Fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) improves cardiovascular risk markers in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on basal insulin

Comparation of fixed-ratio (IDegLira and iGlarLixi) versus free combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist for uncontrolled type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of the fixed-ratio combination (FRC) and free combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, The Cochrane Library, and four Chinese databases were searched for relevant studies from inception to April 13, 2023. Phase III clinical trials involving FRC or free combination in patients with uncontrolled T2DM were included. A network meta-analysis (NMA) was used to evaluate the effects of FRC and free combination. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to evaluate the risk-of-bias. The primary outcomes were changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body weight, and incident hypoglycemia. Secondary outcomes included changes in systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). This study was registered with PROSPERO (CRD42023409585).

RESULTS

Forty-two trials with 23,619 patients were included in the NMA, and treatments were categorized as FRC, free combination and NOINSGLP (neither FRC nor free combination). The forest plots revealed comparable HbA1c control (mean difference (MD) = 0.07%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.17 to -0.30) between free combination and FRC. However, there were significant differences in the body weight (MD = -2.06 kg; 95% CI: -3.34 to -0.77), SBP (MD = -1.22 mmHg; 95% CI: -2.41 to -0.04), and DBP (MD = -1.09 mmHg; 95% CI: -1.94 to -0.24) between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with uncontrolled T2DM, the safety and efficacy of FRC and free combination therapy were comparable. The use of FRC is justifiable in patients requiring free combination.

Glucometabolic outcomes of GLP-1 receptor agonist-based therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Background

Innovative GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA)-based treatment strategies-such as tirzepatide, GLP-1RA plus basal insulin fixed-ratio combinations [FRC], GLP-1RA plus sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors [SGLT-2i] combinations, and high-dose GLP-1RA-have been listed among the most efficacious options for type 2 diabetes management. However, differences in their glucometabolic effects have not been assessed in dedicated head-to-head trials. In the absence of such trials, we aimed to provide a useful comparison among these treatment strategies to guide clinical practice.

Methods

In this network meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, MEDLINE, and Web of Science (from database inception to June 24, 2023) for randomised controlled studies, published in English, that enrolled individuals with type 2 diabetes treated with tirzepatide, iGlarLixi, iDegLira, GLP-1RA plus SGLT-2i combination, or high-dose GLP-1RA (dulaglutide 3 mg and 4.5 mg, semaglutide 2 mg) compared with placebo or active comparators. Eligible studies reported change from baseline in HbA1c as an outcome, which was the primary outcome of this analysis. Secondary outcomes were changes in fasting and post-prandial glucose, bodyweight, LDL-cholesterol, blood pressure and risk of hypoglycaemia. We assessed risk of bias through the Cochrane Collaboration's tool (RoB2 tool), publication bias through visual inspection of funnel plots and Egger's test, and heterogeneity by comparing the magnitude of the common between-study variance (τ2) for each outcome with empirical distributions of heterogeneity variances. This network meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022329878).

Findings

40 trials were included. Tirzepatide 15 mg ranked first in terms of HbA1c reduction compared to other GLP-1RA-based strategies, even those including insulin (vs. iDegLira MD -0.40%, 95% CI [-0.66; -0.14], low certainty; vs. iGlarLixi MD -0.48%, 95% CI [-0.75; -0.21], low certainty), without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia (vs. iDegLira OR 0.35, 95% CI [0.16; 0.79], high certainty; vs. iGlarLixi OR 0.31, 95% CI [0.20; 0.48], high certainty). Tirzepatide 15 mg was also the most efficacious on weight lowering, even compared to high-dose GLP-1RA (eg, semaglutide 2 mg MD -6.56 kg, 95% CI [-7.38; -5.73], low certainty) and GLP-1RA plus SGLT-2i combination (MD -4.61 kg, 95% CI [-5.29; -3.93], low certainty). Risk of bias and publication bias were generally low throughout studies, while high levels of heterogeneity were detected for most outcomes.

Interpretation

Aiming to support clinicians in tailoring treatment to patients' needs, we suggest that a hierarchy among treatment strategies be devised considering the best options for type 2 diabetes. Tirzepatide, followed by GLP-1RA plus basal insulin FRC and GLP-1RA plus SGLT-2i combination, was associated with greater benefit on HbA1c than high-dose GLP-1RA.

Funding

Fondazione per la Ricerca Biomedica "Saverio e Isabella Cianciola" and Next Generation EU, in the context of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan, Investment PE8-Project Age-It: Ageing Well in an Ageing Society.

Transitioning from basal-bolus or premix insulin therapy to a combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in people with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Two fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) are available for once-daily use in adults with type 2 diabetes. We aimed to review the clinical evidence for the efficacy and safety of changing treatment from a basal-bolus insulin (BBI) regimen or a premix insulin to these combination treatments (fixed-ratio or loose) and provide expert opinion on the practicalities of making such a change.

