DUAL II China: Superior HbA1c reductions and weight loss with insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus insulin degludec in a randomized trial of Chinese people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin

Clinical perspectives on the frequency of hypoglycemia in treat-to-target randomized controlled trials comparing basal insulin analogs in type 2 diabetes: a narrative review

The objective of this review was to comprehensively present and summarize trends in reported rates of hypoglycemia with one or two times per day basal insulin analogs in individuals with type 2 diabetes to help address and contextualize the emerging theoretical concern of increased hypoglycemic risk with once-weekly basal insulins.Hypoglycemia data were extracted from treat-to-target randomized clinical trials conducted during 2000-2022. Published articles were identified on PubMed or within the US Food and Drug Administration submission documents. Overall, 57 articles were identified: 44 assessed hypoglycemic outcomes in participants receiving basal-only therapy (33 in insulin-naive participants; 11 in insulin-experienced participants), 4 in a mixed population (insulin-naive and insulin-experienced participants) and 9 in participants receiving basal-bolus therapy. For the analysis, emphasis was placed on level 2 (blood glucose <3.0 mmol/L (<54 mg/dL)) and level 3 (or severe) hypoglycemia.Overall, event rates for level 2 or level 3 hypoglycemia across most studies ranged from 0.06 to 7.10 events/person-year of exposure (PYE) for participants receiving a basal-only insulin regimen; the rate for basal-bolus regimens ranged from 2.4 to 13.6 events/PYE. Rates were generally lower with second-generation basal insulins (insulin degludec or insulin glargine U300) than with neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin or first-generation basal insulins (insulin detemir or insulin glargine U100). Subgroup categorization by sulfonylurea usage, end-of-treatment insulin dose or glycated hemoglobin reduction did not show consistent trends on overall hypoglycemia rates. Hypoglycemia rates reported so far for once-weekly basal insulins are consistent with or lower than those reported for daily-administered basal insulin analogs.

IDegLira for type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

IDegLira is a novel fixed-ratio soluble combination of insulin degludec and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) liraglutide approved for type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients. Individual trials have assessed the clinical profile of IDegLira vs different comparators. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IDegLira for T2D.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to August 15, 2023. The primary outcomes included change from baseline in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and body weight. Risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to evaluate the outcomes.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis identified 1044 citations, and included 13 eligible trials, enroling 7773 patients. Compared with the control groups, IDegLira was optimal in change in HbA1c, percentage of patients achieving HbA1c < 7%, percentage of patients achieving HbA1c < 6.5%, HbA1c < 7.0% without weight gain and without severe or blood glucose (BG)-confirmed hypoglycaemia episodes, HbA1c < 6.5% without weight gain and without severe or BG-confirmed hypoglycaemia episodes, change in fasting plasma glucose, change in self-measured plasma glucose, change in systolic pressure, and total daily insulin dose. No difference was found between the IDegLira and control groups in terms of change in body weight, change in diastolic pressure, severe or BG-confirmed symptomatic hypoglycaemia, nocturnal severe or BG-confirmed symptomatic hypoglycaemia, adverse events or serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with T2D, IDegLira improved glycaemic control whilst balancing out risk for hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal side effects.

Efficacy and safety of fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The efficacy and safety of fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) for type 2 diabetes (T2DM) were extensively investigated by the global DUAL trials. However, the evidence on its efficacy and safety in T2DM has not been systematically reviewed.

METHODS

Randomized controlled trials published in English that compared IDegLira with placebo or GLP-1 agonists or insulin in patients with T2DM were selected up to December 2022. Data on the study characteristics, efficacy and safety outcomes were extracted. We compared the efficacy and safety between "IDegLira versus Insulin," "IDegLira versus GLP-1RA," and "IDegLira versus Placebo". The risk of potential bias was assessed.

RESULTS

In terms of glycaemic efficacy, IDegLira reduced levels of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c; weighted mean differences (WMDs) 0.52%, 95% CI 0.33%-0.71%); fasting blood glucose (0.32 mg/dL, 0.14-0.50 mg/dL), and the nine-point self-measured plasma glucose (0.25 mmol/L, 0.25-0.36 mmol/L). Furthermore, IDegLira was generally better in the attainment of HbA1c < 7.0% or ≤6.5%, HbA1c < 7.0% or ≤6.5% without weight gain and/or without severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes. In non-glycaemic efficacy aspects, IDegLira decreased systolic blood pressure but elevated heart rate. In terms of safety outcomes, IDegLira did not appear to be associated with a risk of hypoglycaemia (RR 1.23, 0.85-1.78) and nocturnal hypoglycaemia (0.89, 0.52-1.52) occurring when compared with other hypoglycaemic agents or placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

IDegLira improves better glycaemic and non-glycaemic outcomes without weight gain and/or without severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes in T2DM. Side effects of IDegLira are mild.

