Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus insulin glargine 100 U/mL in Asia Pacific insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes: The EDITION AP randomized controlled trial

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL in people with type 2 diabetes in China: The INITIATION study

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) in people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) in China.

METHODS

INITIATION (NCT05002933) was a prospective, interventional, multicentre, single-arm, phase IV study conducted in China. Individuals with suboptimally controlled T2D who were insulin naïve or switching from another basal insulin (insulin experienced) were included. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. Safety assessments included hypoglycaemia and adverse events (AEs).

RESULTS

In total, 568 participants were enrolled and 562 initiated Gla-300 treatment (189 in the insulin-naïve subgroup; 373 in the insulin-experienced subgroup). At week 24, the mean ± standard error (SE) change in HbA1c from baseline was -0.91% ± 0.05% (-9.9 ± 0.5 mmol/mol; P < .0001). Significant HbA1c reductions were also observed in the insulin-naïve (mean ± SE change: -1.38% ± 0.09% [-15.1 ± 1.0 mmol/mol]) and insulin-experienced (-0.68% ± 0.05% [-7.4 ± 0.5 mmol/mol]) subgroups (both P < .0001). During the 24-week treatment period, the incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose ≤ 3.9 mmol/L) was 39.7% for all hypoglycaemia and 13.3% for nocturnal hypoglycaemia; the incidence of severe hypoglycaemia was low (0.5%). Overall, treatment-emergent AEs (TEAEs) were reported in 126 participants (22.4%), with no serious treatment-related TEAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

Gla-300 was effective in improving glycaemic control and had a relatively low risk of hypoglycaemia in people with suboptimally controlled T2D who were insulin naïve or switching from another basal insulin in China.

Cost-utility analysis and drug pricing of once-weekly insulin icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec for type 2 diabetes patients treated with basal insulin in China

AIM

Insulin icodec is a first once-weekly administration basal insulin analogue for type 2 diabetes. This study aimed to investigate the price range of icodec for type 2 diabetes in the Chinese market, taking insulin degludec as reference.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Long-term health outcomes and costs for icodec and degludec were simulated using the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcomes Model (version 2.1) over 40 years from the Chinese healthcare provider's perspective. The efficacy and safety data were obtained from the ONWARDS 2 trial (Switching to once-weekly insulin icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec in individuals with basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (ONWARDS 2): a phase 3a, randomised, open label, multicentre, treat-to-target trial). Cost-utility analysis and a binary search were used to investigate the price range of icodec. Sensitivity analyses were performed to verify the robustness of the base-case analysis results.

RESULTS

After a 40-year simulation, the quality-adjusted life years (QALY) of icodec and degludec were 10.32 and 10.28 years, respectively. At the initial assumption of the same annual costs of icodec and degludec of $455.40, icodec was the dominant therapy compared with degludec, with higher QALYs and lower total cost. After the binary search, we observed that the annual cost range of icodec was $625.17-$855.25. This cost range was finally adjusted to be $597.66-$736.34 using one-way sensitivity analysis and confirmed using probabilistic sensitivity analysis and scenario analysis. The scenario analysis revealed that the annual cost range of icodec could be $506.70-$736.34 if the price of degludec decreased by 20% in the future.

CONCLUSION

Insulin icodec appears to be more cost effective than degludec if the annual cost of icodec ranges from $597.66 to $736.34 for patients with type 2 diabetes in China.

Real-World Effectiveness of the Gla-300 + Cap + App Program in Adult Users Living with Type 2 Diabetes in Taiwan

INTRODUCTION

Health2Sync (H2S) is a digital health technology platform that provides coaching and titration support to patients with diabetes. The Mallya cap converts a conventional insulin pen into a smart connected device that can automatically synchronize dose values and associated timestamps (upon injection) to the H2S platform. This single-arm real-world study evaluated the effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) combined with H2S and Mallya cap (Gla-300 + Cap + App program) on clinical outcomes among users with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Taiwan.

