Fasting plasma glucose 6-12 weeks after starting insulin glargine predicts likelihood of treatment success: a pooled analysis

Glycemic control in newly insulin-initiated patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A retrospective follow-up study at a university hospital in Ethiopia

Background

Though many trials had examined the effectiveness of taking insulin with or without oral agents, there are limited real-world data, particularly among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the resource limited settings. This study aimed to examine level of glycemic control among patients with T2DM after initiation of insulin and factors associated with poor glycemic control.

Methods

An analysis of retrospective medical records of patients with T2DM who initiated insulin due to uncontrolled hyperglycemia by oral agents was conducted from 2015–2020 in the University of Gondar Comprehensive Specialized Hospital. Difference in median fasting plasma glucose (FPG) before and after insulin initiations was examined by a Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Kruskal Wallis test was performed to explore difference in the median level of FPG among treatment groups. A logistic regression model was also used to identify associated factors of poor glycemic control after insulin initiation. Statistical significance was declared at p < 0.05.

Results

Of 424 enrolled patients with T2DM, 54.7% were males and the mean age was 59.3±9.3 years. A Wilcoxon signed-rank test showed that there was significant deference in FPG before and after insulin initiation (P < 0.001). A declining trend of blood glucose was observed during the 1-year follow-up period of post-initiation. However, majority of the participants did not achieve target glucose levels. Participants who had higher FPG and systolic blood pressure (SBP) before insulin initiation were found more likely to have poor glycemic control after insulin initiation. Similarly, patients who received atorvastatin compared with simvastatin were found to have poor glycemic control in the post-period of initiation (P = 0.04). Premixed insulin was associated with a lower likelihood of poor glycemic control than neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin (P < 0.001).

Conclusion

Following insulin initiation, a significant change in glycemic level and declining trend of FPG was observed during a 1-year follow-up period. However, the majority of patients still had a poorly controlled glycemic level. Appropriate management focusing on predictors of glycemic control would be of a great benefit to achieve glycemic control.

Once-weekly dulaglutide versus insulin glargine in the early control of fasting serum glucose and HbA1c

AIMS

To determine the early benefit:risk balance of dulaglutide versus insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

This post hoc analysis used data from a randomized, open-label study (AWARD-2; modified intention-to-treat group) in which suboptimally controlled metformin + glimepiride-treated patients received dulaglutide 1.5 mg (n = 273) or insulin glargine (n = 262). Two composite endpoints were used: for weeks 2-20, fasting serum glucose (FSG) <130 mg/dL (<7.2 mmol/L) without hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤70 mg/dL [≤3.9 mmol/L] or severe hypoglycemia); at week 26, patients with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <7.0% (<53.0 mmol/mol) or reduction from baseline ≥1.0% (≥10.9 mmol/mol), no hypoglycemia (as defined above) and no weight gain. Odds ratios (ORs) were generated using logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

The probability of reaching the FSG target without hypoglycemia was higher with dulaglutide than with insulin glargine at weeks 4 (OR 1.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22-2.60) and 8 (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.15-2.48). The proportion of patients achieving the 26-week endpoint was higher with dulaglutide (37.4% vs. 10.3%; OR 5.28; 95% CI 3.28-8.48).

CONCLUSIONS

Dulaglutide's balanced efficacy-to-safety profile compares favorably with that of insulin glargine and is apparent soon after treatment initiation and after 6 months of therapy.

Early fasting glucose measurements can predict later glycaemic response to once weekly dulaglutide

AIMS

To assess whether early measures of fasting blood glucose predict later glycaemic response with once-weekly dulaglutide in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Post hoc analyses were conducted separately for two phase 3 studies (AWARD-5 and AWARD-1) in patients assigned to once-weekly dulaglutide. Week 2 fasting blood glucose was used as a predictor variable, and glycaemic treatment response was defined by HbA1c response based on a composite efficacy endpoint. The association between fasting blood glucose and the glycaemic response was analysed using chi-square tests.

RESULTS

There was a strong association between fasting blood glucose < 7.9 mmol/l at week 2 and achieving the HbA1c composite efficacy endpoint at week 26 (P < 0.01). Higher fasting blood glucose at week 2, however, did not predict absence of glycaemic response and requires further assessment.

CONCLUSIONS

Fasting blood glucose measured at 2 weeks may be an early and useful predictor of glycaemic response to once-weekly dulaglutide treatment.

Early Glycemic Response Predicts Achievement of Subsequent Treatment Targets in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Post hoc Analysis

INTRODUCTION

American Diabetes Association consensus guidelines emphasize individualized treatment in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Early glycemic response is a clinical marker that may predict longer term efficacy for individual patients and provide a clinical tool to enhance personalized treatment. This analysis evaluated whether glycemic response measured at week 12 ("early") could serve as a reliable predictor of glycemic control at weeks 24 and 52 of therapy in patients with T2DM.

METHODS

We used data from 3 randomized, controlled clinical trials that evaluated patients with T2DM treated with 3 commonly prescribed glucose-lowering medications: metformin (n = 597), sulfonylurea (n = 626), and insulin glargine (n = 1046). The gradient boosting method was used to identify predictors of subsequent response; predictive accuracy was represented by sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), and negative predictive value (NPV). Treatment success at weeks 24 and 52 was assessed for each patient and defined as achieving a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level of <7.0% or a reduction from baseline of ≥1.0%.

RESULTS

The predictive parameters (sensitivity, specificity, PPV, and NPV) for improvements in HbA1c at week 24 for metformin were 0.83, 0.81, 0.44, and 0.96; for sulfonylurea, 0.79, 0.94, 0.71, and 0.96; and for insulin glargine, 0.67, 0.89, 0.65, and 0.90. The predictive parameters for improvements in HbA1c at week 52 for metformin were 0.73, 0.84, 0.56, and 0.92 and for sulfonylurea, 0.45, 0.94, 0.74, and 0.82.

CONCLUSION

High predictive values identified in this analysis support "early" response as an appropriate tool for predicting treatment success at weeks 24 and 52. The high NPV (lack of early glycemic response) appears to be an effective indicator of the likely need for change in (or intensification of) therapy. These data support the current guideline recommendations that clinicians evaluate therapeutic responses to pharmacologic interventions with metformin, sulfonylureas, or insulin glargine as early as week 12.

Methods for Predicting Diabetes Phase III Efficacy Outcome From Early Data: Superior Performance Obtained Using Longitudinal Approaches

The link between glucose and HbA1c at steady state has previously been described using steady-state or longitudinal relationships. We evaluated five published methods for prediction of HbA1c after 26/28 weeks using data from four clinical trials. Methods (1) and (2): steady-state regression of HbA1c on fasting plasma glucose and mean plasma glucose, respectively, (3) an indirect response model of fasting plasma glucose effects on HbA1c, (4) model of glycosylation of red blood cells, and (5) coupled indirect response model for mean plasma glucose and HbA1c. Absolute mean prediction errors were 0.61, 0.38, 0.55, 0.37, and 0.15% points, respectively, for Methods 1 through 5. This indicates that predictions improved by using mean plasma glucose instead of fasting plasma glucose, by inclusion of longitudinal glucose data and further by inclusion of longitudinal HbA1c data until 12 weeks. For prediction of trial outcome, the longitudinal models based on mean plasma glucose (Methods 4 and 5) had substantially better performance compared with the other methods.