Geriatric Assessment Impairment Profiles and Mortality in Older Adults With Gastrointestinal Cancers: Latent Class Analysis of the CARE Registry

BACKGROUND

Many older adults with cancer have ≥2 impairments on geriatric assessment, which affects present and future frailty status, treatment tolerability, and outcomes. Our objective was to identify and describe distinct geriatric assessment impairment classes using latent class analysis (LCA) in older patients with gastrointestinal malignancies and assess 1-year mortality.

METHODS

We used the Cancer & Aging Resilience Evaluation (CARE) Study, a registry of older adults (≥60 years) at University of Alabama at Birmingham. The analytic cohort included patients with gastrointestinal malignancies who completed a self-administered geriatric assessment (CARE tool) before chemotherapy and had ≥1 geriatric assessment impairment. Thirteen geriatric assessment impairments were used as indicators in LCA. Resultant classes were described, mortality was estimated, and risk contrasts (differences and hazard ratios) were calculated with 95% confidence intervals. For comparison, estimates were provided for frailty categories (robust, prefrail, and frail) determined from 44 items in the CARE tool. Stratified analyses included high-risk (pancreatic, hepatobiliary, and esophageal) versus low-risk gastrointestinal cancers, and stage (IV vs I-III).

RESULTS

Six geriatric assessment impairment classes were identified: Mild impairment (LC1); Social support impairment (LC2); Weight loss alone (LC3); Impaired, low anxiety/depression (LC4); Impaired with anxiety/depression (LC5); and Global impairment (LC6). One-year mortality was 14%, 22%, 29%, 34%, 50%, and 50% for LC1-LC6, respectively. For frailty categories, estimates ranged from 18% (robust) to 40% (frail). In stratified analyses, LC4-LC6 consistently had higher mortality estimates compared to LC1.

CONCLUSIONS

The 6 geriatric assessment impairment classes showed a wider spread of mortality estimates compared to frailty categories and could be used to identify vulnerable patients and to plan interventions.

Regional variation in cause of death in patients with type 2 diabetes: Insights from EXSCEL

AIMS

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a risk factor for cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular mortality. However, global distribution of cause-specific deaths in T2D is poorly understood. We characterized cause-specific deaths by geographic region among individuals with T2D at risk for cardiovascular disease (CVD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The international EXSCEL trial included 14,752 participants with T2D (73% with established CVD). We identified the proportion of deaths over 5-year follow-up attributed to cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular causes, and associated risk factors. During median 3.2-year follow-up, 1,091 (7.4%) participants died. Adjudicated causes of death were 723 cardiovascular (66.3% of deaths), including 252 unknown, and 368 non-cardiovascular (33.7%). Most deaths occurred in North America (N = 356/9.6% across region) and Eastern Europe (N = 326/8.1%), with fewest in Asia/Pacific (N = 68/4.4%). The highest proportional cause-specific deaths by region were sudden cardiac in Asia/Pacific (23/34% of regional deaths) and North America (86/24%); unknown in Eastern Europe (90/28%) and Western Europe (39/21%); and non-malignant non-cardiovascular in Latin America (48/31%). Cox proportional hazards model for adjudicated causes of death showed prognostic risk factors (hazard ratio [95% CI]) for cardiovascular and non-cardiovascular deaths, respectively: heart failure 2.04 (1.72-2.42) and 1.86 (1.46-2.39); peripheral artery disease 1.83 (1.54-2.18) and 1.78 (1.40-2.26); and current smoking status 1.61 (1.29-2.01) and 1.77 (1.31-2.40).

CONCLUSIONS

In a contemporary T2D trial population, with and without established CVD, leading causes of death varied by geographic region. Underlying mechanisms leading to variability in cause of death across geographic regions and its impact on clinical trial endpoints warrant future research.

Association of Premorbid GLP-1RA and SGLT-2i Prescription Alone and in Combination with COVID-19 Severity

INTRODUCTION

People with type 2 diabetes are at heightened risk for severe outcomes related to COVID-19 infection, including hospitalization, intensive care unit admission, and mortality. This study was designed to examine the impact of premorbid use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) monotherapy, sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) monotherapy, and concomitant GLP1-RA/SGLT-2i therapy on the severity of outcomes in individuals with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection.

METHODS

Utilizing observational data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative through September 2022, we compared outcomes in 78,806 individuals with a prescription of GLP-1RA and SGLT-2i versus a prescription of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) within 24 months of a positive SARS-CoV-2 PCR test. We also compared concomitant GLP-1RA/SGLT-2i therapy to GLP-1RA and SGLT-2i monotherapy. The primary outcome was 60-day mortality, measured from the positive test date. Secondary outcomes included emergency room (ER) visits, hospitalization, and mechanical ventilation within 14 days. Using a super learner approach and accounting for baseline characteristics, associations were quantified with odds ratios (OR) estimated with targeted maximum likelihood estimation (TMLE).

RESULTS

Use of GLP-1RA (OR 0.64, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.56-0.72) and SGLT-2i (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.57-0.68) were associated with lower odds of 60-day mortality compared to DPP-4i use. Additionally, the OR of ER visits and hospitalizations were similarly reduced with GLP1-RA and SGLT-2i use. Concomitant GLP-1RA/SGLT-2i use showed similar odds of 60-day mortality when compared to GLP-1RA or SGLT-2i use alone (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.81-1.05 and OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.76-1.01, respectively). However, lower OR of all secondary outcomes were associated with concomitant GLP-1RA/SGLT-2i use when compared to SGLT-2i use alone.

CONCLUSION

Among adults who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2, premorbid use of either GLP-1RA or SGLT-2i is associated with lower odds of mortality compared to DPP-4i. Furthermore, concomitant use of GLP-1RA and SGLT-2i is linked to lower odds of other severe COVID-19 outcomes, including ER visits, hospitalizations, and mechanical ventilation, compared to SGLT-2i use alone. Graphical abstract available for this article.

Mortality in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE)

OBJECTIVE

We report mortality outcomes in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study (GRADE) among people with type 2 diabetes diagnosed within 10 years and no recent history of cardiovascular events or cancer.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Overall mortality rates and major causes of death were assessed over an average of 5 years of follow-up. Cause of death was adjudicated centrally by a committee masked to treatment assignment. We examined baseline covariates and the 10-year Framingham Risk Score for associations.

RESULTS

Mortality rate was low (0.59 per 100 participant-years). Participants who died during follow-up were likely to be older, be male, have a history of hypertension, have a history of smoking, and have moderate albuminuria. The two most common underlying causes of death were "cardiovascular-cause" (a composite of underlying causes) (38.6%) and cancer (26.8%). There were no differences by treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

Among people with diabetes of relatively short duration, cause of death was varied. Attention to health risks beyond cardiovascular diseases is warranted.

Comparison of tirzepatide and dulaglutide on major adverse cardiovascular events in participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: SURPASS-CVOT design and baseline characteristics

BACKGROUND

Tirzepatide, a once-weekly GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist, reduces blood glucose and body weight in people with type 2 diabetes. The cardiovascular (CV) safety and efficacy of tirzepatide have not been definitively assessed in a cardiovascular outcomes trial.

METHODS

Tirzepatide is being studied in a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled CV outcomes trial. People with type 2 diabetes aged ≥40 years, with established atherosclerotic CV disease, HbA1c ≥7% to ≤10.5%, and body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 were randomized 1:1 to once weekly subcutaneous injection of either tirzepatide up to 15 mg or dulaglutide 1.5 mg. The primary outcome is time to first occurrence of any major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), defined as CV death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The trial is event-driven and planned to continue until ≥1,615 participants experience an adjudication-confirmed component of MACE. The primary analysis is noninferiority for time to first MACE of tirzepatide vs dulaglutide by demonstrating an upper confidence limit <1.05, which will also confirm superiority vs a putative placebo, and also to determine whether tirzepatide produces a greater CV benefit than dulaglutide (superiority analysis).

