Insulin glargine provides greater improvements in glycaemic control vs. intensifying lifestyle management for people with type 2 diabetes treated with OADs and 7-8% A1c levels. The TULIP study

Impact of the Fasting Plasma Glucose Titration Target on the Success of Basal Insulin Titration in Insulin-Naïve Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Analysis

BACKGROUND/AIM

We aimed to examine beneficial and adverse outcomes of basal insulin titration performed with different fasting plasma glucose (FPG) titration targets (TT).

METHODS

A PubMed literature search retrieved 43 reported prospective clinical trials introducing basal insulin in 17643 insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes reporting fasting plasma glucose (FPG), HbA_1c, target achievement, hypoglycemic events, and insulin doses. 61 individual study arms were grouped by fasting plasma glucose titration target (TT; 1: ≤5.0 mmol/l/90 mg/dl; 2: 5.01-5.6 mmol/l/90-100 mg/dl; and 3: ≥5.61 mmol/l/101 mg/dl). Weighted means and their standard deviations were calculated for baseline and end-of-treatment FPG (primary endpoint), HbA_1c, target achievement, hypoglycemic events, insulin doses, and body weight gain and compared over a duration of 31 ± 10 weeks.

RESULTS

Achieved FPG and HbA_1c at the end of the study were significantly lower (by up to 0.8 mmol/l or 0.23%, respectively) with more ambitious TTs (p < 0.0001), leading to better HbA_1c target achievement with more ambitious TTs (by up to 14.6% for HbA_1c ≤ 6.5%), without increasing the risk for hypoglycemic episodes.

CONCLUSIONS

Aiming for a lower FPG TT improves glycemic control without increasing the risk for hypoglycemia.

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.

An Efficacy and Safety Study of Remogliflozin in Obese Indian Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients Who Were Inadequately Controlled on Insulin Glargine Plus other Oral Hypoglycemic Agents

AIMS & OBJECTIVES

The objective of this retrospective study was to investigate the efficacy of adding remogliflozin to current insulin glargine plus two oral drug i.e. metformin and teneligliptin therapy in poorly controlled Indian type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

173 study participants were initially selected from patient database who continued on their insulin glargine or received an increased dose of insulin glargine along with other OHA based therapy (Group A) and 187 were selected who had received remogliflozin (100 mg BD) (Group B) in addition to insulin glargine along with other OHA based therapy. Glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), total daily insulin dose, body weight, and the number of hypoglycemic events were recorded at weeks 0, 12 and 24.

RESULTS

During the study, mean values of HbA1c, FBG and P2BG were significantly reduced in both groups. Insulin requirements decreased from 45.8 ± 16.7 IU/day to 38.5 ± 13.5 IU/day at week 12 (P < 0.001) and at week 24 even further decreased to 29.5 ± 14.5 IU/Day. Twenty three patients in group B were able to cease insulin treatment altogether after 24 week treatment. It has been observed that to attain tight blood glucose control, we need to increase insulin dose in group A from 45.5 ± 16.5 IU/Day to 51.5 ± 14.5 at week 12 (P<0.01), which further increased to 53.8 ± 12.8 IU/Day at week 24 (P<0.01). Adding remogliflozin showed significant effect on blood pressure (P < 0.001) and weight reduction (P < 0.001). It has been observed that 38% patients achieved targeted HbA1c (≤7%) in group B where it was 22% in group A.

CONCLUSION

Results demonstrate that in uncontrolled T2DM patients, remogliflozin 100 mg BD can successfully lay a foundation for prolonged good glycemic control. Early addition of remogliflozin with insulin glargine plus OHAs may be an alternative compared to intensive up titration of insulin daily dose in people with uncontrolled T2DM.

Achievement of Target A1C <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) by U.S. Type 2 Diabetes Patients Treated With Basal Insulin in Both Randomized Controlled Trials and Clinical Practice

OBJECTIVE

Many patients with type 2 diabetes do not reach glycemic goals despite basal insulin treatment. This study assessed the achievement of a target A1C <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) after initiation of basal insulin in two settings.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of pooled randomized controlled trial (RCT) data, from 11 24-week studies of patients initiating basal insulin performed between 2000 and 2005 and of outpatient electronic medical record (EMR) data from the General Electric Centricity database for insulin-naive patients initiating basal insulin between 2005 and 2012. Baseline characteristics stratified by target A1C and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) attainment were compared descriptively.

RESULTS

In the RCT dataset, 49.0% of patients failed to achieve the target A1C at 6 months versus 72.4% and 72.9% at 6 and 12 months in the EMR dataset, respectively. Despite this, in the RCT dataset, 79.4% of patients achieved the target A1C and/or an FPG <130 mg/dL. In the EMR dataset, only 47.6% and 47.3% of patients achieved an A1C <7.0% and/or FPG <130 mg/dL at 6 and 12 months, respectively. Overall, patients with an A1C >7.0% had a longer diabetes duration and were more likely to be female, nonwhite, and self-funding or covered by Medicaid. Among patients with an A1C >7.0%, more RCT patients (58.0%) had an FPG <130 mg/dL than EMR patients at 6 months (27.8%) and 12 months (27.7%).

CONCLUSION

Unmet needs remain after basal insulin initiation, particularly in real-world settings, where many patients require further insulin titration. In both populations, patients failing to achieve the target A1C despite attaining an FPG <130 mg/dL require interventions to improve postprandial control.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Canagliflozin 300 mg Versus Dapagliflozin 10 mg Added to Metformin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Agents that inhibit sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2), including canagliflozin and dapagliflozin, are approved in the United States for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). SGLT2 inhibition lowers blood glucose by increasing urinary glucose excretion, which leads to a mild osmotic diuresis and a net loss of calories that are associated with reductions in body weight and blood pressure. This analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness of canagliflozin 300 mg versus dapagliflozin 10 mg in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin in the United States.

METHODS

A 30-year cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using the validated Economic and Health Outcomes Model of T2DM (ECHO-T2DM) from the perspective of the third-party health care system in the United States. Patient demographics, biomarker values, and treatment effects for the ECHO-T2DM model were sourced primarily from a network meta-analysis (NMA) that included studies of canagliflozin and dapagliflozin in patients with T2DM on background metformin. Costs were derived from sources specific to the United States. Outcomes and costs were discounted at 3%. Sensitivity analyses that varied key model parameters were conducted.

RESULTS

Canagliflozin 300 mg dominated dapagliflozin 10 mg as an add-on to metformin over 30 years, with an estimated cost offset of $13,991 and a quality-adjusted life-year gain of 0.08 versus dapagliflozin 10 mg. Results were driven by the better HbA1c lowering achieved with canagliflozin, which translated to less need for insulin rescue therapy. Findings from sensitivity analyses were consistent with the base case.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that canagliflozin 300 mg is likely to provide better health outcomes at a lower overall cost than dapagliflozin 10 mg in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin from the perspective of the United States health care system.

FUNDING

Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC and Janssen Global Services, LLC.