METHODS

Relevant clinical and trial evidence and general review articles were identified through a literature review of ProQuest (comprising BIOSIS Previews®, Current Contents® Search, Embase® and MEDLINE®) for articles published between 2009 and 2021.

RESULTS

We identified nine articles reporting the results of FRCs, and seven articles reporting results of loose combinations of basal insulin and GLP-1RAs, in people who transitioned treatment from BBI or premix regimens. In most trials, combination treatment led to improved or equivalent glycaemic control, and a reduction in body weight or BMI, versus the original regimens. Some trials reported a reduction in total insulin dose. A few trials reported reduced or unchanged hypoglycaemia rates, or increased patient satisfaction, with combination therapy where these endpoints were examined. We provide guidance on transitioning of treatment and the patient types most likely to benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

In people not achieving glycaemic control with BBI or premix insulin regimens, an FRC or loose combination of basal insulin and GLP-1RA may improve control, decrease the risk of body weight gain or hypoglycaemia and reduce the complexity of treatment.

IDegLira for the Real-World Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in Italy: Protocol and Interim Results from the REX Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

IDegLira was shown to maintain glycemic control while reducing risk of hypoglycemia and body weight gain. The REX study was designed to generate real-world evidence on the use of IDegLira in Italian clinical practice in two different subgroups of patients, those switching to IDegLira from a basal insulin-supported oral therapy (BOT group) and those from a basal plus bolus insulin regimen (BB group).

METHODS

Adult patients with T2D diagnosed for at least 12 months and having started IDegLira 2-3 months prior to enrolment, coming from a BOT or BB regimen, were enrolled in this multicenter observational prospective cohort study conducted in 28 Italian centers. This paper presents the methodological framework of the REX study and provides the interim analysis results describing the patients' baseline characteristics and the clinical reasons for IDegLira treatment initiation.

RESULTS

Of the 360 patients enrolled in the REX study, 331 were considered eligible for this interim analysis, 76.4% in the BOT and 23.6% in the BB group. Mean (SD) HbA1c was 8.5% (1.4) in the BOT and 8.2% (1.7) in the BB group. The most common T2D complications were diabetic macroangiopathy and diabetic nephropathy in both groups. The median (interquartile range) insulin daily dose before IDegLira was 15.0 (10.0-20.0) units in the BOT group and 42 (30.0-52.0) in the BB group. Oral antidiabetics were taken by 98% and 51.3% of patients, respectively. The main reason for switching to IDegLira was the inadequate glycemic control in the BOT group (86% of patients), and the intent to simplify the treatment in the BB group (66.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

IdegLira is initiated after BOT in inadequately controlled patients to improve glycemic control, whereas in BB patients it is used to simplify the therapeutic regimen. Final results of the REX study will shed light on patients' outcomes after IdegLira treatment under routine clinical care.

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

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

Delphi-Based Consensus on Treatment Intensification in Type 2 Diabetes Subjects Failing Basal Insulin Supported Oral Treatment: Focus on Basal Insulin + GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Combination Therapies

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to elaborate a consensus on treatment intensification strategies in patients with type 2 diabetes failing basal insulin supported oral therapy (BOT). The panel focused on glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and basal insulin (BI) combinations.

METHODS

The authors developed a Delphi questionnaire organized into ten statements and 77 items that focused on: the definition of BOT and BOT failure, intensification strategies, fixed-dose combinations in general and the BI/GLP-1RA fixed combination. The survey was administered in two rounds to a panel of 80 Italian diabetes specialists, who rated their level of agreement with each item on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as > 66% of the panel agreeing/disagreeing on any given item.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved for 71 of the 77 items. The panel agreed that the use of sulfonylureas in the BOT regimen is inappropriate. BOT failure was defined as individualized targets not being met for glycated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose and/or postprandial plasma glucose. There was agreement that postprandial hyperglycaemia and/or presence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia or weight gain define BOT failure. Addition of a GLP-1RA to BI therapy was considered to be the best option for BOT intensification. There was consensus for the use of BI/GLP-1RA fixed combinations as valuable options to increase compliance and safely improve glycaemic control. The panel agreed in considering the fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) to be preferable to the fixed-ratio combination insulin glargine/lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) in the control of glycaemia, body weight and cardiovascular risk.

CONCLUSION

According to this Delphi consensus, the addition of a GLP-1RA may be the best option to intensify BOT. The BI/GLP-1RA fixed combinations may increase compliance and optimize the advantages of each of these molecules.

How Effective Is the Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Degludec and Liraglutide (IDegLira) in Different Patient Populations, and When Should It Be Used in Clinical Practice?

