Advancing Therapy in Suboptimally Controlled Basal Insulin-Treated Type 2 Diabetes: Clinical Outcomes With iGlarLixi Versus Premix BIAsp 30 in the SoliMix Randomized Controlled Trial

Real-world effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide in adults with type 2 diabetes: An international, multicentre, 12-month, prospective observational study

AIM

To assess the impact of insulin glargine (100 U/mL) and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) fixed-ratio combination therapy on the overall management of glycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), previously inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs ± basal insulin or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This 12-month, international, multicentre, prospective, observational study included patients (age ≥ 18 years) with T2D who had initiated iGlarLixi within 1 month prior to study inclusion. Data were collected at study inclusion, month 3, month 6 and month 12 from patient diaries, self-measured plasma glucose, and questionnaires. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to month 6.

RESULTS

Of the 737 eligible participants (mean age: 57.8 [standard deviation: 11.2] years; male: 49%), 685 had baseline and post-baseline HbA1c data available. The least squares mean change in HbA1c from baseline to month 6 was -1.4% (standard error [95% confidence interval (CI)]: 0.05 [-1.5, -1.3]). The absolute change from baseline at month 12 was -1.7% ± 1.9% (95% CI: -1.9, -1.5). There were 72 hypoglycaemia events reported during the study period, with a very low incidence of severe hypoglycaemia (two participants [rate: 0.003 events per patient-year]).

CONCLUSIONS

This real-world observational study shows that initiation of iGlarLixi in people with T2D inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs ± basal insulin or GLP-1 RAs improves glycaemic control with a low incidence of hypoglycaemia.

iGlarLixi for type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy and tolerability of iGlarLixi-a novel, fixed-ratio, soluble combination of insulin glargine and lixisenatide-for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov databases were searched from inception to November 15, 2023 to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing iGlarLixi with a placebo or any other antidiabetic agent in adults with T2D. Risk ratios (RRs) and mean differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to evaluate the outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 10 trials enrolling 6071 T2D patients were included. Compared with placebos or other antidiabetic agents, iGlarLixi exerted beneficial effects on changes in HbA1c, the percentage of patients who achieved an HbA1c < 7%, the percentage of patients who achieved an HbA1c < 6.5%, the percentage of patients who achieved an HbA1c < 7.0% without weight gain and/or without severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycemic episodes, changes in fasting plasma glucose, and changes in self-measured plasma glucose. Regarding safety, iGlarLixi did not increase the incidence of severe hypoglycemia or serious adverse events but did increase the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events, symptomatic hypoglycemia, and adverse events (e.g., nausea, vomiting, diarrhea).

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi showed improved efficacy and safety in patients with T2D. Additional large, multicenter RCTs are warranted to obtain deeper insights into the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, thereby providing guidance for clinical treatment decisions.

Expert Opinion on Current Trends in the Use of Insulin in the Management of People with Type 2 Diabetes from the South-Eastern European Region and Israel

Despite the availability of various antihyperglycaemic therapies and comprehensive guidelines, glycaemic control in diabetes management has not improved significantly during the last decade in the real-world clinical setting. Treatment inertia arising from a complex interplay among patient-, clinician- and healthcare-system-related factors is the prime reason for this suboptimal glycaemic control. Also, the key factor leading to inadequate glycaemic levels remains limited communication between healthcare professionals (HCPs) and people with type 2 diabetes (PwT2D). Early insulin administration has several advantages including reduced glucotoxicity, high efficacy and preserved β-cell mass/function, leading to lowering the risk of diabetes complications. The current publication is based on consensus of experts from the South-Eastern European region and Israel who reviewed the existing evidence and guidelines for the treatment of PwT2D. Herein, the experts emphasised the timely use of insulin, preferably second-generation basal insulin (BI) analogues and intensification using basal-plus therapy, as the most-potent glucose-lowering treatment choice in the real-world clinical setting. Despite an increase in the use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), the experts urged timely insulin initiation for inadequate glycaemic control in PwT2D. Furthermore, the combination of BI and GLP-1 RA addressing both fasting plasma glucose and post-prandial excursions as a free- or fixed-ratio combination was identified to reduce treatment complexity and burden. To minimise discontinuation and improve adherence, the experts reiterated quality, regular interactions and discussions between HCPs and PwT2D/carers for their involvement in the diabetes management decision-making process. Clinicians and HCPs should consider the opinions of the experts in accordance with the most recent recommendations for diabetes management.

