CONSENSUS STATEMENT BY THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF CLINICAL ENDOCRINOLOGISTS AND AMERICAN COLLEGE OF ENDOCRINOLOGY ON THE COMPREHENSIVE TYPE 2 DIABETES MANAGEMENT ALGORITHM - 2017 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Renal and Cardiac Implications of Sodium Glucose Cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) Inhibitors: The State of the Science

OBJECTIVE

To review the role of the sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors in the management of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), including the effects on renal and cardiovascular (CV) outcomes.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search of MEDLINE databases (1964 through May 2018) was conducted utilizing key words sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors, SGLT2 inhibitors, and diabetes; additional limits for drug names were added.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

Available English-language data from reviews, abstracts, presentations, and clinical trials of use of SGLT2 therapy specifically detailing outcomes on CV and renal disease in humans were reviewed.

DATA SYNTHESIS

This review will explore the role of the SGLT2 inhibitors on CV and renal outcomes in patients with T2DM. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: A paradigm shift regarding the regulation of medications for the treatment of T2DM has resulted in the need for CV outcomes data as part of the drug approval process. Reduction of major CV events and progression of nephropathy in patients with T2DM represent major outcomes of clinical significance. Few medications have been able to establish a reduction in these end points; data for the use of SGLT2 inhibitors are favorable in this regard.

CONCLUSION

The SGLT2 inhibitors represents a class of medications that reduce glucose levels via a novel and complementary mechanism. Emerging evidence suggests a plausible explanation for the observed reduction in adverse renal and CV outcomes in recent clinical trials. Questions remain whether these agents reduce renal disease risk greater than achievement of the same glycemic goals as other antidiabetics and whether CV and renal benefits are reproducible in high-risk patients with chronic kidney disease.

Management of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease: Lessons learned from type 2 diabetes

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is considered the hepatic manifestation of insulin resistance, which is the hallmark of type 2 diabetes (T2D). NAFLD is a known risk factor for developing T2D and has a very high prevalence in those with existing T2D. The diabetes spectrum includes several conditions from prediabetes to T2D to insulin-dependent diabetes leading to macrovascular and microvascular complications. Similarly, NAFLD has a histologic spectrum that ranges from the relatively benign nonalcoholic fatty liver to the aggressive form of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis with or without liver fibrosis to nonalcoholic steatohepatitis-cirrhosis leading to end-stage liver disease. The management of T2D has witnessed significant changes over the past few decades with multiple new drug classes entering the treatment algorithm. Unfortunately, there are no U.S. Food and Drug Administration-approved medications to treat NAFLD, and guidelines for the management of NAFLD are less established. However, the field of drug development in NAFLD has witnessed a revolution over the past 5 years with the establishment of a regulatory pathway for Food and Drug Administration approval; this has generated substantial interest from pharmaceutical companies. Several diabetes medications have been studied as potential treatments for NAFLD with promising results; moreover, drugs that target specific pathways that play a role in NAFLD development and progression are being developed at a rapid pace. Given the similarities between NAFLD and T2D in terms of pathogenesis, underlying risk factors, and disease spectrum, lessons learned from optimizing treatment for T2D can be extrapolated to the management of NAFLD. The aim of this review is to use the founding principles of the comprehensive type 2 diabetes management algorithm to optimize the management of NAFLD. (Hepatology Communications 2018;2:778-785).

Semaglutide: Review and Place in Therapy for Adults With Type 2 Diabetes

Guidelines increasingly highlight the importance of multifactorial management in type 2 diabetes, in contrast to the more traditional focus on glycemic control. Semaglutide, a recently approved glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, is indicated in Canada for adults with type 2 diabetes to improve glycemic control as monotherapy with diet and exercise when metformin is inappropriate or as an add-on to either metformin alone or metformin plus a sulfonylurea or basal insulin. The Semaglutide Unabated Sustainability in Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes (SUSTAIN) clinical trial program for semaglutide comprises 6 pivotal global phase 3a trials (SUSTAIN 1 through 6) and 2 Japanese phase 3a trials. Phase 3b trials include SUSTAIN 7, and SUSTAIN 8 and 9 (both ongoing). Results from the completed trials support the superiority of semaglutide for reduction of glycated hemoglobin levels and weight loss vs. placebo as well as active comparators, including sitagliptin, exenatide extended-release, dulaglutide and insulin glargine. SUSTAIN 6 trial data confirmed cardiovascular safety and demonstrated significant reductions in major cardiovascular events with semaglutide vs. placebo, an outcome that confirmed the noninferiority of semaglutide. The robust and sustained effects of semaglutide on glycated hemoglobin levels and weight loss vs. comparators, as well as its safety and possible cardiovascular benefit, address an unmet need in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. This article overviews data from across the semaglutide clinical trial program, including efficacy and safety results and findings from post hoc analyses. The potential place of semaglutide in clinical practice is discussed.

Cost of Achieving HbA1c Treatment Targets and Weight Loss Responses with Once-Weekly Semaglutide Versus Dulaglutide in the United States

INTRODUCTION

The National Health and Nutrition Examination Surveys show that many people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in the USA fail to achieve recommended treatment targets. In the SUSTAIN 7 randomized controlled trial, once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 and 1.0 mg) was superior to comparative doses of dulaglutide (0.75 and 1.5 mg) in reducing glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight in people with T2D. The present study estimated the cost per patient achieving HbA1c treatment targets and weight loss responses with once-weekly semaglutide and dulaglutide in the USA.

METHODS

Numbers needed to treat and annual cost per patient achieving HbA1c targets (including a triple composite endpoint of HbA1c < 7% without hypoglycemia and no weight gain) or weight loss responses were calculated on the basis of data from SUSTAIN 7 and the annual cost of treatment from a US healthcare payer perspective.

RESULTS

More patients reached HbA1c targets with once-weekly semaglutide than with dulaglutide, and once-weekly semaglutide showed lower costs of control for all modeled endpoints. The cost per patient achieving the triple composite endpoint was USD 11,916 with once-weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg and USD 15,204 with dulaglutide 1.5 mg, representing a 28% larger cost with dulaglutide 1.5 mg. The cost of reaching the target was 68% larger with dulaglutide 0.75 mg versus once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg. For each patient achieving an HbA1c < 7%, the cost would be 18% larger with dulaglutide 1.5 mg than with once-weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg.

CONCLUSIONS

The cost of bringing one patient to the triple composite endpoint of an HbA1c < 7% without hypoglycemia and no weight gain would be 28% and 68% higher with dulaglutide 1.5 mg relative to once-weekly semaglutide 1.0 mg and dulaglutide 0.75 mg relative to once-weekly semaglutide 0.5 mg, respectively. Once-weekly semaglutide therefore provides better value for money than dulaglutide for the treatment of people with T2D in the USA.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk A/S.

Optimisation of follow-up after metabolic surgery

Bariatric surgery has many benefits beyond weight loss, including improved control of glycaemia, blood pressure, and dyslipidaemia; hence, such surgery has been rebranded as metabolic surgery. The operations are, unfortunately, also associated with major surgical and medical complications. The medical complications include gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, malnutrition, and metabolic complications deriving from vitamin and mineral malabsorption. The benefits of surgery can be optimised by implementing specific protocols before and after surgery. In this Review, we discuss the assessment of the risk of major cardiac complications and severe obstructive sleep apnoea before surgery, and the provision of adequate lifelong postsurgery nutritional, vitamin, and mineral supplementation to reduce complications. Additionally, we examine the best antidiabetic medications to reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia after gastric bypass and sleeve gastrectomy, and the strategies to improve weight loss or reduce weight regain. Although optimising clinical pathways is possible to maximise metabolic benefits and reduce the risks of complications and micronutrient deficiencies, evolution of these strategies can further improve the risk-to-benefit ratio of metabolic surgery.

