Efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide in combination with sulphonylurea and/or biguanide compared with once-daily insulin glargine in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, open-label, phase III, non-inferiority study

A randomized, double-blind trial assessing the efficacy and safety of two doses of dulaglutide in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes (AWARD-JPN)

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Phase 3, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study was conducted in Japanese participants aged ≥20 years, with T2D for ≥6 months and inadequate glycaemic control, while on a single oral antihyperglycaemic medication (NCT04809220). The primary objective was to evaluate superiority of dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg measured by mean change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to 26 weeks. Other efficacy and safety endpoints were evaluated at 26 and 52 weeks. All statistical analyses were conducted using the intention-to-treat population.

RESULTS

Overall, 591 participants were randomized to once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg or 0.75 mg. At Week 26, dulaglutide 1.5 mg was superior to dulaglutide 0.75 mg in HbA1c reduction from baseline (least squares mean [LSM] difference -0.29% [95% confidence interval {CI} -0.43, -0.14]). At Week 52, the dulaglutide 1.5-mg arm had a significantly greater proportion of participants who achieved HbA1c <7.0% (46.3% vs. 38.5%; p = 0.03) and showed significantly greater reduction in fasting serum glucose (LSM difference -9.4 mg/dL [95% CI -14.4, -4.3]; p < 0.001) versus the dulaglutide 0.75-mg arm. No statistically significant change in body weight was observed in either treatment arm. Overall, 442 participants (75.4%) experienced treatment emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Constipation (11.3%), diarrhoea (9.6%) and pyrexia (9.0%) were the most commonly reported TEAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Dulaglutide 1.5 mg once weekly demonstrated superior glycaemic control versus dulaglutide 0.75 mg once weekly, with comparable safety and tolerability, in Japanese people with T2D.

Meta-analysis of head-to-head clinical trials comparing incretin-based glucose-lowering medications and basal insulin: An update including recently developed glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and the glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide/GLP-1 receptor co-agonist tirzepatide

OBJECTIVE

To assess comparative efficacy, safety and tolerability of injectable incretin-based glucose-lowering medications (IBGLMs) versus basal insulin treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed an updated meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of head-to-head comparisons of IBGLMs (short- and long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 [GLP-1] receptor agonists [GLP-1RAs] and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide [GIP]/GLP-1 receptor co-agonist tirzepatide) versus basal insulin using a PubMed database search (April 2022). The primary endpoint was difference in reduction of glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c ) versus baseline between pooled IBGLMs (fixed-effects meta-analysis) and their subgroups (random-effects meta-analysis) versus basal insulin treatment (mean differences). Secondary endpoints were fasting plasma glucose, body weight, HbA_1c target achievement, hypoglycaemia, blood pressure and lipids. Risk of bias assessment was performed using Jadad scores and the Risk of Bias tool 2.0.

RESULTS

In all, 20 studies, representing 47 study arms and 11 843 patients, were eligible. Compared with basal insulin, IGBLMs lowered HbA_1c by 0.48 (0.45-0.52)% more than did basal insulin treatment. This effect was driven by pooled long-acting GLP-1RAs (ΔHbA_1c -0.25 [-0.38; -0.11]%) and the only GIP/GLP-1 receptor co-agonist, tirzepatide (pooled doses; ΔHbA_1c -0.90 [-1.06; -0.75]%), while short-acting GLP-1RAs were equally effective compared with basal insulin (P = 0.90). All IBGLM subgroups achieved significantly lower body weight versus insulin treatment (-4.6 [-4.7; -4.4] kg), in particular tirzepatide (-12.0 [-13.8; -10.1] kg). IBGLMs significantly reduced hypoglycaemia and blood pressure and improved lipid variables. Risk of bias was low. IBGLM treatment was associated with more nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea and study medication discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Recently introduced, highly effective IBGLMs were superior to basal insulin treatment, reinforcing the recommendation that IBGLMs should be considered as the first injectable treatment for most patients with type 2 diabetes.

Safety and effectiveness of dulaglutide 0.75 mg in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes in real-world clinical practice: 36 month post-marketing observational study

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated the safety and effectiveness of dulaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes in the real-world setting in Japan.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, observational post-marketing surveillance study was conducted for 36 months (July 2016 to July 2021) in Japan. Investigators reported data via an electronic data capture system. Data were analyzed by overall population and age group (<65, ≥65 to <75, and ≥75 years).

RESULTS

The analysis population (N = 3,136) included 1,538 (49.04%), 869 (27.71%), and 729 (23.25%) patients aged <65 years, ≥65 to <75 years, and ≥75 years, respectively. Overall, 231 patients (7.37%) experienced ≥1 adverse drug reactions, with the highest frequency in the ≥75 years group. The most common adverse drug reactions were gastrointestinal disorders (n = 106; 3.38%). Severe hypoglycemia (n = 4; 0.13%), major adverse cardiovascular events (n = 4; 0.13%), and acute pancreatitis (n = 1; 0.03%) were uncommon. The mean glycated hemoglobin and bodyweight were reduced from baseline by -0.76% and -1.6 kg, respectively (last observation carried forward). The rate of dulaglutide continuation at 36 months was 58.03% overall and 59.43%, 63.13%, and 48.88% in the <65, ≥65 to <75, and ≥75 years groups, respectively. A factor analysis showed age ≥65 years was associated with a greater incidence of gastrointestinal adverse drug reactions as well as larger reductions in glycated hemoglobin and bodyweight.

CONCLUSIONS

The current real-world data are in accordance with clinical trial findings and further confirm the safety and effectiveness of dulaglutide for elderly patients, whose numbers were limited in the clinical trials.

Insulin-GLP-1 receptor agonist relay and GLP-1 receptor agonist first regimens in individuals with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, open-label trial study

Aims/Introduction

Glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists (GLP‐1 RA) might be less effective in patients with severe hyperglycemia, because hyperglycemia downregulated the GLP‐1 receptor in an animal study. To examine this hypothesis clinically, we compared the glucose‐lowering effects of GLP‐1 receptor agonist liraglutide with and without prior glycemic control.

Materials and Methods

In an open‐label, parallel trial, participants with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes were recruited and randomized to receive once‐daily insulin therapy, degludec (Insulin–GLP‐1 RA relay group, mean 16.8 ± 11.4 IU/day), for 12 weeks and then liraglutide for 12 weeks or subcutaneous injections of GLP‐1 RA, liraglutide (GLP‐1 RA first group, 0.9 mg), for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy end‐points consisted of changes in the levels of fasting plasma glucose and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c).

Results

The median fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c before the study were 210.0 mg/dL and 9.8%, respectively. The levels of fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c significantly decreased in the Insulin–GLP‐1 RA relay group (P < 0.001) and GLP‐1 RA first group (P < 0.001) by week 24, although no intergroup differences were observed. The reduction of HbA1c in the Insulin–GLP‐1 RA relay group tended to be larger than that in the GLP‐1 RA first group in the lowest CPR (C‐peptide immunoreactivity) quartile (P = 0.072). The adverse events consisted of gastrointestinal problems, followed by hypoglycemia.

Conclusions

The GLP‐1 receptor agonist is overall effective without prior glycemic control with insulin in participants with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. However, in participants with insulinopenic type 2 diabetes, prior glycemic control with insulin might overcome glucose toxicity‐induced GLP‐1 resistance.

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.