Effects of age and disease duration on the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi in Asian people with type 2 diabetes: A post hoc analysis of the LixiLan-O-AP and LixiLan-L-CN trials

AIM

To evaluate the effect of age and disease duration on the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi versus insulin glargine 100 units/ml (iGlar) or lixisenatide (Lixi) alone in Asian people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs (LixiLan-O-AP) or basal insulin ± oral antidiabetic drugs (LixiLan-L-CN).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this post hoc analysis, the glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) changes were assessed from baseline to week 24 (LixiLan-O-AP) or 30 (LixiLan-L-CN) in subgroups defined by baseline age (<65, ≥65 years) and duration of T2D. The proportion who achieved the composite of HbA1c <7% (<53.0 mmol/mol) without weight gain and without symptomatic hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L) and the incidences of hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal disorders were also analysed.

RESULTS

HbA1c reductions were consistently greater with iGlarLixi versus iGlar or Lixi across all subgroups, including participants aged ≥65 years and those with T2D for ≥15 or ≥20 years. Greater proportions of participants achieved HbA1c <7% (<53.0 mmol/mol) without weight gain or hypoglycaemia with iGlarLixi versus iGlar or Lixi, regardless of age or T2D duration. Hypoglycaemia incidence was similar with iGlarLixi versus iGlar across most subgroups; the incidence of gastrointestinal disorders was lower with iGlarLixi versus Lixi in all subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi showed consistent efficacy and safety across all age and disease duration subgroups in Asian people with uncontrolled T2D, including older individuals and those with longstanding disease.

Advancing type 2 diabetes therapy with iGlarLixi in older people: Pooled analysis of four randomized controlled trials

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi in older people (≥65 years) with type 2 diabetes (T2D) advancing or switching from oral agents, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), or basal insulin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The data of participants aged <65 years and ≥65 years from four LixiLan trials (LixiLan-O, LixiLan-G, LixiLan-L, SoliMix) were evaluated over 26 or 30 weeks.

RESULTS

Participants aged <65/≥65 years (n = 1039/n = 497) had a mean baseline body mass index of 31.4 and 30.7 kg/m2 and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration of 66 mmol/mol (8.2%) and 65 mmol/mol (8.1%), respectively. Least squares mean HbA1c change from baseline to end of treatment (EOT) was -14.32 mmol/mol (-1.31%) (95% confidence interval [CI] -14.97, -13.77 [-1.37%, -1.26%]) for those aged <65 years and -13.66 mmol/mol (-1.25%) (95% CI -14.54, -12.79 [-1.33%, -1.17%]) for those aged ≥65 years. At EOT, achievement of HbA1c targets was similar between the group aged <65 years and the group aged ≥65 years: <53 mmol/mol (<7%) (59.0% and 56.5%, respectively), <59 mmol/mol (<7.5%) (75.5% and 73.0%, respectively) and <64 mmol/mol (<8%) (83.8% and 84.1%, respectively). The incidence and event rate of American Diabetes Association Level 1 hypoglycaemia during the studies were also comparable between the two groups: 26.7% and 28.2% and 1.7 and 2.1 events per patient-year for the group aged <65 years and the group aged ≥65 years, respectively. A clinically relevant reduction in HbA1c (>1% from baseline for HbA1c ≥64 mmol/mol [≥8%] or ≥0.5% from baseline for HbA1c <64 mmol/mol [<8%]) without hypoglycaemia was attained by 50.0% and 47.6% of participants aged <65 years and ≥65 years, respectively. Adverse events were similar between the two age groups.

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi is a simple, well-tolerated, once-daily alternative for treatment advancement in older people with T2D that provides significant improvements in glycaemic control without increasing hypoglycaemia risk, thus reducing the treatment burden.

Consistent glycaemic efficacy and safety of concomitant use of iGlarLixi and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor therapy for type 2 diabetes: A patient-level pooled analysis of three randomised clinical trials

AIMS

Sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) and/or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) with proven cardio- and reno-protective benefits are recommended in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) at high risk of cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, and/or heart failure. This pooled analysis compared efficacy and safety outcomes of iGlarLixi with or without SGLT2is in people with T2D.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis evaluated outcomes in participants who were receiving an SGLT2i when initiating iGlarLixi (SGLT2i users) and those who were not (SGLT2i non-users) in a pooled dataset from three trials: LixiLan-G (advancing from a GLP-1 RA), SoliMix and LixiLan ONE CAN (advancing from basal insulin).

