Efficacy and safety benefits of iGlarLixi versus insulin glargine 100 U/mL or lixisenatide in Asian Pacific people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes on oral agents: The LixiLan-O-AP randomized controlled trial

Effects of age and disease duration on the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi in Asian people with type 2 diabetes: A post hoc analysis of the LixiLan-O-AP and LixiLan-L-CN trials

AIM

To evaluate the effect of age and disease duration on the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi versus insulin glargine 100 units/ml (iGlar) or lixisenatide (Lixi) alone in Asian people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) uncontrolled on oral antidiabetic drugs (LixiLan-O-AP) or basal insulin ± oral antidiabetic drugs (LixiLan-L-CN).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this post hoc analysis, the glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) changes were assessed from baseline to week 24 (LixiLan-O-AP) or 30 (LixiLan-L-CN) in subgroups defined by baseline age (<65, ≥65 years) and duration of T2D. The proportion who achieved the composite of HbA1c <7% (<53.0 mmol/mol) without weight gain and without symptomatic hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L) and the incidences of hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal disorders were also analysed.

RESULTS

HbA1c reductions were consistently greater with iGlarLixi versus iGlar or Lixi across all subgroups, including participants aged ≥65 years and those with T2D for ≥15 or ≥20 years. Greater proportions of participants achieved HbA1c <7% (<53.0 mmol/mol) without weight gain or hypoglycaemia with iGlarLixi versus iGlar or Lixi, regardless of age or T2D duration. Hypoglycaemia incidence was similar with iGlarLixi versus iGlar across most subgroups; the incidence of gastrointestinal disorders was lower with iGlarLixi versus Lixi in all subgroups.

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi showed consistent efficacy and safety across all age and disease duration subgroups in Asian people with uncontrolled T2D, including older individuals and those with longstanding disease.

The effect of subcutaneous Lixisenatide on weight loss in patients with type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Systematic review and Meta-Analysis of randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

The impacts of subcutaneous Lixisenatide on body weight in patients with type 2 DM, remain inadequately understood; consequently, this systematic review and meta-regression analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to evaluate the influence of subcutaneous Lixisenatide administration on BW and BMI values in individuals with Type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted across four databases, spanning from their inception to February 2023. We computed effect sizes employing the random-effects model and reported results in terms of weighted mean differences (WMD) along with their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

23 articles with 26 RCT arms were included in the meta-analysis. The combined findings from a random-effects model demonstrated a significant reduction in body weight (WMD: -0.97 kg, 95 % CI: -1.10, -0.83, p < 0.001) and BMI (WMD: -0.48 kg/m2, 95 % CI: -0.67, -0.29, P < 0.001) after subcutaneous administration of Lixisenatide. Furthermore, a more pronounced reduction in body weight was discovered in RCTs lasting less than 24 weeks (WMD: -1.56 kg, 95 % CI: -2.91, -0.20, p < 0.001), employing a daily dosage of subcutaneous Lixisenatide lower than 19 Âµg per day (WMD: -1.94 kg, 95 % CI: -2.54, -1.34, p < 0.001) and with a mean participant age of 60 years or more (WMD: -1.86 kg, 95 % CI: -3.16, -0.57, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Lixisenatide was found to significantly decrease BW and BMI in patients with type 2 DM and could be considered as a therapeutic option for those suffering from weight gain caused by other anti-diabetic agents. However, while prescribing Lixisenatide, careful consideration of patient-specific factors is recommended.

Budget Impact Analysis of Intensification with iGlarLixi Compared to Alternative Treatment Strategies Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

INTRODUCTION

The clinical benefits of treating patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with fixed-ratio combination of insulin iGlar (iGlar) plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) were demonstrated in clinical trials and real-world evidence studies; however, its cost impact to healthcare payers is unknown.

