Durability of insulin degludec plus liraglutide versus insulin glargine U100 as initial injectable therapy in type 2 diabetes (DUAL VIII): a multicentre, open-label, phase 3b, randomised controlled trial

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.

Higher Derived Time in Range With IDegLira Versus Insulin Glargine U100 in People With Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Derived time in range (dTIR), calculated from self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG-dTIR) profiles, has demonstrated correlation with risk of cardiovascular and microvascular complications. This post hoc analysis of the DUAL V and DUAL VIII trials aimed to compare dTIR with an insulin degludec/liraglutide fixed-ratio combination (IDegLira) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Nine-point SMBG profiles were taken more than 24 hours at baseline and end of trial (EOT: 26 weeks [DUAL V] and 104 weeks [DUAL VIII]) and used to derive the percentage of readings within target range (70-180 mg/dL). Estimated treatment differences (ETDs, IDegLira-glargine U100) were analyzed using analysis of covariance, with treatment as fixed effects and baseline response as a covariate.

RESULTS

ETDs for change from baseline to EOT in dTIR were significantly greater with IDegLira versus glargine U100 in DUAL V (4.18%, P = .027) and DUAL VIII (5.17%, P = .001). The proportions of people achieving ≥70% dTIR at EOT with IDegLira and glargine U100, respectively, were 62% and 60% in DUAL V (P = .7541), and 50% and 26% in DUAL VIII (P < .0001). The proportion achieving a ≥5% increase in dTIR from baseline to EOT with IDegLira and glargine U100 was 63% in both groups in DUAL V (P = .9043), and 44% and 25%, respectively, in DUAL VIII (P < .0001).

CONCLUSIONS

IDegLira was associated with significantly greater increases in dTIR versus basal insulin alone in people with T2D.

TRIAL ID(S)

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01952145 (DUAL V); ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02501161 (DUAL VIII).

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.

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

OBJECTIVES

IDegLira is a novel fixed-ratio soluble combination of insulin degludec and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) liraglutide approved for type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients. Individual trials have assessed the clinical profile of IDegLira vs different comparators. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IDegLira for T2D.

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception to August 15, 2023. The primary outcomes included change from baseline in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and body weight. Risk ratios (RR), mean differences (MD), and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated to evaluate the outcomes.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis identified 1044 citations, and included 13 eligible trials, enroling 7773 patients. Compared with the control groups, IDegLira was optimal in change in HbA1c, percentage of patients achieving HbA1c < 7%, percentage of patients achieving HbA1c < 6.5%, HbA1c < 7.0% without weight gain and without severe or blood glucose (BG)-confirmed hypoglycaemia episodes, HbA1c < 6.5% without weight gain and without severe or BG-confirmed hypoglycaemia episodes, change in fasting plasma glucose, change in self-measured plasma glucose, change in systolic pressure, and total daily insulin dose. No difference was found between the IDegLira and control groups in terms of change in body weight, change in diastolic pressure, severe or BG-confirmed symptomatic hypoglycaemia, nocturnal severe or BG-confirmed symptomatic hypoglycaemia, adverse events or serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with T2D, IDegLira improved glycaemic control whilst balancing out risk for hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal side effects.

[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.

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2024

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, an interprofessional expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Simplification of Complex Insulin Regimens with IdegLira in People with Type 2 Diabetes: Literature Review and Clinical Recommendations

INTRODUCTION

This study developed a simple algorithm based on clinical results described in medical literature and which allows one to simplify complex insulin regimes with IdegLira to avoid adverse events related to the complexity of some insulin treatments.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of the literature that allowed us to identify studies that evaluated the clinical result of simplifying complex insulin regimes. The authors reviewed the common factors these simpler regimes had, including the type of patients who used them.

RESULTS

We found nine clinical studies published between 2017 and 2022, eight performed in Europe and one in Latin America. The monitoring time of the studies ranged between 3 and 18 months. The size of the study populations was between 61 and 611 patients (the latter was in five countries). In all studies, HbA1c decreased by 0.6-1.7% and the weight decreased by 0.1-3.11 kg.

CONCLUSIONS

On the basis of the findings of these studies, we made some recommendations for clinical practice to simplify treatment. The results of these studies support an algorithm that simplifies the treatment of complex insulin regimens.

Evaluating the long-term cost-effectiveness of fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus other treatment regimens in the chinese type 2 diabetes patients

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

To assess the cost-effectiveness of utilizing IDegLira in comparison to other treatment regimens ( liraglutide and degludec) in managing type 2 diabetes, taking into account the Chinese healthcare system's perspective.

METHODS

The clinical data were obtained from the randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the DUAL I and DUAL II evidence studies that took place in China. To estimate the lifetime quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and direct medical costs of patients receiving different treatment strategies from a long-term perspective, the IQVIA CORE Diabetes Model version 9.0 (IQVIA, Basel, Switzerland) was utilized. The costs were evaluated from the perspective of the China National Health System. Future costs and clinical benefits were discounted annually at 5%, and sensitivity analyses were conducted.

