Beyond metformin: safety considerations in the decision-making process for selecting a second medication for type 2 diabetes management: reflections from a diabetes care editors' expert forum

Risk of Fracture With Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors, Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists, or Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitors in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis Combining 177 Randomized Controlled Trials With a Median Follow-Up of 26 weeks

Aim: This study aims to investigate the association between the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i) and the risk of fracture among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, and Clinical-Trials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Network meta-analysis was performed for total fracture and a series of secondary outcomes. Results: A total of 177 RCTs (n = 165,081) involving the risk of fracture were identified (a median follow-up of 26 weeks). DPP-4i, GLP-1 RAs, and SGLT-2i did not increase total fracture risk compared with insulin (odds ratio: 0.86, 95% confidence interval: 0.39-1.90; 1.05, 0.54-2.04; 0.88, and 0.39-1.97, respectively), metformin (1.41, 0.48-4.19; 1.72, 0.55-5.38; 1.44, 0.48-4.30), sulfonylureas (0.77, 0.50-1.20; 0.94, 0.55-1.62; 0.79, 0.48-1.31), thiazolidinediones (0.82, 0.27-2.44; 1.00, 0.32-3.10; 0.83, 0.27-2.57), α-glucosidase inhibitor (4.92, 0.23-103.83; 5.99, 0.28-130.37; 5.01, 0.23-107.48), and placebo (1.04, 0.84-1.29; 1.27, 0.88-1.83; 1.06, 0.81-1.39). Conclusions: The use of DPP-4i, GLP-1 RAs, or SGLT-2i is unlikely to increase the risk of fracture among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients.

Evaluation of hypoglycemic therapeutics and nutritional supplementation for type 2 diabetes mellitus management: An insight on molecular approaches

OBJECTIVE

This review aims to summarize the current management of type 2 diabetes principles, including oral hypoglycemic agents, types of insulin administration, diet maintenance, and various molecular approaches.

METHODS

A literature search was conducted in different databases such as Scopus, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Web of Science by using the following keywords: type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), first-line and second-line treatment, oral hypoglycemic agents, insulin administration, diet/nutritional therapy, gene and stem cell therapy, and diabetic complications.

RESULTS

The first-line treatment of T2DM includes administering oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) and second-line treatment by insulin therapy and some OHAs like Sulfonylurea's (SU). The oral hypoglycemic or oral antidiabetic drugs have the function of lowering glucose in the blood. Insulin therapy is recommended for people with A1C levels > 7.0, and insulin administration is evolved drastically from the syringe, pump, pen, inhalation, insulin jet, and patch. The use of OHAs and insulin therapy during glycemic control has a severe effect on weight gain and other side effects. Hence, diet maintenance (macro and micronutrients) and nutritional therapy guidelines were also reviewed/recommended for safe T2DM management. Besides, the recent progress in molecular approaches that focuses on identifying new targets for T2DM (i.e.) consisting of gene therapy, stem cell therapy, and the modulation of insulin signaling pathways for the regulation of glucose storage and uptake also discussed.

CONCLUSION

The analysis of all these key factors is necessary to develop a potential agent to cure T2DM and suggest that a combination of therapies will pave the way for advanced management of T2DM.

Predictors and consequences of declining insulin therapy by individuals with type 2 diabetes

AIM

To determine the relationship between decline of insulin therapy by individuals with type 2 diabetes and subsequent blood glucose control.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied adults with type 2 diabetes and suboptimal (HbA_1c ≥ 53 mmol/mol [7.0%]) glycaemic control followed at two academic hospitals between 2000 and 2014 who were recommended insulin therapy. Decline of insulin therapy recommendations was identified using natural language processing of provider notes. Time to HbA_1c < 53 mmol/mol (7.0%) served as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Of 5307 study participants, 2267 (42.7%) declined insulin therapy. Median time to HbA_1c control in individuals who declined vs. started insulin therapy was 50 vs. 38 months, respectively (P < 0.001). In multivariable analysis, decline of insulin therapy was associated with hazard ratio for HbA_1c control of 0.89 (95% CI 0.82 to 0.97; P = 0.008). Participants were more likely to accept insulin therapy recommendations if they had diabetes complications (OR 1.32; 95% CI 1.13 to 1.53; P < 0.001) or a higher HbA_1c (OR 1.10; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.13; P < 0.001), and less likely if they were older (OR 0.81; 95% CI 0.76 to 0.86; P < 0.001) or were taking more non-insulin diabetes medications (OR 0.78; 95% CI 0.74 to 0.83; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Individuals with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes who declined insulin therapy subsequently had worse glycaemic control. These findings highlight the need to improve our understanding of the relationship of this common but poorly explored clinical phenomenon to blood glucose control and ultimately diabetes complications.

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.

Predictors of glycemic control after decline of insulin therapy by patients with type 2 diabetes

AIM

Decline of insulin therapy by patients is common but poorly investigated. We conducted this study to determine patient and treatment characteristics predictive of glycemic control after declining clinician recommendation to initiate insulin therapy.

METHODS

We retrospectively studied adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated at two academic medical centers between 1993 and 2014 who declined their healthcare provider recommendation to initiate insulin.