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics were generally similar between 219 users and 746 non-users. Least squares mean changes in HbA1c from baseline to Week 26 were similar for users (-1.2 % [95 % confidence intervals: -1.4 %, -1.1 %]) and non-users (-1.2 % [-1.2 %, -1.1 %]). Changes in body weight, fasting glucose and post-prandial glucose were similar between groups, as were hypoglycaemic events.

CONCLUSIONS

Pooled results from three studies of adults with T2D demonstrated that iGlarLixi provided similar clinically meaningful improvements in glycaemic control without increased hypoglycaemia risk, regardless of concomitant use of SGLT2is.

The Wedding Bells Sound Really Good! iGlarLixi Fixed-Ratio Combination in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Narrative Review

iGlarLixi is a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. iGlarLixi has proven clinical benefits in terms of glycemia, weight control, and safety, defined by the risk of hypoglycemia. It simultaneously targets many pathophysiologic abnormalities which are at the root of type 2 diabetes and thus presents a complementary mode of action. Finally, it may also address diabetes treatment burden, and, by decreasing the complexity of treatment, it may improve patient adherence and persistence and fight against clinical inertia. This article reviews the results of major randomized controlled trials in people with type 2 diabetes that compared iGlarLixi to other therapeutic regimens, representing different intensification strategies, such as basal supported oral therapy, oral antidiabetic drugs, and a combination of the latter with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists. Moreover, as a supplement to randomized trials, data from real-world evidence have also been included.

Effectiveness and Safety of iGlarLixi (Insulin Glargine 100 U/mL Plus Lixisenatide) in Type 2 Diabetes According to the Timing of Daily Administration: Data from the REALI Pooled Analysis

INTRODUCTION

iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide) has demonstrated glycaemic efficacy and safety in adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Per the European Medicines Agency's product label, iGlarLixi should be injected once a day within 1 h prior to a meal, preferably the same meal every day when the most convenient meal has been chosen. It is however unknown whether iGlarLixi administration timing affects glycaemic control and safety, as clinical trial evidence is mainly based on pre-breakfast iGlarLixi administration. Therefore, we assessed the effectiveness and safety of iGlarLixi in clinical practice, according to its administration timing.

METHODS

Data were pooled from two prospective observational studies including 1303 European participants with T2DM inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs with or without basal insulin who initiated iGlarLixi therapy for 24 weeks. Participants were classified into four subgroups based on daily timing of iGlarLixi injection: pre-breakfast (N = 436), pre-lunch (N = 262), pre-dinner (N = 399), and those who switched iGlarLixi injection time during the study (N = 206).

RESULTS

No meaningful differences in baseline characteristics were observed between the study groups. Least-squares mean reductions in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to week 24 were substantial in all groups, with the numerically largest decrease observed in the pre-breakfast group (1.57%) compared with the pre-lunch (1.27%), pre-dinner (1.42%), or changed injection time (1.33%) groups. Pre-breakfast iGlarLixi injection also resulted in a numerically greater proportion of participants achieving HbA1c < 7.0% at week 24 (33.7% versus 19.0% for pre-lunch, 25.6% pre-dinner, and 23.2% changed injection time). iGlarLixi was well tolerated across all groups, with low rates of gastrointestinal disorders and hypoglycaemia. Mean body weight decreased similarly in all groups (by 1.3-2.3 kg).

CONCLUSION

iGlarLixi was effective and safe regardless of its daily administration time. However, pre-breakfast iGlarLixi injection resulted in a more effective glycaemic control.

