Combination of basal insulin and GLP-1 receptor agonist: is this the end of basal insulin alone in the treatment of type 2 diabetes?

A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of iGlarLixi Versus IDegAsp and Appropriate Price Exploration of iGlarLixi for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients in China

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, a fixed-ratio combination (FRC) of basal insulin glargine plus lixisenatide, have been demonstrated in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. However, no relevant economic analysis of iGlarLixi has been done in China. Thus, the primary objective of this study is to evaluate the cost effectiveness of iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp in Chinese T2DM patients, and then back-calculate the appropriate drug price of iGlarLixi to support its pricing after listing in China.

METHODS

The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcome Model 2 (UKPDS OM2) was applied to estimate lifetime health and economic outcomes from the Chinese health-care system perspective. As no head-to-head comparison data are currently available, the baseline cohort characteristics and the initial clinical data for iGlarLixi were derived from the randomized LixiLan-L-China trial. The relative treatment effects for IDegAsp were based on an indirect treatment comparison. Due to the unavailability of iGlarLixi pricing data, the annual medication cost of iGlarLixi was assumed to be equal to that of IDegAsp at the beginning of the study. Afterwards, a break-even analysis using comparator drug price and the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was performed to back-calculate the appropriate drug price of iGlarLixi. One-way sensitivity analysis, scenario analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were conducted to assess the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

Based on the initial assumption of equal annual medication cost of iGlarLixi and IDegAsp, iGlarLixi was cost effective compared to IDegAsp with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) far below the WTP threshold in Chinese T2DM patients. From the back calculation for the price of iGlarLixi, the annual medication cost of iGlarLixi was $656.96 and $1075.96 to obtain an ICER of iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp close to 1 × GDP and 3 × GDP, respectively. When the discount rate was changed from the base value to 8% (the most sensitive parameter to the model results in one-way sensitivity analysis), the ICER was nearly equal to 1 × GDP and 3 × GDP with the annual medication cost of iGlarLixi decreasing to $590.41 and $865.03, respectively. Thus, iGlarLixi was dominant over IDegAsp with an annual medication cost of $590.41 to $865.03. The findings were robust to one-way sensitivity analysis, PSA and scenario analysis.

CONCLUSION

This long-term cost-effectiveness analysis in Chinese T2DM patients indicates that iGlarLixi, assuming equal price to IDegAsp, is cost-effective versus IDegAsp with an ICER far below the WTP threshold. With 1 × GDP and 3 × GDP threshold set we back-calculate the appropriate annual medication cost of iGlarLixi to be $590.41 to $865.03, respectively.

Direct comparison two fixed-ratio combination glucagon-like peptide receptor agonist and basal insulin on glycemic and non glycemic parameters in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Two types of fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin and a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) have been approved for use in type 2 diabetes. One is insulin degludec/liraglutide (iDergLira), and the other is insulin glargine/lixisenatide (iGlarLixi). Direct comparisons between these two combination is not available.

METHODS

The retrospective study included 186 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) with inadequate glycemic control on metformin and basal insulin (degludec, glargine 100, glargine 300) who were switched to fixed-ratio combination GLP-1 RA and basal insulin. Patients were divided into two groups based on the basal insulin before study: group I (n = 86) treated with degludec were switched to iDegLira and patients group II (n = 99), treated with glargine were switched to iGlarLixi. The aim of this study was to directly compare the effects between two fixed - ratio combination on glycemic parameters and non glycemic parameters. Follow up was 6 months.

RESULTS

Mean HbA1c decreased similarly (- 1.2% vs.-1.1%). Higher percentage patients in iDegLira group had reached the HbA1c < 7% after 6 months (22% vs. 18.2%, p < 0.05). The mean change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was comparable for the two groups, while mean decrease postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) level were lower in iGlarLixi group (2 vs 1.8 mmol/l, p > 0.05). Change in body weight was significant in iDegLira group (1.8 kg vs. 0.7 kg, p < 0.001). At the end of the study patients showed decrease in total cholesterol (TC) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) for 0.2 mmol/L in iDegLira, 0.1 mmol/l in iGlarLixi, triglycerides decreased 0.3 mmol/l in both groups, high-density lipoprotein(HDL) increased 0.1 mm/l in iGlarLixi.

CONCLUSION

Our results showed that more patients with iDegLira had HbA1c less than 7% and these combination had better effect on weight loss. There was no difference observed in FPG and PPG, lipid profile and rate of hypoglycemia.

Switching to a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is associated with improved glycaemic control in a real-world population with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United Arab Emirates: Results from the multicentre, prospective INTENSIFY study

AIM

Investigate the effectiveness of IDegLira, a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec/liraglutide, in a real-world setting in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United Arab Emirates.

METHODS

This non-interventional study enrolled adults switching to IDegLira from basal insulin (BI) or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) with/without concomitant oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). Primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline, assessed using a mixed model for repeated measurements.

