Propensity-score-matched comparative analyses of simultaneously administered fixed-ratio insulin glargine 100 U and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) vs sequential administration of insulin glargine and lixisenatide in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes

Safety and effectiveness of iGlarLixi in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus from Gulf countries during Ramadan holy month: A subgroup analysis of the SoliRam observational study

AIM

To investigate safety and effectiveness of iGlarLixi in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) observing fast during Ramadan from Gulf countries.

METHODS

This planned subgroup analysis of the SoliRam - a multinational, prospective, non-interventional, real-world, observational study - focused on participants from Gulf countries. Primary endpoint was proportion of participants experiencing ≥1 episode of severe and/or symptomatic documented (<70 mg/dL [<3.9 mmol/L]) hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

A total of 241 individuals with T2DM (mean age: 58.1 years; male: 54.4%; mean duration of diabetes: 13.3 years) were included. All 234 eligible participants followed during Ramadan were able to fast for ≥25 days and no participants broke fast due to hypoglycemia. Primary endpoint was reported in one participant (0.5%) during fasting hours during Ramadan. Improvements (mean ± SD change) in HbA1c (-1.0 ± 1.0% [-11 ± 10 mmol/mol]), FPG (-22.5 ± 29.7 mg/dL), and body weight (-1.5 ± 2.0 kg) were observed from pre-Ramadan to post-Ramadan. Three participants (1.2 %) reported an adverse event (AE) of any cause and one (0.4%) reported a gastrointestinal AE.

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi is an effective and well-tolerated treatment in people with T2DM from Gulf countries, including during Ramadan fasting, and is associated with low risk of hypoglycemia.

Clinical Benefits of Treating Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus with iGlarLixi: A Patient-Level Simulation Study

INTRODUCTION

The fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine (iGlar) plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) has proven efficacious in clinical trials; however, there is limited evidence of its benefits in a variety of real-world patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who present in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

A large integrated claims and EHR database was used to identify two real-world (RW) cohorts (ages ≥ 18) with T2DM who were eligible for treatment with iGlarLixi. At baseline, the first cohort (insulin cohort) received insulin with or without oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs), and the second cohort (OAD-only cohort) received OADs only. A Monte Carlo patient-level simulation was applied to each cohort based on treatment strategies and efficacies from the LixiLan-L and LixiLan-O trials to estimate reductions in glycated hemoglobin A1C (A1C) and the percentage achieving age-based A1C goals (≤ 7% for ages < 65 and ≤ 8% for ages ≥ 65) at 30 weeks.

RESULTS

The RW insulin (N = 3797) and OAD-only (N = 17,633) cohorts differed considerably in demographics, age, clinical characteristics, baseline A1C levels, and background OAD therapies compared to the populations in the Lixilan-L and Lixilan-O trials. Regardless of the cohort description, A1C goals were achieved among 52.6% vs. 31.6% (p < 0.001) of patients in the iGlarLixi vs. the iGlar arms in the insulin cohort simulation, while A1C goals were achieved among 59.9% vs. 49.3% and 32.8% (p < 0.001) of patients in the OAD-only cohort simulation in the iGlarLixi vs. the iGlar and lixisenatide arms, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Irrespective of the treatment regimen at baseline (insulin vs. OAD only), this patient-level simulation demonstrated that a greater proportion of patients achieved their A1C goals with iGlarlixi compared to iGlar or lixisenatide alone. These findings suggest that the benefits of iGlarLixi extend to clinically distinct RW populations.

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.

Translating iGlarLixi Evidence for the Management of Frequent Clinical Scenarios in Type 2 Diabetes

Treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires progressive therapy intensification to reach and maintain individualized glycemic targets. iGlarLixi, a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL (iGlar) and lixisenatide (Lixi), has been shown to provide robust HbA1c reductions allowing more people to reach HbA1c targets compared with separate administration of iGlar or Lixi. The purpose of this review is to help clinicians understand treatment intensification using iGlarLixi by presenting typical clinical scenarios supported by research evidence. These cases will focus on individuals with T2D inadequately controlled by oral antihyperglycemic drugs, basal insulin, or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), and take into consideration T2D duration, body mass index, incidence of adverse events, and regimen simplicity. Clinical evidence on the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of iGlarLixi from randomized controlled trials and real-world studies will be discussed in the context of these cases.

Titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine plus lixisenatide: A simplified approach to glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Approximately 50% of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) do not achieve glycemic targets and require treatment intensification. A fixed-ratio combination of a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) with basal insulin, such as lixisenatide with insulin glargine (iGlarLixi), exploits the complementary mechanisms of action of each component to address hyperglycemia while mitigating potential adverse events (AEs). The iGlarLixi dose is titrated considering the effect of basal insulin on fasting plasma glucose, and the fixed-ratio combination ensures that the lixisenatide dose never exceeds 20 μg/day. We describe the characteristics of iGlarLixi therapy, based on the LixiLan clinical program, and provide guidance on the characteristics of patients likely to benefit from such treatment in routine clinical practice. In the phase III LixiLan trials, iGlarLixi resulted in significantly greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), better achievement of HbA1c targets, less glycemic variability versus insulin glargine, lixisenatide or GLP-1 RA alone, and was associated with weight control, less hypoglycemia versus insulin glargine, and fewer GI AEs versus lixisenatide. Findings were consistent regardless of age, diabetes duration, and baseline HbA1c. The efficacy, safety, and convenient once-daily administration schedule of iGlarLixi make it a valuable treatment option for patients with T2DM requiring treatment intensification.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (iGlarLixi 1:1) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs: A randomized, 26-week, open-label, multicentre study: The LixiLan JP-O2 randomized clinical trial

AIMS

To assess efficacy and safety of 26-week treatment with insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (iGlarLixi) compared with insulin glargine U100 (iGlar) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This phase 3, multicentre, open-label, 1:1 randomized, parallel-group study compared efficacy of iGlarLixi and iGlar in patients with T2DM, HbA1c of ≥7.5% to ≤9.5% and fasting plasma glucose ≤10.0 mmol/L (180 mg/dL). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26.

RESULTS

Patients were randomized to iGlarLixi (n = 260) or iGlar (n = 261) (mean age 59.7 years, baseline BMI 26.04 kg/m² , and HbA1c 8.04% [64.4 mmol/mol]). HbA1c reduction was significantly greater with iGlarLixi (-1.40% [-15.3 mmol/mol]) than with iGlar (-0.76% [-8.3 mmol/mol]). Significantly more iGlarLixi patients reached HbA1c <7% at week 26 (71.5% vs 38.5%, P < .0001), with significantly lower weight gain (LS mean difference -1.06 kg, P < .0001). Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (plasma glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L [70 mg/dL]) was recorded in 14.2% of patients with iGlarLixi and 12.3% with iGlar. No severe hypoglycemia was reported in either group. Other than the expected gastrointestinal issues associated with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, we found no major difference in the incidence of TEAEs.

CONCLUSIONS

HbA1c reduction was significantly greater with iGlarLixi than with iGlar; significantly more patients achieved HbA1c <7%, with no additional risk of hypoglycemia and without weight gain. iGlarLixi (1:1) provided an effective treatment option for Japanese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled on OADs. Clinical Trial Number: NCT02752828.

Fixed-ratio combination of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists in the treatment of Japanese people with type 2 diabetes: An innovative solution to a complex therapeutic challenge

Over 10 million people in Japan have known or suspected type 2 diabetes (T2D), and this number is expected to rise. Although many people require therapy escalation because of the progressive nature of T2D, this appears to be suboptimal in Japanese real-world clinical practice. Insulin therapy tends to be introduced only when glycaemic control is very poor (mean glycated haemoglobin >9%). Although basal insulin therapy is effective in reducing fasting plasma glucose (FPG), postprandial plasma glucose often remains uncontrolled. Basal-bolus insulin regimens are complex and carry the risk of weight gain and hypoglycaemia. Recently, fixed-ratio combinations (FRCs) of BI and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) have shown efficacy in reducing both FPG and postprandial plasma glucose with a single injection and without increased risk of hypoglycaemia or weight gain. IDegLira, a titratable FRC of insulin degludec (100 U/mL) and liraglutide, is currently available in Japan and the United States/European Union at a ratio of 1 U (unit):0.036 mg. iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide at a ratio of 1:1 (20 U/20 μg) has recently been approved in Japan. Phase 3 trials in Japan for IDegLira (DUAL Japan) and iGlarLixi (LixiLan JP) have shown that both FRCs are efficacious. This review provides an overview of IDegLira and iGlarLixi (Japanese formulation) and considers their potential use as new therapeutic options to address the clinical need for early glycaemic control in Japanese people with T2D.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (iGlarLixi) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on basal insulin and oral antidiabetic drugs: The LixiLan JP-L randomized clinical trial

AIMS

To assess efficacy and safety of fixed-ratio (1:1) combination insulin glargine and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) compared to insulin glargine U100 (iGlar), with metformin, in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on basal insulin and oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This 26-week, randomized, open-label study compared iGlarLixi to iGlar, both with metformin in adult Japanese patients with T2DM and hemoglobin (Hb) A1c ≥7.5% to ≤9.5%, treated with basal insulin and 1 or 2 OADs. Five hundred and twelve patients were randomized after a 12-week run-in, when iGlar was introduced and/or further titrated and OADs other than metformin were stopped. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26.