RESULTS

IDegLira was projected to reduce the incidence of diabetes-related complications and improve quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE) versus liraglutide and degludec. A survival benefit was observed with IDegLira over Liraglutide (0.073 years). Lifetime costs were lower by Chinese yuan (CNY) 27,945 on IDegLira than on Liraglutide therapy. A similar survival benefit was observed with IDegLira over degludec (0.068 years). Lifetime costs were lower by CNY 1196 on IDegLira than on degludec therapy. Therefore, IDegLira was found to be cost-effective versus liraglutide and degludec with incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of Dominant per QALY gained, respectively, under the threshold of three times the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in China.

CONCLUSION

IDegLira is a cost-effective hypoglycemic treatment option that delivers positive clinical outcomes while also reducing costs for Chinese patients living with type 2 diabetes.

Metformin Impedes Oxidation of LDL In Vitro

Metformin is the most commonly prescribed glucose-lowering drug for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The aim of this study was to investigate whether metformin is capable of impeding the oxidation of LDL, a crucial step in the development of endothelial dysfunction and atherosclerosis. LDL was oxidized by addition of CuCl2 in the presence of increasing concentrations of metformin. The extent of LDL oxidation was assessed by measuring lipid hydroperoxide and malondialdehyde concentrations, relative electrophoretic mobilities, and oxidation-specific immune epitopes. Cytotoxicity of oxLDL in the vascular endothelial cell line EA.hy926 was assessed using the alamarBlue viability test. Quantum chemical calculations were performed to determine free energies of reactions between metformin and radicals typical for lipid oxidation. Metformin concentration-dependently impeded the formation of lipid hydroperoxides, malondialdehyde, and oxidation-specific immune epitopes when oxidation of LDL was initiated by addition of Cu2+. The cytotoxicity of oxLDL was reduced when it was obtained under increasing concentrations of metformin. The quantum chemical calculations revealed that only the reaction of metformin with hydroxyl radicals is exergonic, whereas the reactions with hydroperoxyl radicals or superoxide radical anions are endergonic. Metformin, beside its glucose-lowering effect, might be a suitable agent to impede the development of atherosclerosis and associated CVD. This is due to its capability to impede LDL oxidation, most likely by scavenging hydroxyl radicals.

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

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

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Care in Diabetes-2023

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee, are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations and a full list of Professional Practice Committee members, please refer to Introduction and Methodology. Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Real-World Comparative Evaluation of Add-On Glucagon-like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist in Type 2 Diabetes Treated with or without Insulin

Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) is a potent antidiabetic agent with cardiorenal and weight-losing benefits in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The combination of GLP-1 RA with basal insulin has been suggested in several clinical studies as a useful treatment for intensifying insulin therapy in T2D. However, there has been no real-world evidence study comparing the glycemic effects of GLP-1 RAs add-on to background treatment with and without insulin. A retrospective study was performed in 358 patients with T2D who initiated liraglutide or dulaglutide. Among them, 147 patients were prior and concurrent insulin users, and 211 patients were non-insulin users. After 12 months of GLP-1 RA treatment, the changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1C) and body weight were evaluated. The effectiveness of GLP-1 RAs on HbA1C reduction was greater in insulin users than non-insulin users at 12 months (−1.17% vs. −0.76%; p = 0.018). There was no significant difference in body weight change between insulin users and non-insulin users at 12 months (−1.42 kg vs. −1.87 kg; p = 0.287). The proportion of responders (decrease of HbA1C > 1%) in insulin users was much higher than that in non-insulin users (48% vs. 37 %; p = 0.04). In insulin users, those who had increased insulin dosage at 12 months had significantly less HbA1C reduction than that of non-increased patients (−0.62% vs. −1.57%; p = 0.001). GLP-1 RAs provide superior glucose-lowering effects in insulin-treated patients compared with non-insulin-treated patients with T2D without significant differences in body weight decrease.

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

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

Reconsidering the role of glycaemic control in cardiovascular disease risk in type 2 diabetes: A 21st century assessment

It is well known that the multiple factors contributing to the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes (T2D) confer an increased risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD). Although the relationship between hyperglycaemia and increased microvascular risk is well established, the relative contribution of hyperglycaemia to macrovascular events has been strongly debated, particularly owing to the failure of attempts to reduce CVD risk through normalizing glycaemia with traditional therapies in high-risk populations. The debate has been further fuelled by the relatively recent discovery of the cardioprotective properties of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. Further, as guidelines now recommend individualizing glycaemic targets, highlighting the importance of achieving glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) goals safely, the previously observed negative influences of intensive therapy on CVD risk might not present if trials were repeated using current-day treatments and individualized HbA1c goals. Emerging longitudinal data illuminate the overall effect of excess glucose, the impacts of magnitude and duration of hyperglycaemia on disease progression and risk of CVD complications, and the importance of glycaemic control at or early after diagnosis of T2D for prevention of complications. Herein, we review the role of glucose as a modifiable cardiovascular (CV) risk factor, the role of microvascular disease in predicting macrovascular risk, and the deleterious impact of therapeutic inertia on CVD risk. We reconcile new and old data to offer a current perspective, highlighting the importance of effective, early treatment in reducing latent CV risk, and the timely use of appropriate therapy individualized to each patient's needs.