METHODS

Adults (aged ≥ 20 years) with T2D who were registered H2S users and initiated Mallya cap for a new/existing Gla-300 regimen (identification period May 1, 2021-May 31, 2022) were included in this retrospective cohort study. Follow-up data from H2S were collected for 90 days. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) change (baseline to follow-up) and HbA1c goal attainment were primary outcomes. Hypoglycemia incidence and usage metrics of Mallya cap were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Of 83 participants, 38.6% were new Gla-300 users. HbA1c was reduced in both new (- 2.4 [2.7] %, - 26.2 [29.5] mmol/mol) and previous Gla-300 users (- 0.5 [1.6] %, - 5.5 [17.5] mmol/mol). Reduction in HbA1c was significant (p < 0.05) in both groups. At follow-up, 43.4% of users had a reduction of > 0.5%. Mean HbA1c reductions increased numerically with higher baseline HbA1c and with longer duration of Mallya cap usage.

CONCLUSIONS

Use of digital technology within a connected ecosystem such as Gla-300 + Cap + App program could help people with type 2 diabetes to improve their glycemic condition.

Real-World Outcomes of Individualized Targeted Therapy with Insulin Glargine 300 Units/mL in Insulin-Naïve Korean People with Type 2 Diabetes: TOBE Study

INTRODUCTION

The TOujeo BEyond glucose control (TOBE) study evaluated clinical outcomes with insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) in insulin-naïve Korean people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This 24-week, prospective, non-interventional, multicenter, open-label, single-arm, observational study included adults aged ≥ 20 years with T2DM suboptimally controlled with oral hypoglycemic agents and/or glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists who require basal insulin. Eligible participants were assigned to either general target glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c < 7%) or individualized target groups as per physician's discretion considering guidelines and participants' characteristics. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving the HbA1c target (individualized or general) at 24 weeks.

RESULTS

Among 369 participants, 19.5% (72/369) of participants achieved the HbA1c target at week 24; 37.5% (33/88) in the individualized and 13.9% (39/281) in the general target group. In both target groups, similar reductions in fasting plasma glucose and body weight were observed, with low incidence of hypoglycemia, and T2DM duration was significantly shorter in participants who did versus those who did not achieve the target HbA1c (individualized target group: 9.6 ± 8.0 versus 13.1 ± 8.4 years, P = 0.0454; general target group: 10.2 ± 8.6 versus 12.8 ± 7.4 years, P = 0.0378).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that initiation of insulin therapy with Gla-300 in people with T2DM using an individualized approach is more effective in achieving an HbA1c target. Moreover, earlier initiation of insulin therapy in people with suboptimally controlled T2DM may increase the success rate of glycemic control. A graphical abstract is available with this article.

Efficacy and safety of basal insulins in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

Aim

The comparative effectiveness of basal insulins has been examined in several studies. However, current treatment algorithms provide a list of options with no clear differentiation between different basal insulins as the optimal choice for initiation.

Methods

A comprehensive search of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, ISI, and Scopus, and a reference list of retrieved studies and reviews were performed up to November 2023. We identified phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the efficacy and safety of basal insulin regimens. The primary outcomes evaluated were HbA1c reduction, weight change, and hypoglycemic events. The revised Cochrane ROB-2 tool was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies. A random-effects frequentist network meta-analysis was used to estimate the pooled weighted mean difference (WMD) and odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence intervals considering the critical assumptions in the networks. The certainty of the evidence and confidence in the rankings was assessed using the GRADE minimally contextualized approach.

Results

Of 20,817 retrieved studies, 44 RCTs (23,699 participants) were eligible for inclusion in our network meta-analysis. We found no significant difference among various basal insulins (including Neutral Protamine Hagedorn (NPH), ILPS, insulin glargine, detemir, and degludec) in reducing HbA1c. Insulin glargine, 300 U/mL (IGlar-300) was significantly associated with less weight gain (mean difference ranged from 2.9 kg to 4.1 kg) compared to other basal insulins, namely thrice-weekly insulin degludec (IDeg-3TW), insulin degludec, 100 U/mL (IDeg-100), insulin degludec, 200 U/mL (IDeg-200), NPH, and insulin detemir (IDet), but with low to very low certainty regarding most comparisons. IDeg-100, IDeg-200, IDet, and IGlar-300 were associated with significantly lower odds of overall, nocturnal, and severe hypoglycemic events than NPH and insulin lispro protamine (ILPS) (moderate to high certainty evidence). NPH was associated with the highest odds of overall and nocturnal hypoglycemia compared to others. Network meta-analysis models were robust, and findings were consistent in sensitivity analyses.