Incremental burden of type 2 diabetes in patients experiencing cardiovascular hospitalizations

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the incremental economic burden of type 2 diabetes in patients experiencing cardiovascular (CV) hospitalizations.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Adults with ≥1 CV hospitalization were identified using a US-based healthcare claims database from 1 July 2011 to 30 June 2014. Outcomes for patients surviving the index hospitalization were compared between patients with vs. without type 2 diabetes (cohorts were identified in the pre-index period). Subsequent CV hospitalizations were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards models. All-cause and CV-related healthcare resource utilization (HCRU) and costs captured on a per-patient per-month (PPPM) basis during a variable follow-up period were evaluated using appropriate multivariable regression models.

RESULTS

Of 316,207 patients with ≥1 CV hospitalization, 23% had comorbid type 2 diabetes. The mean age ± SD was 62.6 ± 12.3 years and 64.4% were male. During follow-up, the type 2 diabetes cohort had a 19% higher risk of subsequent CV hospitalizations compared to the non-type-2-diabetes cohort (p < .001). This difference in risk was highest in patients aged 35-44 years. Subsequent all-cause hospitalizations for the type 2 diabetes cohort were longer (mean length of stay, 6.7 vs. 6.3 days; p < .001), with higher total bed-days PPPM (mean, 0.52 vs. 0.43; p < .001), compared to the non-type-2-diabetes cohort. The type 2 diabetes cohort had a significantly higher incremental cost for both the index CV hospitalization (mean cost difference, $1046; p < .001) and all-cause costs PPPM following discharge (mean cost difference, $749; p < .001).

CONCLUSIONS

Comorbid type 2 diabetes was associated with an increased risk of subsequent CV hospitalizations and higher costs and HCRU during the follow-up period.

Strategies for implementing effective mealtime insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) is a growing global epidemic. Due to the progressive nature of the disease, many people with T2D require insulin at some point, most commonly a long-acting (basal) insulin to assist with 24-h control of glucose levels.

OBJECTIVE

This opinion paper provides an overview of considerations for primary care providers (PCPs) in intensifying the treatment regimen when basal insulin therapy is inadequate.

RESULTS

Control of mealtime hyperglycemia, in addition to fasting hyperglycemia, has been shown to be crucial in reaching A1c goals of <7.0%. However, initiating and optimizing mealtime insulin therapy can be challenging for both people with T2D and PCPs, due to a perceived lack of efficacy and burden of insulin treatment, causing "psychological insulin resistance" in people with T2D and clinical inertia among PCPs. Successful implementation of mealtime insulin therapy requires not only choosing appropriate treatment strategies, but also addressing patient-related behavioral and emotional barriers. Simplified treatment algorithms, combined with the use of advanced technology (devices such as insulin pens, pumps, and patches), and collaborative decision-making can help decrease barriers to effective mealtime insulin therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

It is possible to implement an effective basal-bolus insulin regimen in people with T2D in a way that improves glucose control while minimizing negative effects on quality-of-life, treatment satisfaction, and psychological well-being.

Understanding concentrated insulins: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To compile, analyze, and summarize the literature on concentrated insulins (i.e. concentrations >100 units/mL) from randomized controlled trials and derive guidance on appropriate use of these agents.

METHODS

Searches were conducted in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Trialtrove (through April 2016) and ClinicalTrials.gov (through April 2017) for phase 1-4 clinical studies using concentrated insulins. Selected studies included multiple-arm, randomized controlled trials evaluating subcutaneously administered concentrated insulins. Trial registration numbers (selected studies) were searched in Medline, Embase and Google Scholar (through April 2017). Late-phase studies were graded using guidance from the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight completed trials (7900 participants) and 34 qualifying publications were identified. Four marketed concentrated insulins were evaluated: two long-acting basal (insulin glargine 300 units/mL and insulin degludec 200 units/mL [IDeg200]), one rapid-acting prandial (insulin lispro 200 units/mL [ILis200]), and one prandial/basal (human regular insulin 500 units/mL). Early-phase trials established bioequivalence for IDeg200 and ILis200 with the corresponding 100 units/mL formulations. Efficacy studies showed noninferior glycemic control between comparators for long-acting basal and prandial/basal products with generally low severe hypoglycemia. Six additional concentrated insulins with completed early-phase development were also identified.

CONCLUSION

Concentrated-insulin products demonstrated efficacious and safe outcomes in appropriate patients. Clinical findings (HbA1c and hypoglycemia) and methodology (initiation and titration), patient factors (insulin experience and dosing requirements) and treatment characteristics (bioequivalence, potency and device features) are important considerations. This overview of these and other factors provides essential information and guidance for using concentrated insulins in clinical practice.

Cardiovascular safety signals with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors: A disproportionality analysis among high-risk patients

PURPOSE

In 2008, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued Draft Guidance on investigating cardiovascular risk with oral diabetic drugs, including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i). In 2014, underpowered, post hoc analyses of clinical trials suggested an increased risk of heart failure with the use of these products. As such, we assessed disproportionate reporting of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) among reports for DPP-4i submitted to the FDA Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) from 2006 to 2015.

METHODS

We assessed the empirical Bayes geometric mean (EBGM) and its lower bound (EB05) of the relative reporting ratio for MACE among DPP-4i reports in the full FAERS database and in a subset of reports limited to cardiovascular and diabetic drugs. We then compared the EB05 in these 2 analyses and calculated the percent positive agreement for signals of disproportional reporting (SDRs) involving MACE.

RESULTS

Of 180.3 million adverse event reports, 13.4 million were for diabetic and cardiovascular drugs. In the cardiovascular subset, there was an SDR for heart failure with linagliptin (EB05 = 2782.47) and saxagliptin (EB05 = 2.40), myocardial infarction with alogliptin (EB05 = 290.11), and cerebral infarction with sitagliptin (EB05 = 2.80). Of the 14 MACE, 8 had a percent positive agreement ≥50% for an SDR in both analyses. Overall, the cardiovascular subset elicited 11 more SDRs for DPP-4i than the full dataset.

CONCLUSIONS

Postmarketing surveillance of DPP-4i through FAERS suggest increased reporting of MACE, supporting the current FDA warning of heart failure risk. This suggests the need for additional longitudinal, observational research into the association of DPP-4i and other MACE.

Real-world evaluation of Hba1c, blood pressure, and weight loss among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with canagliflozin: an analysis of electronic medical records from a network of hospitals in Florida

OBJECTIVE

Clinical trials and real-world studies reported that canagliflozin (CANA) improved HbA1c, blood pressure (BP), and weight in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study examines if previous results hold regionally and within specific patient sub-groups.

METHODS

Adults with T2DM and ≥12 months of clinical activity before the first CANA prescription (index) were identified in electronic medical records (January 1, 2012-February 15, 2017) from a network of hospitals in Florida. Quality measures were described at baseline and 3, 6, 9, and 12 months post-index. Selected thresholds were HbA1c < 7%, BP < 140/90 mmHg, and weight loss ≥5%. Sub-groups included patients ≥65 years old, with African American race, with CANA dose increase, initiating CANA in an endocrinology setting, and initiating CANA in a primary care setting.

RESULTS

Overall, 1,259 patients (mean age = 56.7 years; 51.2% female, 70.4% White) were identified. Among patients with a baseline HbA1c ≥ 7%, 16.1% had an HbA1c < 7% 3 months following CANA initiation, and the mean HbA1c decreased from 8.8% to 8.1%. Among patients with a baseline systolic BP ≥140 mmHg or diastolic BP ≥ 90 mmHg, 59.3% attained a systolic BP < 140 mmHg and 77.3% a diastolic BP < 90 mmHg after 3 months. HbA1c and BP responses were sustained through 12 months. The proportion of patients with a weight loss from baseline ≥5% increased from 17.0% at 3 months to 31.1% at 12 months. Consistent trends were observed for all sub-groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In CANA-treated patients and patient sub-groups from a network of Florida hospitals, improvements in quality measures and response durability were similar to clinical trials and other real-world studies.