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

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

Real-world effectiveness of IDegLira compared with intensified conventional insulin therapy in adults with type 2 diabetes: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

IDegLira is a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide with proven efficacy against simpler regimens and non-inferiority against basal-bolus insulin therapy. However, the evaluation of its real-world effectiveness is hindered by technical issues and requires further exploration. Thus we aimed to compare effectiveness of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus intensified conventional insulin therapy (ICT) for type 2 diabetes in a real-world setting.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study from an outpatient clinic in Hungary included people who initiated IDegLira due to inadequate glycaemic control (HbA1c > 7.0% [53.0 mmol/mol]) with oral and/or injectable antidiabetic drugs. Data were compared with a historical cohort who initiated ICT. Outcomes included HbA1c, body weight, and hypoglycaemia differences over 18 months of follow-up.

RESULTS

Data were included from 227 and 72 people who initiated IDegLira and ICT, respectively. Estimated mean difference (MD) in HbA1c at 18 months favoured IDegLira versus ICT (MD 0.60, 95% CI 0.88-0.32 [MD 6.6 mmol/mol, 95% CI 9.6-3.5]). More people reached target HbA1c ≤7.0% (53.0 mmol/mol) with IDegLira than ICT (odds ratio 3.36, 95% CI 1.52-7.42). IDegLira treatment was associated with weight loss compared with gain for ICT (MD 6.7 kg, 95% CI 5.0-8.5). The hazard ratio for hypoglycaemia comparing IDegLira with ICT was 0.18 (95% CI 0.08-0.49).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with IDegLira over 18 months resulted in greater HbA1c reductions, weight loss versus gain, and a lower rate of hypoglycaemia versus ICT in people with type 2 diabetes.

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.

DUAL I China: Improved glycemic control with IDegLira versus its individual components in a randomized trial with Chinese participants with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs

BACKGROUND

DUAL I China, one of the DUAL trials, assessed efficacy/safety of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) in Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) not controlled by oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs).

METHODS

This phase 3a, treat-to-target multicenter trial randomized participants (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] 53.0-85.8 mmol/mol; previous metformin ± another OAD) 2:1:1 to IDegLira (n = 361), degludec (n = 179), or liraglutide (n = 180). Primary endpoint was change in HbA1c after 26 weeks. Secondary endpoints included: HbA1c < 53.0 mmol/mol attainment, weight change, treatment-emergent hypoglycemia, end-of-treatment insulin dose, and safety.

RESULTS

At 26 weeks, HbA1c had decreased by a mean 18.12 mmoL/moL (IDegLira), 12.37 mmoL/moL (degludec) (estimated treatment difference [ETD] -6.50 mmoL/moL; 95% confidence interval [CI] -7.96, -5.04; P < .0001), and 11.33 mmoL/moL (liraglutide) (ETD -6.87 mmoL/moL; 95% CI -8.33, -5.41; P < 0.0001), indicating noninferiority for IDegLira vs degludec and superiority vs liraglutide. HbA1c < 53.0 mmoL/moL attainment was 77.0% (IDegLira), 46.4% (degludec), and 48.3% (liraglutide). Mean weight change with IDegLira (0.1 kg) was superior to degludec (1.2 kg) (ETD -1.08 kg; 96% CI -1.55, -0.62; P < 0.0001). Severe or confirmed hypoglycemic event rates were 0.24 (IDegLira) and 0.17 (degludec) episodes/participant-year (estimated rate ratio 1.46; 95% CI 0.71, 3.02; P = .3008, not significant). At the end of treatment, the IDegLira insulin dose was lower (24.5 U/d) vs degludec (30.3 U/d) (ETD -5.49 U; 95% CI -7.77, -3.21; P < 0.0001). No unexpected safety issues occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

IDegLira is efficacious and well tolerated in Chinese adults with T2D not controlled by OADs.

Recent Updates to Clinical Practice Guidelines for Diabetes Mellitus

Guidelines for the management of patients with diabetes have become an important part of clinical practice that improve the quality of care and help establish evidence-based medicine in this field. With rapidly accumulating evidence on various aspects of diabetes care, including landmark clinical trials of treatment agents and newer technologies, timely updates of the guidelines capture the most current state of the field and present a consensus. As a leading academic society, the Korean Diabetes Association publishes practice guidelines biennially and the American Diabetes Association does so annually. In this review, we summarize the key changes suggested in the most recent guidelines. Some of the important updates include treatment algorithms emphasizing comorbid conditions such as atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, heart failure, and chronic kidney disease in the selection of anti-diabetic agents; wider application of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), insulin pump technologies and indices derived from CGM such as time in range; more active screening of subjects at high-risk of diabetes; and more detailed individualization in diabetes care. Although there are both similarities and differences among guidelines and some uncertainty remains, these updates provide a good approach for many clinical practitioners who are battling with diabetes.

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2022

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc22-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

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.

Preserved pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of insulin degludec and liraglutide when administered as insulin degludec/liraglutide in a Chinese population

We report the findings of a single‐dose, randomized, three‐period cross‐over, clinical trial in healthy Chinese individuals (n = 24) comparing the pharmacokinetics of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) with its individual components. Furthermore, we report a population pharmacokinetic analysis of a 26‐week, phase III, treat‐to‐target, randomized trial of 720 Chinese individuals with type 2 diabetes. Participants were randomized to IDegLira, degludec or liraglutide, all once daily with metformin. The pharmacokinetic profiles of IDegLira were similar to its individual components. Dose proportionality was indicated for both IDegLira components. Although there were no relevant covariate effects on degludec exposure, liraglutide exposure was inversely correlated with bodyweight. In conclusion, for the Chinese population, the pharmacokinetics of the fixed‐ratio combination IDegLira is similar to that of its individual components.