RESULTS

iGlarLixi (n = 255) demonstrated significantly greater reductions in HbA1c (-1.27%) than iGlar (n = 257, -0.53%) (LS mean difference: -0.74%, P < .0001) at week 26, confirming the superiority of iGlarLixi. Significantly, more iGlarLixi patients reached target HbA1c <7% at week 26 (51.8% vs 16.0% for iGlar). iGlarLixi patients lost weight in contrast to iGlar patients (-0.51 kg vs +0.55 kg). Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (plasma glucose ≤ 3.9 mmol/L) was observed in 18.8% of iGlarLixi patients vs 16.7% of iGlar patients. iGlarLixi patients had more gastrointestinal-related adverse events than iGlar patients (33.3% vs 8.6%), primarily nausea (16.9% vs 0.8%). However, the treatment was generally well-tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

A once-daily injection of iGlarLixi with metformin is an effective, well-tolerated, and simple therapeutic intervention providing significant improvement in glycemic control in Japanese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled on basal insulin and up to two OADs. Clinical Trial Number: NCT02752412.

Mexican population sub-analysis of the lixilan clinical program with the fixed ratio combination of insulin glargine and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi)

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi in Mexican patients with type 2 diabetes who participated in the LixiLan clinical trials and compare results with the rest of the patients.

METHODS

Data was collected for Mexican patients who participated in either of three studies: phase 2 trial LixiLan-POC, that compared iGlarLixi vs insulin glargine (iGlar) on inadequately controlled patients with metformin; phase 3 trial LixiLan-O, comparing iGlarLixi vs iGlar and lixisenatide on inadequately controlled patients with oral antidiabetic agents; and finally the phase 3 trial LixiLan-L, comparing iGlarLixi vs iGlar on inadequately controlled patients with basal insulin. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to end of treatment.

RESULTS

In the Mexican population, treatment with iGlarLixi significantly improved HbA1c compared with each component alone achieving an average of 6.5%; (6.17%, 6.63% and 6.73% for the LixiLan-POC, O and L studies respectively) and an average HbA1c reduction from baseline of 1.6%, for the three studies at end of treatment period.

CONCLUSION

The efficacy and safety profile of iGlarLixi demonstrate a fair or better composite endpoint of HbA1c without hypoglycemia and no weight gain compared to overall trial population, which could help improve Mexican patients' outcomes.

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.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, selection within the class. The rational combination of insulin glargine 100 + lixisenatide

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a progressive disease accompanied by a gradual worsening of β-cell function. With a long course of T2DM, a significant proportion of patients develop absolute insulinopenia and there is a need to transfer the patient from oral hypoglycemic drugs (OHD) to basal insulin therapy in combination with OHD or to the basal-bolus regimen of insulin therapy (IT). More than 80% of patients with T2DM are obese or overweight and the addition of insulin, which is a lipogenetic hormone, to the therapy contributes to even greater weight gain, which serves as a prerequisite for increasing cardiovascular risks, as well as the appearance and progression of biomechanical problems such as arthrosis of the joints, venous insufficiency. In this review article, we will consider and evaluate the benefits of administering combinations of basal insulin glargine in combination with glucagonlike peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1ra) lixisenatide to one of the most rational treatment regimens for patients with T2DM insulin deficiency and persistent insulin resistance. Also, the article focuses on the variability of glycemia, which according to research can play an important role in the pathogenesis of atherosclerosis and can be an independent risk factor for cardiovascular complications in patients with diabetes. Due to the fact that glycemic control is based on the determination of predominantly glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) as a measure of average glucose concentration, it is known that this marker does not accurately reflect glycemic variability, which is characterized by the amplitude, frequency and duration of hypo- and hyperglycemic fluctuations. A fixed combination of insulin preparations glargin 100 and GLP-1ra lixisenatide allows to select individually effective dosage for a patient with type 2 diabetes and obesity, will help to achieve several goals at the same time - from improving glycemic parameters without increasing body weight and without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia, to significantly reduce the need for insulin with its previous use, as well as reduce the risk of cardiovascular complications.

