Glycemic Control Among Patients Newly Prescribed IDegLira Across Prior Therapy Group in US Real-World Practice

The impact of ideglira in treatment simplification in older adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus already on insulin therapy: The stop study

AIM

The STOP study is a proof-of-concept, aimed at evaluating the effectiveness and safety of IdegLira in deintensifying diabetes therapy in elderly insulin-treated persons with T2DM.

METHODS

The study was a real world, single center retrospective observation.

RESULTS

96 persons were enrolled (46F, age 77 ± 7 yrs, HbA1C 7.5 ± 1.0, diabetes duration 21 ± 10 yrs; 75 % in basal/bolus insulin therapy). After 6 months (T6), fasting plasma glucose significantly decreased as compared to T0, as did HbA1C. The switch to IdegLira was associated with significantly lower rates of level 1 (L1) hypoglycemia at T3 (IR 0.24, 95 % CI 0.11-0.58, p < 0.001) and T6 (IR 0.08, 95 % CI 0.02-0.34, p < 0.001) as compared to T0. Level 2 (L2) hypoglycemia rates significantly decreased at T3 (IR 0.04, 95 % CI 0.01-0.32, p < 0.001) as compared to T0. The proportion of persons (incidence) with L1 hypoglycemia decreased from 33.7 % at T0 to 17.4 % at T3 (p = 0.004) and to 5.8 % at T6 (p < 0.001). Incidence of L2 hypoglycemia decreased from 22.1 % at T0 to 1.16 % at T3 (p < 0.001). No patients had L2 hypoglycemia at T6. Rapid acting insulin was interrupted in 85 % of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

IdegLira represents a viable option in deintensifying insulin therapy in an elderly population.

Effectiveness, Simplification and Persistence of IDegLira in Poorly Controlled People with Type 2 Diabetes: A 4-Year Follow-Up Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Efficacy and safety of the fixed ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) has been largely documented. However, long-term data are limited. This study aimed at describing persistence in therapy and the effectiveness at 48 months of IDegLira.

METHODS

We conducted an observational study based on retrospective chart review. All patients treated with IDegLira during 2018-2022 were included. Data on treatment approaches and clinical outcomes were collected at the first prescription of IDegLira (T0) and after 6, 12, 24, 36, and 48 months.

RESULTS

Overall, 156 patients (mean age 68 years, 64.1% men) started IDegLira, of whom 88 (56.4%) were previously treated with basal-oral therapy (BOT) and 68 (43.6%) with basal-bolus schemes (BB). Before starting IDegLira, 23.8% were treated with ≥ 2 oral antihyperglycemic agents in association with insulin; at T0, the proportion decreased to 3.2%. Short-acting insulin was discontinued after the first week. After 48 months, levels of HbA1c were significantly reduced by 1.34% in the BOT group and 1.07% in the BB group (p < 0.0001 in both groups). In the BOT group, FBG levels decreased by about 50 mg/dl and body weight was unchanged. In the BB group, FBG levels decreased by about 40 mg/dl and body weight was significantly reduced by an average of 7.7 kg. Five patients (3.2%) interrupted therapy with IDegLira during 48 months, and no severe hypoglycemia occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study emphasizes the important role of IDegLira in maintaining a good metabolic control while minimizing the risk of major hypoglycemia and weight gain in the long term. The substantial simplification of treatment schemes can increase adherence.

IDegLira for the real-world treatment of type 2 diabetes in Italy. Final results from the REX observational study

AIM

The study was designed to generate real-world evidence on IDegLira in the Italian clinical practice in two groups of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), switching to IDegLira either from a basal only (basal group) or basal-bolus insulin regimen (BB group).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a non-interventional, multicentre, single-cohort, prospective study assessing the long-term glycaemic control in patients with T2D, who switched to IDegLira from a basal insulin ± glucose-lowering medication regimen with or without a bolus insulin component for approximately 18 months, conducted in 28 Italian diabetes centres. The primary endpoint was the change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels from baseline to 6 months after IDegLira initiation.

RESULTS

The study included 358 patients with a mean age 67.2 years and diabetes duration of 15.7 years. HbA1c significantly decreased from IDegLira start to all study time points in the overall population (basal group -1.19%; BB group -0.60% at the end of observation). Patients achieving HbA1c <7% levels increased from 12.9% (n = 43) to 40.3% (n = 110) at 18 months. Fasting blood glucose and body weight also significantly decreased in both groups, although more in the BB group. Overall, 14.3% of completed patients had an intensification of treatment (mainly in the basal group) and 48.6% had a simplification of treatment (mainly in the BB group).