Current Status and Future Perspectives on Therapeutic Potential of Apigenin: Focus on Metabolic-Syndrome-Dependent Organ Dysfunction

Metabolic syndrome and its associated disorders such as obesity, insulin resistance, atherosclerosis and type 2 diabetes mellitus are globally prevalent. Different molecules showing therapeutic potential are currently available for the management of metabolic syndrome, although their efficacy has often been compromised by their poor bioavailability and side effects. Studies have been carried out on medicinal plant extracts for the treatment and prevention of metabolic syndrome. In this regard, isolated pure compounds have shown promising efficacy for the management of metabolic syndrome, both in preclinical and clinical settings. Apigenin, a natural bioactive flavonoid widely present in medicinal plants, functional foods, vegetables and fruits, exerts protective effects in models of neurological disorders and cardiovascular diseases and most of these effects are attributed to its antioxidant action. Various preclinical and clinical studies carried out so far show a protective effect of apigenin against metabolic syndrome. Herein, we provide a comprehensive review on both in vitro and in vivo evidence related to the promising antioxidant role of apigenin in cardioprotection, neuroprotection and renoprotection, and to its beneficial action in metabolic-syndrome-dependent organ dysfunction. We also provide evidence on the potential of apigenin in the prevention and/or treatment of metabolic syndrome, analysing the potential and limitation of its therapeutic use.

2021 Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diabetes Mellitus of the Korean Diabetes Association

The Committee of Clinical Practice Guidelines of the Korean Diabetes Association (KDA) updated the previous clinical practice guidelines for Korean adults with diabetes and prediabetes and published the seventh edition in May 2021. We performed a comprehensive systematic review of recent clinical trials and evidence that could be applicable in real-world practice and suitable for the Korean population. The guideline is provided for all healthcare providers including physicians, diabetes experts, and certified diabetes educators across the country who manage patients with diabetes or the individuals at the risk of developing diabetes mellitus. The recommendations for screening diabetes and glucose-lowering agents have been revised and updated. New sections for continuous glucose monitoring, insulin pump use, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease in patients with diabetes mellitus have been added. The KDA recommends active vaccination for coronavirus disease 2019 in patients with diabetes during the pandemic. An abridgement that contains practical information for patient education and systematic management in the clinic was published separately.

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.

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSION

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

Preference for Oral and Injectable GLP-1 RA Therapy Profiles in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Discrete Choice Experiment

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (RAs) approved to date are administered by injection; therefore, patient perceptions of an oral GLP-1 RA are unknown. This discrete choice experiment explored preferences for (unbranded) oral and injectable GLP-1 RA profiles among Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

An online survey was designed using literature review and qualitative interview findings, and administered to Japanese patients with T2D and HbA_1c ≥ 7.0% receiving oral antiglycaemic medication (with no experience of injectable antiglycaemic medication). Therapy profiles were created using Japanese head-to-head trial data for orally administered semaglutide (7 mg and 14 mg), injectable dulaglutide (0.75 mg), and injectable liraglutide (0.9 mg). Profiles were not labelled. Choice tasks tested preference between hypothetical profiles, preference between profiles with actual trial data, and willingness to initiate treatment. Relative importance of attributes was determined using conditional logit regression.

RESULTS

A total of 500 respondents were analysed: mean age 61.2 years; 93.8% male; mean HbA_1c 7.6%; 78.2% with HbA_1c ≥ 7.0 to < 8%; 89% with HbA_1c above personal target. Mean BMI was 25.4 kg/m²; 49% had obesity (≥ 25 kg/m²). The treatment attribute with greatest importance was mode and frequency of administration (49.1%), followed by nausea risk (30.8%), weight change (11.3%), and HbA_1c change (8.8%). Oral semaglutide 7 and 14 mg-like profiles were both preferred: the 7 mg-like profile was preferred over dulaglutide (by 91.0% of respondents) and liraglutide (by 89.4%); the 14 mg-like profile was preferred over dulaglutide (by 88.2%) and liraglutide (by 94.4%). Willingness to initiate treatment was also higher for orally administered semaglutide-like profiles: 62.4% with 7 mg and 64.0% with 14 mg, versus 13.6% and 11.0% with injectable GLP-1 RA-like profiles. Subgroup results were generally consistent with the overall sample.

CONCLUSION

Japanese patients with T2D appear to prefer oral GLP-1 RA profiles over injectable GLP-1 RA profiles, and administration appears to be the most important factor in this decision. This highlights the unmet need for an effective and orally administered GLP-1 RA for the treatment of T2D in Japan.

Infectious complications of newer agents in the fight against diabetes

Infectious complications have been reported with antidiabetic medications. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors have been associated with upper respiratory tract infections and urinary tract infections. Sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors have been associated with lower limb amputations, urinary tract infections, genital mycotic infections, and Fournier gangrene.

Fixed-ratio combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in the treatment of Japanese people with type 2 diabetes: An innovative solution to a complex therapeutic challenge

Over 10 million people in Japan have known or suspected type 2 diabetes (T2D), and this number is expected to rise. Although many people require therapy escalation because of the progressive nature of T2D, this appears to be suboptimal in Japanese real-world clinical practice. Insulin therapy tends to be introduced only when glycaemic control is very poor (mean glycated haemoglobin >9%). Although basal insulin therapy is effective in reducing fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose often remains uncontrolled. Basal-bolus insulin regimens are complex and carry the risk of weight gain and hypoglycaemia. Recently, fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of BI and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have shown efficacy in reducing both FPG and postprandial plasma glucose with a single injection and without increased risk of hypoglycaemia or weight gain. IDegLira, a titratable FRC of insulin degludec (100 U/mL) and liraglutide, is currently available in Japan and the United States/European Union at a ratio of 1 U (unit):0.036 mg. iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide at a ratio of 1:1 (20 U/20 μg) has recently been approved in Japan. Phase 3 trials in Japan for IDegLira (DUAL Japan) and iGlarLixi (LixiLan JP) have shown that both FRCs are efficacious. This review provides an overview of IDegLira and iGlarLixi (Japanese formulation) and considers their potential use as new therapeutic options to address the clinical need for early glycaemic control in Japanese people with T2D.

A Real-World Observational Study Evaluating the Probability of Glycemic Control with Basal Insulin or Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

The effectiveness of basal insulin (BI) or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in providing glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Japanese routine practice is not well known. This real-world observational study evaluated the probability of achieving glycemic control in Japanese patients with T2D uncontrolled by oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) who initiated BI or GLP-1 RA therapy.

METHODS

Patients with T2D aged ≥ 18 years initiating BI or GLP-1 RA therapy following treatment with OADs were selected from real-world data (RWD) retrieved from a large electronic medical record database in Japan, using data from 01 January 2010 to 30 June 2019. Patients were required to have glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 7% within 90 days prior to the first prescription of BI or GLP-1 RA. The probability of reaching first HbA1c < 7% was assessed over a 24-month period in cohorts of patients who initiated BI (n = 3477) or GLP-1 RA (n = 780) and in subcohorts by number of OADs at baseline (1, 2, or ≥ 3), HbA1c at baseline (≥ 7 to < 8%, ≥ 8 to < 9%, or ≥ 9%), and age (< 65 or ≥ 65 years).

RESULTS

Mean (standard deviation) baseline HbA1c was 9.4% (1.8%) and 8.8% (1.4%) in patients initiating BI or GLP-1 RA therapy, respectively. The cumulative probability of achieving glycemic control was 50.1% with BI and 60.3% with GLP-1 RA therapy, respectively, at 12 months, and 60.8% and 66.6%, respectively, at 24 months. Quarterly (3-month intervals) conditional probabilities of achieving glycemic control decreased over time and were < 10% after 12 months. Patients with more OADs or higher HbA1c at baseline had a lower probability of achieving glycemic control.

CONCLUSION

Among Japanese patients with T2D who initiated BI or GLP-1 RA therapy after treatment with OADs, the probability of reaching first glycemic control diminished over time. Further therapy intensification is warranted in patients who do not achieve glycemic control within 6-12 months with BI or GLP-1 RA, particularly those with high HbA1c or taking multiple OADs.

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.