RESULTS

In a multivariable analysis of 300 study patients adjusted for demographics, comorbidities and clustering within providers, higher baseline HbA1c (OR 1.85; 95% CI 1.40 to 2.39; p < 0.001) and lifestyle changes (OR 8.39; 95% CI 3.26 to 21.55; p < 0.001) were associated with greater, while non-adherence to diabetes medications (OR 0.014; 95% CI 0.0025 to 0.085; p < 0.001) and discontinuation of a non-insulin diabetes medication (OR 0.30; 95% CI 0.11 to 0.80; p = 0.016) were associated with lower probability of HbA1c decrease after declining insulin therapy.

CONCLUSION

We identified patient characteristics and treatment strategies associated with success and failure of glycemic control after insulin therapy decline by the patient. This information can assist in selection of optimal therapeutic approaches for these individuals.

Mechanism of Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Improvements in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Obesity

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to emphasize the pivotal role of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) in tackling the parallel epidemics of obesity and type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

RECENT FINDINGS

GLP-1-based therapies and in particular GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) have proven to be effective in lowering blood glucose and decreasing weight. GLP-1 RA not only mitigate these significant medical burdens but also result in weight loss and weight loss independent factors that decrease cardiovascular disease (CVD) and microvascular complications of T2DM, such as diabetic nephropathy. GLP-1-based therapies are critical for a patient-centered approach in choosing appropriate pharmacotherapy for T2DM and obesity while also taking into consideration comorbidities, such as cardiovascular and chronic kidney diseases.

Influence of Sodium Glucose Cotransporter 2 Inhibition on Physiological Adaptation to Endurance Exercise Training

CONTEXT

The combination of two beneficial antidiabetes interventions, regular exercise and pharmaceuticals, is intuitively appealing. However, metformin, the most commonly prescribed diabetes medication, attenuates the favorable physiological adaptations to exercise; in turn, exercise may impede the action of metformin.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine the influence of an alternative diabetes treatment, sodium glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibition, on the response to endurance exercise training.

DESIGN, PARTICIPANTS, AND INTERVENTION

In a randomized, double-blind, repeated measures parallel design, 30 sedentary overweight and obese men and women were assigned to 12 weeks of supervised endurance exercise training, with daily ingestion of either a placebo or SGLT2 inhibitor (dapagliflozin: ≤10 mg/day).

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS

Endurance exercise training favorably modified body mass, body composition (dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry), peak oxygen uptake (graded exercise with indirect calorimetry), responses to standardized submaximal exercise (indirect calorimetry, heart rate, and blood lactate), and skeletal muscle (vastus lateralis) citrate synthase activity (main effects of exercise training, all P < 0.05); SGLT2 inhibition did not influence any of these physiological adaptations (exercise training × treatment interaction, all P > 0.05). However, after endurance exercise training, fasting blood glucose was greater with SGLT2 inhibition, and increased insulin sensitivity (oral glucose tolerance test/Matsuda index) was abrogated with SGLT2 inhibition (exercise training × treatment interaction, P < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The efficacy of combining two beneficial antidiabetes interventions, regular endurance exercise and SGLT2 inhibition, was not supported. SGLT2 inhibition blunted endurance exercise training-induced improvements in insulin sensitivity, independent of effects on aerobic fitness or body composition.

Effect of incretin-based therapies on cancers of digestive system among 101 595 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and network meta-analysis combining 84 trials with a median duration of 30 weeks

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the risk of cancers of digestive system with incretin-based therapies among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched for randomized controlled clinical trials that compared incretin-based drugs with placebo or other antidiabetic drugs. Paired reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data and assessed risk of bias of included studies. Network meta-analysis was performed, followed by subgroup analysis. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation system was used to assess the quality of evidence.

RESULTS

A total of 84 studies (n=101 595) involving cancers of digestive system were identified (a median follow-up of 30 weeks). The risk of cancers of digestive system with incretin-based therapies was comparable with insulin (OR: 0.86, 95% CI 0.27 to 2.69), metformin (OR: 0.32, 95% CI 0.07 to 1.38), sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (OR: 5.26, 95% CI 0.58 to 47.41), sulfonylureas (OR: 1.27, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.39), thiazolidinediones (OR: 0.42, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.42), alpha-glucosidase inhibitors (OR: 2.98, 95% CI 0.12 to 73.80), and placebo (OR: 0.87, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.05). The results of subgroup analysis based on the type of digestive system cancers indicated that incretin-based therapies did not increase the risk of gastrointestinal cancers, respectively. The results of subgroup analysis based on age, duration, mean HbA1c, trial duration, and sample size did not indicate the risk of digestive system cancers.

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate to high Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation evidence suggests that incretin-based therapies were not associated with an increased risk of cancer of digestive system in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Gut microbiome and type 2 diabetes: where we are and where to go?

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) is a highly prevalent metabolic disorder characterized by an imbalance in blood glucose level, altered lipid profile and high blood pressure. Genetic constituents, high-fat and high-energy dietary habits, and a sedentary lifestyle are three major factors that contribute to high risk of T2D. Several studies have reported gut microbiome dysbiosis as a factor in rapid progression of insulin resistance in T2D that accounts for about 90% of all diabetes cases worldwide. The gut microbiome dysbiosis may reshape intestinal barrier functions and host metabolic and signaling pathways, which are directly or indirectly related to the insulin resistance in T2D. Thousands of the metabolites derived from microbes interact with the epithelial, hepatic and cardiac cell receptors that modulate host physiology. Xenobiotics including dietary components, antibiotics and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs strongly affect the gut microbial composition and can promote dysbiosis. Any change in the gut microbiota can shift the host metabolism towards increased energy harvest during diabetes and obesity. However, the exact mechanisms behind the dynamics of gut microbes and their impact on host metabolism at the molecular level are yet to be deciphered. We reviewed the published literature for better understanding of the dynamics of gut microbiota, factors that potentially induce gut microbiome dysbiosis and their relation to the progression of T2D. Special emphasis was also given to understand the gut microbiome induced breaching of intestinal barriers and/or tight junctions and their relation to insulin resistance.