Effects of age, gender, and body mass index on efficacy and hypoglycaemia outcomes across treat-to-target trials with insulin glargine 100 U/mL added to oral antidiabetes agents in type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To analyse the effects of patient characteristics and different oral antidiabetes drug (OAD) use on standardised clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes patients initiating insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patient-level data from 16 randomized, treat-to-target clinical trials that added Gla-100 to existing metformin (MET), sulfonylurea (SU) or metformin plus sulfonylurea (MET+SU) treatment in insulin-naïve patients inadequately controlled by oral therapy were analysed and patients were followed for ≥24 weeks. Change in glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to week 24, other glycaemic endpoints and incidence of hypoglycaemia (overall, nocturnal, and severe) were analysed by age (<65 vs ≥65 years), gender (male vs female), body mass index (BMI; <25 vs ≥25 to <30 vs >30 kg/m² ) and concomitant OAD (MET vs SU vs MET+SU).

RESULTS

At baseline, the overall population (N = 3188) had a mean age of 57.7 years, BMI of 30.5 kg/m² , HbA1c of 8.7%, fasting plasma glucose of 192 mg/dL, and 52.7% were male. Younger and older patients had similar HbA1c reductions with Gla-100 and a similar risk of hypoglycaemia. Females and patients with BMI <25 kg/m² were less likely to achieve HbA1c targets and more likely to experience hypoglycaemia, regardless of concomitant OAD. Adding Gla-100 to SU therapy (alone or in combination with MET) increased hypoglycaemia risk across all analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that female patients with type 2 diabetes and normal-weight patients treated with Gla-100 and MET ± SU are less likely to achieve glycaemic targets and, therefore, may require more clinical attention. Addition of Gla-100 to SU regimens may increase hypoglycaemia risk irrespective of age, gender, or BMI.

Basal insulin treatment intensification in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A comprehensive systematic review of current options

AIM

As type 2 diabetes mellitus progresses, most patients require treatment with basal insulin in combination with another agent to achieve recommended glycaemic targets. The purpose of this systematic review was to examine the evidence supporting the use of the available add-on treatments [rapid-acting insulin (RAI), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitors and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors] to basal insulin.

METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and EBSCOhost were searched for English-language articles, and all those captured were original articles (case studies and narrative reviews were omitted). Data on study design, population demographics, interventions and outcomes were tabulated. The extracted outcome data included changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), as well as body weight and safety data.

RESULTS

A total of 88 publications were deemed relevant. All treatments reduced HbA_1c and FPG. The most pronounced reductions in PPG, an unmet need in patients not controlled by basal insulin, were seen following administration of RAIs and short-acting GLP-1 RAs, although data for this outcome are generally lacking. Body weight benefits were observed with GLP-1 RAs and SGLT-2 inhibitors. However, as only articles in English were included, the result was a possible publication bias, while the diversity of study designs and drug combinations limited comparisons between studies.

CONCLUSION

The evidence supports effectiveness of the available add-on treatments to basal insulin. However, other factors, such as potential body-weight increases, convenience/compliance and adverse events, particularly hypoglycaemia, should be considered on a patient-by-patient basis to optimalize treatment outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of insulin in type 2 diabetes: meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

BACKGROUND

It is essential to anticipate and limit the social, economic and sanitary cost of type 2 diabetes (T2D), which is in constant progression worldwide. When blood glucose targets are not achieved with diet and lifestyle intervention, insulin is recommended whether or not the patient is already taking hypoglycaemic drugs. However, the benefit/risk balance of insulin remains controversial. Our aim was to determine the efficacy and safety of insulin vs. hypoglycaemic drugs or diet/placebo on clinically relevant endpoints.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library) including all randomised clinical trials (RCT) analysing insulin vs. hypoglycaemic drugs or diet/placebo, published between 1950 and 2013, was performed. We included all RCTs reporting effects on all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, death by cancer, cardiovascular morbidity, microvascular complications and hypoglycaemia in adults ≥ 18 years with T2D. Two authors independently assessed trial eligibility and extracted the data. Internal validity of studies was analyzed according to the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. Risk ratios (RR) with 95 % confidence intervals (95 % CI) were calculated, using the fixed effect model in first approach. The I(2) statistic assessed heterogeneity. In case of statistical heterogeneity, subgroup and sensitivity analyses then a random effect model were performed. The alpha threshold was 0.05. Primary outcomes were all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality. Secondary outcomes were non-fatal cardiovascular events, hypoglycaemic events, death from cancer, and macro- or microvascular complications.

RESULTS

Twenty RCTs were included out of the 1632 initially identified studies. 18 599 patients were analysed: Insulin had no effect vs. hypoglycaemic drugs on all-cause mortality RR = 0.99 (95 % CI =0.92-1.06) and cardiovascular mortality RR = 0.99 (95 % CI =0.90-1.09), nor vs. diet/placebo RR = 0.92 (95 % CI = 0.80-1.07) and RR = 0.95 (95 % CI 0.77-1.18) respectively. No effect was found on secondary outcomes either. However, severe hypoglycaemia was more frequent with insulin compared to hypoglycaemic drugs RR = 1.70 (95 % CI = 1.51-1.91).

CONCLUSIONS

There is no significant evidence of long term efficacy of insulin on any clinical outcome in T2D. However, there is a trend to clinically harmful adverse effects such as hypoglycaemia and weight gain. The only benefit could be limited to reducing short term hyperglycemia. This needs to be confirmed with further studies.

How much is too much? Outcomes in patients using high-dose insulin glargine

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Many patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) do not achieve glycaemic control targets on basal insulin regimens. This analysis investigated characteristics, clinical outcomes and impact of concomitant oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) in patients with T2DM treated with high-dose insulin glargine.

METHODS

Patient-level data were pooled from 15 randomised, treat-to-target trials in patients with T2DM treated with insulin glargine ± OADs for ≥ 24 weeks. Data were stratified according to whether patients exceeded three insulin dose cut-off levels (> 0.5, > 0.7 and > 1.0 IU/kg). End-points included glycated haemoglobin A1c (A1C), fasting plasma glucose, body weight, and overall, nocturnal and severe hypoglycaemia.

RESULTS

Data from 2837 insulin-naïve patients were analysed. Patients with insulin titrated beyond the three doses investigated had significantly higher baseline A1C levels and were younger, with shorter diabetes duration than those at/below cut-offs (p < 0.05 for all cut-offs); they also had greater weight gain (p < 0.001 for the > 0.5 and > 0.7 IU/kg cut-offs) than those who did not exceed the cut-offs, regardless of concomitant OAD. Patients on concomitant metformin alone had higher insulin doses at Week 24, but achieved greater reductions in A1C, less weight gain and lower hypoglycaemia rates than patients on a concomitant sulfonylurea or metformin plus a sulfonylurea, regardless of whether cut-offs were exceeded.

CONCLUSION

In patients with T2DM, increasing basal insulin doses above 0.5 IU/kg may not improve glycaemic control; treatment strategies targeting postprandial glucose control should be considered for such patients.

