exenatide BID versus placebo in all tertiles (statistically significant in T2 and T3). With exenatide BID, more subjects achieved HbA(1c) <7.0% vs. placebo: T1, 44% vs. 29% (P = not significant); T2, 65% vs. 26%; T3, 54% vs. 29% (P < 0.05 for T2 and T3). Incidence of hypoglycemia was numerically lower with exenatide BID in all tertiles. Adjunctive exenatide BID was associated with statistically significantly greater weight loss (T1, T2) or mitigation of weight gain (T3) compared with placebo. Rates of nausea (42% vs. 8%), diarrhea (18% vs. 7%), and vomiting (18% vs. 4%) were higher with exenatide BID than with placebo and did not vary by tertile.

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of fixed-dose exenatide BID to optimized insulin glargine, regardless of the extent of insulin titration, significantly improved glycemia without increasing hypoglycemia risk, while mitigating insulin-induced weight gain in this post-hoc analysis.

[Timely commencement of insulin in type 2 diabetes: benefits and risks]

The introduction of insulin in type 2 diabetes is often too late, though the immediate as well as late consequences of inadequate metabolic control are well known. That is the reason, why a special attention is given in recent therapeutic guidelines for the importance of early, at least timely insulinisation. This review article summarizes the advantages (mitigation of the beta-cell dysfunction, long lasting good metabolic control) and potential risks (hypoglycemia, weight gain, possible deteriorating patient compliance) of early or timely insulin therapy. It is pointed out that the introduction of insulin is effective and safe therapeutic option during the whole course of type 2 diabetes, the use of different regimes is suitable to reach and maintain the individual glycemic target and, with a structured patient education, it does not disturb the quality of life and the compliance of patients.

(Poly)peptide-based therapy for diabetes mellitus: insulins versus incretins

Insulin therapy remains the standard of care for achieving and maintaining adequate glycemic control, especially in hospitalized patients with critical and noncritical illnesses. Insulin therapy is more effective against elevated fasting glycaemia but less in the reduction of postprandial hyperglycaemia. It is associated with a high incidence of hypoglycemia and weight gain. Contrary, GLP-1 mimetic therapy improves postprandial glycaemia without the hypoglycaemia and weight gain associated with aggressive insulin therapy. Moreover, it has the potential to reduce cardiovascular related morbidity. However, its increased immunogenicity and severe gastrointestinal adverse effects present a huge burden on patients. Thus, a right combination of basal insulin which has lowering effect on fasting plasma glucose and GLP-1 mimetic with its lowering effect on postprandial plasma glucose with minimal gastrointestinal adverse effects, seems the right therapy choice from a clinical point of view for some diabetic patients. In this article, we discuss the pros and cons of the use of insulin analogues and GLP-1 mimetics that are associated with the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

The rationale for combining GLP-1 receptor agonists with basal insulin

• Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is progressive; the more intensively it is treated, the greater is the risk of hypoglycaemia and weight gain. Achieving treatment intensification while mitigating these risks presents a challenge to patient management. • Basal insulins provide control of fasting glucose; however, their utility in the control of postprandial glucose excursions is limited. • Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists stimulate glucose-medicated insulin secretion, suppress glucagon secretion, delay gastric emptying and decrease appetite. Use of GLP-1 receptor agonists in combination therapy with basal insulin offers an alternative approach to intensification of insulin therapy. • Prospective interventional trials demonstrate that GLP-1 receptor agonists added to basal insulin decrease postprandial glucose levels, lower HbA1c levels, decrease weight and lower basal insulin requirements without increasing the risk of major hypoglycaemic events. • The current clinical data are limited by the lack of any data on the long-term effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists over additional prandial regimens; they may be beneficial or deleterious. • Although cost, gastrointestinal side effects and long-term safety should be taken into account when considering this combination, it appears to be growing in popularity and is likely to be an important therapeutic option for T2DM in the future.

Efficacy and safety of lixisenatide once-daily morning or evening injections in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin (GetGoal-M)

OBJECTIVE

To examine the efficacy and safety of lixisenatide (20 μg once daily, administered before the morning or evening meal) as add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled with metformin alone.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This was a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 680 patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 7-10% [53-86 mmol/mol]). Patients were randomized to lixisenatide morning (n = 255), lixisenatide evening (n = 255), placebo morning (n = 85), or placebo evening (n = 85) injections.

RESULTS

Lixisenatide morning injection significantly reduced mean HbA1c versus combined placebo (mean change -0.9% [9.8 mmol/mol] vs. -0.4% [4.4 mmol/mol]; least squares [LS] mean difference vs. placebo -0.5% [5.5 mmol/mol], P < 0.0001). HbA1c was significantly reduced by lixisenatide evening injection (mean change -0.8% [8.7 mmol/mol] vs. -0.4% [4.4 mmol/mol]; LS mean difference -0.4% [4.4 mmol/mol], P < 0.0001). Lixisenatide morning injection significantly reduced 2-h postprandial glucose versus morning placebo (mean change -5.9 vs. -1.4 mmol/L; LS mean difference -4.5 mmol/L, P < 0.0001). LS mean difference in fasting plasma glucose was significant in both morning (-0.9 mmol/L, P < 0.0001) and evening (-0.6 mmol/L, P = 0.0046) groups versus placebo. Mean body weight decreased to a similar extent in all groups. Rates of adverse events were 69.4% in both lixisenatide groups and 60.0% in the placebo group. Rates for nausea and vomiting were 22.7 and 9.4% for lixisenatide morning and 21.2 and 13.3% for lixisenatide evening versus 7.6 and 2.9% for placebo, respectively. Symptomatic hypoglycemia occurred in 6, 13, and 1 patient for lixisenatide morning, evening, and placebo, respectively, with no severe episodes.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin, lixisenatide 20 μg once daily administered in the morning or evening significantly improved glycemic control, with a pronounced postprandial effect, and was well tolerated.

Combination therapy with GLP-1 receptor agonists and basal insulin: a systematic review of the literature

Treatment algorithms for type 2 diabetes call for intensification of therapy over time as the disease progresses and glycaemic control worsens. If diet, exercise and oral antihyperglycaemic medications (OAMs) fail to maintain glycaemic control then basal insulin is added and ultimately prandial insulin may be required. However, such an intensification strategy carries risk of increased hypoglycaemia and weight gain, both of which are associated with worse long-term outcomes. An alternative strategy is to intensify therapy by the addition of a short-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) rather than prandial insulin. Short-acting GLP-1 RAs such as exenatide twice daily are particularly effective at reducing postprandial glucose while basal insulin has a greater effect on fasting glucose, providing a physiological rationale for this complementary approach. This review analyzes the latest randomized controlled clinical trials of insulin/GLP-1 RA combination therapy and examines results from 'real-world' use of the combinations as reported through observational and clinical practice studies. The most common finding across all types of studies was that combination therapy improved glycaemic control without weight gain or an increased risk of hypoglycaemia. Many studies reported weight loss and a reduction in insulin use when a GLP-1 RA was added to existing insulin therapy. Overall, the relative degree of benefit to glycaemic control and weight was influenced by the insulin titration employed in conjunction with the GLP-1 RA. The greatest glycaemic benefits were observed in studies with structured titration of insulin to glycaemic targets while the greatest weight benefits were observed in studies with a protocol-specified focus on insulin sparing. The adverse event profile of GLP-1 RAs in the reviewed trials was similar to that reported with GLP-1 RAs as monotherapy or in combination with OAMs with gastrointestinal events being the most commonly reported.