CONCLUSIONS

Switching to IDegLira in a real-world clinical setting is a valid therapeutic option for patients with T2D with inadequate glycaemic control on basal or BB insulin regimen and/or need to simplify their insulin therapy, with specific reasons and therapeutic goals according to different T2D management trajectories.

Effectiveness of insulin degludec/liraglutide versus insulin degludec/insulin aspart in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes

Aims

To evaluate and compare the effectiveness of once-daily insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) to that of once-daily insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) after switching from basal insulin therapy at 6 months by assessing changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body weight, and insulin doses in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Materials and methods

A total of 91 patients with T2D with HbA1c levels exceeding 7.0% were included in this study. Adjusted least square mean changes in HbA1c, body weight, and total insulin doses were compared between the IDegLira group and IDegAsp group. Subgroup analyses were performed, stratified by median values of HbA1c (< 8.5 and ≥ 8.5%), obesity (body mass index < 25 and ≥ 25 kg/m2), and basal insulin doses (< 14 and ≥ 14 units) at baseline to assess treatment interaction by subgroup.

Results

The IDegLira group showed a greater reduction in HbA1c levels than the IDegAsp group (- 0.17 vs - 0.79%, p = 0.003) with comparable body weight changes. The analyses of adjusted mean changes of total insulin doses showed that the IDegAsp group had a larger increase than the IDegLira group (3.64 vs 1.30 unis, p = 0.016). The effect of IDegLira on HbA1c levels was superior to that of IDegAsp in patients with high HbA1c. There were no inter-group differences in the rate of hypoglycemic episodes.

Conclusions

Once-daily IDegLira had greater effects on HbA1c and a lesser increase in insulin doses than IDegAsp when patients are switched from basal insulin therapy. Moreover, the effect on HbA1c was enhanced in patients with high HbA1c levels at baseline.

[Fixed ratio combinations GLP-1RA and basal insulin: literature review]

The progressive nature of type 2 diabetes mellitus leads to the need for insulin therapy in a significant proportion of patients. Very often start of insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with weight gain and a significant increase of hypoglycemia's risk. However, innovative options, such as fixed ratio combinations of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and basal insulin, minimize weight gain and hypoglycemia risks and allow a greater proportion of patients to achieve individual glycemic control goals without compromising safety parameters. This review includes a description of the randomized clinical trials, as well as the results of real clinical practice of the use of two currently existing fixed ration combinations of GLP-1RA and basal insulin - iDegLira and iGlarLixi.

Fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists as a promising strategy for treating diabetes

The maintenance of appropriate glycemic control is important for the prevention of diabetic complications in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Numerous oral antidiabetic drugs are now clinically available, but in particular, the introduction of injection regimens using insulin and/or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA)s represents promising step-up options for oral antidiabetic drug treatment. The recently licensed fixed-ratio combination (FRC) products, which comprise basal insulin and a GLP-1RA, have potent anti-hyperglycemic effects and reduce the undesirable side-effects of each component, such as body weight gain, hypoglycemia, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Two FRCs-insulin degludec/Liraglutide and insulin glargine/Lixisenatide-are now clinically available and, to date, several phase II/III trials have been conducted in particular groups of subjects with T2D. However, their utility in real-world clinical settings is of interest for most clinicians. Recently reported real-world clinical trials of these two FRCs in various situations have demonstrated their efficacy regarding glycemic control and the quality of life of people with T2D. Their long-term safety and efficacy require confirmation, but a treatment strategy that includes an FRC may be compatible with the concept of “well-balanced” therapy in certain groups of patients with T2D who have inadequate glycemic control.

Switching to a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is associated with improved glycaemic control in a real-world population with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United Arab Emirates: Results from the multicentre, prospective INTENSIFY study

AIM

Investigate the effectiveness of IDegLira, a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec/liraglutide, in a real-world setting in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the United Arab Emirates.

METHODS

This non-interventional study enrolled adults switching to IDegLira from basal insulin (BI) or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) with/without concomitant oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). Primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline, assessed using a mixed model for repeated measurements.