Dulaglutide improves glucocorticoid-induced hyperglycemia in inpatient care and reduces dose and injection frequency of insulin

BACKGROUND

Glucocorticoid (GC)-induced hyperglycemia is characterized by elevated postprandial blood glucose, which commonly requires multiple insulin injections. We investigated whether a long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, dulaglutide (Dula), safely improved GC-induced hyperglycemia in inpatients, to reduce insulin injection frequency.

METHODS

The data of hospitalized patients with GC-induced hyperglycemia treated with Dula (Dula group, n = 38) or without (non-Dula group, n = 38) were retrospectively evaluated. Baseline data were collected at the beginning of GC treatment. The primary outcome in this study was glycemic control, which was compared between the groups using the six-point blood glucose (before and 2 h after each meal) profiles at discharge. The daily injection frequency of injectable drugs at discharge were also compared between groups.

RESULTS

No specific trend of underlying diseases was observed between the non-Dula and Dula groups. The proportion of patients previously administered with GC pulse therapy was comparable between the two groups. No significant differences were observed between groups, in the starting maintenance GC dose, GC dose at pretreatment of Dula and discharge, and cumulative GC dose during the observation. Six-point blood glucose levels at pretreatment and discharge were comparable between the two groups. However, daily injection frequency of injectable drugs and insulin dose were significantly lower in the Dula group than that in the non-Dula group. No differences were observed in the number of hypoglycemic events, the elevation of serum pancreatic enzyme levels, or gastrointestinal adverse events.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that Dula could provide glycemic control while reducing the insulin dose and injection frequency in inpatients with GC-induced hyperglycemia. The occurrence of adverse events such as gastrointestinal symptoms and hypoglycemia did not increase in the Dula-treated patients compared to those not treated, suggesting its safety.

Effect of Hemoglobin A1c Reduction or Weight Reduction on Blood Pressure in Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitor Treatment in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis

Background Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have shown their beneficial effects on cardiovascular outcomes and multiple cardiovascular risk factors, including hypertension. However, the mechanism of blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects of these agents has not been elucidated. This study aims to evaluate the effect of hemoglobin A1c reduction or body weight reduction with GLP-1RA treatment and SGLT2i treatment on BP changes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods and Results Studies were identified by a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register until June 2019. Meta-regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between hemoglobin A1c reduction or body weight reduction and changes of BP. A total of 184 trials were included. Both GLP-1RA and SGLT2i led to significant reductions in systolic BP (weighted mean difference, -2.856 and -4.331 mm Hg, respectively; P<0.001 for both) and diastolic BP (weighted mean difference, -0.898 and -2.279 mm Hg, respectively; P<0.001 for both). For both drug classes, hemoglobin A1c reduction was not independently associated with systolic BP reduction or diastolic BP reduction. In GLP-1RA treatment, weight reduction was positively associated with systolic BP reduction and diastolic BP reduction (β=0.821 and β=0.287, respectively; P<0.001 for both). In SGLT2i treatment, weight loss was significantly associated with systolic BP reduction (β=0.820; P=0.001) but was not associated with diastolic BP reduction. Conclusions Treatment with GLP-1RA and SGLT2i led to significant reductions in BP in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Weight reduction was significantly and independently associated with BP reductions in GLP-1RA treatment and SGLT2i treatment.

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly Dulaglutide in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Using Insulin: Exploratory Subgroup Analysis by Insulin Regimen

PURPOSE

In East Asian patients, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is characterized primarily by β-cell dysfunction, with lower insulin secretion than in Caucasian individuals. Therefore, bolus insulin and premixed insulin containing a bolus insulin component are important therapeutic tools in Japan, in addition to basal insulin. This subgroup analysis is stratified by insulin regimen and uses data from a phase 4, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind and subsequent open-label study in Japan to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide combined with various insulin therapies.

METHODS

This multicenter study enrolled Japanese patients with T2DM and inadequate glycemic control [glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥ 7.5% to ≤ 10.5%] on insulin therapy [basal (B), premixed (PM), or basal bolus (BB)] in combination with or without one or two oral antidiabetic agents. Randomized participants received once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg (n = 120) or placebo (n = 39) during a 16-week double-blind treatment period, and dulaglutide during a 36-week open-label extension. In this subgroup analysis, efficacy measures were changes from baseline in HbA1c, 7-point self-monitored blood glucose profiles, and body weight. Safety measures were incidence of adverse events and hypoglycemia during the first 16 weeks.

RESULTS

At week 16, least squares mean differences (95% CI) regarding changes from baseline in HbA1c for each insulin regimen versus placebo were: B: - 1.62% (- 1.96, - 1.28), PM: - 1.78% (- 2.25, - 1.30), and BB: - 1.15% (- 1.54, - 0.77); p < 0.001 dulaglutide vs. placebo for each subgroup. No significant differences in body weight changes were observed between dulaglutide and placebo for any insulin regimen. Gastrointestinal symptoms were the most commonly observed adverse events in dulaglutide-treated patients. Hypoglycemia incidence rates were: B: dulaglutide 38.5% vs. placebo 23.5%; PM: dulaglutide 38.5% vs. placebo 44.4%; BB: dulaglutide 50.0% vs. placebo 30.8%.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, dulaglutide was generally well tolerated and improved glycemic control significantly versus placebo, regardless of insulin regimen.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02750410.

Once-Weekly Dulaglutide with Insulin Therapy for Type 2 Diabetes: Efficacy and Safety Results from a Phase 4, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study

INTRODUCTION

Although global studies have investigated the combination of dulaglutide with insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), differences in lean body mass and dulaglutide dosing can complicate the extrapolation of global study results to Japanese patients. This phase 4, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, and subsequent open-label study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg in combination with insulin therapy in patients with T2DM.

METHODS

Patients enrolled in this multicenter study were Japanese with T2DM who had inadequate glycemic control (HbA1c 7.5-10.5%) with insulin therapy (basal insulin, premixed insulin, or basal/mealtime insulin) in combination with or without one or two oral antidiabetic agents (OADs). Patients were randomized in a 3:1 ratio to dulaglutide or placebo. The first 16 weeks was the double-blind period with stable insulin dosing, and patients taking placebo were switched to dulaglutide for an additional 36-week open-label period in which all patients took dulaglutide (52 weeks total).

RESULTS

Patients (N = 159) were randomized to dulaglutide (n = 120) or placebo (n = 39). The least-squares (LS) mean changes from baseline in HbA1c at week 16 were dulaglutide - 1.45% and placebo 0.06%. The LS mean and 95% confidence interval for the difference were - 1.50% (- 1.73%, - 1.28%) and dulaglutide was superior to placebo. There were no significant differences between treatment groups in changes from baseline in body weight and insulin dose. The most frequently observed treatment-emergent adverse events in dulaglutide were nasopharyngitis, constipation, abdominal discomfort, nausea, and decreased appetite. The incidence rates of hypoglycemic events by week 16 were dulaglutide 42.5% and placebo 30.8% (P = 0.258).