RESULTS

Over 2 years, 13,299 people at 640 sites in 30 countries across all world regions were randomized. The mean age of randomized participants at baseline was 64.1 years, diabetes duration 14.7 years, HbA1c 8.4%, and BMI 32.6 kg/m2. Overall, 65.0% had coronary disease, of whom 47.3% reported prior myocardial infarction and 57.4% had prior coronary revascularization. 19.1% of participants had a prior stroke and 25.3% had peripheral artery disease. The trial is fully recruited and ongoing.

CONCLUSION

SURPASS-CVOT will provide definitive evidence as to the CV safety and efficacy of tirzepatide as compared with dulaglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist with established CV benefit.

Week-long normoglycaemia in diabetic mice and minipigs via a subcutaneous dose of a glucose-responsive insulin complex

Glucose-responsive formulations of insulin can increase its therapeutic index and reduce the burden of its administration. However, it has been difficult to develop single-dosage formulations that can release insulin in both a sustained and glucose-responsive manner. Here we report the development of a subcutaneously injected glucose-responsive formulation that nearly does not trigger the formation of a fibrous capsule and that leads to week-long normoglycaemia and negligible hypoglycaemia in mice and minipigs with type 1 diabetes. The formulation consists of gluconic acid-modified recombinant human insulin binding tightly to poly-L-lysine modified by 4-carboxy-3-fluorophenylboronic acid via glucose-responsive phenylboronic acid-diol complexation and electrostatic attraction. When the insulin complex is exposed to high glucose concentrations, the phenylboronic acid moieties of the polymers bind rapidly to glucose, breaking the complexation and reducing the polymers' positive charge density, which promotes the release of insulin. The therapeutic performance of this long-acting single-dose formulation supports its further evaluation and clinical translational studies.

Iterative Causal Forest: A Novel Algorithm for Subgroup Identification

Precisely and efficiently identifying subgroups with heterogeneous treatment effects (HTEs) in real-world evidence studies remains a challenge. Based on the causal forest (CF) method, we developed an iterative CF (iCF) algorithm to identify HTEs in subgroups defined by important variables. Our method iteratively grows different depths of the CF with important effect modifiers, performs plurality votes to obtain decision trees (subgroup decisions) for a family of CFs with different depths, then finds the cross-validated subgroup decision that best predicts the treatment effect as a final subgroup decision. We simulated 12 different scenarios and showed that the iCF outperformed other machine learning methods for interaction/subgroup identification in the majority of scenarios assessed. Using a 20% random sample of fee-for-service Medicare beneficiaries initiating sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA), we implemented the iCF to identify subgroups with HTEs for hospitalized heart failure. Consistent with previous studies suggesting patients with heart failure benefit more from SGLT2i, iCF successfully identified such a subpopulation with HTEs and additive interactions. The iCF is a promising method for identifying subgroups with HTEs in real-world data where the potential for unmeasured confounding can be limited by study design.

Strategies used for the COVID-OUT decentralized trial of outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2

The COVID-19 pandemic accelerated the development of decentralized clinical trials (DCT). DCT's are an important and pragmatic method for assessing health outcomes yet comprise only a minority of clinical trials, and few published methodologies exist. In this report, we detail the operational components of COVID-OUT, a decentralized, multicenter, quadruple-blinded, randomized trial that rapidly delivered study drugs nation-wide. The trial examined three medications (metformin, ivermectin, and fluvoxamine) as outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2 for their effectiveness in preventing severe or long COVID-19. Decentralized strategies included HIPAA-compliant electronic screening and consenting, prepacking investigational product to accelerate delivery after randomization, and remotely confirming participant-reported outcomes. Of the 1417 individuals with the intention-to-treat sample, the remote nature of the study caused an additional 94 participants to not take any doses of study drug. Therefore, 1323 participants were in the modified intention-to-treat sample, which was the a priori primary study sample. Only 1.4% of participants were lost to follow-up. Decentralized strategies facilitated the successful completion of the COVID-OUT trial without any in-person contact by expediting intervention delivery, expanding trial access geographically, limiting contagion exposure, and making it easy for participants to complete follow-up visits. Remotely completed consent and follow-up facilitated enrollment.

Case study of semaglutide and cardiovascular outcomes: An application of the Causal Roadmap to a hybrid design for augmenting an RCT control arm with real-world data

Introduction

Increasing interest in real-world evidence has fueled the development of study designs incorporating real-world data (RWD). Using the Causal Roadmap, we specify three designs to evaluate the difference in risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) with oral semaglutide versus standard-of-care: (1) the actual sequence of non-inferiority and superiority randomized controlled trials (RCTs), (2) a single RCT, and (3) a hybrid randomized-external data study.

Methods

The hybrid design considers integration of the PIONEER 6 RCT with RWD controls using the experiment-selector cross-validated targeted maximum likelihood estimator. We evaluate 95% confidence interval coverage, power, and average patient time during which participants would be precluded from receiving a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA) for each design using simulations. Finally, we estimate the effect of oral semaglutide on MACE for the hybrid PIONEER 6-RWD analysis.

Results

In simulations, Designs 1 and 2 performed similarly. The tradeoff between decreased coverage and patient time without the possibility of a GLP1-RA for Designs 1 and 3 depended on the simulated bias. In real data analysis using Design 3, external controls were integrated in 84% of cross-validation folds, resulting in an estimated risk difference of -1.53%-points (95% CI -2.75%-points to -0.30%-points).

Conclusions

The Causal Roadmap helps investigators to minimize potential bias in studies using RWD and to quantify tradeoffs between study designs. The simulation results help to interpret the level of evidence provided by the real data analysis in support of the superiority of oral semaglutide versus standard-of-care for cardiovascular risk reduction.

Use of comprehensive recruitment strategies in the glycemia reduction approaches in diabetes: A comparative effectiveness study (GRADE) multi-center clinical trial

BACKGROUND/AIMS

We present and describe recruitment strategies implemented from 2013 to 2017 across 45 clinical sites in the United States, participating in the Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness Study, an unmasked, randomized controlled trial evaluating four glucose-lowering medications added to metformin in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (duration of diabetes <10 years). We examined the yield of participants recruited through Electronic Health Records systems compared to traditional recruitment methods to leverage access to type 2 diabetes patients in primary care.

METHODS

Site selection criteria included availability of the study population, geographic representation, the ability to recruit and retain a diverse pool of participants including traditionally underrepresented groups, and prior site research experience in diabetes clinical trials. Recruitment initiatives were employed to support and monitor recruitment, such as creation of a Recruitment and Retention Committee, development of criteria for Electronic Health Record systems queries, conduct of remote site visits, development of a public screening website, and other central and local initiatives. Notably, the study supported a dedicated recruitment coordinator at each site to manage local recruitment and facilitate screening of potential participants identified by Electronic Health Record systems.

RESULTS

The study achieved the enrollment goal of 5000 participants, meeting its target with Black/African American (20%), Hispanic/Latino (18%), and age ≧60 years (42%) subgroups but not with women (36%). Recruitment required 1 year more than the 3 years originally planned. Sites included academic hospitals, integrated health systems, and Veterans Affairs Medical Centers. Participants were enrolled through Electronic Health Record queries (68%), physician referral (13%), traditional mail outreach (7%), TV, radio, flyers, and Internet (7%), and other strategies (5%). Early implementation of targeted Electronic Health Record queries yielded a greater number of eligible participants compared to other recruitment methods. Efforts over time increasingly emphasized engagement with primary care networks.

CONCLUSION

Glycemia Reduction Approaches in Diabetes: A Comparative Effectiveness successfully recruited a diverse study population with relatively new onset of type 2 diabetes mellitus, relying to a large extent on the use of Electronic Health Record to screen potential participants. A comprehensive approach to recruitment with frequent monitoring was critical to meet the recruitment goal.