The efficacy and safety of the fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec (degludec) and liraglutide (IDegLira) were confirmed in the DUAL clinical trial program, in which IDegLira demonstrated superior or noninferior glycemic control over comparators in addition to its low risks of hypoglycemia and weight gain. This article identifies the patient types for whom IDegLira is most appropriate by reviewing the DUAL results and subsequent post hoc analyses and presenting real-world cases in which IDegLira has been used effectively in U.S. clinical practice. In the clinic, IDegLira has been used effectively when patients wanted to avoid more complex injectable regimens, particularly those with renal insufficiency for whom treatment options are limited.

Clinical Considerations When Initiating and Titrating Insulin Degludec/Liraglutide (IDegLira) in People with Type 2 Diabetes

Therapeutic inertia is a substantial obstacle to the initiation of insulin therapy in people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D). This effect has in part been perpetuated by concerns over the impact of a burdensome regimen and the increased risk of hypoglycemia and body weight gain often associated with insulin use. An effective, yet simple, less burdensome regimen with a lower risk of body weight gain and hypoglycemia compared with an insulin-only regimen, may help to address these concerns more effectively. We review the available clinical and real-world data on IDegLira, a once-daily, injectable, fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec (degludec) and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) liraglutide, in people with T2D. Evidence from the comprehensive DUAL clinical trial program suggests an advantage of IDegLira over traditional insulin therapies in a number of clinical outcomes, including maintenance of glycemic control, achievement of glycemic targets, reducing the risk of hypoglycemia, and body weight loss. These findings were demonstrated in participants with T2D irrespective of prior GLP-1RA and insulin use. Furthermore, the individual components of IDegLira have confirmed safety (degludec) or significant benefit in terms of improvement of cardiovascular risk (liraglutide). As an injectable therapy that is simple to titrate, IDegLira has the potential to optimize the ability to achieve relevant glycemic targets, and offers a suitable treatment option for people with T2D requiring insulin therapy who are at risk of hypoglycemia or weight gain.

Co-Formulations as the First Injectable in Type 2 Diabetes: A Review of Efficacy, Safety, and Implications in Clinical Practice

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Progression of type 2 diabetes will necessitate the use of injectable therapies in a significant number of people. Co-formulations of degludec with liraglutide (IDeg­Lira) and glargine with lixisenatide (IGlarLixi) are currently recommended for intensification in people with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin or glucagon-like peptide receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) alone or in people with type 2 diabetes who are naïve to insulin with very high glycated haemoglobin. Co-formulation of aspart with degludec (IDegAsp) is recommended as a substitute for premixed insulin. The aim of this article is to review the evidence in the use of co-formulations as the first injectable in type 2 diabetes and its clinical implications. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> In people with type 2 diabetes who are naïve to insulin or GLP-1RA, IDegLira and IGlarLixi achieved stable and durable glycaemic control over a wide range of baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. People on IDegLira and IGlarLixi had lesser risk of hypoglycaemia and weight gain in studies compared to basal insulin and lesser gastrointestinal adverse effects in comparison to GLP-1RA. IDegAsp achieved similar glycaemic control to basal and premixed insulin with lesser risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia. <b><i>Key Messages:</i></b> IDegLira, IGlarLixi, and IDegAsp can be used as the first injectable in people with type 2 diabetes with very high glycated haemoglobin on oral antidiabetic drugs. These co-formulations combine efficacy and durability with lesser injection burden. The components of these agents have proven cardiovascular and renal safety. Their limitations in flexibility of dosing, renal and cardiovascular considerations, and adverse effects are discussed.

Metabolic Control and Adherence to Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients Using IDegLira in a Real-World Setting

INTRODUCTION

Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is a fixed-ratio combination (FRC) of basal insulin and glucagon-like protein-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) that has demonstrated glycemic and metabolic benefits in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in both randomized controlled trials and real-world studies. The impact of adherence to this medication and its effect on patients with T2DM who switch from loose-dose combination therapy to a FRC of insulin and GLP-1RA have not yet been reported. We have examined the metabolic effects and adherence to this medication in a real-life setting, in T2DM patients who initiated IDegLira therapy after being treated with other glucose-lowering drugs.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study of adult T2DM patients managed by the Maccabi Healthcare Services (Israel) who initiated IDegLira and persisted with therapy for 180 days between July 2017 and August 2018. Mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c), body weight change, metabolic parameters, dose and proportion of days covered (PDC) by IDegLira were recorded from initiation to after 180 days of therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 413 patients who persisted with IDegLira therapy for at least 180 days were evaluated as a per protocol group. A significant mean reduction in HbA_1c of 0.65% (95% confidence limits [CL] - 0.78, - 0.52; P < 0.001) was observed at 180 days compared with baseline. IDegLira therapy led to a significant reduction in HbA_1c in patients previously treated with different background combinations of glucose-lowering drugs before being started on IDegLira. The largest group (n = 247) comprised those who switched from a loose-dose combination therapy of insulin and GLP-1 RA as injectable components given alone to the IDegLira FRC. In this group, HbA_1c was reduced by 0.42% (95% CL - 0.57, - 0.27; P < 0.001) and in parallel the PDC of insulin and GLP-1 RA increased from a median of 60% (interquartile range [IQR] 34.4-79.4) in the 180 days prior to IDegLira initiation to 77.8% (IQR 65.6-90.0) in the 180 days after initiation.