Weight change in patients with type 2 diabetes starting basal insulin therapy: correlates and impact on outcomes

BACKGROUND

An increase in body weight is a commonly perceived effect of insulin therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus, and this may serve as a barrier to insulin initiation and usage.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the baseline clinical and demographic factors associated with weight gain during insulin glargine therapy, and the implications of weight change on clinical outcomes.

METHODS

This was a retrospective analysis of patient-level data from phase 3 or 4 randomized controlled, treat-to-target (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] ≤ 100 mg/dL) trials evaluating basal insulin glargine for ≥ 24 weeks. The Pearson correlation coefficient and Cochran-Armitage trend statistic were used to calculate the existence of a trend between absolute and relative weight change, and relative glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) change from baseline; likelihood of achieving target HbA1c < 7.0%; change from baseline FPG; insulin dose requirements; incidence of hypoglycemia; and adverse events.

RESULTS

Eleven studies were included, encompassing a total of 2140 patients. Patients starting insulin glargine treatment gained a mean ± standard deviation 1.8 ± 3.7 kg (4.0 ± 8.2 lb). Most patients had limited weight change (± 2.5 kg or 5.5 lb). Younger age, higher baseline HbA1c, and higher baseline FPG were predictive of greater weight gain (P < 0.0001). Those who gained more weight experienced the largest decrease from baseline in HbA1c and FPG. More weight gain was associated with higher insulin dose requirements, an increased risk of experiencing either symptomatic or glucose-confirmed (< 70 mg/dL) hypoglycemia, and more adverse events. Older patients (> 65 years) were less likely to gain weight or to experience glucose-confirmed hypoglycemia, but more likely to experience severe hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSIONS

In this retrospective analysis of patient-level data, most patients had a stable weight (defined as ± 2.5 kg) after 24 weeks of insulin glargine, and weight gain varied with patient demographics. Therefore, insulin glargine can be used in these patient groups with type 2 diabetes without expectation of significant weight gain.

Effectiveness and safety of basal supported oral therapy with insulin glargine, in Japanese insulin-naive, type 2 diabetes patients, with or without microvascular complications: subanalysis of the observational, non-interventional, 24-week follow-up Add-on Lantus® to Oral Hypoglycemic Agents (ALOHA) study

AIMS

The aim of this study is to evaluate effectiveness and safety of basal supported oral therapy (BOT) using insulin glargine in insulin-naive Japanese patients, with and without microvascular complications.

METHODS

This sub-group analysis of observational, non-interventional ALOHA study, assessed changes in glycemic parameters and glargine dose, at 24weeks or at glargine discontinuation. Count of hypoglycemic episodes was based on physicians' documentation of patient reports. Patients were stratified according to presence/absence of microvascular complications, at baseline. Relationships between baseline patient characteristics and achievement of HbA1c <7% were examined by multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 3631 patients, included during 2007-2009, were stratified in sub-groups: no complications (n= 1889), retinopathy (n=318), neuropathy (n=297), nephropathy (n=356), retinopathy+neuropathy (n= 174), retinopathy+nephropathy (n=154), neuropathy+nephropathy (n=142), and retinopathy+neuropathy+nephropathy (n=301). Changes in HbA1c, fasting and postprandial plasma glucose, and glargine daily dose were similar among patients with and without complications. Response-rate for achieving HbA1c <7.0% was highest in patients without complications (19.1%). In multivariate analysis, patients without complications showed significantly higher odds of attaining HbA1c <7%, independent of diabetes duration and baseline HbA1c levels. Patients with retinopathy+nephropathy had the lowest response-rate (8.8%) and highest hypoglycemic-rate (3.2%).

CONCLUSION

Japanese insulin-naive patients without complications, on BOT with glargine, show higher chances of attaining HbA1c <7.0% than those with complications.

Efficacy and safety of basal insulin glargine 12 and 24 weeks after initiation in persons with type 2 diabetes: a pooled analysis of data from treatment arms of 15 treat-to-target randomised controlled trials

AIM

Evaluate early (0-12 weeks) and later (12-24 weeks) treatment outcomes in subjects with type 2 diabetes not achieving glycaemic control with oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs).

METHODS

Selected data were pooled from 15 randomised, controlled treat-to-target (fasting plasma glucose < 100mg/dL [< 5.6 mmol/L]) trials adding insulin glargine to metformin, a sulphonylurea, or both. Glycaemic and hypoglycaemia parameters, insulin dose, and body weight at weeks 12 and 24 were assessed using individualised subject-level data.

RESULTS

Data from 2837 subjects were analysed. HbA1c decreased from 8.8% (73 mmol/mol) at baseline by 1.4% (15 mmol/mol) at Week 12, and a further 0.2% (2 mmol/mol) at Week 24 in the pooled population. Similar reductions were observed across the different treatment groups. HbA1c < 7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) was reached by 34.8% of participants at Week 12 and an additional 24.3% by Week 24. Hypoglycaemia incidence and rates were similar during the early and continued treatment periods across all treatment combinations, but were markedly lower for insulin glargine plus metformin versus the other 2 regimens.

CONCLUSIONS

Early and sustained glycaemic benefits with a low-risk of hypoglycaemia are observed after initiation of insulin glargine in a pooled type 2 diabetes cohort previously uncontrolled on OADs.

Glycemic control parameters in insulin-naïve patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes referred to endocrinologists, and degree of implementation of the national Spanish consensus for the management of hyperglycemia

OBJECTIVE

To assess blood glucose in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with oral antidiabetic drugs in primary care at the time of referral to specialized endocrinologists, and the degree of implementation of the national consensus guidelines of the Spanish Society of Diabetes by evaluating steps one (S1), two (S2), and three (S3) of the escalating therapy.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective, observational study where 81 endocrinologists evaluated patients ≥40 years of age referred from primary care between July 2012 and July 2013, treated with 1 to 2 oral antidiabetic drugs but no insulin therapy, and with glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) levels ≥6.5%. Patients also had to have HbA(1c) levels and both fasting and postprandial plasma glucose measurements from the previous three months.

RESULTS

A total of 285 patients (57.6% males) were assessed. Mean (SD) age was 63.1 (9.7) years, mean HbA1c was 8.5 (1.2) %, mean FPG was 171.7 (43) mg/dL, and mean postprandial plasma glucose was 206.8 (50) mg/dL. In primary care, 26.0% of patients were at S1 and 74.0% were at S2. After referral to the endocrinologist, 9.8% of patients moved onto S1, 42.8% onto S2, and 47.4% onto S3. Oral antidiabetic drugs most commonly prescribed in primary care were metformin (90.2%), DPP-4 inhibitors (34.4%), and sulfonylureas (30.5%), while drugs most commonly used in the specialized endocrinology setting were metformin (86%), insulin (56.8%), and DPP-4 inhibitors (49.8%). The most commonly followed guidelines were those of the American Diabetes Association and the consensus guidelines of the Spanish Society of Diabetes, in 77% and 45% of cases respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Approximately half the patients treated with oral antidiabetic drugs in primary care are prescribed insulin after referral to an endocrinology specialist. The most commonly followed guidelines in specialized care are the American Diabetes Association guidelines.