Fixed-ratio Combinations (basal Insulin Plus GLP-1RA) In Type 2 Diabetes. an Analytical Review Of Pivotal Clinical Trials

In type 2 diabetes, therapeutic failure to the oral anti diabetics is frequent, the use of schemes with basal insulin or with multiple doses of insulin (basal insulin and short-acting insulins) are a widely accepted way to intensify therapy. The use of GLP-1 receptor agonists is another intensification strategy. The fixedratio combinations with molecules such as insulin degludec + liraglutide, and insulin glargine + lixisenatide have proven useful in intensifying treatment of individuals with type 2 diabetes. The purpose of this review was to evaluate and analyze the results of pivotal studies with both fixed-ratio combinations in individuals with type 2 diabetes, finding that, they are capable of achieving better glycemic control when compared with each of its components separately (with a lower risk of hypoglycemia vs basal insulin and lower risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects vs GLP-1 receptor agonists) in various clinical scenarios, especially in individuals who do not achieve control with oral antidiabetics or who do not achieve control with basal insulin (associated with oral antidiabetics) or in those under management with GLP-1RA plus oral antidiabetics.

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.

Findings for iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30 confirmed in groups of people with type 2 diabetes with different biomedical characteristics

AIM

To report prespecified and post hoc analyses of the SoliMix dataset exploring the impact of baseline participant characteristics on the original SoliMix study outcomes, to enable informed treatment choices for people with different biomedical characteristics.

METHODS

SoliMix (EudraCT 2017-003370-13) compared once-daily iGlarLixi (a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide) with twice-daily BIAsp 30 (30% insulin aspart and 70% insulin aspart protamine). In this analysis, the original primary outcomes of noninferiority of iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30 in terms of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change and superiority in terms of body weight change, together with change in basal insulin dose and hypoglycaemia outcomes, were investigated by baseline age, duration of diabetes, insulin dose, HbA1c level, body mass index (BMI), and renal function.

RESULTS

No evidence of difference in comparative treatment effect was detected across baseline age, duration of diabetes, insulin dose, HbA1c level, BMI and renal function subgroups for any endpoint (all heterogeneity P > 0.05), except American Diabetes Association Level 2 hypoglycaemia event rate when stratified by insulin dose (P = 0.011), which may be a chance difference given multiple testing and the small numbers of Level 2 events.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment effects of iGlarLixi were consistent irrespective of baseline HbA1c, insulin dose, BMI, age, duration of diabetes and renal function, supporting the use of iGlarLixi as an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment option in people with type 2 diabetes with a wide range of biomedical characteristics.

iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U/ml plus lixisenatide) is effective and well tolerated in people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes regardless of age: A REALI pooled analysis of prospective real-world data

AIM

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety in routine clinical practice of insulin glargine/lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) according to age.

METHODS

Patient-level data were pooled from 1316 adults with T2D inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs with or without basal insulin who initiated iGlarLixi for 24 weeks. Participants were classified into age subgroups of younger than 65 years (N = 806) and 65 years or older (N = 510).

RESULTS

Compared with participants aged younger than 65 years, those aged 65 years or older had a numerically lower mean body mass index (31.6 vs. 32.6 kg/m² ), a longer median diabetes duration (11.0 vs. 8.0 years), were more likely to receive prior basal insulin (48.4% vs. 43.5%) and had a lower mean HbA1c (8.93% [74.10 mmol/mol] vs. 9.22% [77.28 mmol/mol]). Similar and clinically relevant reductions in HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose from baseline to week 24 of iGlarLixi therapy were observed regardless of age. At 24 weeks, least-squares adjusted mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) change in HbA1c from baseline was -1.55% (-1.65% to -1.44%) in those aged 65 years or older and -1.42% (-1.50% to -1.33%) in those aged younger than 65 years (95% CI: -0.26% to 0.00%; P = .058 between subgroups). Low incidences of gastrointestinal adverse events and hypoglycaemic episodes were reported in both age subgroups. iGlarLixi decreased mean body weight from baseline to week 24 in both subgroups (-1.6 kg in those aged ≥ 65 years and -2.0 kg in those aged < 65 years).

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi is effective and well tolerated in both younger and older people with uncontrolled T2D.

Ease of Use of the iGlarLixi SoloStar Pen from the LixiLan ONE CAN Pen Sub-Study: Questionnaire Findings from People Living with Type 2 Diabetes and Their HealthCare Providers

INTRODUCTION

For people with type 2 diabetes mellitus who do not achieve glycated hemoglobin A1C targets after treatment with basal insulin therapies, additional therapy with a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) may be required. One option is to use a once-daily fixed-ratio combination (FRC) of basal insulin and a GLP-1 RA such as iGlarLixi (which is composed of insulin glargine 100 U/ml and lixisenatide). However, the ease of transitioning from basal insulin to an FRC has not been studied.