RESULTS

Among 263 patients (BI ± OADs, n = 206; GLP-1 RA ± OADs, n = 57), mean baseline HbA1c was 9.29 % (78 mmol/mol). After 26 weeks, HbA1c was significantly reduced (BI ± OADs, -0.83 % [-9.0 mmol/mol] and GLP-1 RA ± OADs, -1.24 % [-13.5 mmol/mol]; both p < 0.0001). Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) was significantly reduced (-39.48 mg/dL [BI ± OADs] and -82.49 mg/dL [GLP-1 RA ± OADs]; both p < 0.0001). Before treatment initiation, 3/263 patients experienced ≥ 1 severe hypoglycaemic episode and 7/263 patients experienced ≥ 1 non-severe hypoglycaemic episode compared with 1/263 patients who had ≥ 1 severe and 1/263 who had ≥ 1 non-severe episode at end of study. Body weight decreased significantly among patients switching from BI ± OADs (-1.05 kg [p < 0.0001]). Treatment was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

IDegLira significantly reduced HbA1c and FPG in this real-world setting, along with less frequent episodes of hypoglycaemia. Switching to IDegLira offers effective treatment intensification for type 2 diabetes patients with inadequate glycaemic control.

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

AIM

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

MATERIALS AND METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

Initiation of the Fixed Combination IDegLira in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes on Prior Injectable Therapy: Insights from the EASY French Real-World Study

INTRODUCTION

Combining basal insulin (BI) with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) is recognized as a relevant option to optimize glucose control in type 2 diabetes (T2D). The EASY real-world study aimed to evaluate the modalities of initiation and the effectiveness of the insulin Degludec plus Liraglutide (IDegLira) fixed-ratio combination in the French health care system.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis included all patients with T2D and prior injectable therapy (GLP1-RA and/or insulin) who started treatment with IDegLira from September 2016 to December 2017 in 11 French diabetes centers. Baseline characteristics, reasons for IDegLira initiation, and modes of implementation were collected from the medical records. Changes in HbA_1c and body weight were determined in patients with available follow-up data (nearest 6-month visit).

RESULTS

IDegLira was initiated in 629 patients previously treated with GLP-1RA alone (11.6%), insulin alone (31.5% including 16.5% with BI and 14.9% with multiple daily injections [MDI]) or a free combination of GLP-1RA and insulin (56.9% including 44.8% with BI and 12.1% with MDI), associated or not with oral agents. IDegLira starting dose (mean of 29 ± 11 dose steps) most often exceeded the recommended dose, and was significantly correlated with prior BI but not GLP-1RA dosage. At initiation, mean age, body mass index (BMI) and HbA_1c were 60.1 ± 10.2 years, 33.4 ± 6.2 kg/m² and 8.8 ± 1.7%, respectively. In 461 patients with available follow-up (median 178 days), HbA_1c decreased in all subgroups submitted to treatment intensification (- 1.7 ± 1.8% [p < 0.0001], - 1.2 ± 1.8% [p < 0.001] and - 0.8 ± 1.8% [p = 0.0026] in patients with prior GLP-1RA, BI or MDI therapy, respectively) but also in those switching from BI and GLP-1RA free combination (- 0.2 ± 0.9%, p = 0.0419). Significant body weight gain occurred in patients previously treated with GLP-1RA alone (+ 1.5 ± 5.8 kg, p = 0.0572) or combined to BI (+ 1.0 ± 3.1 kg, p < 0.0001) while those on BI (- 1.4 ± 4.6 kg, p = 0.0139) or MDI (- 1.4 ± 5.0 kg, p = 0.0484) experienced weight loss.

CONCLUSIONS

While providing new information on the use of IDegLira in the French healthcare system, these data confirm the effectiveness of this fixed-ratio combination in the management of T2D.

Transitioning from basal-bolus or premix insulin therapy to a combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in people with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

Two fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) are available for once-daily use in adults with type 2 diabetes. We aimed to review the clinical evidence for the efficacy and safety of changing treatment from a basal-bolus insulin (BBI) regimen or a premix insulin to these combination treatments (fixed-ratio or loose) and provide expert opinion on the practicalities of making such a change.

METHODS

Relevant clinical and trial evidence and general review articles were identified through a literature review of ProQuest (comprising BIOSIS Previews®, Current Contents® Search, Embase® and MEDLINE®) for articles published between 2009 and 2021.

RESULTS

We identified nine articles reporting the results of FRCs, and seven articles reporting results of loose combinations of basal insulin and GLP-1RAs, in people who transitioned treatment from BBI or premix regimens. In most trials, combination treatment led to improved or equivalent glycaemic control, and a reduction in body weight or BMI, versus the original regimens. Some trials reported a reduction in total insulin dose. A few trials reported reduced or unchanged hypoglycaemia rates, or increased patient satisfaction, with combination therapy where these endpoints were examined. We provide guidance on transitioning of treatment and the patient types most likely to benefit.