Basal Insulin Intensification in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Review

As the number of people living with type 2 diabetes (T2D) continues to rise, managing their complex needs presents an increasing challenge to physicians. While treatment guidelines provide evidence-based guidance, they are not prescriptive-rather they emphasize individualization of management based on a patient's clinical needs and preferences. Physicians, therefore, need to be fully aware of the advantages and disadvantages of the multiple and increasing treatment options available to them at each stage of the disease. The progressive nature of T2D means that treatment with basal insulin will become inevitable for many patients, while for some patients basal insulin alone will eventually be insufficient for maintaining glycemic targets. Recent guidelines recommend two basic approaches for intensifying basal insulin: the use of rapid-acting insulin, either as additional prandial injections or as part of premix (biphasic) insulin; and the addition of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) to the insulin therapy, which can be administered via subcutaneous injection once or twice daily, or weekly depending on formulation. More recently, two fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin and a GLP-1 RA that allow for once-daily dosing have been approved. Each of these approaches has potential benefits and drawbacks, particularly in terms of risk for hypoglycemia, weight change, convenience, and side effects. Understanding these differences is central to guiding patient and physician choice. This article discusses the rationale, advantages, disadvantages, and implementation of currently available strategies for basal insulin treatment intensification in patients with T2D.

FUNDING

Sanofi US, Inc.

Dulaglutide 1.5 mg as an add-on option for patients uncontrolled on insulin: Subgroup analysis by age, duration of diabetes and baseline glycated haemoglobin concentration

AIMS

To assess efficacy and safety of dulaglutide 1.5 mg combined with insulin, categorized by subgroups of baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c; ≤9% and >9% [≤74.9 and >74.9 mmol/mol]), age (<65 and ≥65 years), and duration of diabetes (<10 and ≥10 years) at 6 months in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This pooled analysis was conducted in a population of patients with T2D with similar baseline characteristics who were included in the AWARD-4 and AWARD-9 clinical trials and randomized to dulaglutide 1.5 mg (pooled mean baseline age 59 years, duration of diabetes 13 years, HbA1c 8.4% [68.3 mmol/mol]). Weight and hypoglycaemia were analysed by individual trial. In AWARD-4, dulaglutide plus lispro three times daily was assessed against glargine plus lispro three times daily. In AWARD-9, dulaglutide added to glargine was assessed against placebo added to glargine. Insulins were titrated to target in both trials.

RESULTS

A total of 445 patients were included in this analysis (73% with HbA1c ≤9%, 27% [≤74.9 mmol/mol] with HbA1c >9% [>74.9 mmol/mol]; 70% aged <65 years, 30% aged ≥65 years; 36% with duration of diabetes <10 years, 64% with duration of diabetes ≥10 years). At 6 months, dulaglutide 1.5 mg significantly reduced HbA1c in all subgroups (P < .001), with the highest reduction observed in patients with baseline HbA1c >9% (>74.9 mmol/mol) (range - 1.3% to -2.5% [-14.2 to -27.3 mmol/mol]). The incidence rates of documented symptomatic and severe hypoglycaemia were similar in all subgroups in both trials. The most common adverse events observed in each trial were gastrointestinal in nature.

CONCLUSION

Dulaglutide 1.5 mg combined with basal or prandial insulin is efficacious for patients with T2D irrespective of age, duration of diabetes or baseline HbA1c.

Safety and Efficacy of High Versus Standard Starting Doses of Insulin Glargine in Overweight and Obese Chinese Individuals with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Inadequately Controlled on Oral Antidiabetic Medications (Beyond VII): Study Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment with basal insulin in Chinese populations is currently sub-optimal, with delayed initiation of insulin treatment and inadequate dose titration. Increasing the initial dose of insulin may be a practicable and effective solution to the problem of titration. A higher initial dose will be helpful for patients to achieve the blood glucose target and improve treatment satisfaction and compliance as well require fewer steps to titrate. Considering that overweight and obese patients usually require higher insulin doses because of insulin resistance, a higher initial dose of the basal insulin is feasible in overweight and obese patients with type 2 diabetes. However, safety is an important issue needing to be considered for higher initial dose treatment. The aim of this study is to assess the safety and efficacy of higher (0.3 U/kg) compared with standard (0.2 U/kg) starting doses of basal insulin in overweight and obese Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes who have failed to achieve glycaemic control using oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs).

METHODS

This is a phase IV, randomized, non-inferiority, open-label trial that will be conducted at approximately 50 centers in China. Eight hundred eighty overweight and obese adult Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes will be randomized to receive higher (0.3 U/kg) or standard (0.2 U/kg) starting doses of basal insulin glargine (100 U/ml) during a 16-week period. The primary endpoint is whether a higher initial dose of basal insulin (0.3 U/kg) is non-inferior to a standard initial dose (0.2 U/kg) based on the percentage of patients with at least one episode of hypoglycaemia (≤ 3.9 mmol/l or severe) over 16 weeks. Secondary endpoints include evaluation of glycosylated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose, postprandial blood glucose, insulin dose and safety.

DISCUSSION

This study is the first randomized-controlled study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of basal insulin treatment with a higher starting dose versus standard starting dose in overweight and obese Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes. Results of this study could generate evidence to support the feasibility of a higher starting dose of basal insulin in diabetes management of overweight and obese Chinese patients, therefore providing an easy approach to improve diabetes management.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT02836704. Registered on July 7th 2016.

FUNDING

Sanofi China.

Treatment Intensification in Type 2 Diabetes: A Real-World Study of 2-OAD Regimens, GLP-1 RAs, or Basal Insulin

INTRODUCTION

Treatment guidelines recommend a stepwise approach to glycemia management in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), but this may result in uncontrolled glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) between steps. This retrospective analysis compared clinical and economic outcomes among patients with uncontrolled T2D initiating two oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), or basal insulin in a real-world setting.

METHODS

Adults with T2D on OAD monotherapy were identified in the MarketScan claims database (2007-2014). Those initiating two OADs (simultaneously or sequentially), GLP-1 RAs, or basal insulin were selected (date of initiation was termed the 'index date'); patients were required to have HbA1c > 7.0% in the 6 months pre-index date. HbA1c was compared from 6 months pre- to 1-year post-index. Annual all-cause healthcare utilization and costs were reported over the 1-year follow-up period.

RESULTS

Data for 6054 patients were analyzed (2-OAD, n = 4442; GLP-1 RA, n = 361; basal insulin, n = 1251). Baseline HbA1c was high in all cohorts, but highest in the basal-insulin cohort. Treatment initiation resulted in reductions in HbA1c in all cohorts, which was generally maintained throughout the follow-up period. Average HbA1c reductions from the 6 months pre- to 1 year post-index date were -1.2% for GLP-1 RA, -1.6% for OADs, and -1.8% for basal insulin. HbA1c < 7.0% at 1 year occurred in 32.6%, 47.5%, and 41.1% of patients, respectively. Annual healthcare costs (mean [SD]) were lowest for OAD (US$10,074 [$22,276]) followed by GLP-1 RA (US$14,052 [$23,829]) and basal insulin (US$18,813 [$37,332]).

CONCLUSION

Despite robust HbA1c lowering following treatment initiation, many patients did not achieve HbA1c < 7.0%. Basal insulin, generally prescribed for patients with high baseline HbA1c, was associated with a large reduction in HbA1c and with higher costs. Therapy intensification at an appropriate time could lead to clinical and economic benefits and should be investigated further.

FUNDING

Sanofi U.S., Inc.

Comparison of Glycemic Variability in Chinese T2DM Patients Treated with Exenatide or Insulin Glargine: A Randomized Controlled Trial

INTRODUCTION

Increasing the frequency of blood glucose monitoring aids the evaluation of glycemic variability and blood glucose control by antidiabetic drugs. It remains unclear, however, whether GLP-1 receptor agonists or basal insulin has a better effect on glycemic variability in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients who are inadequately controlled by metformin. We used a continuous glucose monitoring system (CGMS) to compare patients on a GLP-1 receptor agonist with patients on basal insulin in terms of glycemic variability.

METHODS

This prospective randomized study assigned T2DM patients treated with metformin (N = 39) to either exenatide treatment or insulin glargine treatment for 16 weeks. Glycemic variability was assessed using a CGMS; hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), β-cell function, weight, body mass index (BMI), and waist circumference were also evaluated.