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting, the use of IDegLira was associated with improved glycemic control and adherence to therapy.

Clinical Use of IDegLira: Initiation to Titration After Basal Insulin

Delayed treatment intensification is common in U.S. patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on basal insulin. Concerns about weight gain, hypoglycemia, increased regimen complexity, and additional copayments may lead to reluctance to initiate prandial insulin. IDegLira is a titratable, fixed-ratio coformulation that combines the advantages of insulin degludec and the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist liraglutide in a single once-daily injection and mitigates the side effects associated with each component. Clinical trials have demonstrated that IDegLira improves glycemic control without the increased risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain observed with basal insulin up-titration and the addition of prandial insulin, and this is achieved using twice-weekly titration. Clinical trials and real-world studies have also shown that IDegLira has the potential to reduce therapeutic and titration inertia. However, better outcomes could be achieved with IDegLira initiation in suitable patients with timely titration and by providers sharing their experience with this combination product. This review describes considerations for initiation, titration, and intensification of IDegLira in patients previously receiving basal insulin.

IDegLira improves patient-reported outcomes while using a simple regimen with fewer injections and dose adjustments compared with basal-bolus therapy

AIMS

Basal-bolus therapy is associated with greater treatment burden and lower adherence compared with more simplified regimens. This post hoc analysis studied the difference between insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) and basal-bolus therapy on number of injections, dose adjustments and patient outcomes in the DUAL VII trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

DUAL VII was a 26-week, open-label trial in which patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes who were using metformin and insulin glargine 100 units/mL (20-50 U) were randomized 1:1 to IDegLira (N = 252) or basal-bolus (insulin glargine U100 + insulin aspart ≤4 times/day) (N = 254). This post hoc analysis reports the observed mean number of injections and cumulative dose adjustments during 26 weeks of treatment. Patient-reported outcomes (Treatment-Related Impact Measure - Diabetes [TRIM-D] and Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 [SF-36v2]) were collected at scheduled visits and change from baseline scores calculated.

RESULTS

The clinical benefits (non-inferior HbA1c reductions, weight benefit, less hypoglycaemia) of IDegLira vs basal-bolus therapy were achieved with fewer cumulative dose adjustments (16.6 vs 217.2, respectively) and fewer injections (1 vs ≥3 per day, respectively). Patients treated with IDegLira experienced significant improvements across all TRIM-D domains compared with those undergoing basal-bolus therapy. The SF-36v2 showed improvements in both treatment arms with no significant difference between arms in the physical component summary, but there was a significant improvement in patients treated with IDegLira in the mental component summary (P = .0228).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings, combined with the DUAL VII results, suggest that IDegLira, through a more simplified regimen versus basal-bolus therapy, may help improve patient adherence and improve patient outcomes related to diabetes management, treatment burden and mental health, which in turn may assist in the timely achievement of glycaemic control in clinical practice.

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.

Fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) improves cardiovascular risk markers in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on basal insulin

In this post hoc analysis we investigated the effects of insulin degludec/liraglutide fixed-ratio combination (IDegLira) versus comparators on cardiovascular (CV) risk markers in participants in the DUAL II (vs. insulin degludec), DUAL V (vs. insulin glargine 100 units/mL) and DUAL VII (vs. basal-bolus therapy) trials, grouped by sex, age (<65 years, ≥65 years) and diabetes duration (<10 years, ≥10 years). Treatment contrasts were in favour of IDegLira in many subgroups for changes from baseline in glycated haemoblogin (DUAL II, DUAL V), body weight (all three trials), systolic blood pressure (BP; all three trials), HDL cholesterol (DUAL VII) and LDL cholesterol (DUAL II, DUAL V). Higher heart rates were seen with IDegLira versus comparators (all three trials) plus significantly higher diastolic BP in men (DUAL V). Differences in treatment effect were seen between sexes in waist circumference (DUAL II), systolic BP (DUAL II, DUAL V) and triglycerides (DUAL VII), and between diabetes durations in LDL cholesterol (DUAL V). In conclusion, IDegLira is associated with a general improvement in CV risk markers compared with basal insulin or basal-bolus therapy after 26 weeks of treatment.