Outpatient treatment of COVID-19 and incidence of post-COVID-19 condition over 10 months (COVID-OUT): a multicentre, randomised, quadruple-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Post-COVID-19 condition (also known as long COVID) is an emerging chronic illness potentially affecting millions of people. We aimed to evaluate whether outpatient COVID-19 treatment with metformin, ivermectin, or fluvoxamine soon after SARS-CoV-2 infection could reduce the risk of long COVID.

METHODS

We conducted a decentralised, randomised, quadruple-blind, parallel-group, phase 3 trial (COVID-OUT) at six sites in the USA. We included adults aged 30-85 years with overweight or obesity who had COVID-19 symptoms for fewer than 7 days and a documented SARS-CoV-2 positive PCR or antigen test within 3 days before enrolment. Participants were randomly assigned via 2 × 3 parallel factorial randomisation (1:1:1:1:1:1) to receive metformin plus ivermectin, metformin plus fluvoxamine, metformin plus placebo, ivermectin plus placebo, fluvoxamine plus placebo, or placebo plus placebo. Participants, investigators, care providers, and outcomes assessors were masked to study group assignment. The primary outcome was severe COVID-19 by day 14, and those data have been published previously. Because the trial was delivered remotely nationwide, the a priori primary sample was a modified intention-to-treat sample, meaning that participants who did not receive any dose of study treatment were excluded. Long COVID diagnosis by a medical provider was a prespecified, long-term secondary outcome. This trial is complete and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04510194.

FINDINGS

Between Dec 30, 2020, and Jan 28, 2022, 6602 people were assessed for eligibility and 1431 were enrolled and randomly assigned. Of 1323 participants who received a dose of study treatment and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population, 1126 consented for long-term follow-up and completed at least one survey after the assessment for long COVID at day 180 (564 received metformin and 562 received matched placebo; a subset of participants in the metformin vs placebo trial were also randomly assigned to receive ivermectin or fluvoxamine). 1074 (95%) of 1126 participants completed at least 9 months of follow-up. 632 (56·1%) of 1126 participants were female and 494 (43·9%) were male; 44 (7·0%) of 632 women were pregnant. The median age was 45 years (IQR 37-54) and median BMI was 29·8 kg/m2 (IQR 27·0-34·2). Overall, 93 (8·3%) of 1126 participants reported receipt of a long COVID diagnosis by day 300. The cumulative incidence of long COVID by day 300 was 6·3% (95% CI 4·2-8·2) in participants who received metformin and 10·4% (7·8-12·9) in those who received identical metformin placebo (hazard ratio [HR] 0·59, 95% CI 0·39-0·89; p=0·012). The metformin beneficial effect was consistent across prespecified subgroups. When metformin was started within 3 days of symptom onset, the HR was 0·37 (95% CI 0·15-0·95). There was no effect on cumulative incidence of long COVID with ivermectin (HR 0·99, 95% CI 0·59-1·64) or fluvoxamine (1·36, 0·78-2·34) compared with placebo.

INTERPRETATION

Outpatient treatment with metformin reduced long COVID incidence by about 41%, with an absolute reduction of 4·1%, compared with placebo. Metformin has clinical benefits when used as outpatient treatment for COVID-19 and is globally available, low-cost, and safe.

FUNDING

Parsemus Foundation; Rainwater Charitable Foundation; Fast Grants; UnitedHealth Group Foundation; National Institute of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Diseases; National Institutes of Health; and National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences.

A causal roadmap for generating high-quality real-world evidence

Increasing emphasis on the use of real-world evidence (RWE) to support clinical policy and regulatory decision-making has led to a proliferation of guidance, advice, and frameworks from regulatory agencies, academia, professional societies, and industry. A broad spectrum of studies use real-world data (RWD) to produce RWE, ranging from randomized trials with outcomes assessed using RWD to fully observational studies. Yet, many proposals for generating RWE lack sufficient detail, and many analyses of RWD suffer from implausible assumptions, other methodological flaws, or inappropriate interpretations. The Causal Roadmap is an explicit, itemized, iterative process that guides investigators to prespecify study design and analysis plans; it addresses a wide range of guidance within a single framework. By supporting the transparent evaluation of causal assumptions and facilitating objective comparisons of design and analysis choices based on prespecified criteria, the Roadmap can help investigators to evaluate the quality of evidence that a given study is likely to produce, specify a study to generate high-quality RWE, and communicate effectively with regulatory agencies and other stakeholders. This paper aims to disseminate and extend the Causal Roadmap framework for use by clinical and translational researchers; three companion papers demonstrate applications of the Causal Roadmap for specific use cases.

Mitochondrial metabolites predict adverse cardiovascular events in individuals with diabetes

Metabolic mechanisms underlying the heterogeneity of major adverse cardiovascular (CV) event (MACE) risk in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) remain unclear. We hypothesized that circulating metabolites reflecting mitochondrial dysfunction predict incident MACE in T2D. Targeted mass-spectrometry profiling of 60 metabolites was performed on baseline plasma samples from the Trial Evaluating Cardiovascular Outcomes with Sitagliptin (TECOS; discovery cohort) and Exenatide Study of Cardiovascular Event Lowering (EXSCEL; validation cohort) biomarker substudy cohorts. A principal components analysis metabolite factor comprising medium-chain acylcarnitines (MCACs) was associated with MACE in TECOS and validated in EXSCEL, with higher levels associated with higher MACE risk. Meta-analysis showed that long-chain acylcarnitines (LCACs) and dicarboxylacylcarnitines were also associated with MACE. Metabolites remained associated with MACE in multivariate models and favorably changed with exenatide therapy. A third cohort (Cardiac Catheterization Genetics [CATHGEN]) with T2D was assessed to determine whether these metabolites improved discriminative capability of multivariate models for MACE. Nine metabolites (MCACs and LCACs and 1 dicarboxylacylcarnitine) were associated with time to MACE in the CATHGEN cohort. Addition of these metabolites to clinical models minimally improved the discriminative capability for MACE but did significantly down reclassify risk. Thus, metabolites reporting on dysregulated mitochondrial fatty acid oxidation are present in higher levels in individuals with T2D who experience subsequent MACE. These biomarkers may improve CV risk prediction models, be therapy responsive, and highlight emerging risk mechanisms.

Efficacy and safety of once-daily oral semaglutide 25 mg and 50 mg compared with 14 mg in adults with type 2 diabetes (PIONEER PLUS): a multicentre, randomised, phase 3b trial

BACKGROUND

Once-daily oral semaglutide is an effective type 2 diabetes treatment. We aimed to investigate a new formulation of oral semaglutide at higher investigational doses versus the approved 14 mg dose in adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

This global, multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 3b trial, carried out at 177 sites in 14 countries, enrolled adults with type 2 diabetes, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 8·0-10·5% (64-91 mmol/mol), a BMI of 25·0 kg/m2 or greater, receiving stable daily doses of one to three oral glucose-lowering drugs. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1), by means of an interactive web response system, to once-daily oral semaglutide 14 mg, 25 mg, or 50 mg for 68 weeks. Investigators, site personnel, trial participants, and trial sponsor staff were masked to dose assignment throughout the trial. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 52, evaluated with a treatment policy estimand in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of trial drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04707469, and the European Clinical Trials register, EudraCT 2020-000299-39, and is complete.