Conclusion

The efficacy of various basal insulin regimens is comparable. However, they have different safety profiles. IGlar-300 may be the best choice when weight gain is a concern. In contrast, IDeg-100, IDeg-200, IDet, and IGlar-300 may be preferred when hypoglycemia is the primary concern.

Tirzepatide versus insulin glargine as second-line or third-line therapy in type 2 diabetes in the Asia-Pacific region: the SURPASS-AP-Combo trial

Tirzepatide is a once-weekly GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist. In this phase 3, randomized, open-label trial, insulin-naive adults (≥18 years of age) with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled on metformin (with or without a sulphonylurea) were randomized 1:1:1:1 to weekly tirzepatide 5 mg, 10 mg or 15 mg or daily insulin glargine at 66 hospitals in China, South Korea, Australia and India. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of mean change in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to week 40 after treatment with 10 mg and 15 mg of tirzepatide. Key secondary endpoints included non-inferiority and superiority of all tirzepatide doses in HbA1c reduction, proportions of patients achieving HbA1c < 7.0% and weight loss at week 40. A total of 917 patients (763 (83.2%) in China) were randomized to tirzepatide 5 mg (n = 230), 10 mg (n = 228) or 15 mg (n = 229) or insulin glargine (n = 230). All doses of tirzepatide were non-inferior and superior to insulin glargine for least squares mean (s.e.) reduction in HbA1c from baseline to week 40: tirzepatide 5 mg, 10 mg and 15 mg, -2.24% (0.07), -2.44% (0.07) and -2.49% (0.07), respectively, and insulin glargine, -0.95% (0.07), with a treatment difference ranging from -1.29% to -1.54% (all P < 0.001). Proportions of patients achieving HbA1c < 7.0% at week 40 were greater in tirzepatide 5-mg (75.4%), 10-mg (86.0%) and 15-mg (84.4%) groups compared to insulin glargine (23.7%) (all P < 0.001). All tirzepatide doses led to superior body weight reduction at week 40: tirzepatide 5 mg, 10 mg and 15 mg, -5.0 kg (-6.5%), -7.0 kg (-9.3%) and -7.2 kg (-9.4%), respectively, compared to insulin glargine, 1.5 kg (+2.1%) (all P < 0.001). The most common adverse events with tirzepatide were mild to moderate decreased appetite, diarrhea and nausea. No severe hypoglycemia was reported. Tirzepatide demonstrated superior reductions in HbA1c versus insulin glargine in an Asia-Pacific, predominately Chinese, population with T2D and was generally well tolerated. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04093752 .

Effectiveness, safety, initial optimal dose, and optimal maintenance dose range of basal insulin regimens for type 2 diabetes: A systematic review with meta-analysis

AIMS

To investigate the effectiveness, safety, optimal starting dose, optimal maintenance dose range, and target fasting plasma glucose of five basal insulins in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library were searched from January 2000 to February 2022. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) approach was adopted. The registration ID is CRD42022319078 in PROSPERO.

RESULTS

Among 11 163 citations retrieved, 35 publications met the planned criteria. From meta-analyses and network meta-analyses, we found that when injecting basal insulin regimens at bedtime, the optimal choice in order of most to least effective might be glargine U-300 or degludec U-100, glargine U-100 or detemir, followed by neutral protamine hagedorn (NPH). Injecting glargine U-100 in the morning may be more effective (ie, more patients archiving glycated hemoglobin < 7.0%) and lead to fewer hypoglycemic events than injecting it at bedtime. The optimal starting dose for the initiation of any basal insulins can be 0.10-0.20 U/kg/day. There is no eligible evidence to investigate the optimal maintenance dose for basal insulins.