RESULTS

Among 263 patients (BI ± OADs, n = 206; GLP-1 RA ± OADs, n = 57), mean baseline HbA1c was 9.29 % (78 mmol/mol). After 26 weeks, HbA1c was significantly reduced (BI ± OADs, -0.83 % [-9.0 mmol/mol] and GLP-1 RA ± OADs, -1.24 % [-13.5 mmol/mol]; both p < 0.0001). Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was significantly reduced (-39.48 mg/dL [BI ± OADs] and -82.49 mg/dL [GLP-1 RA ± OADs]; both p < 0.0001). Before treatment initiation, 3/263 patients experienced ≥ 1 severe hypoglycaemic episode and 7/263 patients experienced ≥ 1 non-severe hypoglycaemic episode compared with 1/263 patients who had ≥ 1 severe and 1/263 who had ≥ 1 non-severe episode at end of study. Body weight decreased significantly among patients switching from BI ± OADs (-1.05 kg [p < 0.0001]). Treatment was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

IDegLira significantly reduced HbA1c and FPG in this real-world setting, along with less frequent episodes of hypoglycaemia. Switching to IDegLira offers effective treatment intensification for type 2 diabetes patients with inadequate glycaemic control.

An Indirect Comparison of Basal Insulin Plus Once-Weekly Semaglutide and Fully Optimised Basal-Bolus Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

To date, there have been few head-to-head comparisons between semaglutide once-weekly (OW) and short-acting meal-time insulin in participants with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with basal insulin and requiring treatment intensification. This indirect comparison evaluated the effects of these regimens on glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c), body weight, hypoglycaemia, and other clinically relevant outcomes.

METHODS

A post-hoc, unanchored, individual participant data meta-analysis was conducted on the basis of data from single treatment arms in the SUSTAIN 5 and DUAL 7 trials. Semaglutide 0.5 mg OW and 1.0 mg OW plus basal insulin were compared with an optimised (treat-to-target) basal-bolus regimen of insulin glargine and insulin aspart over 26 weeks, using regression adjustment to account for baseline differences between the trials.

RESULTS

Over 26 weeks, semaglutide 1.0 mg OW plus basal insulin reduced mean HbA_1c by significantly more than the basal-bolus regimen (treatment difference: - 0.36%; p = 0.003), while semaglutide 0.5 mg OW plus basal insulin was comparable with basal-bolus insulin (treatment difference: 0.08%, p = 0.53). Both doses of semaglutide were associated with significant weight loss relative to insulin intensification (treatment differences: 6.8-9.4 kg; p < 0.001). At both doses, semaglutide intensification required less basal insulin per day than bolus intensification, and more participants on semaglutide met HbA_1c targets of < 7.0% and ≤ 6.5% without hypoglycaemia or weight gain (odds ratio [OR] for < 7.0%, 21.9; OR for ≤ 6.5%, 16.2; both p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

In T2D uncontrolled by basal insulin, intensification with semaglutide 1.0 mg OW was associated with better glycaemic control, weight loss, and reduced hypoglycaemia versus a basal-bolus regimen, while limiting the treatment burden associated with frequent injections. Clinicians could consider treatment intensification with semaglutide when T2D is uncontrolled by basal insulin, especially when weight management is a priority. Effective glycaemic control coupled with weight management can alleviate the burden of diabetes-associated complications.

Acute changes in systemic glycemia gate access and action of GLP-1R agonist on brain structures controlling energy homeostasis

Therapies based on glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) long-acting analogs and insulin are often used in the treatment of metabolic diseases. Both insulin and GLP-1 receptors are expressed in metabolically relevant brain regions, suggesting a cooperative action. However, the mechanisms underlying the synergistic actions of insulin and GLP-1R agonists remain elusive. In this study, we show that insulin-induced hypoglycemia enhances GLP-1R agonists entry in hypothalamic and area, leading to enhanced whole-body fat oxidation. Mechanistically, this phenomenon relies on the release of tanycyctic vascular endothelial growth factor A, which is selectively impaired after calorie-rich diet exposure. In humans, low blood glucose also correlates with enhanced blood-to-brain passage of insulin, suggesting that blood glucose gates the passage other energy-related signals in the brain. This study implies that the preventing hyperglycemia is important to harnessing the full benefit of GLP-1R agonist entry in the brain and action onto lipid mobilization and body weight loss.

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

AIMS

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Surface Adsorption-Mediated Ultrahigh Efficient Peptide Encapsulation with a Precise Ratiometric Control for Type 1 and 2 Diabetic Therapy

A surface adsorption strategy is developed to enable the engineering of microcomposites featured with ultrahigh loading capacity and precise ratiometric control of co-encapsulated peptides. In this strategy, peptide molecules (insulin, exenatide, and bivalirudin) are formulated into nanoparticles and their surface is decorated with carrier polymers. This polymer layer blocks the phase transfer of peptide nanoparticles from oil to water and, consequently, realizes ultrahigh peptide loading degree (up to 78.9%). After surface decoration, all three nanoparticles are expected to exhibit the properties of adsorbed polymer materials, which enables the co-encapsulation of insulin, exenatide, and bivalirudin with a precise ratiometric control. After solidification of this adsorbed polymer layer, the release of peptides is synchronously prolonged. With the help of encapsulation, insulin achieves 8 days of glycemic control in type 1 diabetic rats with one single injection. The co-delivery of insulin and exenatide (1:1) efficiently controls the glycemic level in type 2 diabetic rats for 8 days. Weekly administration of insulin and exenatide co-encapsulated microcomposite effectively reduces the weight gain and glycosylated hemoglobin level in type 2 diabetic rats. The surface adsorption strategy sets a new paradigm to improve the pharmacokinetic and pharmacological performance of peptides, especially for the combination of peptides.