FINDINGS

Between Jan 15 and Sept 29, 2021, of 2294 people screened, 1606 (n=936 [58·3%] male; n=670 [41·7%] female; mean [SD] age 58·2 [10·8] years) received oral semaglutide 14 mg (n=536), 25 mg (n=535), or 50 mg (n=535). At baseline, mean (SD) HbA1c was 9·0% (0·8; 74·4 mmol/L [SD 8·3]) and mean bodyweight was 96·4 kg (21·6). Mean changes (SE) in HbA1c at week 52 were -1·5 percentage points (SE 0·05) with oral semaglutide 14 mg, -1·8 percentage points (0·06) with 25 mg (estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0·27, 95% CI -0·42 to -0·12; p=0·0006), and -2·0 percentage points (0·06) with 50 mg (ETD -0·53, -0·68 to -0·38; p<0·0001). Adverse events were reported by 404 (76%) participants in the oral semaglutide 14 mg group, 422 (79%) in the 25 mg group, and 428 (80%) in the 50 mg group. Gastrointestinal disorders, which were mostly mild to moderate, occurred more frequently with oral semaglutide 25 mg and 50 mg than with 14 mg. Ten deaths occurred during the trial; none were judged to be treatment related.

INTERPRETATION

Oral semaglutide 25 mg and 50 mg were superior to 14 mg in reducing HbA1c and bodyweight in adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes. No new safety concerns were identified.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

Metformin for Treatment of Acute COVID-19: Systematic Review of Clinical Trial Data Against SARS-CoV-2

BACKGROUND

Observational and preclinical data suggest metformin may prevent severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes.

PURPOSE

We conducted a systematic review of randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials of metformin treatment for COVID-19 to determine whether metformin affects clinical or laboratory outcomes in individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) and present a structured summary of preclinical data.

STUDY SELECTION

Two independent reviewers searched PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane COVID-19 Study Register, and ClinicalTrials.gov on 1 February 2023 with no date restrictions for trials where investigators randomized adults with COVID-19 to metformin versus control and assessed clinical and/or laboratory outcomes of interest. The Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 tool was used to assess bias.

DATA EXTRACTION

Two reviewers extracted data pertaining to prespecified outcomes of each interest from each included trial.

DATA SYNTHESIS

The synthesis plan was developed a priori and was guided by Synthesis Without Meta-analysis (SWiM) guidelines. Summary tables and narrative synthesis were used (PROSPERO, 2022, CRD42022349896). Three randomized trials met inclusion criteria. In two of the trials investigators found that metformin improved clinical outcomes (prevented need for oxygen and prevented need for acute health care use), and in the third trial a larger portion of adults with diabetes were enrolled but results did show a direction of benefit similar to that of the other trials in the per-protocol group. In the largest trial, subjects were enrolled during the delta and omicron waves and vaccinated individuals were included. The certainty of evidence that metformin prevents health care use due to COVID-19 was moderate per Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. Many preclinical studies have shown metformin to be effective against SARS-CoV-2.

LIMITATIONS

Limitations include inclusion of only three trials and heterogeneity between trials.

CONCLUSIONS

Future trials will help define the role of metformin in COVID-19 treatment guidelines.

Metformin reduces SARS-CoV-2 in a Phase 3 Randomized Placebo Controlled Clinical Trial

Current antiviral treatment options for SARS-CoV-2 infections are not available globally, cannot be used with many medications, and are limited to virus-specific targets.1-3 Biophysical modeling of SARS-CoV-2 replication predicted that protein translation is an especially attractive target for antiviral therapy.4 Literature review identified metformin, widely known as a treatment for diabetes, as a potential suppressor of protein translation via targeting of the host mTor pathway.5 In vitro, metformin has antiviral activity against RNA viruses including SARS-CoV-2.6,7 In the COVID-OUT phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial of outpatient treatment of COVID-19, metformin had a 42% reduction in ER visits/hospitalizations/death through 14 days; a 58% reduction in hospitalizations/death through 28 days, and a 42% reduction in Long COVID through 10 months.8,9 Here we show viral load analysis of specimens collected in the COVID-OUT trial that the mean SARS-CoV-2 viral load was reduced 3.6-fold with metformin relative to placebo (-0.56 log10 copies/mL; 95%CI, -1.05 to -0.06, p=0.027) while there was no virologic effect for ivermectin or fluvoxamine vs placebo. The metformin effect was consistent across subgroups and with emerging data.10,11 Our results demonstrate, consistent with model predictions, that a safe, widely available,12 well-tolerated, and inexpensive oral medication, metformin, can be repurposed to significantly reduce SARS-CoV-2 viral load.

A framework for assessing clinical trial site readiness

Clinical trial processes are unnecessarily inefficient and costly, slowing the translation of medical discoveries into treatments for people living with disease. To reduce redundancies and inefficiencies, a group of clinical trial experts developed a framework for clinical trial site readiness based on existing trial site qualifications from sponsors. The site readiness practices are encompassed within six domains: research team, infrastructure, study management, data collection and management, quality oversight, and ethics and safety. Implementation of this framework for clinical trial sites would reduce inefficiencies in trial conduct and help prepare new sites to enter the clinical trials enterprise, with the potential to improve the reach of clinical trials to underserved communities. Moreover, the framework holds benefits for trial sponsors, contract research organizations, trade associations, trial participants, and the public. For novice sites considering future trials, we provide a framework for site preparation and the engagement of stakeholders. For experienced sites, the framework can be used to assess current practices and inform and engage sponsors, staff, and participants. Details in the supplementary materials provide easy access to key regulatory documents and resources. Invited perspective articles provide greater depth from a systems, DEIA (diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility) and decentralized trials perspective.

Study design and baseline profile for adults with type 2 diabetes in the once-weekly subcutaneous SEmaglutide randomized PRAgmatic (SEPRA) trial

INTRODUCTION

Once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 analog, is approved in the USA as an adjunct to diet and exercise for adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) to improve glycemic control and reduce the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events in people with T2D and established cardiovascular disease. The Semaglutide Unabated Sustainability in Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes (SUSTAIN) phase III clinical trial program demonstrated the efficacy and safety of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide; however, determining its effectiveness in a real-world setting could support decision-making by clinicians, payers and policy makers in routine clinical practice.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

SEmaglutide PRAgmatic (SEPRA) is an ongoing open-label, randomized, pragmatic clinical trial designed to compare the effects of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide versus standard of care in US health-insured adults with T2D and physician-determined inadequate glycemic control. The primary end point is the proportion of participants achieving glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <7.0% at year 1; other key outcomes include glycemic control, weight loss, healthcare utilization, and patient-reported outcomes. Individual-level data will be collected from routine clinical practice and health insurance claims. The last patient last visit is expected by June 2023.

RESULTS

Between July 2018 and March 2021, 1278 participants were enrolled from 138 study sites across the USA. At baseline, 54% were male with mean±SD age 57.4±11.1 years and body mass index 35.7±8.0 kg/m². Mean diabetes duration was 7.4±6.0 years and mean HbA1c was 8.5±1.6%. At baseline, concomitant antidiabetes medications included metformin, sulfonylureas, sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. The majority of participants had hypertension and dyslipidemia. The trial design was self-assessed using the PRagmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary-2 tool by the study steering group and was scored 4-5 in all domains suggesting a highly pragmatic study.

CONCLUSIONS

SEPRA, a highly pragmatic ongoing study, will provide data on the effects of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide in a real-world setting when used during routine management of T2D.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03596450.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Increased Derived Time in Range is Associated with Reduced Risk of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events, Severe Hypoglycemia, and Microvascular Events in Type 2 Diabetes: A Post Hoc Analysis of DEVOTE

Time spent in glycemic target range (time in range [TIR]; plasma glucose 70-180 mg/dL [3.9-10.0 mmol/L]) as a surrogate endpoint for long-term diabetes-related outcomes requires validation. This post hoc analysis investigated the association between TIR, derived from 8-point glucose profiles (dTIR) at 12 months, and time to cardiovascular or severe hypoglycemic episodes in people with type 2 diabetes in the DEVOTE trial. At 12 months, dTIR was significantly negatively associated with time to first major adverse cardiovascular event (P = 0.0087), severe hypoglycemic episode (P < 0.0001), or microvascular event (P = 0.024). A non-significant trend was seen towards association between 12-month hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and these outcomes, but this was no longer seen after addition of dTIR to the model. The results support targeting TIR >70% and suggest dTIR could be used in addition to, or in some instances in place of, HbA1c as a clinical biomarker.