Efficacy and Safety of iGlarLixi, Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine and Lixisenatide, Compared with Basal-Bolus Regimen in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: Propensity Score Matched Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Basal-bolus (BB) regimens are generally used to intensify basal insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) not meeting glycemic targets. However, drawbacks include multiple injection burden and risk of weight gain and hypoglycemia. A once-daily titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) may provide a simple, well-tolerated, and efficacious alternative. We compared these treatments in a post hoc propensity score matched analysis using randomized trial data.

METHODS

From the LixiLan-L study, 195 patients who had been randomized to iGlarLixi were matched for age, sex, race, T2D duration, baseline body mass index, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose, insulin dose, and metformin use to 195 patients who had been randomized to a BB regimen in the GetGoal Duo-2 trial.

RESULTS

At study end, estimated treatment differences for reduction in HbA1c and weight change, and ratio of hypoglycemia events per patient-year (BB vs iGlarLixi) were - 0.28% (standard error 0.08, P = 0.0002), - 1.32 kg (standard error 0.30, P < 0.0001), and 2.85 (P < 0.0001), respectively, all favoring iGlarLixi over BB. Also, proportions of patients reaching individual and composite goals (HbA1c < 7% [< 53 mmol/mol], no weight gain, and no hypoglycemia) were higher in the iGlarLixi compared with the BB treatment group. Gastrointestinal side effects were more common with iGlarLixi.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with T2D inadequately controlled on basal insulin, iGlarLixi offers an effective alternative to BB regimen for reducing HbA1c, without increased risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02058160 (LixiLan-L trial); NCT01768559 (GetGoal Duo-2 trial). Plain language summary available for this article.

Efficacy and safety of lixisenatide as add-on therapy to basal insulin in older adults with type 2 diabetes in the GetGoal-O Study

BACKGROUND

This study compared the efficacy and safety of lixisenatide with placebo as add-on therapy to basal insulin (BI) in adults aged ≥70 years with type 2 diabetes (T2D), with or without moderate renal insufficiency.

METHODS

This post hoc analysis evaluated data from non-frail patients with T2D inadequately controlled on BI with or without oral antidiabetic drugs (n = 108), randomized to once-daily lixisenatide 20 μg or placebo for 24 weeks (GetGoal-O Study). The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to Week 24. Secondary endpoints included changes from baseline in fasting plasma glucose, 2-hour postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), average seven-point self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG), area under the curve for SMPG, daily BI dose, body weight, proportion of patients achieving HbA1c > 0.5%, and composite endpoints. Safety outcomes included the incidence of documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (plasma glucose <60 mg/dL) and gastrointestinal treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Outcomes were also analyzed by the occurrence of moderate renal insufficiency.

RESULTS

Compared with placebo, lixisenatide-treated patients had significantly greater reductions in HbA1c, 2-hour PPG, average seven-point SMPG, and body weight. Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia was approximately two-fold higher in patients treated with placebo than lixisenatide (12.7% vs 5.7%). GI TEAEs occurred more frequently in the lixisenatide- than placebo-treated group (34% vs 9.1%). Moderate renal insufficiency (estimated glomerular filtration rate between ≥30 and <60 mL/min/1.73 m² ) did not negatively affect lixisenatide efficacy or safety. A greater proportion of patients treated with lixisenatide than placebo achieved composite endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

Add-on therapy with lixisenatide in non-frail patients aged ≥70 years with T2D uncontrolled with BI is effective, safe, and well tolerated and should be considered in this population.

Glycaemic benefit of iGlarLixi in insulin-naive type 2 diabetes patients with high HbA1c or those with inadequate glycaemic control on two oral antihyperglycaemic drugs in the LixiLan-O randomized trial

In this post hoc analysis of the randomized controlled LixiLan-O trial in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) not controlled with metformin, with or without a second oral antihyperglycaemic drug (OAD), the efficacy and safety of the fixed-ratio combination, iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U [iGlar] and lixisenatide [Lixi]), compared to its individual components was assessed in two patient subgroups: group 1) baseline HbA1c ≥9% (n = 134); group 2) inadequate control (HbA1c ≥7.0% and ≤9.0%) despite administration of two OADs at screening (n = 725). Treatment with iGlarLixi resulted in significantly greater reduction in least squares mean HbA1c compared to treatment with iGlar or Lixi alone in both subgroups (group 1: 2.9%, 2.5%, 1.7% and group 2: 1.5%, 1.2%, 0.7%, respectively). Target HbA1c less than 7% was achieved in more than 70% of patients using iGlarLixi in both subgroups, while mitigating the weight gain observed with use of iGlar alone. Rates of hypoglycaemic events were low overall. These results suggest that treatment with iGlarLixi achieves superior glycaemic control compared to treatment with iGlar or Lixi alone in T2DM patients with HbA1c ≥9% or in those inadequately controlled with two OADs.