Impact of delaying treatment intensification with a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on basal insulin: A longitudinal study of a US administrative claims database

AIM

To evaluate the effect of delaying treatment intensification with a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) on clinical and economic outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective observational claims study using IMPACT (Impact National Managed Care Benchmark Database) in adult patients with T2D who initiated basal insulin between January 1, 2005 and December 31, 2012, with or without OADs, who remained uncontrolled (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] ≥7.0%). Patients were categorized into 3 groups: early, delayed, and no intensification with a GLP-1 RA. We evaluated changes from baseline to follow-up at 12 months for HbA1c level, rate of hypoglycaemic events, and healthcare costs, and we assessed the association between baseline patient characteristics and subsequent treatment intensification.

RESULTS

A total of 139 patients (9.0% of 1552 eligible patients) met criteria for inclusion in the early intensification group, 588 patients (37.9%) met criteria for inclusion in the delayed intensification group, and 825 patients (53.2%) met criteria for inclusion in the no intensification group. Mean baseline HbA1c values were 9.16%, 9.07%, and 9.34%, respectively. At follow-up, delayed intensification was associated with significantly smaller decreases in HbA1c from baseline (-0.68%) compared with early intensification (-1.01%). Rates of overall hypoglycaemia were numerically greater in the delayed intensification group than in the early intensification group (0.26 vs 0.06 events/patient-years of exposure, respectively). Change in semi-annual total healthcare costs was greater in the no intensification group (+5266 USD) compared with the early intensification group (-560 USD) and the delayed intensification group (+1943 USD).

CONCLUSIONS

Timely addition of a GLP-1 RA to therapy for patients with T2D who were not adequately controlled with basal insulin is associated with better clinical and economic outcomes.

Pulse pressure and diabetes treatments: Blood pressure and pulse pressure difference among glucose lowering modality groups in type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes is associated with higher pulse pressure. In this study, we assessed and compared effects of classic diabetes treatments on pulse pressure (PP), systolic blood pressure (SBP), and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) in patients with type 2 diabetes.In a retrospective cohort study, 718 non-hypertensive patients with type 2 diabetes were selected and divided into 4 groups including metformin, insulin, glibenclamide+metformin, and metformin+insulin. They were followed for 4 consecutive visits lasting about 45.5 months. Effects of drug regimens on pulse and blood pressure over time were assessed separately and compared in regression models with generalized estimating equation method and were adjusted for age, duration of diabetes, sex, smoking, and body mass index (BMI).Studied groups had no significant change in PP, SBP, and DBP over time. No significant difference in PP and DBP among studied groups was observed (PP:P = 0.090; DBP:P = 0.063). Pairwise comparisons of PP, SBP, and DBP showed no statistically significant contrast between any 2 studied groups. Interactions of time and treatment were not different among groups.Our results demonstrate patients using metformin got higher PP and SBP over time. Averagely, pulse and blood pressure among groups were not different. Trends of variation in pulse and blood pressure were not different among studied diabetes treatments.

Safety and efficacy of semaglutide once weekly vs sitagliptin once daily, both as monotherapy in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To assess the safety and efficacy of monotherapy with once-weekly subcutaneous (s.c.) semaglutide vs sitagliptin in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

In this phase IIIa randomized, open-label, parallel-group, active-controlled, multicentre trial, Japanese adults with T2D treated with diet and exercise only or oral antidiabetic drug monotherapy (washed out during the run-in period) received once-weekly s.c. semaglutide (0.5 or 1.0 mg) or once-daily oral sitagliptin 100 mg. The primary endpoint was number of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) after 30 weeks.

RESULTS

Overall, 308 participants were randomized and exposed to treatment, with similar baseline characteristics across the groups. In total, 2.9% of participants in both the semaglutide 0.5 mg and the sitagliptin group prematurely discontinued treatment, compared with 14.7% in the semaglutide 1.0 mg group. The majority of discontinuations in the semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg groups were attributable to adverse events (AEs). More TEAEs were reported in semaglutide- vs sitagliptin-treated participants (74.8%, 71.6% and 66.0% in the semaglutide 0.5 mg, semaglutide 1.0 mg and sitagliptin groups, respectively). AEs were mainly mild to moderate. Gastrointestinal AEs, most frequently reported with semaglutide, diminished in frequency over time. The mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c [baseline 8.1%]) decreased by 1.9% and 2.2% with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg, respectively, vs 0.7% with sitagliptin (estimated treatment difference [ETD] vs sitagliptin -1.13%, 95% confidence interval [CI] -1.32; -0.94, and -1.44%, 95% CI -1.63; -1.24; both P < .0001). Body weight (baseline 69.3 kg) was reduced by 2.2 and 3.9 kg with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg, respectively (ETD -2.22 kg, 95% CI -3.02; -1.42 and -3.88 kg, 95% CI -4.70; -3.07; both P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

In Japanese people with T2D, more TEAEs were reported with semaglutide than with sitagliptin; however, the semaglutide safety profile was similar to that of other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. Semaglutide significantly reduced HbA1c and body weight compared with sitagliptin.