RESULTS

Mean blood glucose level, continuous overlapping net glycemic action, mean amplitude of glycemic excursions, percentage of the time that the blood glucose value was > 10.0 mmol/L, and highest blood glucose level (P  < 0.01-0.05) significantly decreased in both groups. Standard deviation of the mean glucose value, largest amplitude of glycemic excursions, and waist circumference significantly decreased for those treated with exenatide (P  < 0.05), while no changes were observed with insulin glargine treatment. Percentage of the time that the blood glucose value was > 7.8 mmol/L decreased after insulin glargine use (P  < 0.05) but not with the exenatide intervention. Similar decreases in fasting blood glucose and HbA1c and increases in the 1/homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance, disposition index 30, and disposition index 120 were observed in both groups (P  < 0.01-0.05). Reductions in weight and BMI were greater with exenatide than with insulin glargine treatment (P  < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

In overweight and obese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled by metformin, exenatide and insulin glargine have similar efficacies in terms of glycemic variability, HbA1c alleviation, and β-cell function, but exenatide has a greater effect on body weight and BMI.

Patient and prescriber characteristics among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus continuing or discontinuing sulfonylureas following insulin initiation: data from a large commercial database

OBJECTIVE

To describe patient and provider characteristics for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) initiating basal insulin and describe basal insulin's impact on sulfonylurea (SU) discontinuation.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was conducted using the HealthCore Integrated Research Database. Patients had ≥12 months of continuous coverage prior to initiating insulin, and were utilizing at least one anti-hyperglycemic drug at the time of insulin initiation. Predictors for SU discontinuation were evaluated utilizing Cox proportional hazards models.

RESULTS

Among the 74,334 individuals aged ≥18 years with T2DM who initiated basal insulin from 2006-2015, 30% were taking metformin (MET) and SU when initiating insulin. Among the 22,418 MET/SU patients, 31% discontinued SU within 3 months of insulin initiation and, by 12 months, 55% had discontinued SU. Sulfonylurea discontinuation was similar among many patient and provider characteristics, while being modestly positively associated (p < .05; HRs <1.5) with female gender, more co-morbidities, cardiac revascularization, chronic liver disease, hospitalizations with a T2DM diagnosis, and hypoglycemia prior to insulin initiation. SU discontinuation was modestly inversely associated with receiving an insulin prescription from an endocrinologist (HR = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.85-0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Roughly half of commercially-insured T2DM patients discontinued SU within 1 year after insulin initiation, and SU discontinuation was not strongly associated with a range of patient and provider characteristics.

Treatment of type 2 diabetes: future approaches

INTRODUCTION OR BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes, which accounts for ~90% of all diabetes, is a heterogeneous and progressive disease with a variety of causative and potentiating factors. The hyperglycaemia of type 2 diabetes is often inadequately controlled, hence the need for a wider selection of glucose-lowering treatments.

SOURCES OF DATA

Medline, PubMed, Web of Science and Google Scholar.

AREAS OF AGREEMENT

Early, effective and sustained control of blood glucose defers the onset and reduces the severity of microvascular and neuropathic complications of type 2 diabetes and helps to reduce the risk of cardiovascular (CV) complications.

AREAS OF CONTROVERSY

Newer glucose-lowering agents require extensive long-term studies to confirm CV safety. The positioning of newer agents within therapeutic algorithms varies.

GROWING POINTS

In addition to their glucose-lowering efficacy, some new glucose-lowering agents may act independently to reduce CV and renal complications.

AREAS TIMELY FOR DEVELOPING RESEARCH

Studies of potential new glucose-lowering agents offer the opportunity to safely improve glycaemic control with prolonged efficacy and greater opportunity for therapeutic individualisation.

Telemedicine in Complex Diabetes Management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Telehealth has the potential to positively transform the quality and cost-effectiveness of complex diabetes management in adults. This review explores the landscape of telemedicine approaches and evidence for incorporation into general practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

Telemedicine for diabetes care is feasible based on over 100 randomized clinical trials. Evidence shows modest benefits in A1c lowering and other clinical outcomes that are better sustained over time vs. usual care. While telemedicine interventions are likely cost-effective in diabetes care, more research is needed using implementation science approaches. Telehealth platforms have been shown to be both feasible and effective for health care delivery in diabetes, although there are many caveats that require tailoring to the institution, clinician, and patient population. Research in diabetes telehealth should focus next on how to increase access to patients who are known to be marginalized from traditional models of health care.

Why Weight? An Analytic Review of Obesity Management, Diabetes Prevention, and Cardiovascular Risk Reduction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In this review, we examine one of the ironies of American health care-that we pay more for disease management than disease prevention. Instead of preventing type 2 diabetes (T2DM) by treating its precursor, obesity, we fail to provide sufficient insurance coverage for weight management only to fund the more costly burden of overt T2DM.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is a vital need for expanded insurance coverage to help foster a weight-centric approach to T2DM management. This includes broader coverage of anti-diabetic medications with evidence of cardiovascular risk reduction and mortality benefit, anti-obesity pharmacotherapy, bariatric surgery, weight loss devices, endoscopic bariatric therapies, and lifestyle interventions for the treatment of obesity. The fundamental question to ask is why weight? Why wait to go after obesity until its end-stage sequelae cause intractable conditions? Instead of managing the complications of T2DM, consider preventing them by tackling obesity.

Pharmacist Impact on Treatment Intensification and Hemoglobin A1C in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus at an Academic Health Center

Background:

Achievement of treatment goals for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is suboptimal. This is in part driven by a lack of treatment intensification when warranted, termed “clinical inertia.”

Objectives:

To investigate time to treatment intensification and changes in A1C among pharmacist–physician managed (PPM) patients compared to usual medical care (UMC) in patients with T2DM.

Methods:

Retrospective matched cohort study at 2 academic family medicine clinics. Patients in each cohort were matched 1:1 based on age (±5 years), primary care provider, gender, and race.

Results:

A total of 50 patients met inclusion criteria. Mean time to treatment intensification was longer in the UMC cohort as compared with the PPM cohort (325 (66) days vs 200 (62) days [ P = .50]). A higher percentage of patients in the PPM cohort achieved ≥0.5% reduction in A1C in comparison to the UMC cohort (60% vs 44%, respectively [ P = .41]). Patients in the PPM cohort experienced a greater mean decrease in A1C from baseline when compared to patients in the UMC cohort (−1% (1.8%) vs −0.4% (2.2%) [ P = .24]).

Conclusion:

Patients exposed to a pharmacist in this retrospective matched cohort study experienced shorter time to treatment intensification and a greater reduction in A1C than those managed solely by a medical provider, although results were not statistically significant. Additional research is needed to evaluate the role of the pharmacist in improving clinical inertia in the management of T2DM.

Diabetes and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours: Which interplays, if any?

Pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (PanNETs) represent an uncommon type of pancreatic neoplasm, whose incidence is increasing worldwide. As per exocrine pancreatic cancer, a relationship seems to exist between PanNETs and glycaemic alterations. Diabetes mellitus (DM) or impaired glucose tolerance often occurs in PanNET patients as a consequence of hormonal hypersecretion by the tumour, specifically affecting glucose metabolism, or due to tumour mass effects. On the other hand, pre-existing DM may represent a risk factor for developing PanNETs and is likely to worsen the prognosis of such patients. Moreover, the surgical and/or pharmacological treatment of the tumour itself may impair glucose tolerance, as well as antidiabetic therapies may impact tumour behaviour and patients outcome. Differently from exocrine pancreatic tumours, few data are available for PanNETs as yet on this issue. In the present review, the bidirectional association between glycaemic disorders and PanNETs has been extensively examined, since the co-existence of both diseases in the same individual represents a further challenge for the clinical management of PanNETs.