METHODS

This sub-study of the LixiLan ONE CAN trial (NCT03767543) was conducted to assess the ease of transitioning from insulin glargine 100 U/ml to the FRC, iGlarLixi, using the iGlarLixi SoloStar^® pen. Patients completed a validated, ten-item questionnaire, and healthcare professionals (HCPs) completed a five-item questionnaire. Both questionnaires used either five-point Likert scales or yes/no answers as appropriate, and both were completed after 4 weeks of using the iGlarLixi SoloStar pen.

RESULTS

Overall, 95.1% of patients reported that the iGlarLixi Solostar pen was "easy" or "very easy" to use. Similarly, 100% of HCPs reported that it was "easy" or "very easy" to train people to use the pen. Nearly all participants (97.5% of patients and 94% of HCPs) responded that they would recommend the iGlarLixi Solostar pen to others.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that during the transition from insulin glargine 100 U/ml to iGlarLixi, there were no difficulties associated with using the iGlarLixi SoloStar pen injector regarding instruction for use by HCPs or actual use by the majority of patients. The results indicate a broad consensus between patients and HCPs on the relative simplicity of transitioning from self-administration of insulin glargine 100 U/ml to iGlarLixi.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT03767543; Date of registration: December 6, 2018; Retrospectively registered.

iGlarLixi versus premixed insulin initiation in adults with type 2 diabetes advancing from basal insulin therapy: The SoliComplex real-world study

AIM

To compare outcomes in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) suboptimally controlled with basal insulin who initiated treatment with iGlarLixi or premixed insulin.

METHODS

This retrospective real-world analysis was conducted using data from adults (age ≥ 18 years) with T2D in the US Optum Clinformatics database who had previously received basal insulin and newly initiated iGlarLixi or premixed insulin. Cohorts were propensity-score matched on baseline characteristics using a greedy nearest neighbour-matching algorithm, and outcomes were assessed at 12 months. Subgroup analyses were performed for those aged 65 years or older and those with a baseline HbA1c of 9% or higher. The primary endpoint was treatment persistence in the overall population. Secondary endpoints were treatment adherence, healthcare resource utilization (HRU), costs, hypoglycaemia events and change in HbA1c from baseline.

RESULTS

Each cohort comprised 834 participants. In the overall population, treatment persistence at 12 months was statistically significantly higher for iGlarLixi versus premixed insulin: 42.5% versus 39.1%; hazard ratio 0.88; 95% confidence interval 0.778-0.998; P = .0465. Adherence and HbA1c reduction were similar between groups, whereas hypoglycaemia events, HRU and costs were numerically lower for iGlarLixi. Outcomes in both the age 65 years or older subgroup and in those with an HbA1c of 9% or higher were consistent with those for the overall population.

CONCLUSIONS

In this observational study in people with T2D suboptimally controlled on basal insulin, once-daily iGlarLixi was an effective treatment alternative to premixed insulin with significantly higher treatment persistence, similar adherence and HbA1c reduction, and numerically lower hypoglycaemia events, HRU and costs, regardless of age or baseline HbA1c.

iGlarLixi versus basal plus Rapid-Acting insulin in adults with type 2 diabetes advancing from basal insulin therapy: The SoliSimplify Real-World study

AIM

For people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on basal insulin (BI), guidelines recommend several treatment advancement options. This study compared the clinical effectiveness of once-daily iGlarLixi versus a multiple-injection BI + rapid acting insulin (RAI) regimen in adults with T2D advancing from BI therapy in real-world clinical practice.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Electronic medical records from the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) database were analysed retrospectively using propensity score matching to compare therapy advancement with iGlarLixi or BI + RAI in US adults ≥18 years with T2D on BI who had ≥1 valid glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) value at baseline and at the 6-month follow-up. The primary objective was non-inferiority of iGlarLixi to BI + RAI in HbA1c change from baseline to 6 months (margin 0.3%).