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.

Efficacy and safety of the fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide by baseline glycated hemoglobin, body mass index and age in Japanese individuals with type 2 diabetes: A subgroup analysis of two phase III trials

AIMS/INTRODUCTION

To assess efficacy and safety of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes across different baseline characteristics.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data from two randomized controlled trials were used: DUAL I Japan (n = 819 insulin-naïve participants) and DUAL II Japan (n = 210 insulin-experienced participants). Outcomes were assessed according to baseline glycated hemoglobin ( HbA1c ; <8.0%, ≥8.0-<9.0%, ≥9.0%), body mass index (<25, ≥25-<30, ≥30 kg/m2 ) and age (<65, ≥65 years).

RESULTS

In DUAL I Japan, reductions in HbA1c with IDegLira versus degludec and liraglutide were observed across all subgroups (treatment differences: -0.48% to -0.72% vs degludec, -0.29% to -0.73% vs liraglutide). Results were similar with IDegLira versus degludec in DUAL II Japan (treatment differences: -0.82% to -1.61%). Treatment-by-subgroup interactions were significant for IDegLira versus liraglutide for baseline HbA1c and age in DUAL I Japan, and for IDegLira versus degludec for baseline HbA1c in DUAL II Japan. In DUAL I Japan, IDegLira was associated with less weight gain than degludec in most subgroups. In DUAL II Japan, IDegLira was associated with a small mean weight loss (except for baseline HbA1c ≥9.0%) versus a small gain for degludec (except for age ≥65 years subgroup); treatment-by-subgroup interactions were not significant. Total daily insulin dose was lower with IDegLira versus degludec across all categories, except for age >65 years in DUAL II Japan.

CONCLUSIONS

IDegLira reduced HbA1c in Japanese participants with type 2 diabetes across baseline HbA1c , body mass index and age categories, without unexpected safety issues.

Titratable fixed-ratio combination of basal insulin plus a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist: A novel, simplified alternative to premix insulin for type 2 diabetes

Despite novel therapeutic options, many people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) do not achieve their HbA1c targets. Given the progressive nature of T2D, many individuals not controlled with oral therapy will require advancement to injectable therapy using either a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), recently recommended as a first option, or traditionally a basal insulin. However, premix insulins remain frequently used, either as initial injectable therapy or as intensification from basal insulin. Premix insulin injections can potentially provide significant glycaemic improvements to basal insulin but at the expense of increased hypoglycaemia and weight gain and the need for multiple daily doses, which may affect treatment adherence. Real-world evidence suggests that glycaemic control often remains suboptimal with premix insulins. Fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of basal insulin and GLP-1 RAs provide a novel alternative to premix insulin for therapy intensification. While no direct comparisons between premix insulins and FRCs are available, results from meta-analyses suggest that FRCs may offer better HbA1c reductions, a lower risk of hypoglycaemia and less weight gain compared with premix insulin in a simplified treatment regimen. A head-to-head trial of T2D treatment intensification with premix insulin and a FRC of basal insulin plus a GLP-1 RA is currently in progress, which should help to clarify the outcomes for each treatment option. This review discusses the unmet needs of people with T2D treated with premix insulin and provides evidence supporting FRCs of basal insulin and GLP-1 RAs as an alternative treatment option.

Glycated haemoglobin reduction and fixed ratio combinations of analogue basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Fixed ratio combinations (FRCs) of analogue basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are a newer addition to the therapeutic armamentarium for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. They reduce treatment complexity by combining two injectables in a single daily injectable, thus potentially improving adherence and persistence. Clinicians wanting to use FRCs would need to choose between members of the class.

AIM

To describe and contrast the glycated haemoglobin reduction of two FRCs of analogue basal insulin and glucagon like peptide-1 receptor agonist in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

The following Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome question was used for the primary analysis: Among adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus [P], what is the effect of iGlarLixi [I] compared to IDegLira [C] for bringing about glycaemic control (as measured by reduction in glycosylated haemoglobin) [O]? The Prisma Statement was used as a guideline for framing this systematic review. We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane library databases and Clinicaltrials.gov using various keywords and medical search headings related to type 2 diabetes mellitus, iGlarlixi, IDegLira and glycated haemoglobin A1c.

RESULTS

All 14 studies identified by the systematic search met the primary efficacy endpoint of reduction in glycated haemoglobin. There were no head-to-head studies between the FRCs of iGlarlixi and IDegLira, and we therefore did an indirect comparison based on a common comparator of insulin glargine U100. Both iGlarLixi and IDegLira effectively reduce glycated haemoglobin when compared to insulin glargine U100. However, using indirect comparisons, IDegLira had a greater haemoglobin A1c reducing ability (0.6% vs 0.3%). The indirect comparison is limited by the differences between the studies; the fasting blood glucose targets were slightly higher for iGlarLixi studies when compared to the IDegLira studies (4.0-5.0 mmol/L and 4.4-5.6 mmol/L), and the IDegLira study used a greater average dose of insulin glargine when compared to the iGlarLixi studies (66 U/d vs 40 U/d).