Guideline for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus in the Elderly in China (2024 Edition)

With the deepening of aging in China, the prevalence of diabetes in older people has increased noticeably, and standardized diabetes management is critical for improving clinical outcomes of diabetes in older people. In 2021, the National Center of Gerontology, Chinese Society of Geriatrics, and Diabetes Professional Committee of Chinese Aging Well Association organized experts to write the first guideline for diabetes diagnosis and treatment in older people in China, the Guideline for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus in the Elderly in China (2021 Edition). The guideline emphasizes that older patients with diabetes are a highly heterogeneous group requiring comprehensive assessment and stratified and individualized management strategies. The guideline proposes simple treatments and de-intensified treatment strategies for older patients with diabetes. This edition of the guideline provides clinicians with practical and operable clinical guidance, thus greatly contributing to the comprehensive and full-cycle standardized management of older patients with diabetes in China and promoting the extensive development of clinical and basic research on diabetes in older people and related fields. In the past 3 years, evidence-based medicine for older patients with diabetes and related fields has further advanced, and new treatment concepts, drugs, and technologies have been developed. The guideline editorial committee promptly updated the first edition of the guideline and compiled the Guideline for the Management of Diabetes Mellitus in the Elderly in China (2024 Edition). More precise management paths for older patients with diabetes are proposed, for achieving continued standardization of the management of older Chinese patients with diabetes and improving their clinical outcomes.

Evaluating the long-term cost-effectiveness of fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus other treatment regimens in the chinese type 2 diabetes patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To assess the cost-effectiveness of utilizing IDegLira in comparison to other treatment regimens ( liraglutide and degludec) in managing type 2 diabetes, taking into account the Chinese healthcare system's perspective.

METHODS

The clinical data were obtained from the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the DUAL I and DUAL II evidence studies that took place in China. To estimate the lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and direct medical costs of patients receiving different treatment strategies from a long-term perspective, the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model version 9.0 (IQVIA, Basel, Switzerland) was utilized. The costs were evaluated from the perspective of the China National Health System. Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted annually at 5%, and sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

IDegLira was projected to reduce the incidence of diabetes-related complications and improve quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) versus liraglutide and degludec. A survival benefit was observed with IDegLira over Liraglutide (0.073 years). Lifetime costs were lower by Chinese yuan (CNY) 27,945 on IDegLira than on Liraglutide therapy. A similar survival benefit was observed with IDegLira over degludec (0.068 years). Lifetime costs were lower by CNY 1196 on IDegLira than on degludec therapy. Therefore, IDegLira was found to be cost-effective versus liraglutide and degludec with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of Dominant per QALY gained, respectively, under the threshold of three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in China.

CONCLUSION

IDegLira is a cost-effective hypoglycemic treatment option that delivers positive clinical outcomes while also reducing costs for Chinese patients living with type 2 diabetes.

Distinct hypoglycemic effect of different formulations of a fixed ratio of basal insulin plus glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in a patient with pancreatic diabetes

Fixed-ratio combination injection therapy (FRC) is a fixed-ratio mixture containing basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) in a single injection for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes. The two types of FRC products contain different concentrations and mixing ratios of basal insulin and GLP-1 RA. Both products demonstrated satisfactory blood glucose control throughout the day, with less hypoglycemia and weight gain. However, few studies have examined the differences in the actions of the two formulations. Herein, we present a case of a 71-year-old man with pancreatic diabetes and significantly impaired intrinsic insulin secretion capacity, who demonstrated a marked difference in glycemic control following treatment with two different FRC formulations. Treatment with IDegLira, an FRC product, demonstrated suboptimal glucose control in the patient. However, after a change in therapy to another FRC product, IGlarLixi, his glucose control markedly improved, even with a decrease in the injection dose. This difference could have been due to lixisenatide, a short-acting GLP-1RA contained in IGlarLixi, which exerts a postprandial hypoglycemic effect irrespective of intrinsic insulin secretion capacity. In conclusion, IGlarLixi has the potential to achieve good fasting and postprandial glucose control with a once-daily injection, even in patients with type 2 diabetes who have a reduced intrinsic insulin secretion capacity.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13340-023-00621-5.

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.

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.

DUAL II China: Superior HbA1c reductions and weight loss with insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus insulin degludec in a randomized trial of Chinese people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus insulin degludec (degludec) in Chinese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with basal insulin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In DUAL II China, a randomized, double-blinded, multicentre, treat-to-target trial, Chinese adults with T2D and HbA1c of 7.5% or more on basal insulin and metformin, with or without other oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs), were randomized 2:1 to 26 weeks of treatment with either IDegLira (max. dose 50 U degludec/1.8 mg liraglutide) or degludec (max. 50 U/day), respectively, combined with metformin. At 26 weeks, superiority of IDegLira over degludec was assessed for change in HbA1c (primary endpoint), and body weight and number of severe or blood glucose (BG)-confirmed hypoglycaemic episodes (confirmatory secondary endpoints).

RESULTS

Overall, 453 participants were randomized to IDegLira (n = 302) or degludec (n = 151). Superiority was confirmed for IDegLira over degludec in HbA1c change (-1.9% vs. -1.0%, respectively, estimated treatment difference [ETD] [95% confidence interval]: -0.92% [-1.09; -0.75], P < .0001), body weight change (-0.7 vs. +0.4 kg, respectively, ETD [95% CI]: -1.08 kg [-1.63; -0.52], P = .0002) and severe or BG-confirmed hypoglycaemia (estimated rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.53 [0.30; 0.94], P = .0297). The odds of achieving HbA1c less than 7.0% without hypoglycaemia and/or weight gain were greater with IDegLira than degludec (P < .0001 for all). Daily insulin dose at 26 weeks was lower for IDegLira (34.3 U) than degludec (37.4 U) (P = .0014). No unexpected safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

IDegLira may be an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment intensification option for Chinese people with T2D uncontrolled on basal insulin and OADs.