METHODS

A budget impact model was developed from a United States (US) payer's perspective for a hypothetical healthcare plan of 1 million people over a 1-year time horizon. In scenario analysis, patients with uncontrolled glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) treated with 60 units or less of daily insulin (insulin cohort) or oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) only (OAD cohort) were intensified to iGlarLixi/rapid-acting insulin (RAI)/glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) or iGlarLixi/iGlar/GLP-1RA, respectively. Model inputs from real-world data (RWD) included baseline market shares, proportion of patients intensifying to respective treatments, and dosing inputs; unit costs were obtained from published literature. One-way sensitivity analyses assessed the impact of individual parameters.

RESULTS

Intensification with iGlarLixi resulted in the lowest incremental per member per month (PMPM) budget impact compared to other intensifying drugs (iGlar, RAI, and GLP-1RA). In the insulin cohort, the incremental PMPM cost for intensification with iGlarLixi ($0.03) was the lowest among intensifying drugs; GLP-1RA ($72.20) and RAI ($4.81). Similarly, the incremental PMPM cost for intensification with iGlarLixi was the lowest ($1.25) in the OAD cohort among intensifying drugs; GLP-1RA ($321.65) and iGlar ($114.82). In scenario analyses, when equal market intensification shares for iGlarLixi and GLP-1RA were explored, the incremental PMPM cost for iGlarLixi ($0.03) remained lower than GLP-1RA ($2.28) and RAI ($10.44) in the insulin cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Intensification with iGlarLixi was associated with lower costs compared to other treatment intensifications, as well as overall budget reductions compared to pre-intensification when considering cost savings attributable to reduction in HbA1c; therefore, its inclusion for the treatment of T2DM would represent a budget saving.

Pharmacokinetics and Safety of iGlarLixi in Healthy Chinese Participants: Results of a Phase 1 Randomized Study

INTRODUCTION

The Chinese Diabetes Society recommends basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists as an add-on therapy to first-line oral antihyperglycemic drugs for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/ml (iGlar) and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) is known to improve glycemic control in adults with T2D. However, the pharmacokinetics of iGlarLixi has not been evaluated in Chinese participants. The present study evaluated pharmacokinetics and safety of two iGlarLixi (10 U/10 μg and 30 U/15 μg) doses following single subcutaneous administration in healthy Chinese participants.

METHODS

This was a Phase 1, single-center, open-label, parallel-group, randomized study in healthy Chinese adults who were randomized to receive a single dose of iGlarLixi with either 1:1 (10 U/10 μg) or 2:1 (30 U/15 μg) ratio of iGlar and lixisenatide. Primary objectives include assessment of pharmacokinetics of iGlar in iGlarLixi 30 U/15 μg group and the pharmacokinetics of lixisenatide in both the groups (iGlarLixi 10 U/10 μg and iGlarLixi 30 U/15 μg). Safety and tolerability were also assessed.

RESULTS

In iGlarLixi 30 U/15 μg group, iGlar concentrations were low and quantifiable in three of ten participants, while its main metabolite (M1) was quantifiable in all participants, reflecting rapid conversion of iGlar to M1. Median INS-t_max was 14.00 h for iGlar and 13.00 h post-dose for M1. Absorption of lixisenatide was similar in both dose groups with median t_max of 3.25 and 2.00 h post-dose in both groups. The exposure increase was dose proportionate with a 1.5-fold increase in the lixisenatide dose. Adverse events observed were consistent with those previously reported with iGlar or lixisenatide.

CONCLUSION

iGlarLixi administration resulted in early absorption of both iGlar and lixisenatide with a good tolerability profile in healthy Chinese participants. These results are consistent with the previously published data from other geographic regions.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

U1111-1194-9411.

A Cost-effectiveness Analysis of iGlarLixi Versus IDegAsp and Appropriate Price Exploration of iGlarLixi for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients in China

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, a fixed-ratio combination (FRC) of basal insulin glargine plus lixisenatide, have been demonstrated in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients. However, no relevant economic analysis of iGlarLixi has been done in China. Thus, the primary objective of this study is to evaluate the cost effectiveness of iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp in Chinese T2DM patients, and then back-calculate the appropriate drug price of iGlarLixi to support its pricing after listing in China.

