Efficacy and Clinical Characteristics of Liraglutide in Japanese Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

Use of diabetes medications in adults with T2D and CVD in Japan: secondary analysis of the CAPTURE study

Introduction

The CAPTURE study estimated the global prevalence of established cardiovascular disease (CVD) and characterized the usage of glucose-lowering agents (GLAs) in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) across 13 countries. The purpose of this secondary analysis of data from the Japanese sites within CAPTURE (NCT03786406, NCT03811288) was to provide data about medication usage stratified by CVD status among Japanese participants with T2D.

Materials and methods

Data on GLA usage (including those with proven cardiovascular [CV] benefits) in Japanese participants with T2D managed in clinics or hospitals were collected and stratified by CVD subgroups.

Results

There were 800 Japanese participants in the CAPTURE study (n = 502 [no CVD group], n = 298 [CVD group], n = 268 [atherosclerotic CVD subgroup]). Oral antidiabetic agents and insulin were used by 88.5% and 23.4%, respectively, of participants overall. Among participants with established CVD, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (65.1%) were most frequently used, followed by biguanides (50.7%) and insulins (26.2%). The pattern was similar among participants with atherosclerotic CVD. A lower proportion of participants in the CVD group used glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) with proven CV benefits versus the no CVD group (GLP-1 RAs: 7.0% vs. 8.6%; SGLT-2is: 13.4% vs. 19.1%).

Conclusion

This analysis of the CAPTURE study provided a comprehensive overview of prescription patterns for the treatment of T2D in Japan. Use of GLAs with proven CV benefit was low, even in participants with established CVD, which was comparable to the findings from the global cohort.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s13340-023-00638-w.

Effects of switching from liraglutide to semaglutide or dulaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Few studies have examined the effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist switching, particularly in Japanese patients. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the effects of switching from liraglutide to semaglutide or dulaglutide on blood glucose, body weight, and the occurrence of adverse effects in clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was an open-label, prospective, randomized, parallel-group controlled trial. Patients with type 2 diabetes treated with liraglutide (0.6 or 0.9 mg) at Yokosuka Kyosai Hospital in Japan were recruited from September 2020 to March 2022 and, after obtaining informed consent, randomly assigned to the semaglutide or dulaglutide group (1:1). Changes in the glycated hemoglobin level from baseline to weeks 8, 16, and 26 were evaluated post-treatment.

RESULTS

Initially, 32 participants were enrolled, of whom 30 completed the study. Glycemic control was significantly better in the semaglutide group than in the dulaglutide group (-0.42 ± 0.49% vs -0.00 ± 0.34%, P = 0.0120). Body weight significantly decreased in the semaglutide group (-2.6 ± 3.6 kg, P = 0.0153), whereas no change was observed in the dulaglutide group (-0.1 ± 2.7 kg, P = 0.8432). We found a significant difference in body weight between the groups (P = 0.0469). The proportion of participants who reported adverse events was 75.0% and 18.8% in the semaglutide and dulaglutide groups, respectively. One patient in the semaglutide group had difficulty continuing treatment due to severe vomiting and weight loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from once-daily liraglutide to once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg significantly improved glycemic control and body weight compared with switching to once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg.

A randomized trial to investigate the efficacy and safety of once-daily liraglutide 1.8 mg in Japanese adults with type 2 diabetes exhibiting an inadequate response to liraglutide 0.9 mg

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

The present trial compared the efficacy and safety of once-daily liraglutide 1.8 mg with liraglutide 0.9 mg in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes to assess the incremental effects of liraglutide 1.8 mg in those who exhibited an inadequate response to 0.9 mg.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This 26-week randomized trial (NCT02505334) enrolled Japanese adults with type 2 diabetes across 47 sites in Japan. Participants with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c ) 7.5-10.0% were included and those on insulin treatment were excluded. Participants discontinued pre-trial oral antidiabetic drug and initiated liraglutide 0.9 mg for a 12-week run-in period, after which those with HbA1c ≥7.0% (466) were randomized (1:1) to two treatment arms: continuing liraglutide 0.9 mg or dose escalation to 1.8 mg. The change from baseline in HbA1c (primary endpoint) and treatment-emergent adverse events (secondary endpoint) were measured at the end of 26 weeks.