Influence of baseline glycemia on outcomes with insulin glargine use in patients uncontrolled on oral agents

PURPOSE

Optimizing glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) not controlled with ≥ 1 oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) is challenging. Many therapeutic options exist; however, data comparing the effectiveness of different strategies are lacking for the management of patients with T2DM. Our study aim was to provide comparative data on efficacy and hypoglycemia when initiating insulin glargine (glargine) versus alternative treatment options (not including the newest antidiabetes agents, glucagon-like peptide [GLP]-1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase [DPP]-4 inhibitors or sodium-glucose linked transporter [SGLT]-2 inhibitors) in insulin-naive patients with T2DM who remained uncontrolled with OADs.

METHODS

Patient-level data were pooled from 9 randomized controlled trials of ≥ 24 weeks duration with comparable patient populations. The effect of adding glargine was compared with intensification of lifestyle interventions or OADs, addition of neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin, insulin lispro, premixed insulin, or all comparators pooled, on patient glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level, fasting plasma glucose level, weight, and hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

A greater proportion of patients achieved a target HbA1c level ≤ 7.0% with glargine treatment than with pooled comparators, intensification of OADs, or lifestyle interventions; there was no difference when compared with NPH, premixed, or insulin lispro use. The rate for reported hypoglycemic events was lower for glargine use than for pooled comparators or other insulins, but higher compared with intensification of lifestyle interventions or OADs. When stratified by baseline HbA1c level, efficacy/target attainment with glargine use was better than for pooled comparators across all HbA1c strata; OAD intensification, when baseline HbA1c level was ≥ 8.0%; and premixed insulin if baseline HbA1c level was < 8.0%; but similar to other insulins for all other categories. The incidence of reported hypoglycemia was less frequent with glargine use than other insulins, but more frequent than intensification of lifestyle interventions or OADs.

CONCLUSION

When adequate glycemic control is not achieved using OADs in patients with T2DM, initiating insulin glargine is generally less likely to elicit hypoglycemia than initiating NPH, premixed, or prandial insulins, and the benefit-risk balance supports initiating insulin rather than intensification of OAD therapy when baseline HbA1c level is ≥ 8.0%.

Efficacy and risk of hypoglycemia with use of insulin glargine or comparators in patients with cardiovascular risk factors

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular risk factors (CVRFs) may complicate optimization of therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs). We assessed the influence of patient baseline CVRFs on efficacy and rate of hypoglycemia with use of insulin glargine (glargine) added to ongoing OAD treatment compared with alternative therapeutic options; namely, intensification of lifestyle interventions or adding OADs, neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH), lispro, or premixed insulin in patients failing OADs.

METHODS

Patient-level data were pooled from 9 randomized controlled trials of glargine and comparators for 24 weeks in insulin-naive patients with T2DM inadequately controlled on OADs. Efficacy (goal attainment-glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level ≤ 7.0% or decrease ≥ 1.0% change from baseline) and hypoglycemia rates (symptomatic, confirmed, nocturnal, or severe) were compared for patients treated with glargine (n = 1462) and pooled (n = 1476) and individual comparators, overall; and in patients with hypertension (~69%), dyslipidemia (~58%), history of cardiovascular disease (~25%), or any CVRF (~83%) at baseline.

RESULTS

The patient groups were well-balanced at baseline (HbA1c level 8.7%; diabetes duration, 8.6 years). Use of glargine was associated with greater patient goal attainment (57.7% vs 51.4% for HbA1c level ≤ 7.0%; P < 0.001), modestly larger reductions in HbA1c level (-1.68% vs -1.51%; P < 0.001), and less symptomatic hypoglycemia than occurred with pooled comparators, regardless of patient CVRFs (5.04 vs 7.01 events/patient-year of exposure, respectively; P < 0.001). Reductions in HbA1c level and hypoglycemia rates were significantly greater with glargine use than with intensification of OADs or lifestyle modifications, overall, and in patients with any CVRF. Reductions in HbA1c level were greater and hypoglycemia rates lower with use of glargine compared with premixed insulin, overall, and in patients with any CVRF. Reductions in HbA1c level were similar and hypoglycemia rates lower with use of glargine, NPH, and lispro insulin, regardless of patient CVRFs.

CONCLUSION

The glycemic benefits of glargine use compared with alternative therapeutic options are maintained without excess hypoglycemia in patients with CVRFs.

Comparison between the therapeutic effect of metformin, glimepiride and their combination as an add-on treatment to insulin glargine in uncontrolled patients with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To compare the commonly prescribed oral anti-diabetic drug (OAD) combinations to use as an add-on therapy with insulin glargine in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes despite submaximal doses of OADs.

METHODS

People with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (n = 99) were randomly assigned on a 1∶1∶1 basis to receive insulin glargin, with fixed doses of glimepiride, metformin, and glimepiride plus metformin. Outcomes assessed included HbA1c, the changes in fasting glucose levels, body weight, serum lipids values, insulin dose and symptomatic hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

After 24 weeks, HbA1C levels improved from (mean ± SD) 8.5±0.9% to 7.7±0.8% (69.0±10.0 mmol/mol to 60.8±8.6 mmol/mol) with insulin glargine plus metformin, from 8.4±1.0% to 7.7±1.3% (68.8±10.6 mmol/mol to 61.1±14.4 mmol/mol) with insulin glargine plus glimepiride and from 8.7±0.9% to 7.3±0.6% (71.7±9.8 mmol/mol to 56.2±6.7 mmol/mol) with insulin glargine plus glimepirde plus metformin. The decrease in HbA1c was more pronounced with insulin glargine plus glimepiride plus metformin than with insulin glargine plus metformin (0.49% [CI, 0.16% to 0.82%]; P = 0.005) (5.10 mmol/mol [CI, 1.64 to 8.61]; P = 0.005) and insulin glargine plus glimepiride (0.59% [CI, 0.13% to 1.05%]; P = 0.012) (5.87 mmol/mol [CI, 1.10 to 10.64]; P = 0.012) (overall P = 0.02). Weight gain and the risk of hypoglycemia of any type did not significantly differ among the treatment groups.

CONCLUSION

The combination therapy of metformin and glimepiride plus glargine insulin resulted in a significant improvement in overall glycemic control as compared with the other combinations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION INFORMATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00708578. The approval number of Kangbuk Samsung hospital's institutional review board (IRB): C0825.

Effect of gender on treatment outcomes in type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIM

To evaluate the effect of gender on clinical outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving antidiabetes therapy.

METHODS

This is a pooled analysis from nine similarly designed phase 3 and 4 randomized, controlled studies evaluating insulin glargine and an active comparator (NPH insulin, insulin lispro, premixed insulin, oral antidiabetes drugs, dietary intervention) in adults with T2DM. Impact of gender on outcomes including HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), weight-adjusted insulin dose, and hypoglycemia incidence was evaluated after 24 weeks of treatment.