CONCLUSION

Both iGlarLixi and IDegLira effectively reduce glycated haemoglobin. Indirect comparisons, using insulin glargine as the common comparator, suggest that IDegLira reduces glycated haemoglobin to a greater extent than iGlarLixi. However, given the limitations of indirect comparisons, robust head to head studies and real-world data would better inform clinician choice and clinical practice guidelines.

Do GLP-1 Receptor Agonists Increase the Risk of Breast Cancer? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Risk of cancer is a major concern in the development of drugs for the treatment of obesity and diabetes. In randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of the Liraglutide Clinical Development Program, subjects treated with a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) had a higher absolute number of breast cancer events.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether patients treated with GLP-1RAs had a higher risk of breast neoplasms.

DATA SOURCES

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and CENTRAL from July 31, 2019 to February 8, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Reviewers assessed abstracts and full-text articles for RCTs of GLP-1RAs in adults with excessive weight and/or diabetes and a minimum follow-up of 24 weeks.

DATA EXTRACTION

Researchers extracted study-level data and assessed within-study risk of bias with the RoB 2.0 tool and quality of evidence with Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE).

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 52 trials, of which 50 reported breast cancer events and 11 reported benign breast neoplasms. Overall methodological quality was high. Among 48 267 subjects treated with GLP-1RAs, 130 developed breast cancer compared with 107 of 40 755 controls (relative risk [RR], 0.98; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.76-1.26). Subset analyses according to follow-up, participant/investigator blinding, and type of GLP-1RA did not reveal any differences. The risk of benign breast neoplasms also did not differ between groups (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.48-2.01). Trial sequential analysis provided evidence that the sample size was sufficient to avoid missing alternative results.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with GLP-1RAs for obesity and diabetes does not increase the risk of breast neoplasms.

9. Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2021

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) "Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes" includes the ADA's current clinical practice recommendations and is intended to provide the components of diabetes care, general treatment goals and guidelines, and tools to evaluate quality of care. Members of the ADA Professional Practice Committee, a multidisciplinary expert committee (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SPPC), are responsible for updating the Standards of Care annually, or more frequently as warranted. For a detailed description of ADA standards, statements, and reports, as well as the evidence-grading system for ADA's clinical practice recommendations, please refer to the Standards of Care Introduction (https://doi.org/10.2337/dc21-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

Durability of glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis for its association with body weight changes

AIMS

To analyse quantitatively the association between the durability of glycaemic control and body weight changes during treatment.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This study adhered to an appropriate methodology according to Meta-analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. Studies with follow-ups >12 months, and final and intermediate assessments of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) and body weight were included. Four outcomes assessing therapeutic durability were extracted and synthesized using Stata statistical software, including changes in HbA1c, goal-achievement rate, failure rate and coefficient of failure (CoF).

RESULTS

After 8.9 months of treatment, HbA1c levels declined from 8.03% [95% confidence interval (CI), 7.91-8.15; I² = 99.2%] to 7.15% (95% CI, 7.02-7.27; I² = 99.4%) and then gradually increased up to 7.72% (95% CI, 7.50-7.94; I² = 99.0%) 5 years later. The goal-achievement rate decreased from 54.8% (after 1 year of treatment) to 19.4% 5 years later. The CoF was 0.123 ± 0.022%/year (P < .001). After stratification, the CoFs were 0.224 ± 0.025%/year (P < .001) for weight gain, 0.137 ± 0.034%/year (P < .001) for neutral weight and -0.024 ± 0.032%/year (P = .450) for weight loss. After stratification by treatment approaches, the CoFs were 0.45%/year for insulin, 0.43%/year for sulphonylurea, 0.34%/year for thiazolidinediones, 0.29%/year for metformin, 0.16% for glucagon-like polypeptide-1 receptor agonists, 0.12% for surgery, -0.03% for sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors and -0.21% for dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibitors.

CONCLUSION

Modest weight loss with a goal of 2-3% of body weight should be recommended to improve therapeutic durability and prevent beta-cell deterioration.

How Effective Is the Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Degludec and Liraglutide (IDegLira) in Different Patient Populations, and When Should It Be Used in Clinical Practice?

The efficacy and safety of the fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec (degludec) and liraglutide (IDegLira) were confirmed in the DUAL clinical trial program, in which IDegLira demonstrated superior or noninferior glycemic control over comparators in addition to its low risks of hypoglycemia and weight gain. This article identifies the patient types for whom IDegLira is most appropriate by reviewing the DUAL results and subsequent post hoc analyses and presenting real-world cases in which IDegLira has been used effectively in U.S. clinical practice. In the clinic, IDegLira has been used effectively when patients wanted to avoid more complex injectable regimens, particularly those with renal insufficiency for whom treatment options are limited.