RESULTS

After 26 weeks of treatment, liraglutide 1.8 mg was more effective compared with 0.9 mg in lowering HbA1c levels, with an estimated treatment difference of -0.40% (95% confidence interval [CI] -0.55, -0.24; P < 0.0001). Liraglutide 1.8 mg was associated with significantly greater odds of participants reaching HbA1c <7.0% (estimated odds ratio [EOR] 3.87; 95% CI 2.12, 7.08; P < 0.0001) and ≤6.5% (EOR 3.78; 95% CI 1.36, 10.54; P = 0.0109) compared with 0.9 mg. Both doses were well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Liraglutide 1.8 mg had better efficacy in improving HbA1c levels after 26 weeks treatment vs 0.9 mg in Japanese patients, with both doses well tolerated.

Pharmacokinetics, safety, tolerability and efficacy of cotadutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucagon receptor dual agonist, in phase 1 and 2 trials in overweight or obese participants of Asian descent with or without type 2 diabetes

AIM

To evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of cotadutide, a dual glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucagon receptor agonist, in overweight Asian participants with or without type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In the phase 1, randomized, blinded, single-ascending dose study, 24 Japanese and eight Chinese healthy adults (body mass index [BMI] 23-40 kg/m² ) received one subcutaneous dose of cotadutide (50-150 or 100 μg, respectively) or placebo. The primary endpoint was safety. In the phase 2a, randomized, double-blinded, parallel dose-ranging study with forced uptitration, 61 Japanese adults with T2D (BMI 24-40 kg/m² ; HbA1c 7.0%-10.5%) received cotadutide (100, 200, 300 μg) or placebo for 48 days. Co-primary endpoints were safety/tolerability, change in glucose AUC_0-4h and body weight.

RESULTS

Significant reductions from baseline to day 48 were observed with cotadutide for glucose AUC_0-4h (33.6%-42.1% reduction vs. +2.5% with placebo; 95% CIs: 100 μg -45.7%, -33.7%; 200 μg -35.6%, -23.7%; 300 μg -45.0%, -30.8%; placebo 3.4%, 8.3%) and body weight (1.3%-2.5% decrease vs. +0.8% with placebo; 95% CIs: 100 μg -3.4%, -0.8%; 200 μg -4.7%, -2.0%; 300 μg -4.6%, -2.1%; placebo -2.1%, 0.4%). The most common adverse events with cotadutide were mild gastrointestinal symptoms with no serious adverse events. Increased pulse rate with cotadutide versus placebo is consistent with GLP-1 monoagonists.

CONCLUSIONS

Once-daily cotadutide was effective and well tolerated up to 300 μg in overweight Japanese patients with T2D. Further evaluation in Asian populations is warranted.

Evaluation of the efficacy of low-dose liraglutide in weight control among Taiwanese non-diabetes patients

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

Obesity and metabolic syndrome are well-known to be associated with multiple chronic diseases. Currently, high-dose liraglutide has been used for weight control in non-diabetic patients. Considering incretin-based therapy is more effective in Asian populations, the effect of low-dose liraglutide in weight control among these non-diabetic groups has not been well evaluated. Our study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of low-dose liraglutide in weight control among Taiwan patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From July 2017 to December 2018, 46 non-diabetic patients with metabolic syndrome were included. They had received low-dose liraglutide at 0.6 or 1.2 mg per day for weight reduction for 12 weeks. After then, changes in bodyweight, waist and metabolic factors were examined. Overt bodyweight reduction was defined as a decrease of >5% within 12 weeks.