New Horizons: Next-Generation Insulin Analogues: Structural Principles and Clinical Goals

Design of "first-generation" insulin analogues over the past 3 decades has provided pharmaceutical formulations with tailored pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) properties. Application of a molecular tool kit-integrating protein sequence, chemical modification, and formulation-has thus led to improved prandial and basal formulations for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. Although PK/PD changes were modest in relation to prior formulations of human and animal insulins, significant clinical advantages in efficacy (mean glycemia) and safety (rates of hypoglycemia) were obtained. Continuing innovation is providing further improvements to achieve ultrarapid and ultrabasal analogue formulations in an effort to reduce glycemic variability and optimize time in range. Beyond such PK/PD metrics, next-generation insulin analogues seek to exploit therapeutic mechanisms: glucose-responsive ("smart") analogues, pathway-specific ("biased") analogues, and organ-targeted analogues. Smart insulin analogues and delivery systems promise to mitigate hypoglycemic risk, a critical barrier to glycemic control, whereas biased and organ-targeted insulin analogues may better recapitulate physiologic hormonal regulation. In each therapeutic class considerations of cost and stability will affect use and global distribution. This review highlights structural principles underlying next-generation design efforts, their respective biological rationale, and potential clinical applications.

Validation of the revised Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire (DSMQ-R) in the primary care setting

Background

Available tools measuring self-management in diabetes are often improperly validated or do not correlate with glucose metabolism. The Diabetes Self-Management Questionnaire (DSMQ-R) is a valid tool, that showed strong relationship with glucose metabolism in tertiary care among people with mostly type 1 diabetes.

Aim of the study

To validate the translated DSMQ-R questionnaire in a Hungarian sample of people with predominantly type 2 diabetes in primary care.

Methods

We enrolled 492 adults from 38 practices in this cross-sectional cohort study, who filled out the self-administered questionnaire, consisting of DSMQ-R and the Summary of Diabetes Self-Care Activities (SDSCA) questionnaires. Family doctors provided clinical data. The translation process was performed in six steps, reaching the expert committee appraisal. The validity of the questionnaire was evaluated by assessing reliability and construct validity.

Results

Cronbach’s alpha showed the questionnaire to reach good reliability (α = 0.845), although subscales had lower alphas. Contrary to the SDSCA questionnaire, the DSMQ-R sum scale differed significantly between persons on target vs not on target (median (interquartile range): 7.23 (6.17–8.44) vs 6.91 (5.91–8.02), and the DSMQ-R sum scale correlated significantly with BMI, HbA1c and SDSCA sum scale. In multivariate analysis higher DSMQ-R scores were significant predictor of achieving glycemic target goal.

Conclusion

The Hungarian translation of the DSMQ-R is a comprehensible tool to assess self-management of persons with diabetes. The questionnaire is valid and reliable in family practice, although its association with achievement of diabetes HbA1c target is weaker in primary than in tertiary care.

Influence of GLP-1 receptor agonist on insulin dosage and blood glucose control of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) on cases with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in terms of insulin dosage and blood glucose (BG) control.

METHODS

A total of 180 patients with T2DM admitted to our hospital between March 2016 and March 2019 were selected and assigned to a GLP-1RA group (GLP-1 group, n=100) and a control group (control group, n=80). Patients in the GLP-1 group were treated with GLP-1RA combined with insulin, while those in the other group were treated with insulin alone. The following items of each patient were determined: Body weight, body mass index (BMI), waist circumference, blood pressure (BP), BG-related indexes, insulin dosage, insulin resistance index, cardiovascular function, serum lipid-related indexes, adverse reactions, total effective rate, and treatment satisfaction.

RESULTS

Compared with the control group, the GLP-1 group showed a decrease in weight, BMI, waist circumference, BP, BG-related indexes, and insulin resistance index, consumed less insulin dosage, and also showed a decline in cardiovascular function, serum lipid-related indexes (total cholesterol (TC), triacylglycerol (TG), and low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C)), an increase in high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C), less adverse reactions, and higher total effective rate and treatment satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

GLP-1RA contributes to better BG control of patients with T2DM, and it reduces the insulin dosage required during operation for its stimulation to the production of insulin.