Clinical Considerations When Initiating and Titrating Insulin Degludec/Liraglutide (IDegLira) in People with Type 2 Diabetes

Therapeutic inertia is a substantial obstacle to the initiation of insulin therapy in people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D). This effect has in part been perpetuated by concerns over the impact of a burdensome regimen and the increased risk of hypoglycemia and body weight gain often associated with insulin use. An effective, yet simple, less burdensome regimen with a lower risk of body weight gain and hypoglycemia compared with an insulin-only regimen, may help to address these concerns more effectively. We review the available clinical and real-world data on IDegLira, a once-daily, injectable, fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec (degludec) and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) liraglutide, in people with T2D. Evidence from the comprehensive DUAL clinical trial program suggests an advantage of IDegLira over traditional insulin therapies in a number of clinical outcomes, including maintenance of glycemic control, achievement of glycemic targets, reducing the risk of hypoglycemia, and body weight loss. These findings were demonstrated in participants with T2D irrespective of prior GLP-1RA and insulin use. Furthermore, the individual components of IDegLira have confirmed safety (degludec) or significant benefit in terms of improvement of cardiovascular risk (liraglutide). As an injectable therapy that is simple to titrate, IDegLira has the potential to optimize the ability to achieve relevant glycemic targets, and offers a suitable treatment option for people with T2D requiring insulin therapy who are at risk of hypoglycemia or weight gain.

Co-Formulations as the First Injectable in Type 2 Diabetes: A Review of Efficacy, Safety, and Implications in Clinical Practice

<b><i>Background:</i></b> Progression of type 2 diabetes will necessitate the use of injectable therapies in a significant number of people. Co-formulations of degludec with liraglutide (IDeg­Lira) and glargine with lixisenatide (IGlarLixi) are currently recommended for intensification in people with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin or glucagon-like peptide receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) alone or in people with type 2 diabetes who are naïve to insulin with very high glycated haemoglobin. Co-formulation of aspart with degludec (IDegAsp) is recommended as a substitute for premixed insulin. The aim of this article is to review the evidence in the use of co-formulations as the first injectable in type 2 diabetes and its clinical implications. <b><i>Summary:</i></b> In people with type 2 diabetes who are naïve to insulin or GLP-1RA, IDegLira and IGlarLixi achieved stable and durable glycaemic control over a wide range of baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels. People on IDegLira and IGlarLixi had lesser risk of hypoglycaemia and weight gain in studies compared to basal insulin and lesser gastrointestinal adverse effects in comparison to GLP-1RA. IDegAsp achieved similar glycaemic control to basal and premixed insulin with lesser risk of nocturnal hypoglycaemia. <b><i>Key Messages:</i></b> IDegLira, IGlarLixi, and IDegAsp can be used as the first injectable in people with type 2 diabetes with very high glycated haemoglobin on oral antidiabetic drugs. These co-formulations combine efficacy and durability with lesser injection burden. The components of these agents have proven cardiovascular and renal safety. Their limitations in flexibility of dosing, renal and cardiovascular considerations, and adverse effects are discussed.

Persistence with IDegLira in Patients in Clinical Practice: A Nationwide Observational Study in Sweden

AIMS

To explore persistence with insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) treatment, clinical characteristics and concomitant medications in a large population of patients in clinical practice.

METHODS

This was an observational study in patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 2432) who initiated IDegLira between 26 May 2015 and 31 December 2017. Data were obtained from Swedish nationwide registers and linked on an individual level using unique Swedish personal identifiers. Dose calculations were made for patients with ≥ 180 days between the first and last collections of IDegLira prescription. Changes in clinical parameters were evaluated as change from the last observation during 12 months prior to the initiation date until ± 90 days from the last collection of IDegLira.

RESULTS

Pre-index regimens (index date being the date of filling the first prescription of IDegLira) included: multiple daily insulin injections (45.1%); insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) (19.7%); long-acting insulins (11.8%); non-injectable therapy only (11.4%); GLP-1 RA only (9.8%); and no collection of diabetes medication during the 6-month pre-index period (2.3%). The majority of patients (94 and 84%) were persistent with IDegLira at 6 and 12 months, respectively. The most commonly used concomitant medication was metformin (69.4%). Mean daily dose was 33 dose steps. Overall, there was a mean decrease in HbA1c (approx. 10 mmol/mol [1%]) and body weight (- 1.1 kg). Improvements in HbA1c were observed regardless of pre-index treatment.

CONCLUSION

After 12 months, 84% of patients were persistent on IDegLira, with improved glycaemic control and reductions in body weight.

Fixed-Ratio Combinations of Basal Insulin and GLP-1RA in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Highlights from the Literature

New pieces of evidence suggest that combining basal insulin with glucagone-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) in patients with type 2 diabetes could promptly ameliorate glucose control and prevent both hypoglycemic events and unnecessary weight gain compared to more intensive insulin regimens. To review the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin and GLP- 1RA (FRCs). Authors searched PubMed/MEDLINE, ClinicalTrials.gov, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar for freely available original articles, randomized clinical trials (RCTs), clinical reviews, and meta-analysis written in English until January 2020. FRCs provide significative reductions in HbA1c levels in both insulin-naïve (-1.4% to -2%) and insulin- experienced (-1.5% to -2%) type 2 diabetic patients with moderate glucose impairment. More patients achieved the recommended glycemic targets on FRCs compared to those on mono-therapy with basal insulin or GLP-1RAs. The intensification with FRCs results in better glycemic control compared to basal insulin at fasting as well as during the postprandial state. The frequency of hypoglycemia is similar or lower in patients treated with FRCs than in those on basal insulin alone at a similar dose. Weight trend can be variable, ranging from -2.7 to +2 Kg for iDegLira and -0.7 to -1.3 Kg for iGlar- Lixi. However, a lower weight gain is obtained with iDegLira compared to iDeg (-2.2 to -2.5 Kg), iGlar (-1.7 to -3.2 Kg), and basal-bolus (-3.6 Kg) as well as with iGlarLixi compared to iGlar (-1.4 Kg). FRCs should be considered to safely improve the metabolic control in type 2 diabetic patients with moderate glycemic impairment while on oral medications, basal oral regimen or GLP-1RAs. However, a few but significative pieces of evidence suggest that FRCs could be a safe and effective treatment instead of a low dose basal-bolus intensification for patients with mild or moderate glucose impairment in order to reduce the risk of hypoglycemia and unnecessary weight gain, and for simplifying treatment regimen as well.