RESULTS

With 12 weeks of medication use, both groups showed statistical weight reduction. Higher doses of liraglutide had better efficacy, and 44.4% of patients in the liraglutide 1.2 mg group reached overt weight reduction, whereas just 32.1% in the 0.6 mg group had achieved this. Young age was found to be a predictor factor for a positive finding (odds ratio 0.941, P = 0.037). Early responders with decreased bodyweight of >4.2% within the first 4 weeks indicated a better chance to achieve measurable weight reduction.

CONCLUSIONS

Low-dose liraglutide still has high efficacy in weight reduction in Taiwanese people, especially for those of younger age.

Combination use of liraglutide and insulin to Japanese patients with multiple insulin injection: efficacy and cost

OBJECTIVES

The introduction of liraglutide in the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes already taking insulin is still subject to discussion in terms of timing and benefits. Gradually intensive insulin therapy is hastily prescribed. Switching from multiple insulin injection (MII) to insulin and liraglutide is evaluated in this study.

METHODOLOGY

We studied 92 patients with type 2 diabetes previously under MII, C-peptide ≥ 1.5 ng/ml, divided into a group with reasonable glycemic control [RC: HbA1c < 8% (64 mmol/mol)] and another with a poor control [PC: HbA1c ≥ 8%, (64 mmol/mol)] after introduction of liraglutide and insulin therapy.

RESULTS

Except for HbA1c, there were no statistical differences between RC and PC groups. Basal insulin doses were adjusted to achieve the fasting plasma glucose of 90-120 mg/dl. HbA1c was significantly improved in both groups, from 9.6% ± 1.6 (81 mmol/mol) and 7.0% ± 0.6 (53 mmol/mol) to 8.0% ± 1.5 (64 mmol/mol) and 6.8 ± 0.5% (51 mmol/mol). Reduction of body weight was significant only in RC (from 70 ± 16 kg to 68 ± 16 kg, p < 0.01). All patients from RC group and 58% of PC group reached HbA1c < 8% without hypoglycemia.

CONCLUSION

This observation persuades us to propose the liraglutide and insulin combination to patients with C-peptide ≥ 1.5 ng/ml, regardless of the HbA1c.

Superior efficacy with a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) compared with insulin degludec and liraglutide in insulin-naïve Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes in a phase 3, open-label, randomized trial

AIMS

To investigate the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) compared with its individual components in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled on an oral antidiabetic drug (OAD).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This 52-week, open-label, multicentre, treat-to-target trial randomized participants (n = 819) 1:1:1 to IDegLira, liraglutide 1.8 mg or degludec, as add-on to their pre-trial OAD. The maximum IDegLira dose was 50 dose steps (50 U degludec/1.8 mg liraglutide), there was no maximum dose for degludec, and both were titrated based on individual blood glucose measurements.

RESULTS

After 52 weeks, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) decreased by 26 mmol/mol with IDegLira vs 20 mmol/mol with degludec and liraglutide: estimated treatment differences were -6.91 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval [CI] -8.18; -5.64) and -5.30 mmol/mol (95% CI -6.58; -4.03), confirming non-inferiority of IDegLira to degludec and superiority of IDegLira to liraglutide (P < .0001 for both [primary endpoint]). Mean body weight changes were 2.9 kg, 4.1 kg and -1.0 kg with IDegLira, degludec and liraglutide, respectively, showing superiority of IDegLira versus degludec (P = .0001), but a significant difference in favour of liraglutide (P < .0001). Rates of severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemia for IDegLira were lower versus degludec (rate ratio 0.48 [95% CI 0.35; 0.68]; P < .0001), but higher versus liraglutide (rate ratio 37.58 [95% CI 19.80; 71.31]; P < .0001). Mean daily total insulin dose was lower with IDegLira (27.7 U) versus degludec (34.8 U; P < .0001). Overall adverse event (AE) rates were similar. In total, 34.9%, 22.9% and 41.8% of IDegLira-, degludec- and liraglutide-treated participants experienced gastrointestinal AEs.