RESULTS

Overall, 1651 male and 1287 female individuals were included; 49.8% and 50.2% were treated with insulin glargine or comparators, respectively. Females receiving insulin glargine were less likely than males to achieve a glycemic target of HbA1c≤7.0% (53mmol/mol) (54.3% vs 60.8%, respectively, p=0.0162); there was no difference between females and males receiving comparators (52.7% vs 51.3%, respectively, p=0.4625). Females had significantly greater reductions in FPG (3.1mg/dL, p=0.0458), required significantly higher insulin doses (0.03IU/kg, p=0.0071), and had significantly higher annual rates of symptomatic (p<0.0001), glucose-confirmed (<50 and <70mg/dL) symptomatic (p=0.0005 and p<0.0001), and severe hypoglycemia (p=0.0020) than males.

CONCLUSIONS

Females in this analysis had smaller reductions in HbA1c and were less likely to reach glycemic goals despite higher insulin doses and more hypoglycemic events than males. Differences in gender responses to therapy should be considered when individualizing treatment for people with T2DM.

Clinical predictors of risk of hypoglycaemia during addition and titration of insulin glargine for type 2 diabetes mellitus

AIM

Addition and titration of basal insulin is usually effective in improving glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes, but fear of hypoglycaemia remains a barrier. Ability to predict which patients might be at greatest risk of hypoglycaemia might facilitate individualization of treatment and improve safety. The aim of this study was to obtain information about clinical characteristics which might predict risk of hypoglycaemia during initiation of basal insulin.

METHODS

Patient-level data from 2251 participants in 11 studies in which insulin glargine was started and titrated using similar treat-to-target methods was pooled and analysed with logistic regression models.

RESULTS

Participants had mean age 58 years, diabetes duration 8.9 years, body mass index 31.0 and baseline A1c 8.8%. They attained mean A1c 7.1% during 6 months of treatment with final mean glargine dosage 0.44 units/kg. Symptomatic hypoglycaemia occurred in 52%, glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemia (blood glucose <50 mg/dl) in 17%, repeated glucose-confirmed events in 7% and severe hypoglycaemia in 1.5%. Independent predictors of glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemia were younger age, lower body mass index, use of a sulphonylurea in addition to metformin, lower attained A1c and lower dosage of glargine.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings confirm low rates of clinically important hypoglycaemia using this method, and suggest that higher risk of hypoglycaemia may be suspected when patients needing insulin are younger, less obese and taking metformin and a sulphonylurea, and especially when A1c levels ≤7.0% are attained with glargine dosage ≤0.4 units/kg.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine compared to other interventions in younger and older adults: a pooled analysis of nine open-label, randomized controlled trials in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) present therapeutic challenges related to co-morbidities, treatment adherence, and safety. This study examines the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine compared to other glucose-lowering interventions in younger and older adults.

METHODS

In this pooled analysis of 24-week data from nine prospective open-label, multicenter, phase 3/4, two-arm, parallel-group, randomized controlled trials, patients with T2DM aged 18-80 years received insulin glargine (used as a basal insulin regimen) or comparators (including rosiglitazone, pioglitazone, insulin lispro, insulin lispro 75/25, NPH insulin, NPH insulin 30/70, and lifestyle/dietary measures). Endpoints included change from baseline to week 24 in: glycated hemoglobin; fasting plasma glucose; body weight; body mass index; insulin dose; incidence of nocturnal, daytime, or any hypoglycemia. Results were stratified by age (<65, ≥65, 65-74, and ≥75 years) and treatment (insulin glargine or comparator).

RESULTS

A total of 2,938 patients were included (2,263 aged <65 years, 675 aged ≥65 years). Similar levels of glycemic control were achieved in both younger (<65 years) and older (≥65 years) patients with T2DM. Insulin glargine was associated with better glycemic control and a reduced incidence of daytime and any hypoglycemia versus comparator interventions in both younger and older T2DM patients.

CONCLUSION

This analysis suggests that insulin glargine may represent a safe option to improve glycemic control in older patients with T2DM.

The role of GLP-1 mimetics and basal insulin analogues in type 2 diabetes mellitus: guidance from studies of liraglutide

In people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the incretin effect is reduced, but the recent advent of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 agonists/analogues has enabled restoration of at least some of the function of the incretin system, with accompanying improvements in glycaemic control. Two GLP-1 receptor agonists/analogues are currently approved for the treatment of T2DM-exenatide (Byetta®, Eli Lilly & Co., Indianapolis, IN, US) and liraglutide (Victoza®, Novo Nordisk, Bagsvaerd, Denmark); a once-weekly formulation of exenatide (Bydureon®, Eli Lilly & Co.) has also been approved by the European Medicines Agency. The National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has recently published guidance on the use of liraglutide in T2DM, based on evidence from the Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes (LEAD) Phase III trial programme, which compared liraglutide with existing glucose-lowering therapies, such as exenatide and insulin glargine. The LEAD programme reported HbA1c reductions from 0.8 to 1.5% with liraglutide (1.2 and 1.8 mg), accompanied by low rates of hypoglycaemia and some weight loss; side effects were primarily gastrointestinal in nature (e.g. nausea and diarrhoea). Based on the findings of the LEAD studies and the NICE recommendation, liraglutide now represents an important therapy widely available in the UK for certain patient groups, including those with a body mass index (BMI) ≥35.0 kg/m(2) , and patients with a BMI <35 kg/m(2) who are considered unsuitable for insulin and are failing to meet targets for glycaemic control with oral agents. NICE guidelines still suggest that most patients without considerable obesity (BMI <35 kg/m(2) ) are probably best managed using insulin therapy. Evidence also suggests a future role for GLP-1 mimetics in combination with basal insulin.

Telecare Provides comparable efficacy to conventional self-monitored blood glucose in patients with type 2 diabetes titrating one injection of insulin glulisine-the ELEONOR study

BACKGROUND

We compared telecare and conventional self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) programs for titrating the addition of one bolus injection of insulin glulisine in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on oral hypoglycemic agents for ≥3 months who were first titrated with basal insulin glargine.

METHODS

This randomized, multicenter, parallel-group study included 241 patients (mean screening glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], 8.8% [73 mmol/mol]). In the run-in phase, any antidiabetes medication, except for metformin, was discontinued. Metformin was then up-titrated to 2 g/day (1 g twice daily) until study completion. Following run-in, all patients started glargine for 8-16 weeks, targeting fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≤5.6 mmol/L using conventional SMBG. Patients with FPG ≤7 mmol/L added a glulisine dose at the meal with the highest postprandial plasma glucose excursion, titrated to target 2-h postprandial plasma glucose level <7.8 mmol/L using telecare or SMBG for 24 weeks. Patients with FPG >7 mmol/L at week 16 were withdrawn from the study.