RESULTS

Propensity score matching generated cohorts with balanced baseline characteristics (N = 814 in each group). HbA1c reduction from baseline to 6 months with iGlarLixi was non-inferior to BI + RAI [mean difference (95% confidence interval): 0.1 (-0.1, 0.2)%; one-sided p = .0032]. At 6 months, weight gain was significantly lower with iGlarLixi than with BI + RAI [-0.8 (-1.3, -0.2) kg; two-sided p = .0069]. Achievement of HbA1c <7% without hypoglycaemia and weight gain were similar between groups [odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 1.15 (0.81, 1.63); p = .4280]. Hypoglycaemia was low in both groups, probably because of underreporting.

CONCLUSIONS

In real-world clinical practice, glycaemic outcomes 6 months after treatment advancement from BI are similar for people with T2D using iGlarLixi versus BI + RAI, with iGlarLixi leading to less weight gain.

Effectiveness, Safety, and Appropriateness in the Use of the Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine and Lixisenatide in Type 2 Diabetes: The ENSURE Retrospective Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Pivotal trials documented glycemic benefits of fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi), with no weight gain and low hypoglycemia risk in type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed at assessing effectiveness and patterns of use of iGlarLixi in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This was a retrospective, multicenter, study, based on electronic medical records. All patients initiating iGlarLixi from May 2018 to July 2020 were considered.

RESULTS

Overall, 25 centers provided data on 675 patients initiating iGlarLixi with the following characteristics: age 66.4 ± 10.1 years, 54.2% men, T2D duration 15.5 ± 11.5 years, HbA1c 8.6 ± 1.4%, body mass index (BMI) 30.8 ± 5.3 kg/m², 45.1% already treated with basal insulin, and 21.9% with basal bolus (± oral hypoglycemic agents). Metformin and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors were used in 76.0% and 0.9% of patients, respectively. Combinations of iGlarLixi with other glucose-lowering drugs such as sulfonylureas or short-acting insulin were found in 32.4% of patients. Effectiveness of iGlarLixi (N = 184) showed that HbA1c declined by 0.77% [95% confidence interval (CI) -1.00, -0.54] after 6 months. In combination with metformin and/or SGLT-2i (N = 117), HbA1c declined by -0.92% (95% CI -1.22, -0.62) and weight significantly decreased by 1.21 kg. iGlarLixi dose was suboptimally titrated. Safety data (N = 171) showed incidence rates of blood glucose ≤ 70 and < 54 mg/mL of 0.26 and 0.05 events per person-month during 6 months, respectively, with a risk reduction of about 75% with respect the 6 months before iGlarLixi initiation. No severe hypoglycemia was reported.

CONCLUSION

In adults with T2D, effectiveness and safety of iGlarLixi were documented in a real-world setting; appropriateness of use and adequate titration should be urgently improved so that clinical practice outcomes become more comparable to clinical trials results. Further real-world studies on the effect of iGlarLixi therapy are warranted.

Improved patient-reported outcomes with iGlarLixi versus premix BIAsp 30 in people with type 2 diabetes in the SoliMix trial

AIM

To assess patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in the SoliMix trial, which compared the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30 in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SoliMix (EudraCT: 2017-003370-13), a 26-week, open-label study, randomized (1:1) 887 adults with T2D and HbA1c ≥7.5%-≤10.0% (≥58-≤86 mmol/mol) on basal insulin plus oral antihyperglycaemic drugs (OADs) to once-daily iGlarLixi or twice-daily premix insulin, BIAsp 30. PROs were assessed using the Treatment-Related Impact Measure Diabetes (TRIM-D) and Global Treatment Effectiveness Evaluation (GTEE) questionnaires.

RESULTS

Over 26 weeks, iGlarLixi showed greater improvement from baseline versus BIAsp 30 in total TRIM-D score (least squares mean difference [95% confidence interval]: 5.08 [3.69, 6.47]; effect size: 0.32) and in each TRIM-D domain, with the greatest differences seen in diabetes management (8.47 [6.11, 10.84]) and treatment burden (6.95 [4.83, 9.07]). GTEE scores showed a greater proportion of participants and physicians rated a complete or marked improvement of diabetes control with iGlarLixi (80.5%, 82.8%) versus BIAsp 30 (63.3%, 65.1%) at week 26. Post hoc analyses showed that after adjusting for HbA1c, body weight and hypoglycaemia outcomes, iGlarLixi continued to show greater improvements in TRIM-D total scores versus BIAsp 30.