CONCLUSIONS

The five basal insulins are effective for the target population. Glargine U-300, degludec U-100, glargine U-100, and detemir lead to fewer hypoglycemic events than NPH without compromising glycemic control.

Comparative clinical efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Toujeo) versus insulin glargine 100 U/ml in type 2 diabetes and type 1 diabetes: A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

AIM

To compare the clinical efficacy and safety of glargine-U100 (Lantus/Gla-100) with glargine-U300 (Toujeo/Gla-300) in adult patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and type 1 diabetes (T1D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature search on Gla-300/Gla-100 in diabetes management was conducted using the MEDLINE/Embase/Cochrane databases from inception to 10 January 2021. Eligible studies considered for inclusion were parallel-design, randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The Cochrane risk-of-bias tool was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies. The random-effects model was applied for interpretation of the results.

RESULTS

Of 5348 records screened, 592 were assessed for eligibility and 15 RCTs were considered for data extraction and meta-analysis (T2D [N = 10; n = 7082]; T1D [N = 5; n = 2222]). In patients with T1D, all safety parameters were comparable between Gla-100 and Gla-300. In T2D, statistically significant differences were observed in favour of Gla-300 over Gla-100 for nocturnal and total hypoglycaemia. For efficacy parameters, a statistically and clinically significant difference favouring Gla-100 in basal insulin dose requirement was observed for both T2D and T1D. Change in HbA1c showed a statistically but not clinically significant reduction with Gla-100 compared with Gla-300 in T1D. Statistically significant but clinically less relevant differences favoured Gla-300 for control of body weight in T1D and T2D and Gla-100 for fasting blood glucose in T2D.

CONCLUSIONS

Gla-100 and Gla-300 had comparable efficacy and safety profiles in both T1D and T2D populations. Gla-300 showed a lower risk of nocturnal and total hypoglycaemia, significant in insulin-experienced/exposed patients with T2D. Patients on Gla-300 required significantly more units of insulin daily than the Gla-100 group to achieve equivalent efficacy.

Real-world effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/ml in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes in the Latin America region: A subgroup analysis of the ATOS

AIM

To evaluate the real-world effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) in achieving glycaemic goals in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in Mexico, Colombia and Peru (Latin America region) in the A Toujeo Observational Study (ATOS).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

ATOS was a multicentre, prospective, 12-month observational study, which included 4422 insulin-naïve adults (age ≥ 18 years) with T2D uncontrolled (HbA1c > 7% and ≤11%) on at least one oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) who initiated Gla-300 treatment as per routine practice. The primary endpoint was the percentage of participants achieving their predefined individualized HbA1c goal at month 6. Key secondary endpoints included change from baseline in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), fasting self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG), body weight and incidence of hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

In this subgroup analysis, a total of 314 participants with T2D received Gla-300. At baseline, mean ± SD age was 56.0 ± 11.6 years, duration of diabetes was 9.7 ± 6.6 years and 65.9% of participants were on at least two OADs. The individualized HbA1c target was achieved by 25.8% of participants (95% confidence interval [CI]: 20.3-31.9) at month 6 and by 35.3% (95% CI: 28.5-42.5) at month 12. Gla-300 treatment improved glycaemic control with meaningful reductions in mean HbA1c, FPG and fasting SMBG. The incidence of hypoglycaemia reported was low and body weight remained stable.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world setting in the Latin America region, the initiation of Gla-300 in people with T2D uncontrolled on OADs resulted in improved glycaemic control with a low incidence of hypoglycaemia and no change in body weight.

Improved glycaemic control and weight benefit with iGlarLixi versus insulin glargine 100 U/mL in Chinese people with type 2 diabetes advancing their therapy from basal insulin plus oral antihyperglycaemic drugs: Results from the LixiLan-L-CN randomized controlled trial

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi compared with iGlar in Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes advancing therapy from basal insulin ± oral antihyperglycaemic drugs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

LixiLan-L-CN (NCT03798080) was a 30-week randomized, active-controlled, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre study. Participants were randomized 1:1 to iGlarLixi or iGlar. The primary objective was to show the superiority of iGlarLixi over iGlar in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change from baseline to Week 30.