Structural principles of insulin formulation and analog design: A century of innovation

BACKGROUND

The discovery of insulin in 1921 and its near-immediate clinical use initiated a century of innovation. Advances extended across a broad front, from the stabilization of animal insulin formulations to the frontiers of synthetic peptide chemistry, and in turn, from the advent of recombinant DNA manufacturing to structure-based protein analog design. In each case, a creative interplay was observed between pharmaceutical applications and then-emerging principles of protein science; indeed, translational objectives contributed to a growing molecular understanding of protein structure, aggregation and misfolding.

SCOPE OF REVIEW

Pioneering crystallographic analyses-beginning with Hodgkin's solving of the 2-Zn insulin hexamer-elucidated general features of protein self-assembly, including zinc coordination and the allosteric transmission of conformational change. Crystallization of insulin was exploited both as a step in manufacturing and as a means of obtaining protracted action. Forty years ago, the confluence of recombinant human insulin with techniques for site-directed mutagenesis initiated the present era of insulin analogs. Variant or modified insulins were developed that exhibit improved prandial or basal pharmacokinetic (PK) properties. Encouraged by clinical trials demonstrating the long-term importance of glycemic control, regimens based on such analogs sought to resemble daily patterns of endogenous β-cell secretion more closely, ideally with reduced risk of hypoglycemia.

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS

Next-generation insulin analog design seeks to explore new frontiers, including glucose-responsive insulins, organ-selective analogs and biased agonists tailored to address yet-unmet clinical needs. In the coming decade, we envision ever more powerful scientific synergies at the interface of structural biology, molecular physiology and therapeutics.

Understanding the place for GLP-1RA therapy: Translating guidelines for treatment of type 2 diabetes into everyday clinical practice and patient selection

Since the first glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) was approved in 2005 (exenatide twice daily) for type 2 diabetes (T2D), the class has developed with newer compounds having more pronounced effects on glycaemic control and body weight. Also, administration regimes have become more convenient with once weekly injections, and recently an oral administration has become available. Large-scale randomized controlled cardiovascular (CV) outcome trials (CVOTs) have shown that GLP-1RA therapy can reduce the risk of CV disease (CVD) in high-risk individuals with T2D. In addition, GLP-1RAs may have renal benefits driven by new-onset macroalbuminuria, although no effect on hard renal endpoints has been found. Subsequently, the place for GLP-1RA therapy has changed over recent years, with most societies endorsing GLP-1RA therapy in patients with established or high risk of CVD independently of glycaemia. Initiation of GLP-1RA therapy can be complex due to differences in efficacy, side effects and safety profiles as well as administration forms within the class. Implementing guideline recommendations into ideal patient selection may be challenging both in specialty and non-specialty settings. To ensure adequate and proactive use of modern glucose-lowering medications in the treatment of T2D, it is essential to recognize patients with high risk or documented CVD. The present review provides an overview of the efficacy and benefits of the currently available GLP-1RA compounds. Furthermore, we review the results from recent large-scale CVOTs in a clinical context and suggest improving the implementation of GLP-1RA therapy across specialties to improve overall patient selection.

A Real-World, Observational Study of the Initiation, Use, and Effectiveness of Basal-Bolus or Premixed Insulin in Japanese People with Type 2 Diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Basal-bolus (BB) and premixed insulin regimens may lower fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), but are complex to use and associated with weight gain and hypoglycaemia. Although randomized controlled trials and prospective observational studies in insulin-naïve Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) initiating these regimens have been conducted, real-world data are lacking. This study describes the characteristics of patients initiating these regimens in routine clinical practice and identifies the course and outcomes of therapy in the year following initiation.

METHODS

Adults with T2D initiating BB or premixed regimens following OAD therapies held in a Japanese electronic medical record database were identified (2010-2019). Subcohorts were determined by treatment changes during ≤ 12 months of follow-up (no change, intensified, switched, discontinued). Outcomes included change in glycated haemoglobin levels (HbA1c), probability of first reaching HbA1c < 7% (stratified by baseline OAD number, HbA1c and age), and hypoglycaemia incidence.

RESULTS

The main cohorts comprised 1315 BB and 1195 premixed therapy initiators. Most individuals (67.9%) initiated BB as inpatients; 50.8% switched at a mean of 47.6 days. Mean HbA1c lowering was  - 2.5% for BB and  - 1.4% for premixed regimens (no change cohorts). Overall, a greater proportion achieved HbA1c < 7% if they were (at baseline) taking fewer OADs, in a lower HbA1c category, and aged ≥ 65 years. Hypoglycaemia incidence (< 70 mg/dl) was higher with BB than premixed regimens and lower in patients aged < 65 years.

CONCLUSION

Greater HbA1c reductions, but a higher incidence of hypoglycaemia, were reported with BB versus premixed regimens, while both cohorts demonstrated clinically meaningful reductions in HbA1c during follow-up. After initiation, most premixed regimens remained unchanged, whereas switches from BB to less intensive regimens were numerous, in accordance with the use of BB for a limited duration to improve FPG and PPG control.