Estimating the effects of second-line therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus: retrospective cohort study

OBJECTIVE

Metformin is the recommended initial drug treatment in type 2 diabetes mellitus, but there is no clearly preferred choice for an additional drug when indicated. We compare the counterfactual drug effectiveness in lowering glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels and effect on body mass index (BMI) of four diabetes second-line drug classes using electronic health records.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Retrospective analysis of electronic health records of US-based patients in the Explorys database using causal inference methodology to adjust for patient censoring and confounders.

PARTICIPANTS AND EXPOSURES

Our cohort consisted of more than 40 000 patients with type 2 diabetes, prescribed metformin along with a drug out of four second-line drug classes-sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 agonists-during the years 2000-2015. Roughly, 17 000 of these patients were followed for 12 months after being prescribed a second-line drug.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

HbA1c and BMI of these patients after 6 and 12 months following treatment.

RESULTS

We demonstrate that all four drug classes reduce HbA1c levels, but the effect of sulfonylureas after 6 and 12 months of treatment is less pronounced compared with other classes. We also estimate that DPP-4 inhibitors decrease body weight significantly more than sulfonylureas and thiazolidinediones.

CONCLUSION

Our results are in line with current knowledge on second-line drug effectiveness and effect on BMI. They demonstrate that causal inference from electronic health records is an effective way for conducting multitreatment causal inference studies.

IDegLira Versus Insulin Glargine U100: A Long-term Cost-effectiveness Analysis in the US Setting

INTRODUCTION

Treatment with IDegLira has the potential to improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) without the weight gain and with a lower risk of hypoglycemia than with other therapies. The aim of the present analysis was to evaluate the long-term cost-effectiveness of IDegLira versus insulin glargine U100 with re-education and up-titration of the dose for treatment of patients with T2DM failing to achieve glycemic control on basal insulin in the US setting.

METHODS

Data were obtained from the DUAL V randomized controlled trial in which adults with T2DM failing to achieve glycemic targets with insulin glargine U100 were randomly allocated to receive either IDegLira or insulin glargine U100. Long-term projections of clinical outcomes and direct costs were made using the IMS CORE Diabetes Model. Costs were accounted from a healthcare payer perspective. Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted at 3% annually.

RESULTS

IDegLira was associated with improved discounted life expectancy (13.99 [standard deviation 0.19] versus 13.82 [standard deviation 0.20] years) and quality-adjusted life expectancy (9.14 [standard deviation 0.12] versus 8.87 [standard deviation 0.13] quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) compared to insulin glargine U100. IDegLira was associated with increased direct costs of $16,970, yielding an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of $63,678 per QALY gained versus insulin glargine U100. Sensitivity analyses identified that the key driver of cost-effectiveness was the greater reduction in glycated hemoglobin with IDegLira compared with insulin glargine U100.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on head-to-head clinical trial data, the present analysis suggests that IDegLira is likely to improve long-term clinical outcomes for patients with T2DM not achieving glycemic control on basal insulin compared to re-education and up-titration of the dose of insulin glargine U100, with these improvements coming at an increased cost from a healthcare payer perspective. An ICER within the range described as high care value was calculated, suggesting IDegLira is a cost-effective treatment option in the US.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk A/S and Novo Nordisk Inc.

Should Side Effects Influence the Selection of Antidiabetic Therapies in Type 2 Diabetes?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

There are currently over 40 different drugs in 12 distinct classes approved in the USA to treat patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This review summarizes our current knowledge about potential side effects of antidiabetic therapy and attempts to apply it to a clinical practice setting.

RECENT FINDINGS

Given the heterogeneity of both the patients and the disease, it is mathematically impossible to test every available drug combination in long-term outcome, prospective, randomized blinded fashion before a clinician decides which agent(s) to prescribe to a specific patient in a given situation. To complicate the clinician's dilemma, there is lack of available tests to predict an individual's response or propensity to side effects. Further, the data available are derived from small, short-term registration trials and typically focus on relative rather than absolute risks of any given drug and do not address the potential adverse outcomes if a patient's diabetes remains untreated. Clinicians have to personalize their choice of antidiabetic therapy based both on the specific characteristics of the patient in front of them (stage of diabetes and its complications, overall health status, socioeconomic situation, other medications present, desire to improve control of diabetes, etc.) and the current knowledge about the relative and absolute balance of benefits and risks of any individual medication in that specific patient. It has to be recognized that this requires constant re-evaluation as database of our experience with antidiabetic therapy expands.