RESULTS

After glargine titration, 224 patients achieved FPG ≤7 mmol/L, without any difference between telecare and SBMG groups (mean±SD, 6.2±0.8 vs. 6.0±0. 9 mmol/L, respectively). HbA(1c) levels were lower following titration and were similar for telecare and SMBG (7.9±0.9% vs. 7.8±0.9% [63 vs. 62 mmol/mol], respectively). Adding glulisine further reduced HbA(1c) in both groups (-0.7% vs. -0.7%); 45.2% and 54.8% (P=0.14), respectively, of patients achieved HbA(1c) ≤7.0% (≤53 mmol/mol). Weight change and hypoglycemia were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients adding one dose of glulisine at the meal with the highest postprandial plasma glucose excursion to titrated basal glargine achieved comparable improvements in glycemic control irrespective of traditional or telecare blood glucose monitoring.

Insulin initiation in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: treatment guidelines, clinical evidence and patterns of use of basal vs premixed insulin analogues

This review addresses the apparent disconnect between international guideline recommendations, real-life clinical practice and the results of clinical trials, with regard to the initiation of insulin using basal (long-acting) or premixed insulin analogues in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). English language guidelines vary considerably with respect to recommended glycaemic targets, the selection of human vs analogue insulin, and choice of insulin regimen. Randomised trials directly comparing insulin initiation between basal and premixed analogues are scarce, and hard endpoint outcome data are inadequate. The evidence presented suggests that a major component of the HbA1c not being attained in every day clinical practice may be a result of factors that are not adequately addressed in forced titration trials of highly motivated patients, including failure to comply with complex treatment and monitoring regimens. Enforced intensification of unrealistic complex treatment regimens and glycaemic targets may theoretically worsen the psychological well-being in some patients. More simple and sustainable treatment regimens and guidelines are urgently needed. As for the use of insulin in T2D, there is limited evidence to convincingly support that initiation of insulin using basal insulin analogues is superior to initiation using premixed insulin analogues. While awaiting improved clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness data, practical guidance from national and international diabetes organisations should consider more carefully the importance of: i) being clear and consistent; and ii) the early implementation of sustainable and cost-effective insulin treatment regimens with an emphasis on optimising treatment ease of use and patient compliance.

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

Basal insulin analogs are recognized as an effective method of achieving and maintaining glycemic control for patients with type 2 diabetes. However, the progressive nature of the disease means that some individuals may require additional ways to maintain their glycemic goals. Intensification in these circumstances has traditionally been achieved by the addition of short-acting insulin to cover postprandial glucose excursions that are not targeted by basal insulin. However, intensive insulin regimens are associated with a higher risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain, which can contribute to a greater burden on patients. The combination of basal insulin with a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) mimetic is a potentially attractive solution to this problem for some patients with type 2 diabetes. GLP-1 mimetics target postprandial glucose and should complement the activity of basal insulins; they are also associated with a relatively low risk of associated hypoglycemia and moderate, but significant, weight loss. Although the combination has not been approved by regulatory authorities, preliminary evidence from mostly small-scale studies suggests that basal insulins in combination with GLP-1 mimetics do provide improvements in A1c and postprandial glucose with concomitant weight loss and no marked increase in the risk of hypoglycemia. These results are promising, but further studies are required, including comparisons with basal-bolus therapy, before the complex value of this association can be fully appreciated.

An analysis of early insulin glargine added to metformin with or without sulfonylurea: impact on glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia

AIM

To evaluate the benefits of initiating insulin at an earlier versus later treatment stage, and regimens with/without sulfonylurea (SU).

METHODS

Pooled analysis of 11 prospective randomized clinical trials, including 2171 adults with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes initiating insulin glargine following a specific titration algorithm. Clinical outcomes were glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) reduction, per cent achieving HbA1c ≤ 7.0%, weight gain and hypoglycaemic events. Statistical analysis compared outcomes 24 weeks after basal insulin initiation in patients previously uncontrolled on 0/1 oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) versus 2 OADs, and in patients taking metformin (MET) or SU alone or in combination at baseline. A meta-analysis was also conducted.

RESULTS

For the pooled analysis, patients on 0/1 OAD and those on MET monotherapy at baseline had the largest 24-week reductions in HbA1c following the addition of insulin glargine (∼0.44 U/kg). Of patients failing MET/SU monotherapy and MET + SU in combination, 68.1, 50.4 and 56.4% achieved HbA1c ≤ 7.0%, respectively (p = 0.0006). Weight gain was lowest when basal insulin was added to MET. Patients on 0/1 OAD at baseline had significantly less symptomatic hypoglycaemia when basal insulin was added than those on 2 OADs (p = 0.0007). Despite higher insulin doses, those taking MET alone had less hypoglycaemia than those taking SU or MET + SU. Results were confirmed in the meta-analysis.

CONCLUSION

Adding insulin glargine to MET monotherapy early in treatment may provide efficacy/safety benefits over regimens including SU. This may reflect treatment earlier in the disease and supports the inclusion of insulin as a second step in the American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes treatment algorithm.

First insulinization with basal insulin in patients with Type 2 diabetes in a real-world setting in Asia

BACKGROUND

The First Basal Insulin Evaluation (FINE) Asia study is a multinational, prospective, observational study of insulin-naïve Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients in Asia, uncontrolled (A1c ≥ 8%) on oral hypoglycemic agents, designed to evaluate the impact of basal insulin initiation.

METHODS

Basal insulin was initiated with or without concomitant oral therapy and doses were adjusted individually. All treatment choices, including the decision to initiate insulin, were at the physician's discretion to reflect real-life practice.

RESULTS

Patients (n=2679) from 11 Asian countries were enrolled (mean [±SD] duration of diabetes 9.3±6.5 years; weight 68.1±12.7 kg; A1c 9.8 ± 1.6%). After 6 months of basal insulin (NPH insulin, insulin glargine, or insulin detemir), A1c decreased to 7.7±1.4%; 33.7% patients reached A1c <7%. Fasting blood glucose (FBG) decreased from 11.7±3.6 to 7.2±2.5 mmol/L and 36.8% of patients reached FBG <6.1 mmol/L. The mean daily insulin dose prescribed increased marginally from 0.18 to 0.23 U/kg per day at baseline to 0.22-0.24 U/kg per day at Month 6. Mean changes in body weight and reported rates of hypoglycemia were low over the duration of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

Initiation of insulin therapy is still being delayed by approximately 9 years, resulting in many Asian patients developing severe hyperglycemia. Initiating insulin treatment with basal insulin was effective and safe in Asian T2DM patients in a real-world setting, but insulin needs may differ from those in Western countries.

Multiple HbA1c targets and insulin analogues in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review

PROBLEM

Insulin analogues are increasingly used in patients with type 2 diabetes. We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to assess the role of insulin analogues to reach different hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) targets (from 6.5% to 8%) in type 2 diabetic patients.

METHODS

RCTs involving insulin regimens (basal, prandial, biphasic, and basal-bolus) with insulin analogues in type 2 diabetes were identified through electronic searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library) through August 2010. We included any study arm of RCTs if they were at least 12 weeks in duration, and reported HbA1c as an outcome and the proportion of diabetic patients reaching the HbA1c target of <7%. The proportion of patients with HbA1c <6.5%, <7.0%, <7.5%, and <8.0% was estimated using mean and standard deviation of HbA1c at the end of treatment.