Effects of oral semaglutide on cardiovascular outcomes in individuals with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and/or chronic kidney disease: SOUL, a randomized trial, design and baseline characteristics

AIM

To describe the design of Semaglutide cardiOvascular oUtcomes triaL (SOUL) and baseline clinical data of its participants. In SOUL, the effects of oral semaglutide, the first oral glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, on the risk of cardiovascular (CV) events in individuals with type 2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD) and/or chronic kidney disease (CKD) will be assessed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SOUL is a randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled CV outcomes trial comparing oral semaglutide (14 mg once daily) with placebo, both in addition to standard of care, in individuals aged ≥50 years with type 2 diabetes with evidence of ASCVD (coronary artery disease [CAD], cerebrovascular disease, symptomatic peripheral arterial disease [PAD]) and/or CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 ml/min/1.73 m² ).

PRIMARY OUTCOME

time from randomization to first occurrence of a major adverse CV event (MACE; composite of CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction or nonfatal stroke). This event-driven trial will continue until 1225 first adjudication-confirmed MACEs have occurred. Enrollment has been completed.

RESULTS

Overall, 9650 participants were enrolled between 17 June 2019 and 24 March 2021 (male 71.1%, White 68.9%, mean age 66.1 years, diabetes duration 15.4 years, body mass index 31.1 kg/m² , glycated haemoglobin 63.5 mmol/mol [8.0%]). The most frequently used antihyperglycaemic medications at baseline were metformin (75.7%), insulin and insulin analogues (50.5%), sulphonylureas (29.1%), sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (26.7%) and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (23.0%). At randomization, 70.7% of participants had CAD, 42.3% CKD, 21.1% cerebrovascular disease and 15.7% symptomatic PAD (categories not mutually exclusive). Prevalent heart failure was reported in 23.0% of participants.

CONCLUSIONS

SOUL will provide evidence regarding the CV effects of oral semaglutide in individuals with type 2 diabetes and established ASCVD and/or CKD. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

Are fewer cases of diabetes mellitus diagnosed in the months after SARS-CoV-2 infection? A population-level view in the EHR-based RECOVER program

Long-term sequelae of severe acute respiratory coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may include increased incidence of diabetes. Here we describe the temporal relationship between new type 2 diabetes and SARS-CoV-2 infection in a nationwide database. We found that while the proportion of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes increased during the acute period of SARS-CoV-2 infection, the mean proportion of new diabetes cases in the 6 months post-infection was about 83% lower than the 6 months preinfection. These results underscore the need for further investigation to understand the timing of new diabetes after COVID-19, etiology, screening, and treatment strategies.

Impact of Expanding Access to Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems Among Insulin Users with Type 1 or Type 2 Diabetes

Background: Despite increased use of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) systems, studies to quantify patterns of CGM use are limited. In December 2018, a policy change by a commercial insurer expanded coverage of CGM through the pharmacy benefit, creating an opportunity to evaluate the impact of this change on CGM utilization. Research Design and Methods: Pharmacy and medical claims from 2016 to 2020 were used to estimate the prevalence of CGM use among insulin users with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) or type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) before and after the policy change. Change in CGM use was assessed using an interrupted time series design. Results: At the beginning of the study period, 18.8% of T1DM patients and 1.2% of T2DM patients used CGM. Use rose to 30.5% and 6.6% in the quarter before the policy change. The policy resulted in an immediate 9.5% (P < 0.0001) and 2.8% (P < 0.0001) change in use and increased the rate of quarterly change by 0.5% (P = 0.002) and 0.8% (P < 0.0001). At the end of the study period, 58.2% and 14.9% of T1DM and T2DM patients used CGM. Conclusion: CGM use significantly increased after addition to the pharmacy benefit. Rate of change in CGM use was lower in T1DM compared to the T2DM population, but overall use remained higher among patients with T1DM. Increased CGM use in the population studied aligns with those whose clinical guidelines suggest would most likely benefit. Additional work is needed to evaluate the impact of this benefit change on health care spending and outcomes.

A method for comparing multiple imputation techniques: A case study on the U.S. national COVID cohort collaborative

Healthcare datasets obtained from Electronic Health Records have proven to be extremely useful for assessing associations between patients' predictors and outcomes of interest. However, these datasets often suffer from missing values in a high proportion of cases, whose removal may introduce severe bias. Several multiple imputation algorithms have been proposed to attempt to recover the missing information under an assumed missingness mechanism. Each algorithm presents strengths and weaknesses, and there is currently no consensus on which multiple imputation algorithm works best in a given scenario. Furthermore, the selection of each algorithm's parameters and data-related modeling choices are also both crucial and challenging. In this paper we propose a novel framework to numerically evaluate strategies for handling missing data in the context of statistical analysis, with a particular focus on multiple imputation techniques. We demonstrate the feasibility of our approach on a large cohort of type-2 diabetes patients provided by the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) Enclave, where we explored the influence of various patient characteristics on outcomes related to COVID-19. Our analysis included classic multiple imputation techniques as well as simple complete-case Inverse Probability Weighted models. Extensive experiments show that our approach can effectively highlight the most promising and performant missing-data handling strategy for our case study. Moreover, our methodology allowed a better understanding of the behavior of the different models and of how it changed as we modified their parameters. Our method is general and can be applied to different research fields and on datasets containing heterogeneous types.

Medically tailored meals for food insecurity and type 2 diabetes: Protocol for the Food as Medicine for Diabetes (FAME-D) trial

BACKGROUND

Food insecurity is associated with worse glycemic management for individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), but whether medically tailored meals (MTM), a food insecurity intervention, can improve glycemic management is unclear.

OBJECTIVE

To describe the protocol for a trial assessing whether an MTM plus lifestyle intervention improves hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and participant-reported outcomes, relative to a food subsidy (money that can be spent on foods participants choose), for adults with both T2DM and food insecurity.

METHODS

The Food as Medicine for Diabetes (FAME-D) randomized clinical trial (goal n = 200) is a pragmatic trial with an active comparator. Participants, who will have T2DM and report food insecurity, will be randomly assigned to a 6-month MTM plus telephone-delivered lifestyle change intervention, or a 6-month food subsidy ($40/month). The primary outcome is HbA1c at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include HbA1c at 12 months to assess whether the intervention effect (if any) is sustained, along with weight, food insecurity, diabetes distress, and health-related quality of life. Qualitative analyses of semi-structured interviews will help understand why, how, and under what circumstances the intervention achieved its observed results.

CONCLUSION

Results from FAME-D will help inform clinical management of food insecurity when it co-occurs with T2DM. Further, results may be useful as healthcare payors are considering coverage for MTM interventions.

CLINICALTRIALS

gov: NCT04828785.

Outpatient treatment of Covid-19 with metformin, ivermectin, and fluvoxamine and the development of Long Covid over 10-month follow-up

Background

Long Covid is an emerging chronic illness potentially affecting millions, sometimes preventing the ability to work or participate in normal daily activities. COVID-OUT was an investigator-initiated, multi-site, phase 3, randomized, quadruple-blinded placebo-controlled clinical trial (NCT04510194). The design simultaneously assessed three oral medications (metformin, ivermectin, fluvoxamine) using two by three parallel treatment factorial assignment to efficiently share placebo controls and assessed Long Covid outcomes for 10 months to understand whether early outpatient treatment of SARS-CoV-2 with metformin, ivermectin, or fluvoxamine prevents Long Covid.