Long-term management of type 2 diabetes with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists

Continuously reducing excess blood glucose is a primary goal for the management of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Most patients with T2D require glucose-lowering medications to achieve and maintain adequate glycemic control; however, treatment failure may occur, limiting treatment options. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are an emerging therapeutic class that can be prescribed for patients instead of basal insulin after the failure of oral therapies. Recent studies have focused on the durability and tolerability of long-term GLP-1RA therapy. This review summarizes the key efficacy and safety findings from prospective phase 3 clinical studies of at least 76 weeks' duration for the GLP-1RAs currently approved in the United States and the European Union (albiglutide, dulaglutide, exenatide twice daily [BID], exenatide once weekly [QW], liraglutide, and lixisenatide). Currently, most of the long-term data are from uncontrolled extension studies, and continuous patient benefit has been observed for up to 3 years with multiple GLP-1RAs. Four-year comparative data demonstrated a longer time to treatment failure for exenatide BID than for sulfonylurea, and 3-year comparative extension data demonstrated greater glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) reductions and weight loss with exenatide QW than with insulin glargine. Currently, the longest extension study for a GLP-1RA is the DURATION-1 study of exenatide QW, with >7 years of clinical data available. Data from DURATION-1 demonstrated that continuous HbA1c reductions and weight loss were observed for the patients continuing on the treatment, with no unexpected adverse events. Taken together, these data support GLP-1RAs as a long-term noninsulin treatment option after the failure of oral therapies.

A real-world study of treatment patterns and outcomes in US managed-care patients with type 2 Diabetes initiating injectable therapies

AIMS

Examine real-world outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) initiating injectable therapy as part of the Initiation of New Injectable Treatment Introduced after Antidiabetic Therapy with Oral-only Regimens (INITIATOR) study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Linked insurance claims and medical record data were collected from 2 large US health insurers (April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2012) of T2DM adults initiating treatment with glargine (GLA) or liraglutide (LIRA). Baseline characteristics were examined and changes in 12-month follow-up outcomes were described for both treatment groups: HbA1c, weight change, hypoglycaemia, persistence, healthcare utilisation and costs.

RESULTS

A total of 4490 patients were included (GLA, 2116; LIRA, 2374). At baseline, GLA patients had significantly higher HbA1c vs LIRA patients (9.72% vs 8.19%; P < .001), lower likelihood of having HbA1c < 7% (7.1% vs 23.8%; P < .001), lower bodyweight (100.9 kg vs 110.9 kg, P < .001), higher Charlson Comorbidity Index score (0.88 vs 0.63; P < .001), and higher diabetes-related costs ($3492 vs $2089; P < .001), respectively. During 12-months of follow-up, treatment persistence was 64%, mean HbA1c reduction was -1.24% and weight change was + 1.17 among GLA patients, and was 49%, -0.51% and -2.74 kg, respectively, among LIRA patients. Diabetes-related costs increased significantly from baseline to follow-up for LIRA patients ($2089 vs $3258, P < .001) but not for GLA patients ($3492 vs $3550, P = .890).

CONCLUSIONS

There were clinically relevant baseline differences in both groups, suggesting that GLA and LIRA are prescribed for different patient groups, and highlighting that efficacy results from clinical trials do not always translate into real-world practice. Significant increases in healthcare costs were observed in the LIRA group, warranting further cost-effectiveness analysis.

Reasons for discontinuation of GLP1 receptor agonists: data from a real-world cross-sectional survey of physicians and their patients with type 2 diabetes

AIM

Nonadherence to glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1 RAs) is relatively common among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study sought to identify reasons why patients discontinue GLP1 RAs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Retrospective data from the Adelphi Diabetes Disease Specific Programme were used. Physicians managing patients with T2DM were surveyed via face-to-face interviews, and patients treated for T2DM were surveyed via self-completed questionnaires. Patient data were stratified by current versus prior GLP1 RA use.

RESULTS

Physicians (n=443) most frequently reported inadequate blood glucose control (45.6%), nausea/vomiting (43.8%), and gastrointestinal (GI) side effects (36.8%) as reasons for GLP1 RA discontinuation. Patients (n=194) reported the GI-related issues "Made me feel sick" (64.4%) and "Made me throw up" (45.4%) as their top reasons for discontinuation. The most common problems reported (excluding cost) for those currently using GLP1 RAs were "Prefer oral medication over injections" (patients 56%, physicians 32.6%), "Made me feel sick" (patients 38.1%, physicians 16.3%), and "Did not help lose weight" (patients 25.4%, physicians 18%). The most bothersome problems for patients globally (frequency reporting very/extremely bothersome) (excluding cost) were "Difficult to plan meals around" (55.6%), "Made me throw up" (51.6%), and "Caused weight gain" (50%).

CONCLUSION

Both patients and physicians reported GI-related issues as a prominent factor, but disparities between patient experiences and physician perceptions were revealed, suggesting gaps in physician-patient communication. Understanding patients' expectations of GLP1 RAs and physicians' patient-management practices may help increase GLP1 RA adherence and thereby potentially enhance diabetes care.

Nutritional modulation of endogenous glucagon-like peptide-1 secretion: a review

BACKGROUND

The positive influences of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) on blood glucose homeostasis, appetite sensations, and food intake provide a strong rationale for its therapeutic potential in the nutritional management of obesity and type 2 diabetes.

AIM

To summarize GLP-1 physiology and the nutritional modulation of its secretion in the context of obesity and type 2 diabetes management.

FINDINGS

GLP-1 is mainly synthesized and secreted by enteroendocrine L-cells of the gastrointestinal tract. Its secretion is partly mediated by the direct nutrient sensing by G-protein coupled receptors which specifically bind to monosaccharides, peptides and amino-acids, monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fatty acids as well as to short chain fatty acids. Foods rich in these nutrients, such as high-fiber grain products, nuts, avocados and eggs also seem to influence GLP-1 secretion and may thus promote associated beneficial outcomes in healthy individuals as well as individuals with type 2 diabetes or with other metabolic disturbances.