CONCLUSIONS

In people not achieving glycaemic control with BBI or premix insulin regimens, an FRC or loose combination of basal insulin and GLP-1RA may improve control, decrease the risk of body weight gain or hypoglycaemia and reduce the complexity of treatment.

IDegLira for the Real-World Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes in Italy: Protocol and Interim Results from the REX Observational Study

INTRODUCTION

IDegLira was shown to maintain glycemic control while reducing risk of hypoglycemia and body weight gain. The REX study was designed to generate real-world evidence on the use of IDegLira in Italian clinical practice in two different subgroups of patients, those switching to IDegLira from a basal insulin-supported oral therapy (BOT group) and those from a basal plus bolus insulin regimen (BB group).

METHODS

Adult patients with T2D diagnosed for at least 12 months and having started IDegLira 2-3 months prior to enrolment, coming from a BOT or BB regimen, were enrolled in this multicenter observational prospective cohort study conducted in 28 Italian centers. This paper presents the methodological framework of the REX study and provides the interim analysis results describing the patients' baseline characteristics and the clinical reasons for IDegLira treatment initiation.

RESULTS

Of the 360 patients enrolled in the REX study, 331 were considered eligible for this interim analysis, 76.4% in the BOT and 23.6% in the BB group. Mean (SD) HbA1c was 8.5% (1.4) in the BOT and 8.2% (1.7) in the BB group. The most common T2D complications were diabetic macroangiopathy and diabetic nephropathy in both groups. The median (interquartile range) insulin daily dose before IDegLira was 15.0 (10.0-20.0) units in the BOT group and 42 (30.0-52.0) in the BB group. Oral antidiabetics were taken by 98% and 51.3% of patients, respectively. The main reason for switching to IDegLira was the inadequate glycemic control in the BOT group (86% of patients), and the intent to simplify the treatment in the BB group (66.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

IdegLira is initiated after BOT in inadequately controlled patients to improve glycemic control, whereas in BB patients it is used to simplify the therapeutic regimen. Final results of the REX study will shed light on patients' outcomes after IdegLira treatment under routine clinical care.

Short-Term Effectiveness and Reduction in Insulin Requirements in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Treated With IdegLira in a Real-World Setting

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic, highly prevalent disease with a significant impact on health. Appropriate treatment requires effective and timely escalation to achieve metabolic control. To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of IDegLira on adults with T2DM previously treated with oral antidiabetics and/or insulin in a real-life setting.

METHODS

An observational study in a real-world setting was conducted. Patients were selected from the outpatient clinic of two centers dedicated to specialized diabetes care. Main outcomes were HbA1c, body weight, insulin dose changes, hypoglycemia, and other adverse events.

RESULTS

67 T2DM patients treated with IDegLira were monitored between 3 and 7 months. At the end of foll ow-up, the median change in HbA1c was -1.05% (CI95% -1.45, -0.65), and a decrease in insulin requirement was also observed (mean difference -10 TDD units (CI95% - 17 to -2.5). No treatment discontinuation was reported, hypoglycemia events were reported in 3 patients at the end of follow-up versus 8 patients at baseline.

CONCLUSIONS

This real-life study shows the effectiveness in glycemic control of IDegLira use in T2DM patients who do not achieve goals with other therapies, with an adequate safety profile. The findings need to be confirmed with evaluation of therapeutic results in larger cohorts.

An update on the safety of insulin-GLP-1 receptor agonist combinations in type 2 diabetes mellitus

INTRODUCTION

Recent development of novel antidiabetic drugs with proven cardiovascular (CV) and renal benefit and positive effect on body weight enable to take a more complex approach toward the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Fixed-ratio combinations of insulin-GLP-1 receptor agonist (FRC) utilize complementary mechanisms of action of their individual components and address multiple pathologies linked with T2DM at the same time.

AREAS COVERED

There are currently three FRCs on the market: iGlarLixi (glargine and lixisenatide in 2 different formulations) and IDegLira (degludec and liraglutide). We provide an up-to-date review on the rationale for the use of FRCs and their current position in the management of T2DM. We discuss the available evidence from randomized controlled trials, post hoc analyses, indirect comparative studies and real-world data on their effect on glycemic control, risk of hypoglycemia, body weight, CV safety, and their safety profile.

EXPERT OPINION

FRCs represent an efficacious option for treatment intensification from basal insulin or even the first insulin-based therapy in T2DM. Their excellent glucose-lowering efficacy is complemented with lower risk of hypoglycemia in comparison to basal insulin, neutral effect on body weight and the lower risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects in comparison to GLP-1 receptor agonists.