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to better glycaemic control, weight benefit and less hypoglycaemia, once-daily iGlarLixi provided improved diabetes management, treatment burden and perceived effectiveness versus twice-daily premix BIAsp 30, further supporting iGlarLixi as an advanced treatment option in people with suboptimally controlled T2D on basal insulin plus OADs.

Hypoglycaemia events with iGlarLixi versus premix biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in people with type 2 diabetes advancing from basal insulin: An analysis of the SoliMix trial

AIMS

To explore details of the incidence and rates of daytime and nocturnal hypoglycaemia, levels of hypoglycaemia, and relationship to glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), when comparing iGlarLixi versus premixed biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in the SoliMix randomized controlled trial.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This exploratory analysis of SoliMix used logistic regression and negative binomial regression analyses to assess between-treatment differences in the incidence and rates of hypoglycaemia by time of day. A negative binomial model was used to derive estimated annualized hypoglycaemia rates as a function of HbA1c.

RESULTS

iGlarLixi was associated with lower incidence and rates of American Diabetes Association Level 2 (<54 mg/dL [<3.0 mmol/L]) hypoglycaemia during both night and day versus BIAsp 30. Incidence and rates of Level 1 (<70 to ≥54 mg/dL [<3.9 to ≥3.0 mmol/L]) hypoglycaemia were also mostly shown to be reduced with iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30. Severe (Level 3) events were too few for analysis (n = 3). iGlarLixi was associated with lower modelled event rates of Level 2 and Level 1 hypoglycaemia over a wide range of HbA1c levels versus BIAsp 30.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that the lower HbA1c levels and weight benefit seen with iGlarLixi versus premixed BIAsp 30 in people with type 2 diabetes advancing their basal insulin therapy in the SoliMix trial are also accompanied by a lower risk of hypoglycaemia at any time of day and across a broad range of HbA1c levels.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers.

METHODS

The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development.

RESULTS

This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

Cost-Effectiveness of iGlarLixi Versus Premix BIAsp 30 in People with Type 2 Diabetes Suboptimally Controlled by Basal Insulin in the US

INTRODUCTION

Many people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) experience suboptimal glycemic control and require therapy advancement. This cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to compare iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide) versus BIAsp 30 (biphasic insulin aspart 30) in people with T2DM suboptimally controlled with basal insulin.

METHODS

The IQVIA Core Diabetes Model was used to estimate lifetime costs and outcomes for people with T2DM from a US healthcare payer perspective. Initial clinical data were based on the phase 3 randomized, open-label, active-controlled SoliMix clinical study, which compared the efficacy and safety of once-daily iGlarLixi with twice-daily BIAsp 30. Lifetime costs (US$) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were predicted, and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30 was estimated; the willingness-to-pay threshold was considered to be $50,000. A subgroup analysis considered people with T2DM aged ≥ 65 years.

RESULTS

Estimated QALYs gained were slightly higher with iGlarLixi compared with BIAsp 30 (9.3 vs. 9.2), with lower costs for iGlarLixi ($117,854 vs. $120,109); the ICER for iGlarLixi was therefore considered dominant over BIAsp 30 in the base case. Key drivers for cost savings were the higher dose and twice-daily administration for BIAsp 30 versus once-daily administration for iGlarLixi. The robustness of the base-case results was confirmed by sensitivity and scenario analyses. Results were similar in a subgroup of people with T2DM aged ≥ 65 years.

CONCLUSION

In people with T2DM with suboptimal glycemic control on basal insulin, iGlarLixi confers improved QALYs and reduced costs compared with BIAsp 30.

Cost-Effectiveness of iGlarLixi Versus Premix BIAsp 30 in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Suboptimally Controlled by Basal Insulin in the UK

INTRODUCTION

iGlarLixi is indicated as an adjunct to diet and exercise in addition to metformin (with or without sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors) to improve glycemic control in adults with insufficiently controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D). A cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted to compare iGlarLixi with premix biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30) in people with T2D suboptimally controlled with basal insulin (BI).