CONCLUSION

The stimulation of endogenous GLP-1 secretion by manipulating the composition of the diet may be a relevant strategy for obesity and type 2 diabetes management. A better understanding of the dose-dependent effects as well as the synergistic effects of nutrients and whole foods is needed in order to develop recommendations to appropriately modify the diet to enhance GLP-1 beneficial effects.

Incretin-Based Therapy and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

The present study aims to evaluate the risk of pancreatic cancer with incretin-based therapy among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov for eligible studies published up to March 06 2016. This meta-analysis includes all studies reporting adverse events of pancreatic cancer with use of incretin-based therapies compared with placebo or non-incretin anti-diabetic drugs in patients with T2DM. We used fixed-effect model to compare pooled relative risk (RR) with related 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 159 randomized trials were identified. Out of these, 135 studies were excluded as pancreatic cancer occurrence had not been included as an end point. The remaining 24 trials enrolling 47,904 participants were further assessed. Overall, no increased risk of pancreatic cancer were detected in association with incretin-based treatment (RR = 0.7, 95% CI 0.37-1.05). The incidence of pancreatic neoplasm was even lower among incretin-based groups than controls (RR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.87) in trials with duration more than 104 weeks. There was even decreased risk of pancreatic cancer within groups paralleled by incretin-matched placebos (RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.93) than by non-incretin anti-diabetic drugs. Neither monotherapy (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.38-1.01) nor combination regimen (RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.45-1.90) of incretin mimetics increased the risk of pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows that incretin-based therapies are not associated with increase in the risk of pancreatic cancer. Interestingly, subgroup analyses suggested lower risk of pancreatic cancer in incretin groups than placebo in long-term studies (>104 weeks). Considering the inconsistent results among randomized trials and previous epidemiological investigations, more such studies should be conducted to clarify the existence or non-existence of this association.

FUNDING

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 81270476 and 81470830).

Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: From "Guidelines" to "Position Statements" and Back: Recommendations of the Israel National Diabetes Council

Given the increased prevalence of type 2 diabetes worldwide, most patients are treated by their primary health care team (PHCT). PHCTs need guidance in choosing the best treatment regimen for patients, since the number of glucose-lowering agents (GLAs) is rapidly increasing, as is the amount of clinical data regarding these drugs. The American Diabetes Association/European Association for the Study of Diabetes Position Statement emphasizes the importance of personalized treatment and lists drug efficacy, risk of hypoglycemia, effect on weight, side effects, and cost as important parameters to consider when choosing GLAs. The suggested Israeli guidelines refocus earlier international recommendations from 2012 and 2015, based on emerging data from cardiovascular outcome trials as well as what we believe are important issues for patient care (i.e., durability, hypoglycemia risk, and weight gain).

Ten-Year Trends in the Morbidity of Diabetes Mellitus and Antidiabetic Drug Utilization in Croatia: A Study Based on Routinely Collected Data

Objectives. To investigate trends of diabetes mellitus (DM) morbidity and antidiabetic drug utilization in Croatian primary health care (PHC) from 2005 to 2014. Method. Routinely collected morbidity data from all PHC units, presented in Croatian health-statistics yearbooks, were retrieved. Data on drug utilization were retrieved from the Annual Reports of the Croatian Agency for Medicinal Products and Medical Devices (ATC/DDD, antidiabetic, A10). Results. Total morbidity increased by 33.3% and DM increased by 65.6%, mostly in patients over age 65 (from 50% to 57%). Estimated DM prevalence in adults increased from 3.9% to 6.4%. Increased morbidity was followed by an even higher increase in drug utilization (120%). Metformin was first, with a constant increase (from 18% to 39%), followed by glimepiride, while glibenclamide use decreased. Total utilization of insulin increased even more, mostly for aspart (600%) and newly introduced glargine and detemir, while human insulin usage sharply decreased. Spending also increased, mostly for aspart (from 21% to 61% of total). Conclusions. Increased DM is followed by a higher increase in antidiabetic drug utilization; this trend will continue in the future. In Croatian PHC, metformin has primacy along with insulin analogues.

Advances in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: impact of dulaglutide

The purpose of this review is to provide a review of current data of the most recently approved glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1-receptor agonist, dulaglutide, in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. To complete this, a PubMed search was performed to identify manuscripts published from 1947 to July 2015. The search terms "Trulicity", "dulaglutide", and "LY2189265" were utilized, and publications were included if they evaluated the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, safety, or patient-reported outcomes of dulaglutide. Dulaglutide is a GLP-1 receptor agonist that mimics endogenous GLP-1, the hormone produced in response to food intake. Modifications have been made to the molecule to delay breakdown and allow for once-weekly dosing. Dulaglutide has been studied as monotherapy and in combination with several agents, including metformin, glimepiride, pioglitazone, and insulin lispro. Dulaglutide has demonstrated superior efficacy compared to placebo, metformin, insulin glargine, sitagliptin, and twice-daily exenatide. It was found to be noninferior to liraglutide. The most common adverse effects in clinical studies were gastrointestinal-related adverse events, and patient satisfaction was high with the use of dulaglutide. Dulaglutide is an appealing option for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, based on its once-weekly dosing, A1c lowering comparable to liraglutide, weight reduction comparable to exenatide, and a similar adverse-effect profile to other GLP-1 receptor agonists.