RESULTS

We identified 53 RCTs, with 92 arms, and 32,689 patients. The proportion of patients at target was highest with the basal-bolus regimen, and ranged from 27.8% (95% CI, 22.2-34%) for the HbA1c target <6.5% to 88% (CI 83-92%) for the HbA1c target <8%. Biphasic insulin regimen ranked second at any HbA1c target, while prandial and basal regimens alternated across different HbA1c targets.

CONCLUSIONS

At any HbA1c target, basal-bolus insulin regimens with insulin analogues obtained the best results, which may be useful for detailing the best treatment effect in individual patients.

Liraglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

This paper presents a summary of the evidence review group (ERG) report into the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of liraglutide in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, based upon the manufacturer’s submission to the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) as part of the single technology appraisal process. The manufacturer proposed the use of liraglutide as a second or third drug in patients with type 2 diabetes whose glycaemic control was unsatisfactory with metformin, with or without a second oral glucose-lowering drug. The submission included six manufacturer-sponsored trials that compared the efficacy of liraglutide against other glucose-lowering agents. Not all of the trials were relevant to the decision problem. The most relevant were Liraglutide Effects and Actions in Diabetes 5 (LEAD-5) (liraglutide used as part of triple therapy and compared against insulin glargine) and LEAD-6 [liraglutide in triple therapy compared against another glucagon-like peptide-1 agonist, exenatide]. Five of the six trials were published in full and one was then unpublished. Two doses of liraglutide, 1.2 and 1.8 mg, were used in some trials, but in the two comparisons in triple therapy, against glargine and exenatide, only the 1.8-mg dose was used. Liraglutide in both doses was found to be clinically effective in lowering blood glucose concentration [glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c)], reducing weight (unlike other glucose-lowering agents, such as sulphonylureas, glitazones and insulins, which cause weight gain) and also reducing systolic blood pressure (SBP). Hypoglycaemia was uncommon. The ERG carried out meta-analyses comparing the 1.2- and 1.8-mg doses of liraglutide, which suggested that there was no difference in control of diabetes, and only a slight difference in weight loss, insufficient to justify the extra cost. The cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out using the Center for Outcomes Research model. The health benefit was reported as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The manufacturer estimated the cost-effectiveness to be £15,130 per QALY for liraglutide 1.8 mg compared with glargine, £10,054 per QALY for liraglutide 1.8 mg compared with exenatide, £10,465 per QALY for liraglutide 1.8 mg compared with sitagliptin, and £9851 per QALY for liraglutide 1.2 mg compared with sitagliptin. The ERG conducted additional sensitivity analyses and concluded that the factors that carried most weight were:

The European Medicines Agency has approved liraglutide in dual therapy with other oral glucose-lowering agents. NICE guidance recommends the use of liraglutide 1.2 mg in triple therapy when glycaemic control remains or becomes inadequate with a combination of two oral glucose-lowering drugs. The use of liraglutide 1.2 mg in a dual therapy is indicated only in patients who are intolerant of, or have contraindications to, three oral glucose-lowering drugs. The use of liraglutide 1.8 mg was not approved by NICE. The ERG recommends research into the (currently unlicensed) use of liraglutide in combination with long-acting insulin.

Relationship of baseline HbA1c, HbA1c change and HbA1c target of < 7% with insulin analogues in type 2 diabetes: a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials

AIM

We performed a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with insulin analogues in type 2 diabetes utilising a least-squared regression model in order to assess the relationship between baseline HbA1c, the magnitude of HbA1c decrease and attainment of HbA1c target of < 7%.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials involving insulin regimens (basal, prandial, biphasic and basal-bolus) were identified through electronic searches (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and The Cochrane Library) through September 2010. We included any study arm of RCTs if they were at least 12 weeks in duration; the number of patients in any arm was more than 30 and reported the baseline HbA1c and change from baseline HbA1c.

RESULTS

We found 87 studies, with a total of 135 arms, and 38,803 patients. The weighted R(2) values for the overall analysis assessing the association between baseline HbA1c and absolute change in HbA1c or the proportion of patients at target were 0.485 (p < 0.001) and 0.146 (p < 0.001), respectively. Subanalyses of insulin regimens for the association between basal HbA1c and absolute decrease of HbA1c produced weighted R(2), which were significant for all insulin regimens with the highest association for basal-bolus (R(2) = 0.719, p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

The strong positive relationship between baseline HbA1c and the magnitude of HbA1c change we found in RCTs using insulin analogues in type 2 diabetes should be considered when assessing the clinical efficacy of insulin therapies.

Treatment regimens with insulin analogues and haemoglobin A1c target of <7% in type 2 diabetes: a systematic review

We conducted a systematic review of randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effectiveness of insulin regimens (basal, biphasic, prandial, and basal-bolus) with insulin analogues to reach the haemoglobin A1c target of <7% in patients with type 2 diabetes. We identified 48 trials, with 85 arms and 30,588 patients. There were 38 arms using basal insulin, with 17,588 patients, and a primary outcome of 41.4% (95% CI=35.6-47.4%); 26 arms using biphasic insulin, with 9237 patients, and a primary outcome of 46.5% (40.8-52.3%); 9 arms using prandial insulin, with 1605 patients, and a primary outcome of 39.6% (95% CI, 28.6-51.3%); and 12 arms using basal-bolus insulin, with 2114 patients, and a primary outcome of 53.9% (43.5-64). The high heterogeneity was related, in part, to first time insulin use, final insulin dose, and use of oral drug. The overall incidence of hypoglycaemia ranged from 0 to 4.71 events/patient/30 days; weight gain ranged from 1.75 kg for basal to 3 kg for biphasic insulin. The HbA1c target of <7% can be achieved in a percentage of type 2 diabetic patients ranging from 40% to 54% depending on the particular insulin regimen.

Clinical and economic outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes initiating insulin glargine disposable pen versus exenatide BID

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate clinical and economic outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who failed oral anti-diabetic drug (OAD) therapy and initiated either insulin glargine with disposable pen (GLA-P) or exenatide BID (EXE).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This retrospective study used data from a large US-managed care claims database and included adult T2DM patients initiating treatment with GLA-P or EXE in 2007 or 2008. Propensity score matching was used to control observed baseline differences between treatment groups. Primary study end-points included treatment persistence, A1C, healthcare utilization, and healthcare costs during the 1-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

Two thousand three hundred and thirty nine patients were included in the study (GLA-P: 381; EXE: 1958); 626 patients were in the 1:1 matched cohort (54% male; mean age: 54 years; mean A1C: 9.2%). At follow-up, patients in the GLA-P group were significantly more persistent in treatment than EXE patients (48% vs 15% in persistence rate and 252 vs 144 days in persistence days; both p<0.001). GLA-P patients also had significantly lower A1C at follow-up (8.02% vs 8.32%; p=0.042) and greater A1C reduction from baseline (-1.23% vs -0.92%; p=0.038). There were no significant differences in claims-based hypoglycemia rates and overall diabetes-related healthcare utilization and cost.