RESULTS

In total, 426 participants were randomized to iGlarLixi (n = 212) or iGlar (n = 214). Mean age was 58 years, 67% had a body mass index ≥24 kg/m² , corresponding to overweight/obesity, and the mean diabetes duration was 12.3 years. From mean baseline HbA1c of 8.1% in both groups, greater decreases were seen with iGlarLixi versus iGlar [least squares mean difference: -0.7 (95% confidence interval: -0.9, -0.6)%; p < .0001] to final HbA1c of 6.7% and 7.4%, respectively. HbA1c <7.0% achievement was greater with iGlarLixi (63.3%) versus iGlar (29.9%; p < .0001). Mean body weight decreased with iGlarLixi and increased with iGlar [least squares mean difference: -0.9 (95% confidence interval: -1.4, -0.5) kg; p = .0001]. Hypoglycaemia incidence was similar between groups. Few gastrointestinal adverse events occurred (rated mild/moderate) with a slightly higher incidence with iGlarLixi than iGlar.

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi provided better glycaemic control and facilitated more participants to reach glycaemic targets alongside beneficial effects on body weight, no additional risk of hypoglycaemia, and few gastrointestinal AEs, supporting iGlarLixi use as an efficacious and well tolerated therapy option in Chinese people with long-standing T2D advancing therapy from basal insulin.

A double-blind, Randomized controlled trial on glucose-lowering EFfects and safety of adding 0.25 or 0.5 mg lobeglitazone in type 2 diabetes patients with INadequate control on metformin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor therapy: REFIND study

AIMS

To compare the efficacy and safety of adding low-dose lobeglitazone (0.25 mg/day) or standard-dose lobeglitazone (0.5 mg/day) to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with inadequate glucose control on metformin and dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP4) inhibitor therapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this phase 4, multicentre, double-blind, randomized controlled, non-inferiority trial, patients with T2DM insufficiently controlled by metformin and DPP4 inhibitor combination therapy were randomized to receive either low-dose or standard-dose lobeglitazone. The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of low-dose lobeglitazone in terms of glycaemic control, expressed as the difference in mean glycated haemoglobin levels at week 24 relative to baseline values and compared with standard-dose lobeglitazone, using 0.5% non-inferiority margin.

RESULTS

At week 24, the mean glycated haemoglobin levels were 6.87 ± 0.54% and 6.68 ± 0.46% in low-dose and standard-dose lobeglitazone groups, respectively (p = .031). The between-group difference was 0.18% (95% confidence interval 0.017-0.345), showing non-inferiority of the low-dose lobeglitazone. Mean body weight changes were significantly greater in the standard-dose group (1.36 ± 2.23 kg) than in the low-dose group (0.50 ± 1.85 kg) at week 24. The changes in HOMA-IR, lipid profile and liver enzyme levels showed no significant difference between the groups. Overall treatment-emergent adverse events (including weight gain, oedema and hypoglycaemia) occurred more frequently in the standard-dose group.

CONCLUSIONS

Adding low-dose lobeglitazone to metformin and DPP4 inhibitor combination resulted in a non-inferior glucose-lowering outcome and fewer adverse events compared with standard-dose lobeglitazone. Therefore, low-dose lobeglitazone might be one option for individualized strategy in patients with T2DM.

Real-World Effectiveness and Safety of Insulin Glargine 300 U/mL in Insulin-Naïve People with Type 2 Diabetes: the ATOS Study

INTRODUCTION

The clinical benefits of insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) have been confirmed in randomised clinical trials (EDITION programme and BRIGHT) and real-world studies in the USA and Western Europe. ATOS evaluated the real-world effectiveness and safety of Gla-300 in wider geographic regions (Asia, the Middle East, North Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe).

METHODS

This prospective observational, international study enrolled adults (≥ 18 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) uncontrolled [haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) > 7% to ≤ 11%] on one or more oral anti-hyperglycaemic drugs (OADs) who had been advised by their treating physician to add Gla-300 to their existing treatment. The primary endpoint was achievement of a pre-defined individualised HbA1c target at month 6.