Methods

This was a decentralized, remotely delivered trial in the US of 1,125 adults age 30 to 85 with overweight or obesity, fewer than 7 days of symptoms, and enrolled within three days of a documented SARS-CoV-2 infection. Immediate release metformin titrated over 6 days to 1,500mg per day 14 days total; ivermectin 430mcg/kg/day for 3 days; fluvoxamine, 50mg on day one then 50mg twice daily through 14 days. Medical-provider diagnosis of Long Covid, reported by participant by day 300 after randomization was a pre-specified secondary outcome; the primary outcome of the trial was severe Covid by day 14.

Result

The median age was 45 years (IQR 37 to 54), 56% female of whom 7% were pregnant. Two percent identified as Native American; 3.7% as Asian; 7.4% as Black/African American; 82.8% as white; and 12.7% as Hispanic/Latino. The median BMI was 29.8 kg/m2 (IQR 27 to 34); 51% had a BMI >30kg/m2. Overall, 8.4% reported having received a diagnosis of Long Covid from a medical provider: 6.3% in the metformin group and 10.6% in the metformin control; 8.0% in the ivermectin group and 8.1% in the ivermectin control; and 10.1% in the fluvoxamine group and 7.5% in the fluvoxamine control. The Hazard Ratio (HR) for Long Covid in the metformin group versus control was 0.58 (95% CI 0.38 to 0.88); 0.99 (95% CI 0.592 to 1.643) in the ivermectin group; and 1.36 in the fluvoxamine group (95% CI 0.785 to 2.385).

Conclusions

There was a 42% relative decrease in the incidence of Long Covid in the metformin group compared to its blinded control in a secondary outcome of this randomized phase 3 trial.

Are fewer cases of diabetes mellitus diagnosed in the months after SARS-CoV-2 infection?

Long-term sequelae of severe acute respiratory coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection may include an increased incidence of diabetes. Our objective was to describe the temporal relationship between new diagnoses of diabetes mellitus and SARS-CoV-2 infection in a nationally representative database. There appears to be a sharp increase in diabetes diagnoses in the 30 days surrounding SARS-CoV-2 infection, followed by a decrease in new diagnoses in the post-acute period, up to 360 days after infection. These results underscore the need for further investigation, as understanding the timing of new diabetes onset after COVID-19 has implications regarding potential etiology and screening and treatment strategies.

Management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes, 2022. A consensus report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the previous consensus statements on the management of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes in adults, published since 2006 and last updated in 2019. The target audience is the full spectrum of the professional healthcare team providing diabetes care in the USA and Europe. A systematic examination of publications since 2018 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on social determinants of health, the healthcare system and physical activity behaviours including sleep. There is a greater emphasis on weight management as part of the holistic approach to diabetes management. The results of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes trials involving sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, including assessment of subgroups, inform broader recommendations for cardiorenal protection in people with diabetes at high risk of cardiorenal disease. After a summary listing of consensus recommendations, practical tips for implementation are provided.

Diabetes medications and associations with Covid-19 outcomes in the N3C database: A national retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

While vaccination is the most important way to combat the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, there may still be a need for early outpatient treatment that is safe, inexpensive, and currently widely available in parts of the world that do not have access to the vaccine. There are in-silico, in-vitro, and in-tissue data suggesting that metformin inhibits the viral life cycle, as well as observational data suggesting that metformin use before infection with SARS-CoV2 is associated with less severe COVID-19. Previous observational analyses from single-center cohorts have been limited by size.

METHODS

Conducted a retrospective cohort analysis in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) for associations between metformin use and COVID-19 outcomes with an active comparator design of prevalent users of therapeutically equivalent diabetes monotherapy: metformin versus dipeptidyl-peptidase-4-inhibitors (DPP4i) and sulfonylureas (SU). This took place in the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) longitudinal U.S. cohort of adults with +SARS-CoV-2 result between January 1 2020 to June 1 2021. Findings included hospitalization or ventilation or mortality from COVID-19. Back pain was assessed as a negative control outcome.

RESULTS

6,626 adults with T2DM and +SARS-CoV-2 from 36 sites. Mean age was 60.7 +/- 12.0 years; 48.7% male; 56.7% White, 21.9% Black, 3.5% Asian, and 16.7% Latinx. Mean BMI was 34.1 +/- 7.8kg/m2. Overall 14.5% of the sample was hospitalized; 1.5% received mechanical ventilation; and 1.8% died. In adjusted outcomes, compared to DPP4i, metformin had non-significant associations with reduced need for ventilation (RR 0.68, 0.32-1.44), and mortality (RR 0.82, 0.41-1.64). Compared to SU, metformin was associated with a lower risk of ventilation (RR 0.5, 95% CI 0.28-0.98, p = 0.044) and mortality (RR 0.56, 95%CI 0.33-0.97, p = 0.037). There was no difference in unadjusted or adjusted results of the negative control.

CONCLUSIONS

There were clinically significant associations between metformin use and less severe COVID-19 compared to SU, but not compared to DPP4i. New-user studies and randomized trials are needed to assess early outpatient treatment and post-exposure prophylaxis with therapeutics that are safe in adults, children, pregnancy and available worldwide.

Re-examining the widespread policy of stopping sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors during acute illness: A perspective based on the updated evidence

Sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are now seen as an integral part of therapy in type 2 diabetes to control not only blood glucose but to improve cardiovascular and kidney outcomes. Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is an uncommon but serious complication of type 2 diabetes, which has a high case fatality rate. The absolute risk of DKA in large, prospective randomized clinical trials in people with type 2 diabetes using SGLT2 inhibitors has been low, although the relative risk is higher in those assigned to SGLT2 inhibitors compared with placebo. In those without diabetes but prescribed SGLT2 inhibitors for heart failure or chronic kidney disease, the risk of DKA is similar to placebo. Over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic, cases of DKA have also been reported in cases of COVID-19 hospitalizations. Consensus guidelines have recommended that SGLT2 inhibitors should be avoided in cases of serious illness and suggest they are not recommended for routine in-hospital use. However, recent data suggest potential beneficial effects of SGLT2 inhibitors in the setting of acute illness with COVID-19 with no increase in adverse events and low rates of DKA, which were non-severe. Given the low rates of DKA in cardiovascular outcome trials and in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes, the potential for SGLT2 inhibitors not being re-initiated following discharge and their cardiovascular and kidney benefits, we believe the practice of routine 'sick day' guidance should be re-examined based on current evidence with a call for further research in this area. Furthermore, high-quality trials of initiation of SGLT2 inhibitors in people admitted to hospital with cardiovascular disease or kidney disease, and trials of continuation of SGLT2 inhibitors in people, with careful monitoring of DKA should be conducted. These should be further supplemented with large observational studies.

Effect of SARS-CoV-2 Infection and Infection Severity on Longer-Term Glycemic Control and Weight in People With Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection and severity of infection with longer-term glycemic control and weight in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the U.S.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study using longitudinal electronic health record data of patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C). Patients were ≥18 years old with an ICD-10 diagnosis of T2D and at least one HbA1c and weight measurement prior to and after an index date of their first coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) diagnosis or negative SARS-CoV-2 test. We used propensity scores to identify a matched cohort balanced on demographic characteristics, comorbidities, and medications used to treat diabetes. The primary outcome was the postindex average HbA1c and postindex average weight over a 1 year time period beginning 90 days after the index date among patients who did and did not have SARS-CoV-2 infection. Secondary outcomes were postindex average HbA1c and weight in patients who required hospitalization or mechanical ventilation.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the postindex average HbA1c or weight in patients who had SARS-CoV-2 infection compared with control subjects. Mechanical ventilation was associated with a decrease in average HbA1c after COVID-19.

CONCLUSIONS

In a multicenter cohort of patients in the U.S. with preexisting T2D, there was no significant change in longer-term average HbA1c or weight among patients who had COVID-19. Mechanical ventilation was associated with a decrease in HbA1c after COVID-19.