The Benefit of Insulin Degludec/Liraglutide (IDegLira) Compared With Basal-Bolus Insulin Therapy is Consistent Across Participant Subgroups With Type 2 Diabetes in the DUAL VII Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) results in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels comparable with basal-bolus (BB) therapy. Here, we assessed the effect of once-daily IDegLira compared with BB (once-daily insulin glargine 100 U/mL and insulin aspart ≤4 times/day) across subgroups with varying characteristics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

DUAL VII trial participants (type 2 diabetes [T2D], HbA1c 53-86 mmol/mol [7.0%-10.0%]) were subgrouped post hoc based on the following baseline characteristics: HbA1c (≤58.5, >58.5 to ≤69.4, and >69.4 mmol/mol; ≤7.5%, >7.5 to ≤8.5%, and >8.5%), body mass index (<30, ≥30 to <35, and ≥35 kg/m²), age (18 to <65 and ≥65 years), duration of diabetes (≥0 to 10 and ≥10 years), total pretrial daily basal insulin dose (20 to <30, ≥30 to <40, and ≥40 to ≤50 U), and fasting plasma glucose (<7.2 mmol/L/<130 mg/dL and ≥7.2 mmol/L/≥130 mg/dL).

RESULTS

Compared with BB, and in all subgroups, IDegLira treatment consistently gave similar HbA1c reductions, less severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycemia, lower end-of-trial (EOT) total daily insulin dose, and weight loss. In all subgroups, mean EOT HbA1c was ≤53 mmol/mol (≤7.0%). The greatest HbA1c reduction occurred in the highest baseline HbA1c subgroup. Overall, mean EOT daily insulin dose was 0.43 to 0.52 U/kg with IDegLira and 0.74 to 1.07 U/kg with BB. More participants achieved the triple composite endpoint (HbA1c <53 mmol/mol [<7.0%] without weight gain or hypoglycemia) with IDegLira vs BB across the baseline HbA1c subgroups (≤58.5 mmol/mol [44.6% vs 7.0%], >58.5 to ≤69.4 mmol/mol [41.1% vs 8.3%], and >69.4 mmol/mol [23.8% vs 3.4%]).

CONCLUSION

These results support initiating IDegLira in patients with varying baseline characteristics and uncontrolled T2D on basal insulin.

CLINICALTRIALS.GOV REGISTRATION

NCT02420262.

Indirect comparison of efficacy and safety of insulin glargine/lixisenatide and insulin degludec/insulin aspart in type 2 diabetes patients not controlled on basal insulin

BACKGROUND

Fixed-dose combinations of insulin glargine/lixisenatide (IGlarLixi) or insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) constitute treatment intensification in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D).

OBJECTIVES

Compare efficacy and safety of IGlarLixi and IDegAsp (as intensification from basal insulin), by indirect comparison of phase III trials, in the absence of head-to-head trials.

STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies comparing treatment intensification by once-daily IDegAsp or IGlarLixi to basal insulin. Data were extracted from two trials (BOOST: Intensify-Basal and LixiLan-L) retained for analysis.

SYNTHESIS METHODS

Treatments were compared in terms of estimated treatment difference (ETD) in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting and postprandial plasma glucose (FPG and PPG) change from baseline; in addition to hypoglycaemia incidence and weight changes.

RESULTS

In a fixed-effect model examining HbA1c control, IGlarLixi was more effective than IDegAsp in reducing HbA1c (ETD 0.53%, P<0.0001]), PPG (ETD 2.65%, P<0.0001), and body weight (ETD 1.73kg, P<0.0001). Patients on IGlarLixi were more likely to achieve HbA1c<7% than patients on IDegAsp (odds ratio [OR]=0.40, P<0.0001), with lower incidence of hypoglycaemia (OR=1.33, P<0.001).

LIMITATIONS

Limited number of studies; different baseline HbA1c and FPG.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily IGlarLixi is more efficient than once-daily IDegAsp in controlling HbA1c and PPG and associates with greater weight loss and lower hypoglycaemia incidence.

Mexican population sub-analysis of the lixilan clinical program with the fixed ratio combination of insulin glargine and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi)

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi in Mexican patients with type 2 diabetes who participated in the LixiLan clinical trials and compare results with the rest of the patients.

METHODS

Data was collected for Mexican patients who participated in either of three studies: phase 2 trial LixiLan-POC, that compared iGlarLixi vs insulin glargine (iGlar) on inadequately controlled patients with metformin; phase 3 trial LixiLan-O, comparing iGlarLixi vs iGlar and lixisenatide on inadequately controlled patients with oral antidiabetic agents; and finally the phase 3 trial LixiLan-L, comparing iGlarLixi vs iGlar on inadequately controlled patients with basal insulin. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to end of treatment.

RESULTS

In the Mexican population, treatment with iGlarLixi significantly improved HbA1c compared with each component alone achieving an average of 6.5%; (6.17%, 6.63% and 6.73% for the LixiLan-POC, O and L studies respectively) and an average HbA1c reduction from baseline of 1.6%, for the three studies at end of treatment period.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy and safety profile of iGlarLixi demonstrate a fair or better composite endpoint of HbA1c without hypoglycemia and no weight gain compared to overall trial population, which could help improve Mexican patients' outcomes.