The role of basal insulin and GLP-1 receptor agonist combination products in the management of type 2 diabetes

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes necessitates the development of new treatment options to individualize therapy. Basal insulin has been a standard treatment option for years, while glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) have grown in use over the past decade due to glucose-lowering efficacy and weight loss potential. There are two new combination injectable products that have recently been approved combining basal insulins with GLP-1 RAs in single pen-injector devices. United States guidelines recently emphasize the option to use combination injectable therapy with GLP-1 RAs and basal insulin once the basal insulin has been optimally titrated as a second- or third-line agent in addition to metformin without reaching the goal A1c. Insulin glargine/lixisenatide 100/33 (IGlarLixi) can be dosed between 15 and 60 units once daily from a single pen-injector device. Insulin degludec/liraglutide 100/3.6 (IDegLira) can be dosed between 10 and 50 units once daily, also from a single pen-injector device. Maximum doses, while measured in units, correspond to limits defined by each individual GLP-1 RA. The dual use of basal insulin plus GLP-1 RA is non-inferior compared with basal insulin plus a single injection of prandial insulin at the largest meal and compared with twice daily-dosed premixed insulins; and this combination is associated with weight loss and less hypoglycemia. These new combination products could help providers effectively and efficiently follow clinical practice guidelines while enhancing patient adherence with injectable medications.

Clinical Benefits Over Time Associated with Use of V-Go Wearable Insulin Delivery Device in Adult Patients with Diabetes: A Retrospective Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Advances in insulin delivery have improved outcomes in patients with diabetes. This study evaluated the impact of V-Go® Wearable Insulin Delivery device on glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and insulin total daily dose (TDD) in patients with diabetes not achieving glycemic targets.

METHODS

Electronic medical record data was obtained for adult patients with A1C > 7% treated at a multicenter endocrine practice who initiated V-Go between August 2012 and August 2015. Data were collected at baseline and for up to four follow-up visits, and were analyzed overall, stratified by insulin use at baseline, and for patients prescribed a basal-bolus insulin regimen delivered by multiple daily injections (MDI) at baseline. Economic evaluations were conducted in patients previously prescribed MDI regimens.

RESULTS

Patients (N = 103) were evaluated after a mean of 2, 6, 10, and 14 months of V-Go use. Baseline glycemic control was poor (A1C > 9%) in 59% of patients. Significant, sustained reductions in A1C compared with baseline were observed at every visit (p < 0.0001), with mean ± SE decrease of 1.67 ± 0.24% after 14 months. For patients prescribed insulin at baseline (n = 80), TDD was significantly reduced at all visits (p < 0.0001), with mean ± SE reduction of 17 ± 4.5 units/day at 14 months. Patients previously prescribed MDI therapy (n = 58) benefited from 1.53 ± 0.31% (p < 0.001) A1C reduction and TDD decrease of 30 ± 5 units/day after 14 months. Direct pharmacy wholesale acquisition costs for diabetes therapeutics were reduced by $25.00/patient/month.

CONCLUSION

Use of V-Go was associated with improved glycemic control and decreased TDD. For patients previously prescribed basal-bolus MDI therapy, switching to insulin therapy with V-Go resulted in pharmacy cost savings based on wholesale acquisition costs. V-Go offers an efficacious method of insulin delivery that improves outcomes in patients and can reduce costs.

FUNDING

Valeritas, Inc.

Real-world evidence concerning clinical and economic outcomes of switching to insulin glargine 300 units/mL vs other basal insulins in patients with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin

This retrospective cohort study compared real-world clinical and healthcare-resource utilization (HCRU) data in patients with type 2 diabetes using basal insulin (BI) who switched to insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) or another BI. Data from the Predictive Health Intelligence Environment database 12 months before (baseline) and 6 months after (follow-up) the switch date (index date, March 1, 2015 to May 31, 2016) included glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), hypoglycaemia, HCRU and associated costs. Baseline characteristics were balanced using propensity score matching. Change in HbA1c from baseline was similar in both matched cohorts (n = 1819 in each). Hypoglycaemia incidence and adjusted event rate were significantly lower with Gla-300. Patients switching to Gla-300 had a significantly lower incidence of HCRU related to hypoglycaemia. All-cause and diabetes-related hospitalization and emergency-department HCRU were also favourable for Gla-300. Lower HCRU translated to lower costs in patients using Gla-300. In this real-world study, switching to Gla-300 reduced the risk of hypoglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes when compared with those switching to another BI, resulting in less HCRU and potential savings of associated costs.

iGlarLixi: A New Once-Daily Fixed-Ratio Combination of Basal Insulin Glargine and Lixisenatide for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Patients with type 2 diabetes require treatment intensification to maintain glycemic control. Clinician reluctance, patient injection fears, hypoglycemia, weight gain, or other objections may lead to clinical inertia, whereby therapy is not intensified and patients live with uncontrolled hyperglycemia and increased risk for complications. Initiation of injectable therapy with a glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor agonist and/or basal insulin is a recommended option for patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on one or more oral agents.

PURPOSE

This article reviews clinical evidence and provides information on dosing and administration of iGlarLixi, a titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine and the GLP-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide that effectively lowers both fasting and postprandial glucose levels.

FINDINGS

In phase 3 trials, iGlarLixi provided greater A1C reduction than insulin glargine or lixisenatide alone, without increased hypoglycemia risk compared with insulin glargine. iGlarLixi did not lead to weight gain versus insulin glargine and was associated with a lower frequency of gastrointestinal adverse effects than lixisenatide. iGlarLixi was recently approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to improve glycemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin (<60 units daily) or lixisenatide. iGlarLixi is administered by subcutaneous injection once daily, and the dose is titrated based on each patient's insulin needs using a simple titration algorithm.

CONCLUSION

iGlarLixi offers an effective and well-tolerated treatment option for patients with type 2 diabetes requiring additional glycemic control, with comparable or improved safety outcomes than its separate components. Because of its simple regimen and low rate of adverse effects, iGlarLixi may improve adherence and, consequently, therapeutic outcomes.

Insulin therapy for type 2 diabetes - are we there yet? The d-Nav® story

Insulin replacement therapy is mostly used by patients with type 2 diabetes who become insulin deficient and have failed other therapeutic options. They comprise about a quarter of those with diabetes, endures the majority of the complications and consumes the majority of the resources. Adequate insulin replacement therapy can prevent complications and reduce expenses, as long as therapy goals are achieved and maintained. Sadly, these therapy goals are seldom achieved and outcomes have not improved for decades despite advances in pharmacotherapy and technology.

There is a growing recognition that the low success rate of insulin therapy results from intra-individual and inter-individual variations in insulin requirements. Total insulin requirements per day vary considerably between patients and constantly change without achieving a steady state. Thus, the key element in effective insulin therapy is unremitting and frequent dosage adjustments that can overcome those dynamics. In practice, insulin adjustments are done sporadically during outpatient clinic. Due to time constraints, providers are not able to deliver appropriate insulin dosage optimization.

The d-Nav® Insulin Guidance Service has been developed to provide appropriate insulinization in insulin users without increasing the burden on healthcare systems. It relies on dedicated clinicians and a spectrum of technological solutions. Patients are provided with a handheld device called d-Nav® which advises them what dose of insulin to administer during each injection and automatically adjust insulin dosage when needed. The d-Nav care specialists periodically follow-up with users through telephone calls and in-person consultations to bestow user confidence, correct usage errors, triage, and identify uncharacteristic clinical courses.

The following review provide details about the service and its clinical outcomes.

Select medications that unexpectedly lower HbA1c levels

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

A variety of medication classes are available for diabetes; however, treatment options become limited due to adverse effect profiles and cost. Current diabetes guidelines include agents not originally developed for diabetes treatment, bromocriptine and colesevelam.

COMMENT

Other non-diabetes medications demonstrating haemoglobin A1c lowering, including agents for weight loss, depression, anaemia and coronary artery disease, are described in this review article.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

More research looking into the impact of non-diabetes medications on blood glucose may offer additional diabetes treatment strategies.