METHODS

The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study Outcome Model 2 (UKPDS OM2) was applied to estimate lifetime health and economic outcomes from the Chinese health-care system perspective. As no head-to-head comparison data are currently available, the baseline cohort characteristics and the initial clinical data for iGlarLixi were derived from the randomized LixiLan-L-China trial. The relative treatment effects for IDegAsp were based on an indirect treatment comparison. Due to the unavailability of iGlarLixi pricing data, the annual medication cost of iGlarLixi was assumed to be equal to that of IDegAsp at the beginning of the study. Afterwards, a break-even analysis using comparator drug price and the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold was performed to back-calculate the appropriate drug price of iGlarLixi. One-way sensitivity analysis, scenario analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) were conducted to assess the robustness of the model.

RESULTS

Based on the initial assumption of equal annual medication cost of iGlarLixi and IDegAsp, iGlarLixi was cost effective compared to IDegAsp with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) far below the WTP threshold in Chinese T2DM patients. From the back calculation for the price of iGlarLixi, the annual medication cost of iGlarLixi was $656.96 and $1075.96 to obtain an ICER of iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp close to 1 × GDP and 3 × GDP, respectively. When the discount rate was changed from the base value to 8% (the most sensitive parameter to the model results in one-way sensitivity analysis), the ICER was nearly equal to 1 × GDP and 3 × GDP with the annual medication cost of iGlarLixi decreasing to $590.41 and $865.03, respectively. Thus, iGlarLixi was dominant over IDegAsp with an annual medication cost of $590.41 to $865.03. The findings were robust to one-way sensitivity analysis, PSA and scenario analysis.

CONCLUSION

This long-term cost-effectiveness analysis in Chinese T2DM patients indicates that iGlarLixi, assuming equal price to IDegAsp, is cost-effective versus IDegAsp with an ICER far below the WTP threshold. With 1 × GDP and 3 × GDP threshold set we back-calculate the appropriate annual medication cost of iGlarLixi to be $590.41 to $865.03, respectively.

Improved glycaemic control and weight benefit with iGlarLixi versus insulin glargine 100 U/mL in Chinese people with type 2 diabetes advancing their therapy from basal insulin plus oral antihyperglycaemic drugs: Results from the LixiLan-L-CN randomized controlled trial

AIMS

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi compared with iGlar in Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes advancing therapy from basal insulin ± oral antihyperglycaemic drugs.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

LixiLan-L-CN (NCT03798080) was a 30-week randomized, active-controlled, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre study. Participants were randomized 1:1 to iGlarLixi or iGlar. The primary objective was to show the superiority of iGlarLixi over iGlar in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change from baseline to Week 30.

RESULTS

In total, 426 participants were randomized to iGlarLixi (n = 212) or iGlar (n = 214). Mean age was 58 years, 67% had a body mass index ≥24 kg/m² , corresponding to overweight/obesity, and the mean diabetes duration was 12.3 years. From mean baseline HbA1c of 8.1% in both groups, greater decreases were seen with iGlarLixi versus iGlar [least squares mean difference: -0.7 (95% confidence interval: -0.9, -0.6)%; p < .0001] to final HbA1c of 6.7% and 7.4%, respectively. HbA1c <7.0% achievement was greater with iGlarLixi (63.3%) versus iGlar (29.9%; p < .0001). Mean body weight decreased with iGlarLixi and increased with iGlar [least squares mean difference: -0.9 (95% confidence interval: -1.4, -0.5) kg; p = .0001]. Hypoglycaemia incidence was similar between groups. Few gastrointestinal adverse events occurred (rated mild/moderate) with a slightly higher incidence with iGlarLixi than iGlar.

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi provided better glycaemic control and facilitated more participants to reach glycaemic targets alongside beneficial effects on body weight, no additional risk of hypoglycaemia, and few gastrointestinal AEs, supporting iGlarLixi use as an efficacious and well tolerated therapy option in Chinese people with long-standing T2D advancing therapy from basal insulin.