Use of Premixed Insulin, Metformin, and a Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist as a Therapeutic Approach for Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE | To explore the use of premixed insulin, a glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, and metformin as combination therapy for type 2 diabetes. DESIGN AND METHODS | All adult patients with type 2 diabetes who had been prescribed premixed insulin and a GLP-1 receptor agonist simultaneously at our outpatient clinic were selected for retrospective review. We reviewed A1C, weight, cumulative daily insulin dose, and adverse events over 12 months. RESULTS | A total of 72 patients received premixed insulin and a GLP-1 receptor agonist, of which 32 met inclusion criteria. The average duration of type 2 diabetes for these patients was 14.2 ± 7.1 years. Mean A1C at baseline was 10.5 ± 2.1%. At 12 months, mean A1C was 8.3 ± 1.9%. The change in mean A1C after 12 months was -2.2% (95% CI -3.433 to -1.014, P <0.0001). At 12 months, the mean cumulative insulin dose was 33.3 units less than before the therapy change (95% CI -57.13 to -9.46, P = 0.0030). Average weight change at 12 months was -2.2 kg (95% CI -27.6 to 37.6, P = NS). After 12 months, 61% of included patients (19 of 31) had an A1C ≤8%. Six additional patients were not included in analysis because they stopped the regimen after <3 months because of adverse events. CONCLUSION | Despite a decreased cumulative daily dose of insulin, patients with historically uncontrolled type 2 diabetes using metformin, premixed insulin, and a GLP-1 receptor agonist in combination experienced improved glycemic control over 12 months. Prospective randomized trials are needed to better assess the potential benefit of this combination therapy.

Impact of Simultaneous Versus Sequential Initiation of Basal Insulin and Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists on HbA1c in Type 2 Diabetes: A Retrospective Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

When and how to intensify treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) not achieving glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) targets with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) in clinical practice remains a matter of clinical preference. This pilot study was conducted using the retrospective observational data from such patients to evaluate the impact on HbA1c of three treatment sequences: simultaneous initiation of basal insulin (BI) and a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA; Cohort 1); BI followed by GLP-1 RA initiation within a 90-day timeframe (Cohort 2); or BI followed by GLP-1 RA initiation beyond 90 days (Cohort 3).

METHODS

Data from the regional US electronic medical records database, Research Action for Health Network (REACHnet), were extracted for all patients with T2D aged ≥ 18 years who had encounter dates between January 2011 and August 2017 and ≥ 1 HbA1c laboratory value(s) < 90 days before BI initiation and ≥ 2 HbA1c laboratory values within 1 year after BI initiation and who met the inclusion criteria for GLP-1 RA initiation set for Cohorts 1, 2, or 3. The primary endpoints were the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c < 7.0%, which was estimated via Kaplan-Meier analysis, and change in HbA1c within 12 months.

RESULTS

Overall, 869 patients were analyzed, of whom 109 were in Cohort 1, 301 in Cohort 2, and 459 in Cohort 3. Baseline HbA1c was 10.3 ± 2.1, 10.3 ± 2.0, and 10.2 ± 2.1% for these three cohorts, respectively. Statistically significantly more patients in Cohort 1 than in Cohort 3 achieved HbA1c < 7.0% (33.4 vs. 20.9%, respectively; p  = 0.0186). Mean observed reductions in HbA1c at 12 months were - 1.7% (Cohort 1), - 1.5% (Cohort 2), and - 1.3% (Cohort 3).

CONCLUSIONS

Simultaneous initiation of BI and GLP-1 RA achieves glycemic control more effectively than sequential initiation of BI with GLP-1 RA added beyond 90 days.

The Evolving Treatment of Diabetic Retinopathy

Purpose

To review the current therapeutic options for the management of diabetic retinopathy (DR) and diabetic macular edema (DME) and examine the evidence for integration of laser and pharmacotherapy.

Methods

A review of the PubMed database was performed using the search terms diabetic retinopathy, diabetic macular edema, neovascularization, laser photocoagulation, intravitreal injection, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), vitrectomy, pars plana vitreous surgery, antiangiogenic therapy. With additional cross-referencing, this yielded 835 publications of which 301 were selected based on content and relevance.

