Efficacy and safety of linagliptin as add-on therapy to basal insulin and metformin in people with Type 2 diabetes

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of linagliptin in people with Type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin and metformin.

METHODS

This was a post hoc subanalysis of participants who received basal insulin and metformin in a global phase III study that randomized participants (1:1) to receive linagliptin 5 mg once daily or placebo for ≥52 weeks as add-on therapy to basal insulin alone or in combination with metformin and/or pioglitazone. During the first 24 weeks, the background dose of basal insulin remained stable; thereafter, adjustments based on glucose concentrations were recommended. The primary endpoint of the subanalysis was the change from baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks. The safety analysis incorporated data up to a maximum of 110 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 950 participants receiving background insulin and metformin were included in this subanalysis (linagliptin and placebo, both n = 475). At week 24, the placebo-corrected adjusted mean (±se) change from baseline in HbA1c with linagliptin was -7 (±1) mmol/mol [-0.7 (±0.1) %; 95% CI -0.8, -0.6; P < 0.0001]. The overall frequency of drug-related adverse events (linagliptin, 18.9%; placebo, 21.9%) and investigator-reported hypoglycaemia (linagliptin, 30.7%; placebo, 31.6%) were similar in both groups at the end of treatment. The frequency of severe hypoglycaemia was low (linagliptin, 1.7%; placebo, 0.8%). No meaningful changes in mean (±sd) body weight were noted in either group [week 52: linagliptin, -0.5 (±3.2) kg; placebo, 0.0 (±3.1) kg].

CONCLUSIONS

Linagliptin added to basal insulin and metformin improved glycaemic control, without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia or body weight gain.

Efficacy and tolerability of saxagliptin compared with glimepiride in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled study (GENERATION)

AIMS

To assess the efficacy and safety of adjunctive saxagliptin vs glimepiride in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and inadequate glycaemic control.

METHODS

In this multinational, randomized, double-blind, phase IIIb/IV study (GENERATION; NCT01006603), patients aged ≥65 years were randomized (1 : 1) to receive saxagliptin 5 mg/day or glimepiride ≤6 mg/day, added to metformin, during a 52-week treatment period. The primary endpoint was achievement of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) <7.0% at week 52 without confirmed/severe hypoglycaemia. The key secondary endpoint was incidence of confirmed/severe hypoglycaemia. Safety and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

Of 720 patients randomized (360 in each treatment group; mean age 72.6 years; mean T2D duration 7.6 years), 574 (79.8%) completed the study (saxagliptin 80.3%; glimepiride 79.2%). Similar proportions of patients achieved the primary endpoint with saxagliptin and glimepiride (37.9 vs 38.2%; odds ratio 0.99, 95% confidence interval 0.73, 1.34; p = 0.9415); however, a significant treatment-by-age interaction effect was detected (p = 0.0389): saxagliptin was numerically (but not significantly) superior to glimepiride for patients aged <75 years (39.2 vs 33.3%) and numerically inferior for patients aged ≥75 years (35.9 vs 45.5%). The incidence of confirmed/severe hypoglycaemia was lower with saxagliptin vs glimepiride (1.1 vs 15.3%; nominal p < 0.0001). Saxagliptin was generally well tolerated, with similar incidences of adverse events compared with glimepiride.

CONCLUSION

As avoiding hypoglycaemia is a key clinical objective in elderly patients, saxagliptin is a suitable alternative to glimepiride in patients with T2D aged ≥65 years.

Long-term glycaemic response and tolerability of dapagliflozin versus a sulphonylurea as add-on therapy to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: 4-year data

AIMS

To assess the long-term efficacy and tolerability of dapagliflozin versus glipizide as add-on to metformin in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

The present study was an extension of an earlier randomized, double-blind, phase III study of dapagliflozin (n = 406) vs glipizide (n = 408) to 208 weeks (4 years). Patients continued to receive their assigned medication. No statistical treatment-group comparisons were calculated.

RESULTS

At 208 weeks, dapagliflozin compared with glipizide produced sustained reductions in glycated haemoglogin (HbA1c): -0.30% [95% confidence interval (CI), -0.51 to -0.09], in total body weight: -4.38 kg (95% CI -5.31 to -3.46) and in systolic blood pressure (SBP): -3.67 mmHg (95% CI -5.92 to -1.41). The HbA1c coefficient of failure was significantly lower for dapagliflozin than for glipizide: 0.19 (95% CI 0.12-0.25) versus 0.61 (95% CI 0.49-0.72, difference -0.42; p = 0.0001). Dapagliflozin was not associated with glomerular function deterioration, while this occurred more frequently in patients in the glipizide group. Fewer patients reported hypoglycaemia in the dapagliflozin compared with the glipizide group (5.4 vs 51.5%). Genital and urinary tract infections were more common with dapagliflozin than with glipizide, but their incidence decreased with time and all events responded well to antimicrobial treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients completing 4 years of treatment, dapagliflozin was well tolerated and associated with sustained glycaemic efficacy and greater reductions in body weight and SBP versus glipizide.