RESULTS

Of the 4550 participants included, 4422 (51.8% female) were eligible for assessment. The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age was 57.2 ± 10.8 years, duration of diabetes was 10.2 ± 6.2 years and baseline HbA1c was 9.28 ± 1.0%. The proportion of participants reaching their individualised glycaemic target was 25.2% [95% confidence interval (CI) 23.8-26.6%] at month 6 and 44.5% (95% CI 42.9-46.1%) at month 12. At months 6 and 12, reductions were observed in HbA1c (-1.50% and -1.87%) and fasting plasma glucose (-3.42 and -3.94 mmol/L). Hypoglycaemia incidence was low, and body weight change was minimal. Adverse events were reported in 283 (6.4%) participants, with 57 (1.3%) experiencing serious adverse events.

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting, initiation of Gla-300 in people with T2DM uncontrolled on OADs resulted in improved glycaemic control and low rates of hypoglycaemia with minimal weight change.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov number NCT03703869.

Clinical outcomes in high‐hypoglycaemia‐risk patients with type 2 diabetes switching to insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus a first‐generation basal insulin analogue in the United States : Results from the DELIVER High Risk real‐world study

Aims

To compare 12‐month clinical effectiveness of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla‐300) versus first‐generation basal insulin analogues (BIAs) (insulin glargine 100 units/mL [Gla‐100] or insulin detemir [IDet]) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who were at high risk of hypoglycaemia and switched from one BIA to a different one (Gla‐300 or Gla‐100/IDet) in a real‐world setting.

Methods

DELIVER High Risk was a retrospective observational cohort study of 2550 patients with T2D who switched BIA to Gla‐300 (Gla‐300 switchers) and were propensity score‐matched (1:1) to patients who switched to Gla‐100 or IDet (Gla‐100/IDet switchers). Outcomes were change in glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), attainment of HbA1c goals (<7% and <8%), and incidence and event rates of hypoglycaemia (all‐hypoglycaemia and hypoglycaemia associated with an inpatient/emergency department [ED] contact).

Results

HbA1c reductions were similar following switching to Gla‐300 or Gla‐100/IDet (−0.51% vs. −0.53%; p = .67), and patients showed similar attainment of HbA1c goals. Patients in both cohorts had comparable all‐hypoglycaemia incidence and event rates. However, the Gla‐300 switcher cohort had a significantly lower risk of inpatient/ED‐associated hypoglycaemia (adjusted odds ratio: 0.73, 95% confidence interval: 0.60–0.89; p = .002) and experienced significantly fewer inpatient/ED‐associated hypoglycaemic events (0.21 vs. 0.33 events per patient per year; p < .001).

Conclusion

In patients with T2D at high risk of hypoglycaemia, switching to Gla‐300 or Gla‐100/IDet achieved similar HbA1c reductions and glycaemic goal attainment, but Gla‐300 switchers had a significantly lower risk of hypoglycaemia associated with an inpatient/ED contact during 12 months after switching.

Real-World Use of Insulin Glargine U100 and U300 in Insulin-Naïve Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: DosInGlar Study

INTRODUCTION

In the EDITION clinical trial programme, patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving insulin glargine (IGlar) U300 required 10-15% more insulin than those receiving IGlar U100. This study sought to determine whether this difference was apparent in real-world practice.

METHODS

In this observational, retrospective cohort study, electronic medical records in the Big-Pac® database (Real Life Data) relating to adult insulin-naïve patients with T2DM who initiated IGlar U100 or U300 treatment in Spain in 2016-2017 and remained on treatment for 18 months were selected. IGlar U100- and U300-treated patients were matched 1:1 (propensity score matching). The primary analysis compared changes from baseline in mean daily IGlar dose (U and U/kg) at 6 (± 2), 12 (± 2) and 18 (± 2) months between cohorts (paired t tests). Changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) and weight were analysed descriptively.