Results

Many recent studies have evaluated the pharmacological, laser and surgical therapeutic strategies for the treatment and prevention of DR and DME. Several newer diagnostic systems such as optical coherence tomography (OCT), microperimetry, and multifocal electroretinography (mfERG) are also assisting in further refinements in the staging and classification of DR and DME. Pharmacological therapies for both DR and DME include both systemic and ocular agents. Systemic agents that promote intensive glycemic control, control of dyslipidemia and antagonists of the renin-angiotensin system demonstrate beneficial effects for both DR and DME. Ocular therapies include anti-VEGF agents, corticosteroids and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Laser therapy, both as panretinal and focal or grid applications continue to be employed in management of DR and DME. Refinements in laser devices have yielded more tissue-sparing (subthreshold) modes in which many of the benefits of conventional continuous wave (CW) lasers can be obtained without the adverse side effects. Recent attempts to lessen the burden of anti-VEGF injections by integrating laser therapy have met with mixed results. Increasingly, vitreoretinal surgical techniques are employed for less advanced stages of DR and DME. The development and use of smaller gauge instrumentation and advanced anesthesia agents have been associated with a trend toward earlier surgical intervention for diabetic retinopathy. Several novel drug delivery strategies are currently being examined with the goal of decreasing the therapeutic burden of monthly intravitreal injections. These fall into one of the five categories: non-biodegradable polymeric drug delivery systems, biodegradable polymeric drug delivery systems, nanoparticle-based drug delivery systems, ocular injection devices and with sustained release refillable devices. At present, there remains no one single strategy for the management of the particular stages of DR and DME as there are many options that have not been rigorously tested through large, randomized, controlled clinical trials.

Conclusion

Pharmacotherapy, both ocular and systemic, will be the primary mode of intervention in the management of DR and DME in many cases when cost and treatment burden are less constrained. Conventional laser therapy has become a secondary intervention in these instances, but remains a first-line option when cost and treatment burden are more constrained. Results with subthreshold laser appear promising but will require more rigorous study to establish its role as adjunctive therapy. Evidence to support an optimal integration of the various treatment options is lacking. Central to the widespread adoption of any therapeutic regimen for DR and DME is substantiation of safety, efficacy, and cost-effectiveness by a body of sound clinical trials.

Lixisenatide versus insulin glulisine on top of insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a cost-per-responder analysis in China

Objective: To compare the cost per responder of lixisenatide versus insulin glulisine once daily (basal-plus) and three times daily (basal-bolus) on top of basal insulin for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled by basal insulin in China.Methods: The cost per responder was estimated based on clinical data obtained from the GetGoal Duo-2 clinical trial and direct medical costs from the perspective of the Chinese healthcare system over a 52-week time horizon. The response was assessed at week 26 in the clinical trial, which was extrapolated to 52 weeks to estimate the annual cost per responder. Responders were primarily defined using a composite endpoint that based on an HbA1c ≤ 7.0% threshold AND no weight gain With or Without no documented symptomatic hypoglycemia. Composite endpoints with varied HbA1c thresholds were defined in secondary analyses.Results: For the composite endpoint of HbA1c threshold ≤7.0% AND no weight gain, the annual cost per responder results were 96,722 CNY, 122,552 CNY and 135,926 CNY (14,616, 18,520 and 20,541 US dollars) for lixisenatide combined with basal insulin, basal-plus, and basal-bolus, respectively. For the composite endpoint of HbA1c threshold ≤7.0% AND no weight gain AND no documented symptomatic hypoglycemia, the annual cost per responder results were 136,290 CNY, 231,487 CNY and 222,424 CNY (20,596, 34,982 and 33,612 US dollars) for lixisenatide combined with basal insulin, basal-plus, and basal-bolus, respectively. The secondary analyses proved similar results.Conclusion: Lixisenatide combined with basal insulin is associated with a lower cost per responder compared with basal-plus and basal-bolus for T2DM patients inadequately controlled by basal insulin in China.

Clinical and psychological characteristics of liraglutide treatment among patients with type 2 diabetes

Aim:

This study aimed to evaluate the glycemic control, quality of life (QOL), and sleep quality in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients who are treated with liraglutide and to investigate whether the QOL and sleep quality were correlated with the glycemic control of this population.

Methods:

A cross-sectional study was carried out on T2DM patients who were treated with liraglutide. Data on body weight and glycemic control were recorded while the QOL and sleep quality were assessed using the Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36), the 5-item World Health Organization Well-Being Index (WHO-5), and the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) questionnaires.

Results:

Eighty-four T2DM patients who initiated liraglutide with a mean age of 46.7 years were included in the study. The mean hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was 7.76% (standard deviation [SD] =0.62), and about 88.1% of patients had HbA1c > 7%. The PSQI score showed not too bad sleep quality (mean 4.3 ± 1.9). The mean WHO-5 score of the study population showed a “moderate” QOL (12.4 ± 3). Patients had lowest SF-36 score (mean = 52.3) in the subscale of “energy and fatigue.” There was a significant positive correlation between HbA1C and the “energy and fatigue” (r = 0.232, P = 0.034) but not with the other subscales.

Conclusion:

Patients with T2DM taking liraglutide have moderate sleep difficulty and QOL score. Nonetheless, none of these outcomes was significantly correlated with glycemic control. Further well-designed studies with long-term follow-up and larger population sizes are needed to confirm our findings.