Baseline ALT levels as a marker of glycemic response to treatment with GLP-1 receptor agonists

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to assess if ALT levels, as a marker of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, may predict HbA1c response to treatment with GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A retrospective, longitudinal, analytical study was conducted including patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus continuously treated with GLP-1 agonists (85% with liraglutide) for one year. Patients were divided into two groups according to baseline ALT levels, with 24 U/L (the median of the distribution) as the cut-off point. The dependent variable was HbA1c change (one-year follow-up minus baseline). The predictive value of ALT levels above 24 U/L and ALT change was analyzed using multivariate linear regression adjusted to age, gender, diabetes duration, type and dose of GLP-1 RA, baseline HbA1c, baseline body mass index (BMI), and change in BMI.

RESULTS

A total of 117 patients (48% females) aged 58.6 (SD 9.6) years were enrolled into the study. Treatment was associated with a change in ALT of -4.3 U/L (p=0.041) and a change in HbA1c of -1.1% (p<0.0001). Decreases in HbA1c (-1.41% vs -0.76%; p=0.045) and ALT (-9.25 vs 0.46 U/L; p=0.002) were significantly higher in patients with ALT levels above the median. In the multivariate analysis, both ALT>24 U/L (b=-0.74; 95%CI: -1.31 to -0.18; p=0.011) and ALT change (b=0.028; 95%CI: 0.010 to 0.046; p=0.003), were significant response predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated baseline transaminase values and decreased transaminase levels during follow-up are associated to a favorable glycemic response to GLP-1 RAs.

Effects of dextromethorphan as add-on to sitagliptin on blood glucose and serum insulin concentrations in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, multiple crossover, single-dose clinical trial

In this clinical trial, we investigated the blood glucose (BG)-lowering effects of 30, 60 and 90 mg dextromethorphan (DXM) as well as 100 mg sitagliptin alone versus combinations of DXM and sitagliptin during an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) in 20 men with T2DM. The combination of 60 mg DXM plus 100 mg sitagliptin was observed to have the strongest effect in the OGTT. It lowered maximum BG concentrations and increased the baseline-adjusted area under the curve for serum insulin concentrations in the first 30 min of the OGTT (mean ± standard deviation 240 ± 47 mg/dl and 8.1 ± 6.1 mU/l/h, respectively) to a significantly larger extent than did 100 mg sitagliptin alone (254 ± 50 mg/dl and 5.8 ± 2.5 mU/l/h, respectively; p < 0.05) and placebo (272 ± 49 mg/dl and 3.9 ± 3.0 mU/l/h, respectively; p < 0.001). All study drugs were well tolerated, alone and in combination, without serious adverse events or hypoglycaemia. Long-term clinical trials are now warranted to investigate the potential of the combination of 30 or 60 mg DXM and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in the treatment of individuals with T2DM, in particular as preclinical studies have identified the β-cell protective properties of DXM.

Effects of exenatide on measures of diabetic neuropathy in subjects with type 2 diabetes: results from an 18-month proof-of-concept open-label randomized study

OBJECTIVE

Experimental studies have reported potential benefit of glucagon-like peptide-1(GLP-1) receptor agonists in preventing diabetic peripheral neuropathy (DPN). We therefore performed a proof-of-concept pilot study to evaluate the effect of exenatide, a GLP-1 agonist, on measures of DPN and cardiovascular autonomic neuropathy (CAN) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Forty-six T2D subjects (age 54±10years, diabetes duration 8±5years, HbA1c 8.2±1.3%) with mild to moderate DPN at baseline were randomized to receive either twice daily exenatide (n=22) or daily insulin glargine (n=24). The subjects, with similar HbA1c levels, were followed for 18months. The primary end point was the prevalence of confirmed clinical neuropathy (CCN). Changes in measures of CAN, other measures of small fiber neuropathy such as intra-epidermal nerve fiber density (IENFD), and quality of life were also analyzed.

RESULTS

Glucose control was similar in both groups during the study. There were no statistically significant treatment group differences in the prevalence of CCN, IENFD, measures of CAN, nerve conductions studies, or quality of life indices.

CONCLUSIONS

In this pilot study of patients with T2D and mild to moderate DPN, 18months of exenatide treatment had no significant effect on measures of neuropathy compared with glargine treatment.

Impact on glycated haemoglobin of a biological response-based measure of medication adherence

AIMS

The aim of this study was to examine the relationship between a specific glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) measurement and a pharmaceutical dispensings-based measure of adherence calculated over the 90 days before each HbA1c measure among patients who have newly initiated metformin therapy.

METHODS

We identified 3109 people with type 2 diabetes who initiated metformin as their first-ever antihyperglycaemic drug, analysing all 9918 HbA1c measurements that were taken over the next 2 years. We used an adaptation of the 'proportion of days covered' method for assessing medication adherence that corresponded to an ∼90-day interval preceding an HbA1c measurement, terming the adaptation the 'biological response-based proportion of days covered' (BRB-PDC). To account for multiple observations per patient, we analysed the association between HbA1c and BRB-PDC within the generalized estimating equation framework. Analyses were stratified by HbA1c level before metformin initiation using a threshold of 8% (64 mmol/mol).