RESULTS

The IGlar U100 and U300 cohorts included 556 matched pairs (46.9% female) with the following mean (standard deviation) values at baseline, respectively: age 63.6 (12.8) versus 63.7 (11.9) years; years since diagnosis 9.5 (1.4) versus 9.5 (1.3); HbA1c 8.8 (1.3) versus 8.7 (1.5) %; weight 84.6 (16.9) versus 84.7 (17.1) kg. Mean IGlar dose at baseline was 0.19 U/kg/day (both cohorts). Patients receiving IGlar U300 showed a greater increase from baseline in IGlar dose at 6, 12 and 18 months [mean dose (U/kg/day) 5.1%, 10.3% and 12.8% greater, respectively, in IGlar U300-treated patients]. Mean HbA1c was 8.1% in both cohorts at 18 months. Mean (SD) weight at 18 months with IGlar U100 and IGlar300 was 86.8 (17.0) kg and 85.0 (17.1) kg, respectively.

CONCLUSION

In real-world practice, insulin dose was significantly higher in IGlar U300-treated than U100-treated patients at 6, 12 and 18 months, with similar reductions in HbA1c. At equal IGlar price/unit in Spain, the increased dose requirements of IGlar U300 would result in higher costs.

Comparison of insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus glargine 100 U/mL on glycemic control and hypoglycemic events in East Asian patients with type 2 diabetes: A Patient-level meta-analysis of phase 3 studies

AIMS

To evaluate efficacy and safety of Gla-300 with Gla-100 in a patient-level meta-analysis among large East Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

A patient level meta-analysis of three EDITION studies with similar design and endpoints were conducted over 6-months treatment period. The analysis included 547 patients treated with Gla-300 and 348 patients treated with Gla-100.

RESULTS

Over 6-month treatment period, mean change in HbA1c was similar for Gla-300 [Least square (LS) mean, (SE): -1.13 (0.05) % and Gla-100: -1.14 (0.05) %], showing non-inferiority of Gla-300 to Gla-100 (LS mean difference: 0.02%, 95% CI: -0.08 to 0.11). Gla-300 was associated with reduced risk of hypoglycemic event (confirmed ≤ 3.9 mmol/L or severe) vs Gla-100 at any time of day or at night (00:00-05:59 h). The event rates of hypoglycemia were consistently lower with Gla-300 than Gla-100. Severe hypoglycemia was rare in both treatment groups. Weight gain was minimal in both treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

Gla-300 provides comparable glycemic control to Gla-100 in East Asian patients with broad clinical spectrum of T2DM, with consistently less hypoglycemia at any time of the day and night.

Glycemic Variability and Time in Range During Self-titration of Once Daily Insulin Glargine 300 U/ml Versus Neutral Protamine Hagedorn Insulin in Insulin-naïve Chinese Type 2 Diabetes Patients

INTRODUCTION

To compare glycemic variability (GV) and time in range (TIR) in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) initiated on once-daily bedtime insulin glargine 300U/ml (Gla-300) versus neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM).

METHODS

This was a 24-week, open-label exploratory study with 1:1 randomization comparing patient-adjusted titration of Gla-300 (n = 23) versus NPH (n = 23) at bedtime in insulin-naïve T2D patients on maximum oral glucose-lowering drugs. The starting dose was 0.2 U/kg/day and with self-titration of one unit per week to achieve a target fasting glucose of 4.4-6 mmol/l, without hypoglycemia. Participants had masked CGM at baseline, weeks 11 and 24. The primary outcome was between-treatment differences in CGM glucose standard deviation (SD) at week 24.

RESULTS

HbA1c at week 24 were similar, with 21% of Gla-300 versus 4% of NPH-treated patients achieving HbA1c < 7% without confirmed hypoglycemia. There were no differences in anytime glucose SD at week 24 (LS mean difference - 0.08 mmol/l, 95% CI [- 0.42-0.26], p = 0.63). Anytime %TIRs (3.9-10.0 mmol/l) at week 24 were similar (p = 0.91). Nocturnal % time below range < 3.9 mmol/l was significantly lower in the Gla-300 group (least squares (LS) mean difference - 5.03% [- 9.92 to - 0.14], p = 0.04) with lower % coefficient of variation (LS mean difference - 4.5% [- 8.1 to - 0.8], p = 0.018). Diurnal TIR was higher in Gla-300 patients at week 11 but there were no differences at week 24.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily bedtime Gla-300 was associated with lower nocturnal GV, time below range and self-reported hypoglycemia in insulin-naïve Chinese T2D patients over a 24-week study period, as compared with NPH insulin.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03389490.