METHODS

The IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model was used to estimate lifetime costs and outcomes for people with T2D from a UK health care perspective at a willingness-to-pay threshold of £20,000. Initial clinical data were based on the phase 3 randomized, open-label, active-controlled SoliMix clinical trial which compared the efficacy and safety of once-daily iGlarLixi with that of twice-daily BIAsp 30. Costs associated with management and complications and utilities values were derived from published sources. Lifetime costs (in £GBP) and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were predicted; extensive scenario and sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

Estimated QALYs gained were slightly higher with iGlarLixi (8.9 vs. 8.8) compared with premix BIAsp 30, at a higher cost (£23,204 vs. £21,961). The base case incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) per QALY was £13,598. Treatment acquisition was the main driver of cost differences (iGlarLixi, £11,750; premix BIAsp 30, £10,395). Costs associated with management and complications were generally similar between comparators.

CONCLUSION

iGlarLixi provides improved QALY outcomes at an acceptable cost compared with premix BIAsp 30, with an ICER below the threshold generally considered acceptable by UK authorities. In people with T2D, iGlarLixi is a simple, cost-effective option for advancing therapy of BI, with fewer daily injections than premix BIAsp 30.

Real-world evidence on the use of a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) in people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes in Romania: a prospective cohort study (STAR.Ro)

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of insulin glargine and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) fixed-ratio combination on a cohort of Romanian adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

DESIGN

Open-label, 24-week, prospective cohort study.

SETTING

65 secondary care diabetes centres in Romania.

PARTICIPANTS

The study included 901 adults with T2D suboptimally controlled with previous oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs)±basal insulin (BI) who initiated treatment with iGlarLixi upon the decision of the investigator. Major exclusion criteria were iGlarLixi contraindications and refusal to participate. 876 subjects received at least one dose of iGlarLixi (intention-to-treat/safety population).

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary endpoint was change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to week 24 in the modified intention-to-treat population (study participants with HbA1c available at baseline and week 24). Secondary efficacy outcomes were percentage of participants reaching HbA1c targets and change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG).

RESULTS

Mean baseline HbA1c was 9.2% (SD 1.4) and FPG was 10.8 mmol/L (2.9). Mean HbA1c change was -1.3% (95% CI: -1.4% to -1.2%, p<0.0001) at week 24. HbA1c levels ≤6.5%, <7% and<7.5% at week 24 were achieved by 72 (8.9%), 183 (22.6%) and 342 (42.3%) participants, respectively. Mean FPG change was -3.1 mmol/L (95% CI: -3.3 to -2.8, p<0.001) at week 24. Mean body weight change was -1.6 kg (95% CI: -1.9 to -1.3, p<0.001) at 24 weeks. Mean iGlarLixi dose increased from 19.5 U (SD 7.7) and 30.1 U (10.0) to 30.2 U (8.9) (ratio 2/1 pen) and 45.0 U (11.6) (ratio 3/1 pen). Adverse events (AEs) were reported by 43 (4.9%) participants (18 (2.1%) gastrointestinal) with 4 (0.5%) reporting serious AEs. 13 (1.5%) participants reported at least one event of symptomatic hypoglycaemia, with one episode of severe hypoglycaemia reported.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-world setting, 24-week treatment with iGlarLixi provided a significant reduction of HbA1c with body weight loss and low hypoglycaemia risk in T2D suboptimally controlled with OADs±BI treatment.

Expert Panel Guidance and Narrative Review of Treatment Simplification of Complex Insulin Regimens to Improve Outcomes in Type 2 Diabetes

Given the progressive nature of type 2 diabetes (T2D), most individuals with the disease will ultimately undergo treatment intensification. This usually involves the stepwise addition of a new glucose-lowering agent or switching to a more complex insulin regimen. However, complex treatment regimens can result in an increased risk of hypoglycaemia and high treatment burden, which may impact negatively on both therapeutic adherence and overall quality of life. Individuals with good glycaemic control may also be overtreated with unnecessarily complex regimens. Treatment simplification aims to reduce individual treatment burden, without compromising therapeutic effectiveness or safety. Despite data showing that simplifying therapy can achieve good glycaemic control without negatively impacting on treatment efficacy or safety, it is not always implemented in clinical practice. Current clinical guidelines focus on treatment intensification, rather than simplification. Where simplification is recommended, clear guidance is lacking and mostly focused on treatment of the elderly. An expert, multidisciplinary panel evaluated the current treatment landscape with respect to guidance, published evidence, recommendations and approaches regarding simplification of complex insulin regimens. This article outlines the benefits of treatment simplification and provides practical recommendations on simplifying complex insulin treatment strategies in people with T2D using illustrative cases.