CONCLUSION

Once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg was superior to once-weekly placebo in glycemic control improvement and well tolerated in patients with T2DM in combination with insulin therapy with or without OADs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02750410.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

The Effects of Once-Weekly Dulaglutide and Insulin Glargine on Glucose Fluctuation in Poorly Oral-Antidiabetic Controlled Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Aim. To compare the effects of once-weekly Dulaglutide with once-daily glargine in poorly oral-antidiabetic controlled patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Method. A total of 25 patients with T2DM admitted into Department of Endocrinology from December 2012 to August 2013 were randomly assigned into two groups: Dulaglutide group (n = 16) and glargine group (n = 9). All patients received either Dulaglutide or glargine treatments for 52 weeks. Continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMS) were applied to them for two 72 h periods at before and after the treatment each. Patient general clinical data were collected and analyzed. Result. Fast blood glucose (FBG) of the glargine group declined more significantly than the Dulaglutide group after treatment (p < 0.05). The mean blood glucose (MBG), standard deviation of blood glucose (SDBG), mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (MAGE) within a day, the largest amplitude of glycemic excursion (LAGE), M-value, absolute means of daily difference (MODD) of glycemic excursion, the percentage of time (≤2.8 mmol/L, ≤3.9 mmol/L, ≥10.0 mmol/L, ≥13.9 mmol/L, 3.9-7.8 mmol/L, and 9-10.0 mmol/L), maximum glycemic value, and minimum glycemic value were similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). The incidence of hypoglycemia was also similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). Though serum levels of TNF-α, IL-6, and 8-PGF2α all decreased, significant reduction was found in TNF-α and 8-PGF2α. TNF-α was only significantly reduced in the Dulaglutide group, while 8-PGF2α was seen in both groups. Conclusion. For T2DM patients with poorly controlled oral antidiabetic drugs, once-weekly Dulaglutide not only has the same effect on glucose fluctuation as once-daily glargine but also significantly reduced TNF-α and 8-PGF2α after a 52 week treatment protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01648582.

Orally Administered Semaglutide Versus GLP-1 RAs in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Previously Receiving 1-2 Oral Antidiabetics: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Orally administered semaglutide is the first glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) for oral administration. As head-to-head trials assessing orally administered semaglutide as an add-on to 1-2 oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) vs other GLP-1 RAs are limited, a network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed to assess the relative efficacy and safety of orally administered semaglutide 14 mg once-daily (QD) vs injectable GLP-1 RAs in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on 1-2 OADs.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted to identify randomised controlled trials of GLP-1 RAs in patients inadequately controlled on 1-2 OADs. Data at 26 ± 4 weeks were extracted for efficacy and safety outcomes feasible for the NMA: change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), weight, HbA1c target levels (< 7.0% and ≤ 6.5%), blood pressure, and any gastrointestinal adverse events specified in system organ class. Data were synthesised using NMA and a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

In total, 27 studies were included in the analyses. Orally administered semaglutide 14 mg QD was associated with significantly greater reductions in HbA1c vs most comparators, and numerically greater reductions vs semaglutide 0.5 mg once-weekly (QW), dulaglutide 1.5 mg QW and liraglutide 1.8 mg QD. HbA1c reductions with semaglutide 1 mg QW were numerically greater than those with orally administered semaglutide 14 mg QD. Reductions in body weight for orally administered semaglutide 14 mg QD were significantly greater than all comparators except semaglutide QW (both doses). Orally administered semaglutide QD 14 mg was associated with statistically similar odds of experiencing gastrointestinal adverse events vs injectable GLP-1 RAs.

CONCLUSION

Orally administered semaglutide 14 mg QD as an add-on to 1-2 OADs is one of the most efficacious GLP-1 RAs for reducing HbA1c and body weight at 26 ± 4 weeks. Orally administered semaglutide 14 mg QD is well tolerated, with a safety profile in line with the GLP-1 RA class.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

Long-Term Efficacy and Safety of Linagliptin in a Japanese Population with Type 2 Diabetes Aged ≥ 60 Years Treated with Basal Insulin: A Randomised Trial

INTRODUCTION

An estimated 4.3 million people aged ≥ 65 years with diabetes live in Japan. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of linagliptin in older Japanese patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

METHODS

In this phase 4, randomised, placebo-controlled national study (part of a global study) conducted in Japan over a period of 52 weeks, 102 patients on stable treatment with basal insulin ± metformin/alpha-glucosidase inhibitors were randomised (1:1) to receive linagliptin 5 mg qd or placebo. The primary end point was the change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) after 24 weeks of treatment, with additional analyses at 52 weeks.

RESULTS

Mean age and HbA1c of the study population were 71 years and 8.1%, respectively. Approximately two-thirds of participants were aged ≥ 70 years, two-thirds had macrovascular complications, approximately half had a baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate < 60 ml/min/1.73 m², and two-thirds had a time since diagnosis of diabetes > 10 years. Significant HbA1c reductions with linagliptin vs. placebo were observed at 24 weeks, - 0.71% (95% CI - 0.96, - 0.45, p < 0.0001), and maintained at 52 weeks, - 0.58% (95% CI - 0.82, - 0.34, p < 0.0001). Linagliptin improved the chances of achieving a categorical HbA1c target (< 8.0% and < 7.0%) at 24 and 52 weeks in patients who were not at their respective target at the beginning of the study. Addition of linagliptin to insulin was associated with a numerical increase in the risk of any hypoglycaemia, but not in the risk of clinically significant hypoglycaemia, severe hypoglycaemia or recurring hypoglycaemia.

CONCLUSION

Linagliptin was effective in improving glucose control in Japanese patients aged ≥ 60 years with T2DM on stable glucose-lowering therapy with basal insulin. Linagliptin was well tolerated and no new safety concerns were raised. The results presented here are highly consistent with the results from the global study, which was conducted over a 24-week period.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02240680.

FUNDING

Boehringer Ingelheim and Eli Lilly and Company Diabetes Alliance.

Initial injectable therapy in type 2 diabetes: Key considerations when choosing between glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists and insulin

Managing type 2 diabetes is complex and necessitates careful consideration of patient factors such as engagement in self-care, comorbidities and costs. Since type 2 diabetes is a progressive disease, many patients will require injectable agents, usually insulin. Recent ADA-EASD guidelines recommend glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) as first injectable therapy in most cases. The basis for this recommendation is the similar glycemic efficacy of GLP-1 RAs and insulin, but with GLP-1 RAs promoting weight loss instead of weight gain, at lower hypoglycemia risk, and with cardiovascular benefits in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. GLP-1 RAs also reduce burden of glucose self-monitoring. However, tolerability and costs are important considerations, and notably, rates of drug discontinuation are often higher for GLP-1 RAs than basal insulin. To minimize risk of gastrointestinal symptoms patients should be started on lowest doses of GLP-1 RAs and up-titrated slowly. Overall healthcare costs may be lower with GLP-1 RAs compared to insulin. Though patient-level costs may still be prohibitive, GLP-1 RAs can replace 50-80 units of insulin daily and reduce costs associated with glucose self-monitoring. Decisions regarding initiating injectable therapy should be individualized. This review provides a framework to guide decision-making in the real-world setting.

Efficacy and Safety of Dulaglutide Versus Insulin Glargine in Chinese T2DM Patients: A Subgroup Analysis of a Randomized Trial (AWARD-CHN2)

INTRODUCTION

To evaluate efficacy and safety data of dulaglutide in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had inadequate glycemic control with 1-2 oral antihyperglycemic medications (OAMs).

METHODS

This is a subgroup analysis of a phase 3, open-label, randomized, parallel-arm, 52-week study in Chinese patients aged ≥ 18 years with T2DM who had inadequate glycemic control with OAMs (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] ≥ 7.0% and ≤ 11.0%). The primary endpoint was assessment of the noninferiority of dulaglutide 1.5 mg as measured by change in HbA1c, compared with insulin glargine (glargine), using a 0.4% noninferiority margin at week 26.

RESULTS

A total of 607 patients from China were randomized 1:1:1 to once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 or 0.75 mg or once-daily glargine. At week 26, the least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline in HbA1c was greater with dulaglutide 1.5 mg (- 1.67%) and dulaglutide 0.75 mg (- 1.31%) compared with glargine (- 1.11%). The LSM (95% confidence interval) for the difference of dulaglutide 1.5 mg and 0.75 mg vs glargine was - 0.56% (- 0.75 to - 0.37) and - 0.20% (- 0.39 to - 0.01), respectively. Both doses of dulaglutide were noninferior and superior to glargine at 26 weeks and 52 weeks (two-sided P value < 0.05). The mean body weight decreased (P < 0.001) and total hypoglycemia rates were lower (P < 0.05) in the dulaglutide groups compared with the glargine group. Gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) were the most frequently reported AEs in dulaglutide groups.