CONCLUSION

IDegLira was superior to degludec and liraglutide in terms of HbA1c reduction and superior to degludec in terms of body weight change and rates of hypoglycaemia in Japanese people with T2D.

Network meta-analysis of liraglutide versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in Japanese patients

AIMS

To determine the comparative efficacy and safety of liraglutide and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors as antidiabetics for Japanese patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating outcomes among Japanese adults with uncontrolled T2DM and including liraglutide or DPP-4 inhibitors up to August 2016. We extracted data on trial and patient characteristics, and the following outcomes: HbA1c, weight, patients meeting HbA1c <7%, patients experiencing hypoglycemic events, microalbuminuria, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and creatinine. We synthesized data using network meta-analyses (NMA) using a Bayesian framework. Continuous outcomes were modeled using normal likelihoods and an identity link, while dichotomous outcomes were modeled using a binomial likelihood and a logit link.

RESULTS

The systematic literature review yielded 39 publications pertaining to 38 trials. A total of 27 trials (5032 patients) reported change in HbA1c at 12 weeks and at 24 weeks 9 trials (2091 patients). All treatments showed statistically significant reductions in HbA1c relative to placebo at 12 and 24 weeks. Liraglutide 0.9 mg was statistically superior to all DPP-4 interventions (vildagliptin, sitagliptin, linagliptin, alogliptin, teneligliptin, trelagliptin and omarigliptin) at 12 weeks and 24 weeks among those reporting. Treatments were not statistically differentiable with respect to weight change and risk of hypoglycemia. Finally, no comparisons of eGFR and microalbuminuria were conducted, as this data was reported in too few trials to conduct analyses.

LIMITATIONS

Some important outcomes were limited by poor reporting (eGFR and microalbuminuria) or low event rates (hypoglycemia). The follow-up time was relatively short. Clinically, the 24 week time point is more important as it demonstrates more sustained results.

CONCLUSIONS

Our research suggests that liraglutide 0.9 mg offers a more efficacious treatment option for T2DM than the DPP-4 inhibitors among adult Japanese patients and that it is a viable option for this population.

Once-daily liraglutide (1.2 mg) compared with twice-daily exenatide (10 μg) in the treatment of type 2 diabetes patients: An indirect treatment comparison meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists provide effective hyperglycemia management in patients with type 2 diabetes. In a randomized head-to-head trial, liraglutide 1.8 mg q.d. led to greater reductions in HbA1c than exenatide 10 μg b.i.d. There are no direct comparisons of liraglutide 1.2 mg q.d. and exenatide b.i.d.; therefore, in the present study, an indirect comparison and meta-analysis were undertaken.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for randomized controlled trials of liraglutide 1.2 mg q.d. or exenatide b.i.d. with HbA1c as an outcome and ≥25 subjects. Key data were extracted and analyzed. A random-effects model was used to incorporate heterogeneity between studies.

RESULTS

Three liraglutide 1.2 mg q.d. (n = 1060) and 10 exenatide b.i.d. (n = 2609) placebo-controlled studies were identified, allowing indirect comparison with placebo as the common arm. Baseline characteristics were mean age ~55 years, disease duration ~7 years, HbA1c ~8%, and body mass index ~32 kg/m² . Compared with exenatide b.i.d., liraglutide 1.2 mg was associated with significantly greater reductions from baseline in HbA1c (-0.29%; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.53, -0.05) and fasting plasma glucose (-0.92 mmol/L; 95% CI -1.43, -0.41), with shorter duration of nausea (3 vs 14 days; P = 0.002) and fewer withdrawals (odds ratio 0.34; 95% CI 0.22, 0.52). The incidence of adverse events (including nausea) and withdrawals because of adverse events were similar between treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

Liraglutide 1.2 mg provided a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c than exenatide 10 μg b.i.d. The significantly shorter duration of nausea with liraglutide than exenatide may be appreciated by patients.