Diabetes and Aging: From Treatment Goals to Pharmacologic Therapy

Diabetes is becoming one of the most widespread health burning problems in the elderly. Worldwide prevalence of diabetes among subjects over 65 years was 123 million in 2017, a number that is expected to double in 2045. Old patients with diabetes have a higher risk of common geriatric syndromes, including frailty, cognitive impairment and dementia, urinary incontinence, traumatic falls and fractures, disability, side effects of polypharmacy, which have an important impact on quality of life and may interfere with anti-diabetic treatment. Because of all these factors, clinical management of type 2 diabetes in elderly patients currently represents a real challenge for the physician. Actually, the optimal glycemic target to achieve for elderly diabetic patients is still a matter of debate. The American Diabetes Association suggests a HbA1c goal <7.5% for older adults with intact cognitive and functional status, whereas, the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) recommends HbA1c levels of 6.5% or lower as long as it can be achieved safely, with a less stringent target (>6.5%) for patients with concurrent serious illness and at high risk of hypoglycemia. By contrast, the American College of Physicians (ACP) suggests more conservative goals (HbA1c levels between 7 and 8%) for most older patients, and a less intense pharmacotherapy, when HbA1C levels are ≤6.5%. Management of glycemic goals and antihyperglycemic treatment has to be individualized in accordance to medical history and comorbidities, giving preference to drugs that are associated with low risk of hypoglycemia. Antihyperglycemic agents considered safe and effective for type 2 diabetic older patients include: metformin (the first-line agent), pioglitazone, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists. Insulin secretagogue agents have to be used with caution because of their significant hypoglycemic risk; if used, short-acting sulfonylureas, as gliclazide, or glinides as repaglinide, should be preferred. When using complex insulin regimen in old people with diabetes, attention should be paid for the risk of hypoglycemia. In this paper we aim to review and discuss the best glycemic targets as well as the best treatment choices for older people with type 2 diabetes based on current international guidelines.

Propensity-score-matched comparative analyses of simultaneously administered fixed-ratio insulin glargine 100 U and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) vs sequential administration of insulin glargine and lixisenatide in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes

AIM

To conduct two exploratory analyses to compare indirectly the efficacy and safety of simultaneous administration of insulin glargine 100 U (iGlar) and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) lixisenatide (Lixi) as a single-pen, titratable, fixed-ratio combination (iGlarLixi [LixiLan trials]) vs sequential administration of iGlar + Lixi (GetGoal Duo trials) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Propensity-score matching based on baseline covariates was used to compare simultaneous iGlarLixi vs sequential combination of iGlar + Lixi with the addition of Lixi in patients who did not reach the glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) goal of <53 mmol/mol (<7%) after short-term use of iGlar alone (LixiLan-O vs GetGoal Duo-1 comparison) and vs sequential addition of Lixi in uncontrolled patients after long-term use of iGlar alone (LixiLan-L vs GetGoal Duo-2 comparison).

RESULTS

In both analyses, compared with sequential iGlar + Lixi, iGlarLixi led to significantly greater HbA1c reductions with associated weight loss and significantly more patients reaching target HbA1c <53 mmol/mol despite lower insulin doses. Symptomatic hypoglycaemia rates were similar, despite greater HbA1c reductions with iGlarLixi. Lower rates of gastrointestinal adverse events were observed with iGlarLixi, probably as a result of the more gradual titration of Lixi with iGlarLixi.

CONCLUSIONS

Indirect propensity-score-matched exploratory comparisons suggest that early treatment with a simultaneous, titratable, fixed-ratio combination of basal insulin and a GLP-1RA (iGlarLixi) may be more effective and possess better gastrointestinal tolerability than a sequential approach of adding a GLP-1RA in patients with uncontrolled T2D initiating or intensifying basal insulin therapy.