CONCLUSION

Both doses of dulaglutide are efficacious and tolerable in Chinese patients with T2DM who had inadequate glycemic control on OAMs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT01648582.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

Use of Insulin Glargine 100 U/mL for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus in East Asians: A Review

Insulin glargine (IGlar) 100 U/mL (IGlar-100) is widely used in East Asian countries for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and is the gold standard of basal insulin treatment. In this review we summarize key information about clinical experience with IGlar-100 in East Asian patients with T2DM, including findings from clinical trials and postmarketing studies. We also provide recommendations and opinions on the optimal use of IGlar-100 in this population. The findings from the studies highlighted in our review indicate that IGlar-100 can be a suitable treatment option for East Asians with T2DM, from initial therapy in combination with oral antihyperglycemic medications through to different combinations and intensification models. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Effect of Once-Weekly Dulaglutide on Glucose Levels in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Findings from a Phase 4, Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Dulaglutide is a recombinant glucagon-like peptide-1 immunoglobulin G4 Fc fusion protein approved for treating patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The aim of this study was to assess postprandial data over 4 weeks for dulaglutide (0.75 mg) versus placebo after a standardized test meal in Japanese patients with T2D.

METHODS

The pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of once-weekly dulaglutide (0.75 mg) in Japanese patients with T2D on diet and exercise therapy (N = 12) were evaluated by assessing postprandial data up to week 4 in a phase 4, single-center, randomized, cross-over, single-blind, placebo-controlled study. The primary end point was the change in 4-h glucose area under the concentration versus time curve [AUC (0-4 h)] from baseline to week 4. Secondary end points included changes from baseline in other PD parameters (insulin, C-peptide, glucagon, and triglycerides) at weeks 1, 2, and 4 and the safety and tolerability of dulaglutide 0.75 mg. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) during the 1st week was performed as an exploratory measure in each treatment period.

RESULTS

The decrease in AUC (0-4 h) from baseline to week 4 following dulaglutide administration was statistically significant compared with placebo at weeks 1, 2, and 4 (P < 0.0001). Insulin and C-peptide levels were also significantly increased (P < 0.05) with dulaglutide versus placebo at weeks 2 and 4. There were no statistically significant differences between groups in glucagon and triglyceride levels. Daily average glucose concentrations were decreased on the day after the first administration of dulaglutide and remained at similar levels for 4 days. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was slightly higher with dulaglutide versus placebo.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, dulaglutide decreased postprandial glucose from week 1 in Japanese patients with T2D, indicating that dulaglutide treatment is associated with favorable PD effects soon after treatment begins.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03315780.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly Japan K.K. (Kobe, Japan).

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide versus insulin glargine in mainly Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on metformin and/or a sulphonylurea: A 52-week open-label, randomized phase III trial

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide with that of insulin glargine in combination with metformin and/or a sulphonylurea in mainly Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this 52-week, randomized, parallel-arm open-label study, we enrolled patients aged ≥18 years with T2DM for at least 6 months and a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration ≥53.0 mmol/mol (7.0%) and ≤96.7 mmol/mol (11.0%). The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 to determine non-inferiority of dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus glargine.

RESULTS

A total of 774 patients from China, South Korea, Mexico and Russia were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to dulaglutide 1.5 mg, dulaglutide 0.75 mg or glargine treatment groups. The patients' mean age was 55 years and the average T2DM duration was ~8 years. The least squares mean (SE) changes from baseline in HbA1c at 26 weeks were - 18.9 (0.73) mmol/mol (-1.73 [0.067]%) for dulaglutide 1.5 mg and -14.5 (0.73) mmol/mol (-1.33 [0.067]%) for dulaglutide 0.75 mg, compared with -12.7 (0.73) mmol/mol (-1.16 [0.067]%) for glargine. Statistical criteria for superiority were met with both dulaglutide 1.5 mg and dulaglutide 0.75 mg. More patients in the dulaglutide 1.5 and 0.75 mg groups achieved HbA1c target <53.0 mmol/mol (<7.0%) than in the glargine group at week 26 (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). Body weight decreased with dulaglutide and increased with glargine. The incidence and rate of total hypoglycaemia were lower with dulaglutide versus glargine. Gastrointestinal adverse events, including diarrhoea and nausea, were the most frequently reported for patients taking dulaglutide.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-weekly dulaglutide provides greater improvement in HbA1c, with weight loss and less hypoglycaemia, than once-daily insulin glargine in a population of mainly Asian patients with T2DM who had failed to achieve optimal glycaemic control on metformin and/or a sulphonylurea.

Risk of Malignant Neoplasia with Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Treatment in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are effective glucose-lowering drugs, but there is concern that they may increase the risk of malignant neoplasia. The present meta-analysis examined the safety of GLP-1 receptor agonists with regard to malignant neoplasia.

METHODS

We analyzed data from randomized controlled trials with a minimum duration of 24 weeks that assessed the incidence of neoplasms in type 2 diabetes patients receiving GLP-1 receptor agonists compared with placebo or other hypoglycemic drugs. We searched the MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane databases with a language restriction of English through October 1, 2018, and carried out a meta-analysis of the available trial data using a fixed effects model to calculate odds ratios (ORs) for neoplasia.

RESULTS

Thirty-four relevant articles, providing data for 50452 patients, were included in the meta-analysis. Compared with the incidence of malignant neoplasia with placebo or other interventions, no increase in malignant neoplasm formation was observed with the use of GLP-1 receptor agonists (OR 1.04, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.94-1.15; p = 0.46), liraglutide (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.91-1.27; p = 0.38), exenatide (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.86-1.16; p = 1.00), semaglutide (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.35-2.22; p = 0.80), or albiglutide (OR 1.07, 95% CI 0.23-4.88; p = 0.93). A subanalysis of trials lasting longer than 3 years also showed no increase in the neoplasia risk with GLP-1 receptor agonist use (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.92-1.15; p = 0.60). Between-trial statistical heterogeneity was low for all comparisons.

CONCLUSION

GLP-1 receptor agonists can be used without safety concerns related to malignant neoplasia in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and microvascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to assess the effect of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) on microvascular endpoints in adult patients with type 2 diabetes. We included 60 studies with 60 077 patients. GLP-1 RAs marginally reduced urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio compared with placebo or other antidiabetic agents (weighted mean difference - 2.55 mg/g; 95% confidence interval [CI] -4.37 to -0.73 and -5.52; -10.89 to -0.16, respectively) and had no clinically relevant effect on change in estimated glomerular filtration rate. Treatment with GLP-1 RAs did not increase incidence of diabetic retinopathy, macular oedema, retinal detachment and retinal haemorrhage, irrespective of comparator. Nevertheless, incidence of vitreous haemorrhage was higher in subjects treated with GLP-1 RAs compared with placebo (odds ratios 1.93; 95% CI 1.09 to 3.42). In conclusion, GLP-1 RAs are safe regarding nephropathy- and retinopathy-related outcomes. Caution may be warranted for incidence of vitreous haemorrhage. The low overall quality of evidence highlights the need for consistent assessment and reporting of microvascular endpoints in future trials.

Durability of Glucose-Lowering Effect of the First Administration of Dulaglutide: A Retrospective, Single-Center, Single-Arm Study

INTRODUCTION

Dulaglutide (Dula) is a once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist that efficiently reduces the level of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the durability of the glucose-lowering effect of the first injection of Dula (1st Dula) remains unclear.

METHODS

This study had a retrospective, single-center, and single-arm design in a clinical setting and was conducted between April 2016 and March 2017. We investigated the changes and fluctuations in glucose level in 15 patients with T2D using a continuous glucose monitor, from 1 day before the first administration of Dula to 6 days thereafter.