Reduced Hypoglycemia Risk in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Switched to/Initiating Insulin Glargine 300 vs 100 U/ml: A European Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Randomized controlled trials and real-world data from the USA have shown similar glycemic control with insulin glargine 300 U/ml (Gla-300) and insulin glargine 100 U/ml (Gla-100) and reduced hypoglycemia risk with Gla-300. This real-world study describes the efficacy and safety of Gla-300 and Gla-100 in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in France, Spain, and Germany.

METHODS

This retrospective chart review analysis used anonymized data for adults with T2D switching basal insulin analog (BIA) therapy to Gla-300 or Gla-100, or insulin-naïve patients initiating Gla-300 or Gla-100. Outcomes included change from baseline to 6-month follow-up in glycated hemoglobin A1c (A1C), total and severe hypoglycemia incidences and events, insulin dose, and reasons for BIA choice.

RESULTS

Six hundred sixty-five physicians (33.8% Spain, 31.7% France, 34.4% Germany) provided chart data for patients switching to Gla-300 (n = 679) or Gla-100 (n = 429) or initiating Gla-300 (n = 719) or Gla-100 (n = 711). After adjustment for baseline characteristics, A1C reductions from baseline were similar for patients switching to Gla-300 or Gla-100 (- 0.87% vs. - 0.93%; p = 0.326) while those switched to Gla-300 vs. Gla-100 had a significantly greater mean reduction in hypoglycemic events (- 1.29 vs. - 0.81 events during 6 months; p = 0.012). Mean insulin doses after titration were 0.43 ± 0.36 and 0.40 ± 0.28 U/kg in Gla-300 and Gla-100 switchers, respectively. Factors that significantly influenced BIA choice included a lower risk of hypoglycemia (for Gla-300) and physician familiarity (for Gla-100). Outcomes for insulin-naïve patients were broadly similar to those of switchers.

CONCLUSIONS

In this real-world European study, patients with T2D who switched therapy to Gla-300 or Gla-100 had improved glycemic control and reduced hypoglycemia at 6 months, with significant hypoglycemia advantages with Gla-300.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus insulin glargine 100 U/mL in Asia Pacific insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes: The EDITION AP randomized controlled trial

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes in Asia Pacific.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this open-label, randomized, active-controlled, 26-week study, insulin-naïve participants with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with non-insulin antihyperglycaemic drugs were randomized (2:1) to Gla-300 or Gla-100. The initial daily dose of basal insulin was 0.2 U/kg and was adjusted at least weekly for 8-12 weeks to a target fasting self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) of 4.4-5.6 mmol/L.

RESULTS

Of the 604 participants randomized, 570 (Gla-300, n = 375; Gla-100, n = 195) completed the study. Non-inferiority of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 in HbA1c reduction from baseline to week 26 was confirmed. In the Gla-300 and Gla-100 groups, 51.1% and 52.2% of participants achieved the HbA1c target of <7.0% (rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.98 [0.84 to 1.14]) and 19.1% and 21.9% achieved the target without hypoglycaemia during the last 12 weeks of treatment (rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.87 [0.63 to 1.20]). Changes in fasting plasma glucose and 24-hour average eight-point SMPG were comparable between groups. Incidence of hypoglycaemia at any time of day was similar between treatment groups at week 26, but incidence of any nocturnal hypoglycaemia was numerically lower with Gla-300 than Gla-100 over the initial 12-week titration period and 26-week on-treatment period. Rates of adverse events were similar between groups and low for serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Glycaemic control of Gla-300 is non-inferior to Gla-100 with a similar or lower incidence and proportion of hypoglycaemia in people with type 2 diabetes in Asia Pacific, reinforcing the results in the global EDITION programme.