Management of Hyperglycemia in Type 2 Diabetes, 2022. A Consensus Report by the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD)

The American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes convened a panel to update the previous consensus statements on the management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes in adults, published since 2006 and last updated in 2019. The target audience is the full spectrum of the professional health care team providing diabetes care in the U.S. and Europe. A systematic examination of publications since 2018 informed new recommendations. These include additional focus on social determinants of health, the health care system, and physical activity behaviors, including sleep. There is a greater emphasis on weight management as part of the holistic approach to diabetes management. The results of cardiovascular and kidney outcomes trials involving sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, including assessment of subgroups, inform broader recommendations for cardiorenal protection in people with diabetes at high risk of cardiorenal disease. After a summary listing of consensus recommendations, practical tips for implementation are provided.

Multicenter, Randomized Trial of a Bionic Pancreas in Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Currently available semiautomated insulin-delivery systems require individualized insulin regimens for the initialization of therapy and meal doses based on carbohydrate counting for routine operation. In contrast, the bionic pancreas is initialized only on the basis of body weight, makes all dose decisions and delivers insulin autonomously, and uses meal announcements without carbohydrate counting.

METHODS

In this 13-week, multicenter, randomized trial, we randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio persons at least 6 years of age with type 1 diabetes either to receive bionic pancreas treatment with insulin aspart or insulin lispro or to receive standard care (defined as any insulin-delivery method with unblinded, real-time continuous glucose monitoring). The primary outcome was the glycated hemoglobin level at 13 weeks. The key secondary outcome was the percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter; the prespecified noninferiority limit for this outcome was 1 percentage point. Safety was also assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 219 participants 6 to 79 years of age were assigned to the bionic-pancreas group, and 107 to the standard-care group. The glycated hemoglobin level decreased from 7.9% to 7.3% in the bionic-pancreas group and did not change (was at 7.7% at both time points) in the standard-care group (mean adjusted difference at 13 weeks, -0.5 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.6 to -0.3; P<0.001). The percentage of time that the glucose level as assessed by continuous glucose monitoring was below 54 mg per deciliter did not differ significantly between the two groups (13-week adjusted difference, 0.0 percentage points; 95% CI, -0.1 to 0.04; P<0.001 for noninferiority). The rate of severe hypoglycemia was 17.7 events per 100 participant-years in the bionic-pancreas group and 10.8 events per 100 participant-years in the standard-care group (P = 0.39). No episodes of diabetic ketoacidosis occurred in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

In this 13-week, randomized trial involving adults and children with type 1 diabetes, use of a bionic pancreas was associated with a greater reduction than standard care in the glycated hemoglobin level. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04200313.).

Glycemia Reduction in Type 2 Diabetes - Glycemic Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The comparative effectiveness of glucose-lowering medications for use with metformin to maintain target glycated hemoglobin levels in persons with type 2 diabetes is uncertain.

METHODS

In this trial involving participants with type 2 diabetes of less than 10 years' duration who were receiving metformin and had glycated hemoglobin levels of 6.8 to 8.5%, we compared the effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications. We randomly assigned participants to receive insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), the sulfonylurea glimepiride, the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide, or sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor. The primary metabolic outcome was a glycated hemoglobin level, measured quarterly, of 7.0% or higher that was subsequently confirmed, and the secondary metabolic outcome was a confirmed glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5%.

RESULTS

A total of 5047 participants (19.8% Black and 18.6% Hispanic or Latinx) who had received metformin for type 2 diabetes were followed for a mean of 5.0 years. The cumulative incidence of a glycated hemoglobin level of 7.0% or higher (the primary metabolic outcome) differed significantly among the four groups (P<0.001 for a global test of differences across groups); the rates with glargine (26.5 per 100 participant-years) and liraglutide (26.1) were similar and lower than those with glimepiride (30.4) and sitagliptin (38.1). The differences among the groups with respect to a glycated hemoglobin level greater than 7.5% (the secondary outcome) paralleled those of the primary outcome. There were no material differences with respect to the primary outcome across prespecified subgroups defined according to sex, age, or race or ethnic group; however, among participants with higher baseline glycated hemoglobin levels there appeared to be an even greater benefit with glargine, liraglutide, and glimepiride than with sitagliptin. Severe hypoglycemia was rare but significantly more frequent with glimepiride (in 2.2% of the participants) than with glargine (1.3%), liraglutide (1.0%), or sitagliptin (0.7%). Participants who received liraglutide reported more frequent gastrointestinal side effects and lost more weight than those in the other treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

All four medications, when added to metformin, decreased glycated hemoglobin levels. However, glargine and liraglutide were significantly, albeit modestly, more effective in achieving and maintaining target glycated hemoglobin levels. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.).

Glycemia Reduction in Type 2 Diabetes - Microvascular and Cardiovascular Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Data are lacking on the comparative effectiveness of commonly used glucose-lowering medications, when added to metformin, with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease outcomes in persons with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We assessed the comparative effectiveness of four commonly used glucose-lowering medications, added to metformin, in achieving and maintaining a glycated hemoglobin level of less than 7.0% in participants with type 2 diabetes. The randomly assigned therapies were insulin glargine U-100 (hereafter, glargine), glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin. Prespecified secondary outcomes with respect to microvascular and cardiovascular disease included hypertension and dyslipidemia, confirmed moderately or severely increased albuminuria or an estimated glomerular filtration rate of less than 60 ml per minute per 1.73 m² of body-surface area, diabetic peripheral neuropathy assessed with the Michigan Neuropathy Screening Instrument, cardiovascular events (major adverse cardiovascular events [MACE], hospitalization for heart failure, or an aggregate outcome of any cardiovascular event), and death. Hazard ratios are presented with 95% confidence limits that are not adjusted for multiple comparisons.

RESULTS

During a mean 5.0 years of follow-up in 5047 participants, there were no material differences among the interventions with respect to the development of hypertension or dyslipidemia or with respect to microvascular outcomes; the mean overall rate (i.e., events per 100 participant-years) of moderately increased albuminuria levels was 2.6, of severely increased albuminuria levels 1.1, of renal impairment 2.9, and of diabetic peripheral neuropathy 16.7. The treatment groups did not differ with respect to MACE (overall rate, 1.0), hospitalization for heart failure (0.4), death from cardiovascular causes (0.3), or all deaths (0.6). There were small differences with respect to rates of any cardiovascular disease, with 1.9, 1.9, 1.4, and 2.0 in the glargine, glimepiride, liraglutide, and sitagliptin groups, respectively. When one treatment was compared with the combined results of the other three treatments, the hazard ratios for any cardiovascular disease were 1.1 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.9 to 1.3) in the glargine group, 1.1 (95% CI, 0.9 to 1.4) in the glimepiride group, 0.7 (95% CI, 0.6 to 0.9) in the liraglutide group, and 1.2 (95% CI, 1.0 to 1.5) in the sitagliptin group.

CONCLUSIONS

In participants with type 2 diabetes, the incidences of microvascular complications and death were not materially different among the four treatment groups. The findings indicated possible differences among the groups in the incidence of any cardiovascular disease. (Funded by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases and others; GRADE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01794143.).

Impact of Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) Vaccination and Booster on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) Symptom Severity Over Time in the COVID-OUT Trial

BACKGROUND

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) vaccination has decreasing protection from acquiring any infection with emergence of new variants; however, vaccination continues to protect against progression to severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). The impact of vaccination status on symptoms over time is less clear.

METHODS

Within a randomized trial on early outpatient COVID-19 therapy testing metformin, ivermectin, and/or fluvoxamine, participants recorded symptoms daily for 14 days. Participants were given a paper symptom diary allowing them to circle the severity of 14 symptoms as none (0), mild (1), moderate (2), or severe (3). This is a secondary analysis of clinical trial data on symptom severity over time using generalized estimating equations comparing those unvaccinated, SARS-CoV-2 vaccinated with primary vaccine series only, or vaccine-boosted.

