Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist or bolus insulin with optimized basal insulin in type 2 diabetes

Treatment intensification following glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in type 2 diabetes: Comparative effectiveness analyses between free vs. fixed combination of GLP-1 RA and basal insulin. RESTORE-G real-world study

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Add-on of basal insulin (BI) to intensify the ongoing therapy with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) is recommended, but it is unclear if free or fixed combination of BI and GLP-1 RA produce similar outcomes. A retrospective comparative effectiveness analysis of the add-on of glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) to ongoing GLP-1 RA vs. switch to fixed ratio combination of degludec and liraglutide (iDegLira) was performed.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Real-world data collected in electronic medical records by 32 Italian diabetes clinics. Propensity score (PS) adjustment was applied to assess changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), body weight, and BI dose after 6 months from Gla-300 or iDegLira initiation. Compared to iDegLira group (N = 260), Gla-300+GLP-1 RA group (N = 255) had older age and higher levels of HbA1c (9.1 vs. 8.9%). After 6 months, statistically significant greater FBG improvement [estimated mean difference and 95% confidence intervals: -24.05 mg/dl (-37.04; -11.06; p = 0.0003) and BI dose increase [+0.03 U/kg (95%CI 0.00; 0.06); p = 0.009] were found in the free vs. fixed combination group, although low doses of BI (0.2 U/kg) were reached in both groups. Trends of larger HbA1c and body weight reductions with the free combination were also found, without reaching the statistical significance.

CONCLUSION

Although inertia in insulin initiation and titration was documented in both groups, higher benefit on FBG control was obtained with free vs. fixed combination, likely due to a better titration of BI and GLP-1 RA.

De-intensification of basal-bolus insulin regimen after initiation of a GLP-1 RA improves glycaemic control and promotes weight loss in subjects with type 2 diabetes

AIMS

To evaluate the impact of adding a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in basal-bolus (BB) insulin regimen, on insulin requirement, HbA1c, weight loss up to 24 months.

METHODS

Data on subjects with T2D on BB who initiated a GLP-1 RA have been retrospectively collected. HbA1c, body weight, and insulin dose were recorded at baseline, 6, 12, and 24 months after initiation of GLP-1 RA therapy. A linear mixed model for repeated measures was used to evaluate the changes in HbA1c, body weight, and insulin requirement over time.

RESULTS

We included 156 subjects (63.5% males; age 62 ± 11 years, HbA1c 70 ± 22.0 mmol/mol; 8.6 ± 4.2%). Compared to baseline, HbA1c and body weight were significantly lower at 6 months after introducing a GLP-1RA and remained stable up to 24 months (all p < 0.0001 vs. baseline). At 24 months, 81% of subjects discontinued prandial insulin, while 38.6% discontinued basal insulin as well. Insulin requirement at baseline (aOR 0.144; 95% CI, 0.046-0.456; P = 0.001) was the only significant predictor of prandial insulin discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

Replacing prandial insulin with GLP-1 RA is a valuable strategy to simplify the BB insulin regimen while improving glycaemic control and promoting weight loss in subjects with T2D.

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.

Pharmacotherapy of type 2 diabetes: An update and future directions

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is a widely prevalent disease with substantial economic and social impact for which multiple conventional and novel pharmacotherapies are currently available; however, the landscape of T2D treatment is constantly changing as new therapies emerge and the understanding of currently available agents deepens. This review aims to provide an updated summary of the pharmacotherapeutic approach to T2D. Each class of agents is presented by mechanism of action, details of administration, side effect profile, cost, and use in certain populations including heart failure, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, obesity, chronic kidney disease, and older individuals. We also review targets of novel therapeutic T2D agent development. Finally, we outline an up-to-date treatment approach that starts with identification of an individualized goal for glycemic control then selection, initiation, and further intensification of a personalized therapeutic plan for T2D.