RESULTS

After multivariable adjustment using 0% adherence as the reference category, BRB-PDC in the range 50-79% was associated with HbA1c values lower by -0.113 [95% confidence interval (CI) -0.202, -0.025] among patients with pre-metformin HbA1c <8%, and by -0.247 (95% CI -0.390, -0.104) among those with HbA1c ≥8% at metformin initiation. Full adherence (≥80%) was associated with HbA1c values lower by -0.175% (95% CI -0.257, -0.093) and by -0.453% (95% CI -0.586, -0.320).

CONCLUSIONS

Using this novel short-interval approach that more closely associates adherence with the expected biological response, the association between better adherence and HbA1c levels was considerably stronger than has been previously reported; however, the strength of the impact was dependent upon the HbA1c level before initiating metformin.

A clinical review of GLP-1 receptor agonists: efficacy and safety in diabetes and beyond

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes is increasing at an astounding rate. Many of the agents used to treat type 2 diabetes have undesirable adverse effects of hypoglycemia and weight gain. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists represent a unique approach to the treatment of diabetes, with benefits extending outside glucose control, including positive effects on weight, blood pressure, cholesterol levels, and beta-cell function. They mimic the effects of the incretin hormone GLP-1, which is released from the intestine in response to food intake. Their effects include increasing insulin secretion, decreasing glucagon release, increasing satiety, and slowing gastric emptying. There are currently four approved GLP-1 receptor agonists in the United States: exenatide, liraglutide, albiglutide, and dulaglutide. A fifth agent, lixisenatide, is available in Europe. There are important pharmacodynamic, pharmacokinetic, and clinical differences of each agent. The most common adverse effects seen with GLP-1 therapy include nausea, vomiting, and injection-site reactions. Other warnings and precautions include pancreatitis and thyroid cell carcinomas. GLP-1 receptor agonists are an innovative and effective option to improve blood glucose control, with other potential benefits of preserving beta-cell function, weight loss, and increasing insulin sensitivity. Once-weekly formulations may also improve patient adherence. Overall, these are effective agents for patients with type 2 diabetes, who are either uncontrolled on metformin or intolerant to metformin.

Pharmacokinetics and clinical evaluation of the alogliptin plus pioglitazone combination for type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Type 2 diabetes is a complex disease with multiple defects, which generally requires a combination of several pharmacological approaches to reach glucose control targets. A unique fixed-dose combination combines a thiazolidinedione (pioglitazone) and a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (alogliptin).

AREA COVERED

An extensive literature search was performed to analyze the pharmacokinetics of pioglitazone and alogliptin when used separately and in combination as well as to summarize clinical and toxicological considerations about the combined therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Pioglitazone, a potent insulin sensitizer, and alogliptin, an incretin-based agent that potentiates post-meal insulin secretion and reduces glucagon secretion, have complementary mechanisms of action. The clinical efficacy of a combined therapy is superior to any single therapy in patients treated with diet or with metformin (with or without sulphonylurea). These two drugs can be administered once daily, with or without a meal. No clinically relevant pharmacokinetic interactions between the two agents have been described and the fixed-dose combination has shown bioequivalence with alogliptin and pioglitazone given separately. Combining alogliptin with pioglitazone does not alter the safety profile of each compound. Weight gain observed with pioglitazone may be limited with the addition of alogliptin. The concern of an increased risk of heart failure remains to be better investigated.

Potential for dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor single-pill combinations

With prolonged duration of Type 2 diabetes mellitus, most patients need a combination of antihyperglycemic drugs to reach their target HbA1c. Evidence shows that single-pill combinations (SPCs) may increase patient satisfaction, adherence, and reduce overall health-care costs. Several SPCs containing metformin and another oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) are available on the market. Although well established in clinical practice, long-term durability and tolerability of traditional OADs can be inadequate. Dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitors and sodium glucose cotransporter (SGLT) 2 inhibitors are two newer classes of OADs that are efficacious and are less likely to induce adverse effects such as gastrointestinal reactions, hypoglycemia and weight gain when compared with metformin, sulfonylureas, and thiazolidinediones. This article describes current efficacy and safety data of DPP-4/SGLT2 inhibitor combination therapy. Pharmacokinetics, mechanism-of-action based rationale for the combination and timing of the addition of a SPC to the treatment regimen are discussed.

Should sulfonylureas remain an acceptable first-line add-on to metformin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes? Yes, they continue to serve us well!

Since their introduction to clinical practice in the 1950s, sulfonylureas have been widely prescribed for use in patients with type 2 diabetes. Of all the other medications currently available for clinical use, only metformin has been used more frequently. However, several new drug classes have emerged that are reported to have equal glucose-lowering efficacy and greater safety when added to treatment of patients in whom metformin monotherapy is no longer sufficient. Moreover, current arguments also suggest that the alternative drugs may be superior to sulfonylureas with regard to the risk of cardiovascular complications. Thus, while there is universal agreement that metformin should remain the first-line pharmacologic therapy for those in whom lifestyle modification is insufficient to control hyperglycemia, there is no consensus as to which drug should be added to metformin. Therefore, given the current controversy, we provide a Point-Counterpoint on this issue. In the point narrative presented below, Dr. Abrahamson provides his argument suggesting that avoiding use of sulfonylureas as a class of medication as an add-on to metformin is not appropriate as there are many patients whose glycemic control would improve with use of these drugs with minimal risk of adverse events. In the following counterpoint narrative, Dr. Genuth suggests there is no longer a need for sulfonylureas to remain a first-line addition to metformin for those patients whose clinical characteristics are appropriate and whose health insurance and/or financial resources make an alternative drug affordable.