A greater proportion of participants with type 2 diabetes achieve treatment targets with insulin degludec/liraglutide versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL at 26 weeks: DUAL VIII, a randomized trial designed to resemble clinical practice

This report presents the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus insulin glargine 100 units/mL (IGlar U100) as initial injectable therapy at 26 weeks in the 104-week DUAL VIII durability trial (NCT02501161). Participants (N = 1012) with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) were randomized 1:1 to open-label IDegLira or IGlar U100. Visits were scheduled at weeks 1, 2, 4 and 12, and every 3 months thereafter. After 26 weeks, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reductions were greater with IDegLira versus IGlar U100 (-21.5 vs. -16.4 mmol/mol [-2.0 vs. -1.5%]), as was the percentage of participants achieving HbA1c <53 mmol/mol (78.7% vs. 55.7%) and HbA1c targets without weight gain and/or hypoglycaemia. Estimated treatment differences for insulin dose (-13.01 U) and body weight change (-1.57 kg) significantly favoured IDegLira. The hypoglycaemia rate was 44% lower with IDegLira versus IGlar U100. Safety results were similar. In a trial resembling clinical practice, more participants receiving IDegLira than IGlar U100 met treatment targets, supporting use of IDegLira as an initial injectable therapy for people with T2D uncontrolled on OADs and eligible for insulin initiation.

Evaluation of the Short-Term Cost-Effectiveness of IDegLira Versus Basal Insulin and Basal-Bolus Therapy in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Based on Attainment of Clinically Relevant Treatment Targets

BACKGROUND

Effective glycemic control can reduce the risk of complications and their related costs in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Many patients fail to reach hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≤ 6.5% or < 7.0%, often due to adverse effects of treatment, such as hypoglycemia and weight gain. Glycemic targets should be individualized and consider multiple factors, including the risk of adverse events and the patient's characteristics and comorbid conditions.

OBJECTIVE

To compare the odds and annual cost of achieving treatment targets, which incorporate HbA1c targets of < 7.5%, < 8.0%, and ≤ 9.0%, with insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) versus basal insulin and basal-bolus therapy.

METHODS

This is a post hoc analysis of the DUAL V and DUAL VII 26-week trials, which randomized patients with T2D uncontrolled (HbA1c 7%-10%) on insulin glargine 100 units/mL (IGlar U100) and metformin to IDegLira or continued IGlar U100 titration (DUAL V) or IGlar U100 + insulin aspart (DUAL VII), all with metformin. Proportions of patients achieving HbA1c targets (< 7.5%, < 8.0%, and ≤ 9.0%) by the end of trial were assessed via 3 outcomes: alone, without either hypoglycemia or weight gain (double composite outcome), or without a combination of hypoglycemia and weight gain (triple composite outcome). The cost per patient achieving the triple composite outcome at each HbA1c target (< 7.5%, < 8.0%, and ≤ 9.0%) was calculated by dividing the annual cost of treatment by the proportion of patients achieving the target. This short-term (1-year) cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the perspective of a U.S. health care payer.

RESULTS

More patients achieved HbA1c < 7.5% (P < 0.0001) and < 8.0% (P = 0.0003), and a similar percentage achieved HbA1c ≤ 9.0% with IDegLira versus IGlar U100 (DUAL V). Similar proportions of patients achieved all 3 HbA1c targets with IDegLira compared with basal-bolus therapy (DUAL VII). The odds of achieving double or triple composite outcomes were significantly higher for IDegLira versus IGlar U100 or basal-bolus for all 3 HbA1c targets (P < 0.0001 in each case) in both trials. For each $1 spent on IDegLira, the equivalent annual costs per patient to achieve HbA1c targets of < 7.5%, < 8.0%, or ≤ 9.0% without hypoglycemia and without weight gain were $2.43, $2.10, and $2.05, respectively, for IGlar U100 and $6.33, $5.80, and $6.06, respectively, for basal-bolus therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on data from DUAL V and DUAL VII, this analysis showed that a greater or similar proportion of patients with T2D reached HbA1c targets with IDegLira compared with IGlar U100/basal-bolus therapy. Odds of achieving double or triple composite outcomes of HbA1c reduction without hypoglycemia and/or without weight gain were greatest for IDegLira. Short-term cost analyses based on the triple composite outcomes suggest that IDegLira is a cost-effective treatment option in the United States compared with either uptitration of IGlar U100 or basal-bolus therapy.