Switching from biosimilar (Basalin) to originator (Lantus) insulin glargine is effective in Chinese patients with diabetes mellitus: a retrospective chart review

Background: This study investigated the effectiveness and safety of switching from Basalin® to Lantus® in Chinese patients with diabetes mellitus (DM). Methods:  A retrospective chart review conducted using the electronic medical records of patients hospitalized at the Qingdao Endocrine and Diabetes Hospital from 2005 to 2016. All patients were diagnosed with DM and underwent switching of insulin from Basalin to Lantus during hospitalization. Data collected included fasting (FBG), pre- and post-prandial whole blood glucose, insulin dose, reasons for insulin switching and hypoglycemia. Four study time points were defined as: hospital admission, Basalin initiation, insulin switching (date of final dose of Basalin), and hospital discharge. Blood glucose measurements were imputed as the values recorded closest to the dates of these four time points for each patient. Results: Data from 73 patients (70 patients with type 2 diabetes, 2 with type 1, and 1 undisclosed) were analyzed. At admission, mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and FBG were 8.9% (SD=1.75) and 9.98 (3.22) mmol/L, respectively. Between Basalin initiation and insulin switch, mean FBG decreased from 9.68 mmol/L to 8.03 mmol/L (p<0.0001), over a mean 10.8 (SD=6.85) days of Basalin treatment, and reduced further to 7.30 mmol/L at discharge (p=0.0116) following a mean 6.6 (7.36) days of Lantus. The final doses of Basalin and Lantus were similar (0.23 vs. 0.24 IU/kg/day; p=0.2409). Furthermore, reductions in pre- and post-prandial blood glucose were also observed between Basalin initiation, insulin switch and hospital discharge. The incidence of confirmed hypoglycemia was low during Basalin (2 [2.4%]) and Lantus (1 [1.2%]) treatment, with no cases of severe hypoglycemia. Conclusion: In this study population, switching from Basalin to Lantus was associated with further reductions in blood glucose, although the dose of insulin glargine did not increase. Further studies are required to verify these findings and determine the reason for this phenomenon.

Antidiabetic treatment patterns and specialty care utilization among patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease

Background

To evaluate real-world patient characteristics, medication use, and health care utilization patterns in patients with type 2 diabetes with established cardiovascular disease (CVD).

Methods

Cross-sectional analysis of patients with type 2 diabetes seen at Cleveland Clinic from 2005 to 2016, divided into two cohorts: with-CVD and without-CVD. Patient demographics and antidiabetic medications were recorded in December 2016; department encounters included all visits from 1/1/2016 to 12/31/2016. Comorbidity burden was assessed by the diabetes complications severity index (DCSI) score.

Results

Of 95,569 patients with type 2 diabetes, 40,910 (42.8%) were identified as having established CVD. Patients with CVD vs. those without were older (median age 69.1 vs. 58.2 years), predominantly male (53.8% vs. 42.6%), and more likely to have Medicare insurance (69.4% vs. 35.3%). The with-CVD cohort had a higher proportion of patients with a DCSI score ≥ 3 than the without-CVD cohort (65.0% vs. 10.3%). Utilization rates of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium–glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors were low in both with-CVD (4.1 and 2.5%) and without-CVD cohorts (5.4 and 4.1%), respectively. The majority of patient visits (75%) were seen by a primary care provider. During the 1-year observation period, 81.9 and 62.0% of patients with type 2 diabetes and CVD were not seen by endocrinology or cardiology, respectively.

Conclusions

These data indicated underutilization of specialists and antidiabetic medications reported to confer CV benefit in patients with type 2 diabetes and CVD. The impact of recently updated guidelines and cardiovascular outcome trial results on management patterns in such patients remains to be seen.

The effect of change in fasting glucose on the risk of myocardial infarction, stroke, and all-cause mortality: a nationwide cohort study

Background

The effect of change in blood glucose levels on the risk of cardiovascular disease among individuals without diabetes is currently unclear. We aimed to examine the association of change in fasting serum glucose with incident cardiovascular disease and all-cause mortality among representative large population.

Methods

We analyzed the data from retrospective cohort of Korean National Health Insurance Service. In total, 260,487 Korean adults aged over 40 years, without diabetes mellitus and cardiovascular disease at baseline measured change in fasting serum glucose according to the criteria of impaired and diabetic fasting glucose status: normal fasting glucose (NFG, fasting glucose: < 100 mg/dL), impaired fasting glucose (IFG, fasting glucose: 100.0–125.9 mg/dL), and diabetic fasting glucose (DFG, fasting glucose: ≥ 126.0 mg/dL). Compared to the persistently unchanged group (i.e. NFG to NFG or IFG to IFG), Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were performed in the changed group to obtain the hazards ratio (HR) with 95% confidence interval (CI) for the subsequent median 8-year myocardial infarction, stroke, and all-cause mortality.

Results

Compared to individuals with persistent NFG (i.e., NFG to NFG), individuals who shifted from NFG to DFG had an increased risk of stroke (HR [95% CI]: 1.19 [1.02–1.38]) and individuals who shifted from NFG to IFG or DFG had increased risks of all-cause mortality (HR [95% CI]: 1.08 [1.02–1.14] for NFG to IFG and 1.56 [1.39–1.75] for NFG to DFG). Compared to individuals with persistent IFG, individuals who shifted from IFG to DFG had an increased risk of MI and all-cause mortality (HR [95% CI]: 1.65 [1.20–2.27] and 1.16 [1.02–1.33], respectively).

Conclusions

Increasing fasting glucose in non-diabetic population is associated with risks of the MI, stroke, and all-cause mortality, which is more rapid, more severe.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s12933-018-0694-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Initiating Titratable Fixed-Ratio Combinations of Basal Insulin Analogs and Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists: What You Need to Know

IN BRIEF Titratable fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of a basal insulin and a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist are new therapeutic options for people with type 2 diabetes. Two FRCs-insulin degludec/liraglutide and insulin glargine/lixisenatide-have been approved for use in the United States. The two components in these FRCs target different aspects of diabetes pathophysiology, working in a complementary manner to decrease blood glucose while mitigating the side effects associated with each component (hypoglycemia and weight gain with insulin and gastrointestinal side effects with GLP-1 receptor agonists). This article reviews these products and key considerations for their use.

The Efficacy and Safety of the Chinese Herbal Formula, JTTZ, for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes with Obesity and Hyperlipidemia: A Multicenter Randomized, Positive-Controlled, Open-Label Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Studies have shown an increasing number of type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with concomitant obesity and hyperlipidemia syndromes, resulting from relevant metabolic disorders. However, there are few medications and therapies, which can thoroughly address these issues. Therefore, the current study evaluated the efficacy and safety of using JTTZ, a Chinese herbal formula, to treat T2D with obesity and hyperlipidemia.

METHODS

A total of 450 participants with T2D (HbA1c ≥ 7.0%; waist circumference ≥ 90 cm and 80 cm in males and females, resp.; and triglycerides (TG) ≥ 1.7 mmol/L) were randomly assigned, in equal proportions, to two groups in this multicenter randomized, positive-controlled, open-label trial. One group received JTTZ formula, and the other received metformin (MET) for 12 consecutive weeks. The primary efficacy outcomes were changes in HbA1c, TG, weight, and waist circumference. Adverse reactions and hypoglycemia were monitored.

RESULTS

HbA1c decreased by 0.75 ± 1.32% and 0.71 ± 1.2% in the JTTZ and MET groups, respectively, after 12 weeks of treatment. TG levels in the JTTZ and MET groups were reduced by 0.64 ± 2.37 mmol/L and 0.37 ± 2.18 mmol/L, respectively. Weight was decreased by 2.47 ± 2.71 kg in the JTTZ group and by 2.03 ± 2.36 kg in the MET group. JTTZ also appeared to alleviate insulin resistance and increase HOMA-β. In addition, symptoms were significantly relieved in participants in the JTTZ group compared to those in the MET group. One case of hypoglycemia was reported in the MET group. No severe adverse events were reported in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

The JTTZ formula led to safe and significant improvements in the blood glucose, blood lipids, and weight levels; relieved symptoms; and enhanced β cell function for T2D patients with obesity and hyperlipidemia. The JTTZ formula has shown that it could potentially be developed as an alternative medicine for patients with T2D, particularly those who cannot tolerate metformin or other hypoglycemic drugs. This trial was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01471275.

Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Canagliflozin 300 mg Versus Dapagliflozin 10 mg Added to Metformin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in the United States

INTRODUCTION

Agents that inhibit sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2), including canagliflozin and dapagliflozin, are approved in the United States for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). SGLT2 inhibition lowers blood glucose by increasing urinary glucose excretion, which leads to a mild osmotic diuresis and a net loss of calories that are associated with reductions in body weight and blood pressure. This analysis evaluated the cost-effectiveness of canagliflozin 300 mg versus dapagliflozin 10 mg in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin in the United States.