RESULTS

The mean glucose levels decreased significantly from 1 day before 1st Dula up to 5 days thereafter, whereas the standard deviation, mean amplitude of glucose excursion, and percentage of the glucose levels > 180 mg/dL were significantly improved only up to 3, 2, and 3 days after the 1st Dula, respectively, compared to those before administration.

CONCLUSION

The effect of blood glucose regulation after the 1st Dula did not continue for a whole week. These effects should be considered when adjusting for other hypoglycemic agents.

Systematic Review of Efficacy and Safety of Newer Antidiabetic Drugs Approved from 2013 to 2017 in Controlling HbA1c in Diabetes Patients

Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus (T2DM) is the most common form of diabetes mellitus and accounts for about 95% of all diabetes cases. Many newer oral as well as parenteral antidiabetic drugs have been introduced in to the market in recent years to control hyperglycemic conditions in diabetes patients and many of these drugs produce potential side effects in diabetes patients. Hence, this systematic review was aimed to analyze and compare the efficacy and safety of oral antidiabetic agents in controlling HbA1c in T2DM patients, that were approved by the United States-Food and Drug Administration (US-FDA) from 2013 to 2017. All randomized controlled, double-blind trials published in English during the search period involving the newer antidiabetic agents were selected. In the outcome assessment comparison, semaglutide demonstrated the highest efficacy in lowering HbA1c, with a 1.6% reduction (p < 0.0001) when given at a dose of 1.0 mg. The safety profile of all the agents as compared to placebo or control were similar, with no or slight increase in the occurrence of adverse events (AEs) but no fatal reaction was reported. The most common AEs of all the antidiabetic agents were gastrointestinal in nature, with several cases of hypoglycemic events. However, among all these agents, semaglutide seems to be the most efficacious drug to improve glycemic control in terms of HbA1c. Alogliptin has the least overall frequency of AEs compared to other treatment groups.

A Systematic Literature Review and Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Once-Weekly Semaglutide with Other GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Previously Receiving 1-2 Oral Anti-Diabetic Drugs

INTRODUCTION

Once-weekly semaglutide is a new glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue administered at a 1.0 or 0.5 mg dose. As head-to-head trials assessing once-weekly semaglutide as an add-on to 1-2 oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs) vs other GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are limited, a network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed. The objective was to assess the relative efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide vs GLP-1 RAs in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled on 1-2 OADs.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted in order to identify trials of GLP-1 RAs in patients inadequately controlled on 1-2 OADs. Data at 24 ± 4 weeks were extracted for efficacy and safety outcomes (feasible for analysis in a NMA), which included the key outcomes of change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and weight, as well as discontinuation due to adverse events (AEs). Data were synthesized using a NMA and a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

In total, 26 studies were included across the base case analyses. Once-weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg was associated with significantly greater reductions in HbA1c and weight vs all GLP-1 RA comparators. Once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg also achieved significantly greater reductions in HbA1c and weight compared with the majority of other GLP-1 RAs. Both doses of once-weekly semaglutide were associated with similar odds of discontinuation due to AEs compared with other GLP-1 RAs.

CONCLUSION

Overall, once-weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg as an add-on to 1-2 OADs is the most efficacious GLP-1 RA in terms of the reduction of HbA1c and weight from baseline after 6 months of treatment. In addition, the analysis suggests that once-weekly semaglutide is well tolerated and not associated with an increase in discontinuations due to AEs compared with other GLP-1 RAs.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

A Network Meta-Analysis Comparing Semaglutide Once-Weekly with Other GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Japanese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Semaglutide once-weekly (QW) is a novel glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue administered at a 0.5 or 1.0 mg dose. In the absence of head-to-head trials between semaglutide QW and other GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in a Japanese population, a network meta-analysis (NMA) was performed. The objective was to assess the relative efficacy and safety of semaglutide QW vs GLP-1 RAs in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), with a specific focus on the comparison between semaglutide 0.5 mg QW and dulaglutide 0.75 mg QW.

METHODS

A systematic review (SR) and supplementary Japanese searches were conducted to identify trials of GLP-1 RAs in Japanese patients on diet and exercise, who have previously received 0-1 oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). Data at 52-56 weeks were extracted for the following outcomes (feasible for analysis in an NMA): glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), weight, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and overall hypoglycemia. The data were synthesized using an NMA and a Bayesian framework.

RESULTS

Four trials, identified from the SR and Japanese-specific searches, were relevant for inclusion in the NMA. When compared to dulaglutide 0.75 mg QW, semaglutide 0.5 mg QW was shown to provide significant reductions in HbA_1c [- 0.61% (12.3 mmol/mol)], weight (- 1.45 kg), SBP (- 5.03 mmHg), and FPG (- 1.26 mmol/L). No significant differences in the proportion of patients achieving a HbA_1c level < 7% (53 mmol/mol) or the risk of overall hypoglycemia were observed between semaglutide 0.5 mg QW and dulaglutide 0.75 mg QW.

CONCLUSION

Overall, semaglutide 0.5 mg QW was associated with significant reductions from baseline in HbA_1c, weight, SBP, and FPG compared with dulaglutide 0.75 mg QW in Japanese patients with T2DM. These data may provide valuable evidence for clinical decision-making, cost-effectiveness analyses, and health technology appraisal (HTA) requirements.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk Pharma Ltd.

Comparative usability study of the dulaglutide single-use pen versus the insulin degludec FlexTouch® among self-injection-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in Japan

OBJECTIVE

This study assessed training time with the dulaglutide single-use pen (SUP) and the insulin degludec disposable prefilled pen (FlexTouch^®) in self-injection-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in Japan.

METHODS

This multi-center, open-label, comparative, crossover study measured training time with the dulaglutide SUP vs FlexTouch^®. Participants learned how to use both devices in a randomly assigned order. Healthcare providers (HCP) conducted the training. The primary end-point was the time required to train self-injection-naïve T2DM participants to self-inject correctly using each device. Secondary end-points included performance measures, such as success and error rates, patient perceptions related to ease-of-use, and factors associated with training time and performance.

RESULTS

Overall, 48 participants were randomized and completed the study. The mean training time to achieve correct administration was significantly shorter with the dulaglutide SUP vs FlexTouch^® (7.4 min vs 19.7 min, p < .001). The proportions of participants who successfully completed the mock injection without error were similar for both devices. Ninety-two percent (44/48) of participants reported that the dulaglutide SUP was easier to use than FlexTouch^®.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, participants required a shorter training time to achieve correct administration with the dulaglutide SUP, and had a higher preference for the dulaglutide SUP, when compared to FlexTouch^®. These data suggest that the dulaglutide SUP is easy-to-use, which may decrease the burden on HCPs to train diabetic patients how to administer injection therapy and reduce patient injection hurdles, such as needle fear.

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 cost-effectiveness of dulaglutide versus insulin glargine for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Japan

AIMS

Dulaglutide is a new once weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist administered via a disposable auto-injection pen for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The objective of this study was to estimate the cost-effectiveness of dulaglutide vs insulin glargine for the management of T2DM from a Japanese healthcare perspective, in accordance with recently approved Japanese Cost-Effectiveness Guidelines.

METHODS

The IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model (version 9) was used to estimate the long-term costs and effects of treatment with dulaglutide and insulin glargine. Direct comparative data from the Araki 2015 trial (NCT01584232) was used to inform the analysis. Costs associated with treatment and complications were derived from Japanese sources wherever possible and inflated to 2015 Japanese Yen (JPY). Utilities were based upon a European systematic review of diabetes utilities and adjusted for use in a Japanese population. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (OWSA and PSA) were conducted on all inputs and key modeling assumptions.