RESULTS

The parent clinical trial prospectively enrolled 1323 participants, of whom 1062 (80%) prospectively recorded some daily symptom data. Of these, 480 (45%) were unvaccinated, 530 (50%) were vaccinated with primary series only, and 52 (5%) vaccine-boosted. Overall symptom severity was least for the vaccine-boosted group and most severe for unvaccinated at baseline and over the 14 days (P < .001). Individual symptoms were least severe in the vaccine-boosted group including cough, chills, fever, nausea, fatigue, myalgia, headache, and diarrhea, as well as smell and taste abnormalities. Results were consistent over Delta and Omicron variant time periods.

CONCLUSIONS

SARS-CoV-2 vaccine-boosted participants had the least severe symptoms during COVID-19, which abated the quickest over time. Clinical Trial Registration. NCT04510194.

Randomized Trial of Metformin, Ivermectin, and Fluvoxamine for Covid-19

BACKGROUND

Early treatment to prevent severe coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) is an important component of the comprehensive response to the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) pandemic.

METHODS

In this phase 3, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we used a 2-by-3 factorial design to test the effectiveness of three repurposed drugs - metformin, ivermectin, and fluvoxamine - in preventing serious SARS-CoV-2 infection in nonhospitalized adults who had been enrolled within 3 days after a confirmed diagnosis of infection and less than 7 days after the onset of symptoms. The patients were between the ages of 30 and 85 years, and all had either overweight or obesity. The primary composite end point was hypoxemia (≤93% oxygen saturation on home oximetry), emergency department visit, hospitalization, or death. All analyses used controls who had undergone concurrent randomization and were adjusted for SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and receipt of other trial medications.

RESULTS

A total of 1431 patients underwent randomization; of these patients, 1323 were included in the primary analysis. The median age of the patients was 46 years; 56% were female (6% of whom were pregnant), and 52% had been vaccinated. The adjusted odds ratio for a primary event was 0.84 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 1.09; P = 0.19) with metformin, 1.05 (95% CI, 0.76 to 1.45; P = 0.78) with ivermectin, and 0.94 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.36; P = 0.75) with fluvoxamine. In prespecified secondary analyses, the adjusted odds ratio for emergency department visit, hospitalization, or death was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.94) with metformin, 1.39 (95% CI, 0.72 to 2.69) with ivermectin, and 1.17 (95% CI, 0.57 to 2.40) with fluvoxamine. The adjusted odds ratio for hospitalization or death was 0.47 (95% CI, 0.20 to 1.11) with metformin, 0.73 (95% CI, 0.19 to 2.77) with ivermectin, and 1.11 (95% CI, 0.33 to 3.76) with fluvoxamine.

CONCLUSIONS

None of the three medications that were evaluated prevented the occurrence of hypoxemia, an emergency department visit, hospitalization, or death associated with Covid-19. (Funded by the Parsemus Foundation and others; COVID-OUT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04510194.).

Impact of the hepatoselective glucokinase activator TTP399 on ketoacidosis during insulin withdrawal in people with type 1 diabetes

AIMS

To determine the effect of TTP399, a hepatoselective glucokinase activator, on the risk of ketoacidosis during insulin withdrawal in individuals with type 1 diabetes (T1D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Twenty-three participants with T1D using insulin pump therapy were randomized to 800 mg TTP399 (n = 12) or placebo (n = 11) for 7 to 10 days. After the treatment period, an insulin withdrawal test (IWT) was performed, during which insulin pumps were removed to induce ketogenesis. The IWT was stopped after 10 hours or if blood glucose reached >399 mg/dL [22.1 mmol/L], if beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) was >3.0 mmol/L, or for patient discomfort. The primary endpoint was the proportion of participants who reached BHB concentrations of 1 mmol/L or greater.

RESULTS

During the 7- to 10-day treatment period, mean fasting plasma glucose was significantly reduced ( -27.6 vs. -4.4 mg/dL [-1.5 vs. -0.2 mmol/L]; P = 0.03) and there were fewer adverse events, including hypoglycaemia, in the TTP399-treated arm. During the IWT, no differences were observed between TTP399 and placebo in mean serum BHB concentration, mean duration of IWT, or BHB at termination of IWT. However, serum bicarbonate was numerically higher and urine acetoacetate was quantitatively lower in the TTP399-treated participants. As a result of higher bicarbonate values, none of the TTP399-treated participants met the prespecified criteria for diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), defined as BHB >3 mmol/L and serum bicarbonate <18 mEq/L, compared to 42% of placebo-treated participants.

CONCLUSIONS

When used as an adjunctive therapy to insulin, TTP399 improves glycaemia without increasing hypoglycaemia in individuals with T1D. During acute insulin withdrawal, TTP399 did not increase BHB concentrations and decreased the incidence of DKA.

Glycemic Control and Clinical Outcomes in U.S. Patients With COVID-19: Data From the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C) Database

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of the study is to evaluate the relationship between HbA1c and severity of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) with acute COVID-19 infection.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study using observational data from the National COVID Cohort Collaborative (N3C), a longitudinal, multicenter U.S. cohort of patients with COVID-19 infection. Patients were ≥18 years old with T2D and confirmed COVID-19 infection by laboratory testing or diagnosis code. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality following the date of COVID-19 diagnosis. Secondary outcomes included need for invasive ventilation or extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO), hospitalization within 7 days before or 30 days after COVID-19 diagnosis, and length of stay (LOS) for patients who were hospitalized.

RESULTS

The study included 39,616 patients (50.9% female, 55.4% White, 26.4% Black or African American, and 16.1% Hispanic or Latino, with mean ± SD age 62.1 ± 13.9 years and mean ± SD HbA1c 7.6% ± 2.0). There was an increasing risk of hospitalization with incrementally higher HbA1c levels, but risk of death plateaued at HbA1c >8%, and risk of invasive ventilation or ECMO plateaued >9%. There was no significant difference in LOS across HbA1c levels.

CONCLUSIONS

In a large, multicenter cohort of patients in the U.S. with T2D and COVID-19 infection, risk of hospitalization increased with incrementally higher HbA1c levels. Risk of death and invasive ventilation also increased but plateaued at different levels of glycemic control.

Vaccination against SARS-CoV-2 is associated with a lower viral load and likelihood of systemic symptoms

Background

Data conflict on whether vaccination decreases severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral load. The objective of this analysis was to compare baseline viral load and symptoms between vaccinated and unvaccinated adults enrolled in a randomized trial of outpatient coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) treatment.

Methods

Baseline data from the first 433 sequential participants enrolling into the COVID-OUT trial were analyzed. Adults aged 30–85 with a body mass index (BMI) ≥25 kg/m² were eligible within 3 days of a positive SARS-CoV-2 test and <7 days of symptoms. Log₁₀ polymerase chain reaction viral loads were normalized to human RNase P by vaccination status, by time from vaccination, and by symptoms.

Results

Two hundred seventy-four participants with known vaccination status contributed optional nasal swabs for viral load measurement: median age, 46 years; median (interquartile range) BMI 31.2 (27.4–36.4) kg/m². Overall, 159 (58%) were women, and 217 (80%) were White. The mean relative log₁₀ viral load for those vaccinated <6 months from the date of enrollment was 0.11 (95% CI, –0.48 to 0.71), which was significantly lower than the unvaccinated group (P = .01). Those vaccinated ≥6 months before enrollment did not differ from the unvaccinated with respect to viral load (mean, 0.99; 95% CI, –0.41 to 2.40; P = .85). The vaccinated group had fewer moderate/severe symptoms of subjective fever, chills, myalgias, nausea, and diarrhea (all P < .05).

Conclusions

These data suggest that vaccination within 6 months of infection is associated with a lower viral load, and vaccination was associated with a lower likelihood of having systemic symptoms.