LIMITATIONS

Since this was a retrospective analysis, causality of treatment benefits cannot be established. The study was specific to two treatments and may not generalize to other models of insulin administration. Some of the results, although statistically significant, may not be found clinically important.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world setting among T2DM patients who failed to achieve or sustain glycemic goal with OADs, initiation of GLA-P instead of EXE may be a more effective option because it was associated with greater treatment persistence, greater A1C reduction without a significantly higher rate of hypoglycemia, and similar healthcare costs.

The role of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists in the therapeutic management of type 2 diabetes--a comprehensive review

The treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been revolutionized by the introduction of novel therapeutic regimens following the clinical approval of the long-acting basal insulin glargine 10 years ago, followed by insulin detemir and, more recently, agents that target the glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 system with dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4)-resistant products, such as liraglutide and exenatide, and DPP-4 inhibitors, such as sitagliptin, saxagliptin, alogliptin, and vildagliptin. The position and clinical efficacy of the GLP-1 mimetics are less well understood, however, and how they should be best used in the context of the established clinical efficacy of long-acting insulin analogs is yet to be defined. The aim of this review is to provide a summary of the efficacy, safety, and weight changes associated with long-acting insulin analogs (insulin glargine and insulin detemir) and two GLP-1 mimetics (exenatide and liraglutide). MEDLINE, EMBASE, and BIOSIS databases were searched with a timeframe of January 1, 2003-January 12, 2009 using the following terms: "Insulin glargine," with the co-indexing terms "LANTUS" and "HOE901"; "Insulin detemir," with the co-indexing term "Levemir"; "Exenatide"; and "Liraglutide." This literature review demonstrates that GLP-1 and basal insulin therapies are effective treatment options for insulin-naïve patients with suboptimal glycemic control with oral hypoglycemic agents. There are potential advantages of basal insulin and GLP-1 therapies in particular populations of patients. Further comparative data are needed to fully investigate the relative positioning of these therapies within the T2DM treatment paradigm.

Combined randomised controlled trial experience of malignancies in studies using insulin glargine

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Recent publications of data extracted from population registries have suggested a possible relationship between treatment with insulin glargine and increased incidence of cancer/breast cancer. The aim of the present study was investigate this possible relationship using data from the manufacturer's (sanofi-aventis) pharmacovigilance database.

METHODS

We analysed the manufacturer's (sanofi-aventis) pharmacovigilance database for all randomised clinical trials (RCTs; Phase 2-4) comparing insulin glargine with any comparator in type 1 or type 2 diabetes. We identified all serious adverse events coded under the System Organ Class of 'neoplasms, benign, malignant and unspecified'. Treatment-emergent neoplasms judged to be malignant were included in this analysis.

RESULTS

The database included 31 studies, 12 in type 1 diabetes and 19 in type 2 diabetes. Twenty compared insulin glargine with NPH insulin, 29 were parallel-group studies and two had a crossover design. Studies were generally of 6 months' duration, except for trial reference number 4016 (n = 1,017), which had a duration of 5 years. Overall, 10,880 people were included in the analysis (insulin glargine, 5,657; comparator, 5,223). Forty-five people (0.8%) vs 46 people (0.9%) reported 52 and 48 cases of malignant cancer in the insulin glargine and comparator groups, respectively (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.60-1.36). Skin (12 people with 16 events vs six people with seven events, RR 1.85, 95% CI 0.69-4.92), colon and rectum (six vs ten people, RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.20-1.52), breast (four vs six people, RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.17-2.18) and gastrointestinal tract (six vs four people, RR 1.38, 95% CI 0.39-4.90) were the most commonly reported sites.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

In these 31 RCTs, insulin glargine was not associated with an increased incidence of cancer, including breast cancer, compared with the comparator group.

Patient-directed titration for achieving glycaemic goals using a once-daily basal insulin analogue: an assessment of two different fasting plasma glucose targets - the TITRATE study

AIMS

To compare efficacy and safety of two fasting plasma glucose (FPG) titration targets [4.4-6.1 mmol/l (80-110 mg/dl) and 3.9-5.0 mmol/l (70-90 mg/dl)] using a patient-directed, treat-to-target algorithm for once-daily basal insulin in insulin-naïve subjects with type 2 diabetes suboptimally treated with oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs).

METHODS

In this 20-week, randomized, controlled, open-label, multicentre, treat-to-target study, 244 insulin-naïve subjects with type 2 diabetes, HbA(1c)>or=7.0 and <or=9.0% on OAD treatment, were randomized (1 : 1) to one of two treatment arms using 3.9-5.0 or 4.4-6.1 mmol/l FPG as titration targets. Once-daily insulin detemir doses were adjusted using algorithm-guided patient-directed titration to achieve target FPG values.

RESULTS

Overall, the combined treatment groups achieved a mean HbA(1c) level of 6.9% at the end of the study. Substantial reductions in HbA(1c) were seen in both treatment groups, with the majority of subjects in both titration groups at the end of the study achieving the American Diabetes Association (ADA)-recommended HbA(1c) level of <7%. In the 3.9-5.0 mmol/l FPG target treatment group, HbA(1c) values decreased from a baseline mean of 8.0% to 6.8% at 20 weeks. In the 4.4-6.1 mmol/l FPG target group, HbA(1c) values decreased from 7.9% at baseline to 7.0% at 20 weeks (Intention to treat - last observation carried forward data set). These decreases were significantly different between the two treatment groups (Least squares mean difference = -0.271, 95% CI -0.441 to -0.101, p = 0.0019), favouring the FPG target of 3.9-5.0 mmol/l vs. the 4.4-6.1 mmol/l target. At the end of the study period, 64.3% of subjects in the 3.9-5.0 mmol/l treatment group achieved HbA(1c) levels <7% compared with 54.5% of subjects in the 4.4-6.1 mmol/l group (95% CI 1.03-3.37, odds ratio 1.86, p = 0.04). Insulin detemir dosing patterns were similar between treatment groups, with the 3.9-5.0 mmol/l group using slightly greater doses throughout the study period (0.57 U/kg vs. 0.51 U/kg at the end of the study). Overall rates of hypoglycaemia episodes were low and were comparable between treatment groups (7.73 and 5.27 events/subject/year for the 3.9-5.0 and 4.4-6.1 mmol/l groups, respectively). A single event of major hypoglycaemia was reported in the 3.9-5.0 mmol/l group. Mean weight changes from baseline to the end of the study were small and did not differ significantly between treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

The 3.9-5.0 mmol/l FPG target showed superior efficacy compared with the 4.4-6.1 mmol/l target, although both FPG titration targets resulted in substantial reductions of HbA(1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes using a patient-directed insulin titration algorithm. A majority of subjects in both titration groups achieved the ADA-recommended guideline of <7% HbA(1c) at the end of the study with low rates of hypoglycaemia. These data indicate that lowering the fasting glucose target using a self-directed titration algorithm with once-daily detemir is safe and increases the likelihood of achieving the target level of HbA(1c). Indeed, using this approach, a majority of patients can achieve an HbA(1c) of <7%.