RESULTS

Dulaglutide 0.75 mg was associated with higher quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), life years (LYs), and total costs, compared to insulin glargine, resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of 416,280 JPY/QALY gained. Treatment with dulaglutide increased the time alive and free from diabetes-related complications by 4 months. OWSA and PSA indicated that results were robust to plausible variations in input parameters and modeling assumptions.

LIMITATIONS

Key limitations of this study are similar to other cost-utility analyses of diabetes, including the extrapolation of short-term clinical trial data into lifelong durations. In addition, due to the lack of robust published Japanese data, some values were derived from non-Japanese sources.

CONCLUSIONS

This analysis suggests that dulaglutide 0.75 mg may be a cost-effective treatment alternative to insulin glargine for patients with T2DM in Japan.

Comparisons of diabetic retinopathy events associated with glucose-lowering drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A network meta-analysis

AIM

To assess the comparative effects of glucose-lowering drugs (GLDs) on the risk of diabetic retinopathy (DR) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

We systematically searched Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, PUBMED and EMBASE from inception to January 17, 2017 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that reported DR events among T2DM patients receiving any GLD. Random-effects pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed to calculate odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 37 independent RCTs with 1806 DR events among 100 928 patients with T2DM were included. The mean duration of diabetes was 8.7 years and mean baseline HbA1c was 8.2% (SD, 0.5%). Our network meta-analysis found that DPP-4i (OR, 1.20; 95% CI, 0.87-1.65), GLP-1RA (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.94-1.52) and SGLT2 inhibitors (OR, 0.79; 95% CI, 0.49-1.28) were not associated with a higher risk of DR than placebo; however, a significantly increased risk of DR was associated with DPP-4i in the pairwise meta-analysis (OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.05-1.53). Sulfonylureas, on the other hand, were associated with a significantly increased risk of DR compared to placebo (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.01-2.76).

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence indicates that the association between DPP-4i, GLP-1RA or SGLT2 inhibitors and risk of DR remains uncertain in patients with T2DM. Some evidence suggests that sulfonylureas may be associated with increased risk of DR. However, given that DR events were not systematically assessed, these effects should be explored further in large-scale, well-designed studies.

Improved glycemic control with once-weekly dulaglutide in addition to insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients on hemodialysis evaluated by continuous glucose monitoring

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding once-weekly dulaglutide to insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients on hemodialysis.

METHODS

Fifteen insulin-treated T2DM patients on hemodialysis were enrolled. Continuous glucose monitoring was performed before (1st hospitalization) and after the fifth dulaglutide administration (2nd hospitalization). The insulin dose was reduced after the first administration of dulaglutide (1st hospitalization day 6). Parameters of glycemic control were compared on 1st hospitalization days 4-5, 2nd hospitalization days 3-4, and days 6-7.

RESULTS

The median total daily insulin dose was reduced significantly from 12 (12-25) to 0 (0-12) U (p < 0.0001) after treatment with dulaglutide. Mean glucose level on 2nd hospitalization days 3-4 significantly decreased and that on days 6-7 tended to decrease compared with that on 1st hospitalization days 4-5 (median, 8.2 to 6.7 mmol/L, P = 0.006 and 8.2 to 6.9 mmol/L, P = 0.053, respectively). %CV of glucose levels decreased significantly after dulaglutide administration (28.1 to 19.8, P = 0.003 and 28.1 to 21.0, P = 0.019). However, the incidence of hypoglycemia remained unchanged.

CONCLUSIONS

Dulaglutide may improve glycemic control and excursion and allow total daily insulin to be reduced without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia in T2DM patients on hemodialysis.

Subgroup Analysis Stratified by Baseline Pancreatic β-cell Function in a Japanese Study of Dulaglutide in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

This analysis investigated the relationship between baseline fasting pancreatic β-cell function and efficacy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg (dulaglutide) or once-daily liraglutide 0.9 mg (liraglutide) for up to 52 weeks.

METHODS

In a 52-week study of monotherapy in Japanese patients with T2D, patients were categorized into three subgroups defined by tertiles (low, medium, and high) of baseline values of three pancreatic β-cell function parameters [fasting C-peptide, C-peptide index, and secretory units of islets in transplantation (SUIT) index]. Associations between these parameters and efficacy [defined by changes from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), postprandial blood glucose (PBG), mean of all meals blood glucose excursion, and body weight] in the dulaglutide group (280 patients) or the liraglutide group (137 patients) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Patients in the subgroups with high insulin-secreting ability (based on pancreatic β-cell function) were younger and had shorter disease duration and higher body mass index compared to those with low insulin-secreting ability. No specific trend was observed between baseline pancreatic β-cell function and changes in HbA1c or FBG. Reductions from baseline in mean PBG and excursion were greatest for patients in the low β-cell function tertiles. Inconsistent trends in body weight were observed across the treatment groups and β-cell function parameters.

CONCLUSION

In Japanese patients with T2D, changes in HbA1c and body weight after 52 weeks of treatment with dulaglutide or liraglutide could not be predicted by patients' fasting pancreatic β-cell function before treatment.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01558271).

FUNDING

Eli Lilly K.K. (Kobe, Japan).

Efficacy and safety of subgroup analysis stratified by baseline HbA1c in a Japanese phase 3 study of dulaglutide 0.75 mg compared with insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes

The efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg (dulaglutide) compared with once-daily insulin glargine (glargine) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes were evaluated according to subgroups stratified by baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) (≤8.5% or >8.5%). This exploratory analysis of a randomized, open-label, phase 3 study included 361 patients. In both HbA1c subgroups (patients with baseline HbA1c ≤8.5% or >8.5%), a statistically significantly greater reduction in HbA1c was observed in dulaglutide-treated patients compared with glargine-treated patients after 26 weeks of treatment (HbA1c ≤8.5%: dulaglutide, -1.27%; glargine, -0.72%; HbA1c >8.5%: dulaglutide, -2.04%; glargine, -1.47%; p < 0.001 for both). Mean body weight was decreased from baseline in both subgroups of the dulaglutide group and increased in both subgroups of the glargine group; there were statistically significant differences between the treatment groups in both subgroups (p < 0.05 for both). In both subgroups, similar reductions in fasting blood glucose were observed for dulaglutide- and glargine-treated patients, and a greater reduction in postprandial blood glucose was observed for dulaglutide-treated patients compared with glargine-treated patients. Although dulaglutide increased gastrointestinal adverse events compared with glargine in both subgroups, all gastrointestinal events of diarrhea, nausea, constipation, and vomiting in dulaglutide-treated patients were mild in intensity and well tolerated. In both subgroups, there was a lower incidence of hypoglycemia with dulaglutide than with glargine. Dulaglutide demonstrated significantly greater HbA1c reduction compared with glargine, with an acceptable safety profile, regardless of baseline HbA1c.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 mimetics, optimal for Asian type 2 diabetes patients with and without overweight/obesity: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are desirable for diabetes, especially in patients with overweight/obesity. We aimed to determine whether GLP-1RAs exhibit different glucose-lowering efficacies between Asian type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with and without overweight/obesity. Randomized controlled trials were searched in EMBASE, MEDLINE, CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov. Studies published in English with treatment duration ≥12 weeks and information on HbA1c changes were included. The studies were divided into normal body mass index (BMI) and overweight/obese groups according to baseline BMI. Among 3190 searched studies, 20 trials were included in the meta-analysis. The standardized mean differences in HbA1c change, fasting glucose change, and postprandial glucose change were equivalent between normal BMI and overweight/obese studies (p > 0.05). The relative risk of HbA1c < 6.5% target achievement in normal BMI trials (7.93; 95% confidence interval: 3.27, 19.20) was superior to that in overweight/obesity trials (2.23; 1.67, 2.97), with a significant difference (p = 0.020). Body weight loss (p = 0.572) and hypoglycemic risk(p = 0.920) were similar in the two groups. The glucose-lowering effects of GLP-1RAs were equivalent among Asian T2D patients. With their advantages for weight-loss or weight-maintenance, GLP-1RAs are optimal medicines for Asian T2D patients with and without overweight/obesity.