METHODS

A 30-year cost-effectiveness analysis was performed using the validated Economic and Health Outcomes Model of T2DM (ECHO-T2DM) from the perspective of the third-party health care system in the United States. Patient demographics, biomarker values, and treatment effects for the ECHO-T2DM model were sourced primarily from a network meta-analysis (NMA) that included studies of canagliflozin and dapagliflozin in patients with T2DM on background metformin. Costs were derived from sources specific to the United States. Outcomes and costs were discounted at 3%. Sensitivity analyses that varied key model parameters were conducted.

RESULTS

Canagliflozin 300 mg dominated dapagliflozin 10 mg as an add-on to metformin over 30 years, with an estimated cost offset of $13,991 and a quality-adjusted life-year gain of 0.08 versus dapagliflozin 10 mg. Results were driven by the better HbA1c lowering achieved with canagliflozin, which translated to less need for insulin rescue therapy. Findings from sensitivity analyses were consistent with the base case.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that canagliflozin 300 mg is likely to provide better health outcomes at a lower overall cost than dapagliflozin 10 mg in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin from the perspective of the United States health care system.

FUNDING

Janssen Scientific Affairs, LLC and Janssen Global Services, LLC.

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

AIM

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Comparative effectiveness of metformin monotherapy in extended release and immediate release formulations for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in treatment-naïve Chinese patients: Analysis of results from the CONSENT trial

AIMS

Metformin treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) can be limited by gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs), resulting in treatment discontinuation. We investigated whether once-daily metformin extended release (XR) is superior in terms of GI tolerability, with non-inferior efficacy, compared with thrice-daily metformin immediate release (IR) in treatment-naïve Chinese patients with T2DM.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective, open-label, randomized, multicentre, phase IV interventional study enrolled Chinese T2DM patients to receive either metformin XR or metformin IR with a 2-week screening period, a 16-week treatment period and a 2-week follow-up period without treatment. Co-primary endpoints were a non-inferiority assessment of metformin XR vs metformin IR in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) least squares mean (LSM) change from baseline to week 16 and the superiority of GI tolerability for metformin XR vs metformin IR.

RESULTS

Overall, 532 patients were randomized to metformin IR (n = 267) or metformin XR (n = 265). The HbA1c LSM change was -1.61% and -1.58% in each group, respectively (LSM difference, 0.03; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.10, 0.17). Incidences of drug-related AEs were 26.5% (n = 66) in the metformin IR-only group and 32.2% (n = 85) in the metformin XR-only group, and GI AEs were 23.8% and 22.3% in each group, respectively (difference, -1.52; 95% CI, -8.60, 5.56). The treatment difference met the predefined non-inferiority upper CI margin of 0.4% in HbA1c.

CONCLUSIONS

Metformin XR was non-inferior to metformin IR for the LSM change in HbA1c from baseline to week 16 and not superior to metformin IR for overall GI AE incidence during treatment of Chinese T2DM patients.

EADSG Guidelines: Insulin Therapy in Diabetes

A diagnosis of diabetes or hyperglycemia should be confirmed prior to ordering, dispensing, or administering insulin (A). Insulin is the primary treatment in all patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) (A). Typically, patients with T1DM will require initiation with multiple daily injections at the time of diagnosis. This is usually short-acting insulin or rapid-acting insulin analogue given 0 to 15 min before meals together with one or more daily separate injections of intermediate or long-acting insulin. Two or three premixed insulin injections per day may be used (A). The target glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) for all children with T1DM, including preschool children, is recommended to be < 7.5% (< 58 mmol/mol). The target is chosen aiming at minimizing hyperglycemia, severe hypoglycemia, hypoglycemic unawareness, and reducing the likelihood of development of long-term complications (B). For patients prone to glycemic variability, glycemic control is best evaluated by a combination of results with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) (B). Indications for exogenous insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) include acute illness or surgery, pregnancy, glucose toxicity, contraindications to or failure to achieve goals with oral antidiabetic medications, and a need for flexible therapy (B). In T2DM patients, with regards to achieving glycemic goals, insulin is considered alone or in combination with oral agents when HbA1c is ≥ 7.5% (≥ 58 mmol/mol); and is essential for treatment in those with HbA1c ≥ 10% (≥ 86 mmol/mol), when diet, physical activity, and other antihyperglycemic agents have been optimally used (B). The preferred method of insulin initiation in T2DM is to begin by adding a long-acting (basal) insulin or once-daily premixed/co-formulation insulin or twice-daily premixed insulin, alone or in combination with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) or in combination with other oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) (B). If the desired glucose targets are not met, rapid-acting or short-acting (bolus or prandial) insulin can be added at mealtime to control the expected postprandial raise in glucose. An insulin regimen should be adopted and individualized but should, to the extent possible, closely resemble a natural physiologic state and avoid, to the extent possible, wide fluctuating glucose levels (C). Blood glucose monitoring is an integral part of effective insulin therapy and should not be omitted in the patient's care plan. Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) values should be used to titrate basal insulin, whereas both FPG and postprandial glucose (PPG) values should be used to titrate mealtime insulin (B). Metformin combined with insulin is associated with decreased weight gain, lower insulin dose, and less hypoglycemia when compared with insulin alone (C). Oral medications should not be abruptly discontinued when starting insulin therapy because of the risk of rebound hyperglycemia (D). Analogue insulin is as effective as human insulin but is associated with less postprandial hyperglycemia and delayed hypoglycemia (B). The shortest needles (currently the 4-mm pen and 6-mm syringe needles) are safe, effective, and less painful and should be the first-line choice in all patient categories; intramuscular (IM) injections should be avoided, especially with long-acting insulins, because severe hypoglycemia may result; lipohypertrophy is a frequent complication of therapy that distorts insulin absorption, and therefore, injections and infusions should not be given into these lesions and correct site rotation will help prevent them (A). Many patients in East Africa reuse syringes for various reasons, including financial. This is not recommended by the manufacturer and there is an association between needle reuse and lipohypertrophy. However, patients who reuse needles should not be subjected to alarming claims of excessive morbidity from this practice (A). Health care authorities and planners should be alerted to the risks associated with syringe or pen needles 6 mm or longer in children (A).

Insulin/Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Combination Therapy for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: Are Two Agents Better Than One?

IN BRIEF Given the progressive nature of type 2 diabetes, treatment intensification is usually necessary to maintain glycemic control. However, for a variety of reasons, treatment is often not intensified in a timely manner. The combined use of basal insulin and a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist is recognized to provide a complementary approach to the treatment of type 2 diabetes. This review evaluates the efficacy and safety of two co-formulation products, insulin degludec/liraglutide and insulin glargine/lixisenatide, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on either component agent alone. We consider the benefits and limitations of these medications based on data from randomized clinical trials and discuss how they may address barriers to treatment intensification.

Practical strategies for improving outcomes in T2DM: The potential role of pioglitazone and DPP4 inhibitors

T2DM is a complex disease underlined by multiple pathogenic defects responsible for the development and progression of hyperglycaemia. Each of these factors can now be tackled in a more targeted manner thanks to glucose-lowering drugs that have been made available in the past 2 to 3 decades. Recognition of the multiplicity of the mechanisms underlying hyperglycaemia calls for treatments that address more than 1 of these mechanisms, with more emphasis placed on the earlier use of combination therapies. Although chronic hyperglycaemia contributes to and amplifies cardiovascular risk, several trials have failed to show a marked effect from intensive glycaemic control. During the past 10 years, the effect of specific glucose-lowering agents on cardiovascular risk has been explored with dedicated trials. Overall, the cardiovascular safety of the new glucose-lowering agents has been proven with some of the trials summarized in this review, showing significant reduction of cardiovascular risk. Against this background, pioglitazone, in addition to exerting a sustained glucose-lowering effect, also has ancillary metabolic actions of potential interest in addressing the cardiovascular risk of T2DM, such as preservation of beta-cell mass and function. As such, it seems a logical agent to combine with other oral anti-hyperglycaemic agents, including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i). DPP4i, which may also have a potential to preserve beta-cell function, is available as a fixed-dose combination with pioglitazone, and could, potentially, attenuate some of the side effects of pioglitazone, particularly if a lower dose of the thiazolidinedione is used. This review critically discusses the potential for early combination of pioglitazone and DPP4i.

Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists and Cardiovascular Events: Class Effects versus Individual Patterns

Several new glucose-lowering medications have been approved, such as dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs), and sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Among GLP-1RAs, lixisenatide, a short-acting drug, did not show cardiovascular (CV) benefits in patients with Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D) and acute coronary syndrome. Extended-release exenatide was also not significantly better for CV outcomes. By contrast, once daily liraglutide and once weekly semaglutide, both long-acting GLP-1RAs, decreased the incidence of major adverse CV events and mortality. This Review attempts to explain favorable CV results with some, but not all, GLP-1RAs, to aid in their differential prescription with the aim of further reducing the adverse CV burden of T2D.

Good glycaemic control is associated with a better prognosis in breast cancer patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Although diabetes mellitus (DM) is one of the risk factors associated with increased breast cancer (BC) mortality, the effects of glycaemic control on the prognosis of BC have not been thoroughly evaluated. This retrospective study aimed to evaluate the relationship between glycaemic control and BC prognosis and to determine an optimal target of glycaemic control for BC patients with diabetes. We included 2812 stage 0-3 BC women, of whom 145 were diabetic and were 2667 non-diabetic. In those with diabetes, a mean haemoglobin A1C (HbA1C) < 7% (n = 77) was defined as well-controlled diabetes, while a mean HbA1C > 9% (n = 16) was defined as poorly controlled diabetes. All of the BC populations were followed from the date on which BC was diagnosed until 31 December 2015. Cox regression analysis was performed to estimate the adjusted hazards for all-cause mortality and BC-specific mortality. After controlling for the baseline and BC-related confounders, the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) for all-cause mortality and the HR for BC-specific mortality were 3.65 (95% confidence interval [95% CI] 1.13-11.82) and 8.37 (95% CI 1.90-36.91), respectively, for poorly controlled diabetic women and non-DM women. However, for the diabetic women with good glycaemic control, the HRs of all-cause mortality and BC-specific mortality were not significantly different (HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.42-1.01; HR 0.77, 95% CI 0.18-3.32, respectively) from those for both mortalities in non-DM patients. For moderate controlled diabetic women, the HRs for all-cause mortality and BC-specific mortality were 1.95 (95% CI 0.89-4.27) and 3.55 (95% CI 1.369-9.30), respectively. This pilot and retrospective cohort study reveals a relationship between glycaemic control and BC prognosis in diabetic women. In addition, well-controlled HbA1C, with maintained mean HbA1C values under 7%, may be associated with a better progression outcome of BC.

Clinical implications of current cardiovascular outcome trials with sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors

The final goal in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) is reduction in cardiovascular (CV) complications and total mortality. Various factors including hyperglycemia contribute to these complications and mortality directly and indirectly. In recent years, large-scale CV outcome trials with new antidiabetic medications, such as dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP1) receptor agonists, and sodium glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, have been completed. Most clinical trials with DPP4 inhibitors have shown no inferiority compared with placebo treatments in terms of CV safety. However, they did not show benefits in terms of adverse CV events or mortality. CV outcome trials with GLP1 receptor agonists showed inconsistent results: lixisenatide did not show benefits in preventing major adverse CV events. In contrast, liraglutide and semaglutide (longer acting GLP1 receptor agonists) proved to be superior in terms of alleviating CV morbidity and mortality. Two large-scale CV outcome trials with SGLT2 inhibitors showed significant results: empagliflozin proved to be superior in preventing CV and all-cause mortality, and canagliflozin proved to be superior in preventing CV mortality but not all-cause mortality. So far, controlling cardiometabolic risk factors such as hemodynamic changes and weight loss by SGLT2 inhibitors are suggested to be the main mechanisms for these results. However, the risk-benefit profile for these new drugs will need further elucidation, and more studies are warranted to reveal the possible mechanisms. It will also be important to confirm these results from other ongoing trials with SGLT2 inhibitors.

Comparison of non-insulin antidiabetic agents as an add-on drug to insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes: a network meta-analysis

We aimed to evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA), sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i), or thiazolidinedione (TZD) as an adjunctive treatment in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on insulin therapy. We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov through April 2016. Bayesian network meta-analyses were performed with covariate adjustment. The primary outcome was the change in glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline. Fifty randomized controlled trials covering 15,494 patients were included. GLP-1RA showed the greatest HbA1c-lowering effect compared to the control (-0.84%; 95% credible interval, -1.00% to -0.69%), followed by TZD (-0.73%; -0.93 to -0.52%), SGLT2i (-0.66%; -0.84% to -0.48%), and DPP4i (-0.54%; -0.68% to -0.39%). SGLT2i showed the greatest fasting plasma glucose reduction. GLP-1RA and SGLT2i showed greater body weight reduction, whereas TZD increased body weight. TZD was ranked the highest in terms of insulin dose reduction. The risk of hypoglycemia was increased with TZD or GLP-1RA. The study provides the best available evidence on the comparative efficacy and safety of non-insulin anti-diabetic agents on top of pre-existing insulin therapy for inadequately controlled T2DM patients.

The safety of gliptins : updated data in 2018

INTRODUCTION

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4is) are generally considered as glucose-lowering agents with a safe profile in type 2 diabetes.

AREAS COVERED

An updated review of recent safety data from randomised controlled trials, observational studies, meta-analyses, pharmacovigilance reports regarding alogliptin, linagliptin, saxagliptin, sitagliptin, and vildagliptin, with a special focus on risks of hypoglycemia, pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer, major cardiovascular events, hospitalisation for heart failure and other new safety issues, such as bone fractures and arthralgia. The safety of DPP-4i use in special populations, elderly patients, patients with renal impairment, liver disease or heart failure, will also be discussed.

EXPERT OPINION

The good tolerance/safety profile of DPP-4is has been largely confirmed, including in more fragile populations, with no gastrointestinal adverse effects and a minimal risk of hypoglycemia. DPP-4is appear to be associated with a small increased incidence of acute pancreatitis in placebo-controlled trials, although most observational studies are reassuring. Most recent studies with DPP-4is do not confirm the increased risk of hospitalisation for heart failure reported with saxagliptin in SAVOR-TIMI 53, but further post-marketing surveillance is still recommended. New adverse events have been reported such as arthralgia, yet a causal relationship remains unclear.

Calculating individualized glycaemic targets using an algorithm based on expert worldwide diabetologists: Implications in real-life clinical practice

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to assess the clinical implications of calculating an individualized HbA_1c target using a recently published algorithm in a real-life clinical setting.

METHODS

General practitioners (GPs) from the Spanish Society of Family Medicine Diabetes Expert Group were invited to participate in the study. Each GP selected a random sample of patients with diabetes from his or her practice and submitted their demographic and clinical data for analysis. Individualized glycaemic targets were calculated according to the algorithm. Predictors of good glycaemic control were studied. The rate of patients attaining their individualized glycaemic target or the uniform target of HbA_1c  < 7.0% was calculated.

RESULTS

Forty GPs included 408 patients in the study. Of the 8 parameters included in the algorithm, "comorbidities," "risk of hypoglycaemia from treatment," and "diabetes duration" had the greatest impact on determining the individualized glycaemic target. Number of glucose-lowering agents and adherence were independently associated with glycaemic control. Overall, 60.5% of patients had good glycaemic control per individualized target, and 56.1% were well controlled per the uniform target of HbA_1c  < 7.0% (P = .20). However, 12.8% (23 of 246) of the patients with HbA_1c  ≥ 7.0% were adequately controlled per individualized target, and 2.6% (6 of 162) of the patients with HbA_1c  < 7.0% were uncontrolled since their individualized target was lower.

CONCLUSIONS

In a real-life clinical setting, applying individualized targets did not change the overall rate of patients with good glycaemic control yet led to reclassification of 7.1% (29 of 408) of the patients. More studies are needed to validate these results in different populations.