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

AIMS

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Consensus Recommendations on GLP-1 RA Use in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: South Asian Task Force

The advent of incretin mimetics such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) has enriched the armamentarium for diabetes management owing to their glycaemic as well as extra-glycaemic benefits. The approval status and availability of this class of drugs vary widely across the globe. Being a relatively newer class of drug with numerous benefits, several national and international guidelines are working towards addressing clinical questions pertaining to the optimal use of GLP-1 RAs for the management of diabetes. Although the newer class of drugs are associated with significant benefits such as patient-centric approach, these drugs demand the providers to be vigilant and knowledgeable about the medication. The South Asian population is at higher risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) because of their genetic predisposition and lifestyle changes. Hence, prevention and management of T2DM and its associated complications in this population are of paramount importance. The current report aims to present an overview of current knowledge on GLP-1 RAs based on pragmatic review of the available clinical evidence. In addition, this report is a consensus of expert endocrinologists representing South Asian countries including India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Nepal, Sri Lanka, Afghanistan and the Maldives on essential recommendations related to the use of GLP-1 RAs in a real-world scenario.

Glycaemic benefit of iGlarLixi in insulin-naive type 2 diabetes patients with high HbA1c or those with inadequate glycaemic control on two oral antihyperglycaemic drugs in the LixiLan-O randomized trial

In this post hoc analysis of the randomized controlled LixiLan-O trial in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) not controlled with metformin, with or without a second oral antihyperglycaemic drug (OAD), the efficacy and safety of the fixed-ratio combination, iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U [iGlar] and lixisenatide [Lixi]), compared to its individual components was assessed in two patient subgroups: group 1) baseline HbA1c ≥9% (n = 134); group 2) inadequate control (HbA1c ≥7.0% and ≤9.0%) despite administration of two OADs at screening (n = 725). Treatment with iGlarLixi resulted in significantly greater reduction in least squares mean HbA1c compared to treatment with iGlar or Lixi alone in both subgroups (group 1: 2.9%, 2.5%, 1.7% and group 2: 1.5%, 1.2%, 0.7%, respectively). Target HbA1c less than 7% was achieved in more than 70% of patients using iGlarLixi in both subgroups, while mitigating the weight gain observed with use of iGlar alone. Rates of hypoglycaemic events were low overall. These results suggest that treatment with iGlarLixi achieves superior glycaemic control compared to treatment with iGlar or Lixi alone in T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥9% or in those inadequately controlled with two OADs.

BE-SMART (Basal Early Strategies to Maximize HbA1c Reduction with Oral Therapy): Expert Opinion

The past three decades have seen a quadruple rise in the number of people affected by diabetes mellitus worldwide, with the disease being the ninth major cause of mortality. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) often remains undiagnosed for several years due to its asymptomatic nature during the initial stages. In India, 70% of diagnosed diabetes cases remain uncontrolled. Current guidelines endorse the initiation of insulin early in the course of the disease, specifically in patients with HbA1c > 10%, as the use of oral agents alone is unlikely to achieve glycemic targets. Early insulin initiation and optimization of glycemic control using insulin titration algorithms and patient empowerment can facilitate the effective management of uncontrolled diabetes. Early glucose control has sustained benefits in people with diabetes. However, insulin initiation, dose adjustment, and the need to repeatedly assess blood glucose levels are often perplexing for both physicians and patients, and there are misconceptions and concerns regarding its use. Hence, an early transition to insulin and ideal intensification of treatment may aid in delaying the onset of diabetes complications. This opinion statement was formulated by an expert panel on the basis of existing guidelines, clinical experience, and economic and cultural contexts. The statement stresses the timely and appropriate use of basal insulin in T2DM. It focuses on the seven vital Ts-treatment initiation, timing of administration, transportation and storage, technique of administration, targets for titration, tablets, and tools for monitoring.Funding: Sanofi.

Evaluating the long-term cost-effectiveness of fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) for type 2 diabetes in Spain based on real-world clinical evidence

AIM

To evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus comparator regimens for type 2 diabetes in Spain, based on real-world evidence.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Clinical data were taken from the European Xultophy Treatment Retrospective Audit (EXTRA) real-world evidence study in which patients failing to meet glycaemic targets were switched to IDegLira. Baseline regimens (prior to IDegLira treatment) were categorized as: multiple daily insulin injections (MDI; 28%); glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists in combination with insulin (24%); basal insulin (19%); GLP-1 receptor agonists (10%); and non-injectable medications (19%). The IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model was used to project long-term outcomes for patients switching to IDegLira or continuing their baseline regimens (excluding non-injectable regimens). Costs were accounted from a Spanish National Health System perspective. Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted at 3% annually and sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

IDegLira was projected to reduce the incidence of diabetes-related complications and improve quality-adjusted life expectancy versus all four comparators. IDegLira reduced direct medical costs versus GLP-1 receptor agonists in combination with insulin, and versus GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy, and was therefore considered dominant (cost saving while improving outcomes). IDegLira was found to be cost-effective versus MDI and basal insulin with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of EUR 3013 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained and EUR 6890 per QALY gained, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term projections based on real-world evidence indicated that IDegLira is likely to improve clinical outcomes and reduce costs or be cost-effective compared with other injectable regimens in people with type 2 diabetes in Spain.