Evaluation of the impact of once weekly dulaglutide on patient-reported outcomes in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: comparisons with liraglutide, insulin glargine, and placebo in two randomized studies

BACKGROUND

Standardized patient-reported outcome (PRO) questionnaires can be utilized to evaluate treatment satisfaction (subjective evaluation of treatment) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). These outcomes are important because they may affect patient adherence and overall study results.

METHODS

PROs were evaluated in two randomized 26-week clinical trials in Japanese patients with T2D taking dulaglutide 0.75 mg (dulaglutide) once weekly; comparators were once-daily liraglutide (0.9 mg/day) and once-weekly placebo in one study and once-daily insulin glargine (glargine) in the other study. The Perceptions About Medications-Diabetes 21 Questionnaire - Japanese version (PAM-D21-J) and the Injectable Diabetes Medication Questionnaire - Japanese version (IDMQ-J) were completed by patients in both studies. These measures were both considered exploratory endpoints. All scale scores range from 0 to 100, with higher scores reflecting better outcomes.

RESULTS

Patients reported that dulaglutide was more convenient and flexible than liraglutide (PAM-D21-J Convenience/Flexibility subscale: dulaglutide least-square mean [LSM], 84.58; liraglutide LSM, 78.94; p = .026), and that they were more satisfied with dulaglutide than with liraglutide (IDMQ-J Satisfaction subscale: dulaglutide, 75.24; liraglutide, 69.53; p = .012). Patients also reported that dulaglutide was more convenient and flexible than glargine (PAM-D21-J Convenience/Flexibility subscale: dulaglutide, 87.89; glargine, 79.22; p < .001), and that they were more satisfied with dulaglutide than with glargine (IDMQ-J Satisfaction subscale: dulaglutide, 78.86; glargine, 69.66; p < .001), and felt dulaglutide was more effective than glargine, with fewer symptoms and adverse events (PAM-D21-J Perceived Effectiveness subscale: dulaglutide, 77.61; glargine, 67.22; p < .001; Emotional Effects subscale: dulaglutide, 93.02; glargine, 89.55; p = .017; IDMQ-J Blood Glucose Control subscale: dulaglutide, 76.33; glargine, 67.57; p < .001). In addition, patients responded that dulaglutide was superior to placebo in the PAM-D21-J Convenience/Flexibility, Perceived Effectiveness, and Emotional Effects subscales and all IDMQ-J subscales (Satisfaction, Ease of Use, Lifestyle Impact, Blood Glucose Control).

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, after 26 weeks of once-weekly dulaglutide administration in Japanese patients with T2D, PROs were generally positive versus the three comparator treatments (liraglutide, glargine, and placebo), suggesting increased treatment satisfaction through better blood glucose control and convenience/flexibility and reduced negative emotional effects of diabetes.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov (monotherapy study: NCT01558271 , registered March 12, 2012; combination therapy study: NCT01584232 , registered April 23, 2012).

Analysis of efficacy and safety of dulaglutide 0.75 mg stratified by sex in patients with type 2 diabetes in 2 randomized, controlled phase 3 studies in Japan

We analyzed the efficacy and safety of once weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg by sex in 2 randomized, controlled phase 3 studies in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (a 52-week monotherapy study [comparator liraglutide 0.9 mg] and a 26-week combination therapy study [comparator insulin glargine]). Females comprised 18% of patients in the monotherapy study and 29% of patients in the combination therapy study. Mean reductions from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were similar between the sexes for dulaglutide- and liraglutide-treated patients (range -1.17% to -1.49%). Females had numerically greater weight loss or less weight gain than males across all treatment groups. The percentages of patients with reductions in both HbA1c and weight from baseline were also greater for females than for males in all treatment groups. In all treatment groups, the incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events tended to be greater among females than among males. No differences in the incidences of total or nocturnal hypoglycemia were observed between the sexes in any treatment group. Overall, in 2 studies in Japan, across all treatment groups it appeared that HbA1c lowering was unaffected by patient sex, while female patients had greater weight loss or less weight gain and greater incidence of adverse events, including nausea, compared to male patients. Incidences of patients discontinuing dulaglutide early due to adverse event were low (<10%) for both sexes, and no new safety concerns related to dulaglutide were identified for either sex. Therefore, the benefit/risk ratio for dulaglutide remains unchanged, positive for both sexes.

Efficacy and safety analyses across 4 subgroups combining low and high age and body mass index groups in Japanese phase 3 studies of dulaglutide 0.75 mg after 26 weeks of treatment

In 855 Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes receiving once weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg in 3 phase 3 studies, the effects on efficacy and safety at week 26 (last observation carried forward) were investigated in a post hoc descriptive analysis of subgroups of age (<65 years [young], ≥65 years [elderly]) and body mass index (BMI [<25 kg/m², ≥25 kg/m²]). The 4 subgroups were as follows: 1) the young/low-BMI subgroup (Y/L) (n = 255); 2) the young/high-BMI subgroup (Y/H) (n = 386), 3) the elderly/low-BMI subgroup (E/L) (n = 137), and 4) the elderly/high-BMI subgroup (E/H) (n = 77). The mean changes from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight, respectively, were -1.69% and -0.29 kg in the Y/L subgroup; -1.48% and -0.09 kg in the Y/H subgroup; -1.68% and -0.20 kg in the E/L subgroup; and -1.72% and -0.26 kg in the E/H subgroup. The incidences of nausea and hypoglycemia, respectively, were 6.7% and 11.0% in the Y/L subgroup; 7.0% and 8.0% in the Y/H subgroup; 10.2% and 18.2% in the E/L subgroup; and 3.9% and 22.1% in the E/H subgroup. Dulaglutide improved HbA1c regardless of age or BMI; a higher incidence of hypoglycemia was observed in elderly patients compared to younger patients.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: a systematic review of comparative effectiveness research

BACKGROUND

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) act by increasing insulin secretion, decreasing glucagon secretion, slowing gastric emptying, and increasing satiety.

OBJECTIVE

Published evidence directly comparing GLP-1RAs with other approved treatments for type 2 diabetes (T2D) was systematically reviewed.

METHODS

A literature search was performed using MEDLINE and Embase databases to identify papers comparing GLP-1RAs with other classes of glucose-lowering therapy in patients with T2D.

RESULTS

Of the 1303 papers identified, 57 met the prespecified criteria for a high-quality clinical trial or retrospective study. The efficacy and tolerability of approved GLP-1RAs (exenatide twice daily or once weekly, dulaglutide, liraglutide, lixisenatide, and albiglutide) were compared with insulin products (23 prospective studies + seven retrospective studies), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (11 prospective studies + three retrospective studies), sulfonylureas (nine prospective studies + one retrospective study), thiazolidinediones (five prospective studies), and metformin (two prospective studies). GLP-1RAs are effective as a second-line therapy in improving glycemic parameters in patients with T2D. Reductions in glycated hemoglobin from baseline with GLP-1RAs tended to be greater or similar compared with insulin therapy. GLP-1RAs were consistently more effective in reducing body weight than most oral glucose-lowering drugs and insulin and were associated with lower hypoglycemia risk versus insulin or sulfonylureas. GLP-1RAs improved cardiovascular risk factors, and preliminary data suggest they improve cardiovascular outcomes in patients with T2D compared with oral glucose-lowering drugs. However, results from ongoing studies are awaited to confirm these early findings.

CONCLUSION

This systematic review found that GLP-1RAs are an effective class of glucose-lowering drugs for T2D.