DISCLOSURES

This study was supported by Novo Nordisk A/S. The analysis was based on the DUAL V (NCT01952145) and DUAL VII (NCT02420262) trials, which were funded and conducted by Novo Nordisk. This post hoc analysis was conceived and interpreted by the authors and drafted with medical writing support that was funded by Novo Nordisk. Novo Nordisk also reviewed the manuscript for medical accuracy. Hunt and Malkin are employees of Ossian Health Economics and Communications, which received consulting fees from Novo Nordisk during the conduct of this study and has received consulting fees from Novo Nordisk, unrelated to this study. Mocarski, Ranthe, and Schiffman are employees of Novo Nordisk and Novo Nordisk A/S. Cannon has received speaker fees/honoraria from Abbvie, Amgen, and Janssen; speaker fees from Novo Nordisk; and has stock ownership in Novo Nordisk. Bargiota has received speaker fees/honoraria from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Novartis. Billings has received personal fees from Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, and Dexcom, unrelated to this study. Leiter reports grants and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Janssen, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Sanofi, Servier, and GSK, unrelated to this study. Doshi has no relevant conflicts of interest to disclose. Parts of this study were presented as a poster at the AMCP Managed Care & Specialty Pharmacy Annual Meeting; April 23-26, 2018; Boston, MA.

Metabolic Control and Adherence to Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients Using IDegLira in a Real-World Setting

INTRODUCTION

Insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) is a fixed-ratio combination (FRC) of basal insulin and glucagon-like protein-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) that has demonstrated glycemic and metabolic benefits in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in both randomized controlled trials and real-world studies. The impact of adherence to this medication and its effect on patients with T2DM who switch from loose-dose combination therapy to a FRC of insulin and GLP-1RA have not yet been reported. We have examined the metabolic effects and adherence to this medication in a real-life setting, in T2DM patients who initiated IDegLira therapy after being treated with other glucose-lowering drugs.

METHODS

This is a retrospective observational study of adult T2DM patients managed by the Maccabi Healthcare Services (Israel) who initiated IDegLira and persisted with therapy for 180 days between July 2017 and August 2018. Mean glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c), body weight change, metabolic parameters, dose and proportion of days covered (PDC) by IDegLira were recorded from initiation to after 180 days of therapy.

RESULTS

A total of 413 patients who persisted with IDegLira therapy for at least 180 days were evaluated as a per protocol group. A significant mean reduction in HbA_1c of 0.65% (95% confidence limits [CL] - 0.78, - 0.52; P < 0.001) was observed at 180 days compared with baseline. IDegLira therapy led to a significant reduction in HbA_1c in patients previously treated with different background combinations of glucose-lowering drugs before being started on IDegLira. The largest group (n = 247) comprised those who switched from a loose-dose combination therapy of insulin and GLP-1 RA as injectable components given alone to the IDegLira FRC. In this group, HbA_1c was reduced by 0.42% (95% CL - 0.57, - 0.27; P < 0.001) and in parallel the PDC of insulin and GLP-1 RA increased from a median of 60% (interquartile range [IQR] 34.4-79.4) in the 180 days prior to IDegLira initiation to 77.8% (IQR 65.6-90.0) in the 180 days after initiation.

CONCLUSION

In a real-world setting, the use of IDegLira was associated with improved glycemic control and adherence to therapy.

IDegLira Improves Glycemic Control in Japanese Patients with Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes on Premixed Insulin Therapy

INTRODUCTION

DUAL II Japan (NCT02911948) was a 26-week, phase 3a randomized, treat-to-target trial which compared the efficacy and safety of IDegLira with degludec in 210 Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled on premixed or basal insulin therapy. The DUAL II Japan trial presented the opportunity for a post hoc analysis to examine the safety and efficacy of switching patients from a premixed regimen (containing both basal and bolus insulin components) to IDegLira.

METHODS

Patients from DUAL II Japan were stratified according to prior insulin regimen (premixed or basal insulin). The following endpoints were assessed in this post hoc analysis by pre-trial insulin regimen: change in HbA_1c, body weight, daily total insulin dose, nine-point self-measured blood glucose, and severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycemia (defined as severe or plasma glucose less than 56 mg/dL).

RESULTS

This post hoc analysis included 39 patients who switched from premixed insulin to IDegLira. The treatment effect in this population was independent of insulin type at baseline (premixed or basal; interaction test, P = 0.2535). In patients switching from premixed insulin to IDegLira, mean [standard deviation (SD)] HbA_1c was 8.26% (0.73) at baseline and 6.68% (0.93) at week 26. Mean (SD) body weight was reduced by 1.5 (2.9) kg. At week 26, daily insulin dose was 34.2 dose steps. After 26 weeks, the mean prandial increment was smaller at all meals with IDegLira irrespective of pre-trial insulin regimen. Rate of hypoglycemic events was 2.59 events/patient-year of exposure over the 26 weeks.

CONCLUSION

This post hoc study is the first to evaluate the switch from premixed insulin to IDegLira in patients with uncontrolled T2D. IDegLira initiation resulted in improved HbA_1c and weight loss. This study offers insight into the effectiveness and safety of switching patients from premixed insulin therapy to IDegLira, and provides support for further investigation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02911948.