The metabolic effects of adding exenatide to basal insulin therapy when targeting remission in early type 2 diabetes in a randomized clinical trial

Combining a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1-RA) with basal insulin is an emerging option when initiating injectable therapy in longstanding type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Recognizing that short-term insulin therapy can improve beta-cell function and induce glycemic remission in early T2DM, we hypothesized that adding the short-acting GLP1-RA exenatide to basal insulin in early T2DM may enhance the achievability of these outcomes. In this completed, 20-week, open-label, parallel-arm trial at an academic hospital, 103 individuals aged 30-80 years with <7 years duration of T2DM were randomized (by computer-generated sequence) to 8-weeks treatment with (i) insulin glargine (Glar; n = 33), (ii) glargine + thrice-daily lispro (Glar/Lispro; n = 35), or (iii) glargine + twice-daily exenatide (Glar/Exenatide; n = 35), followed by 12-weeks washout. The analyzed population of 102 participants (median 3.5 years of T2DM, A1c 6.6% ±0.7%) consisted of 33 on Glar, 35 on Glar/Lispro and 34 on Glar/Exenatide. Oral glucose tolerance tests at baseline, 4-weeks, 8-weeks and 20-weeks enabled assessment of beta-cell function (Insulin Secretion-Sensitivity Index-2 (ISSI-2)) and glycemic control. Mean ISSI-2 over the 8-week intervention (primary outcome) did not differ across the groups (Glar/Exenatide 237 ± 11; Glar/Lispro 208 ± 11; Glar 223 ± 11; p = 0.19). Baseline-adjusted A1c at 8-weeks (secondary outcome) was lowest in Glar/Exenatide followed by Glar/Lispro and Glar (mean 5.9% vs 6.0% vs 6.2%; p = 0.0007). After 12-weeks washout, however, neither baseline-adjusted A1c nor baseline-adjusted ISSI-2 (secondary outcomes) differed between the groups, nor did (additional outcome) rates of remission (Glar/Exenatide 26.7%, Glar/Lispro 43.8%, Glar 32.1%; p = 0.35). There were no severe hypoglycemia episodes. In conclusion, adding exenatide to basal insulin in early T2DM does not further enhance underlying beta-cell function or the capacity to achieve diabetes remission, despite yielding on-treatment glycemic benefit.

Effect of once-weekly semaglutide versus thrice-daily insulin aspart, both as add-on to metformin and optimized insulin glargine treatment in participants with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 11): A randomized, open-label, multinational, phase 3b trial

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of once-weekly (OW) semaglutide versus thrice-daily (TID) insulin aspart (IAsp) in participants with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with insulin glargine (IGlar) and metformin.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

SUSTAIN 11 (NCT03689374) was a randomized (1:1), parallel, open-label, multinational, phase 3b trial. After a 12-week run-in to optimize once-daily IGlar U100, 1748 adults with T2D (HbA1c >7.5% to ≤10.0%) were randomized to OW semaglutide or TID IAsp as add-on to optimized IGlar and metformin for 52 weeks. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from randomization to week 52. Confirmatory secondary endpoints included the occurrence of severe hypoglycaemic episodes and change in body weight (BW). Safety was assessed.

RESULTS

HbA1c (randomization: 8.6% [70.0 mmol/mol]) decreased by 1.5% points (16.6 mmol/mol) and 1.2% points (13.4 mmol/mol) with semaglutide (n = 874) and IAsp (n = 874), respectively (estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0.29% points [95% confidence interval {CI} -0.38; -0.20]; P < .0001 for non-inferiority). Few severe hypoglycaemic episodes were recorded in either group, with no statistically significant difference between the groups. Change in BW from randomization (87.9 kg) to week 52 was in favour of semaglutide (-4.1 kg) versus IAsp (+2.8 kg) (ETD -6.99 kg [95% CI -7.41; -6.57]). A higher proportion of participants experienced adverse events with semaglutide (58.5%) versus IAsp (52.1%); most were mild to moderate.

CONCLUSIONS

In this basal insulin-treated population, OW semaglutide improved glycaemic control to a greater extent than TID IAsp and provided numerically greater weight loss.

The Case for Early Use of Glucagon-like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Obstructive Sleep Apnea Patients with Comorbid Diabetes and Metabolic Syndrome

Patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) have high rates of co-occurring type 2 diabetes, hypertension, obesity, stroke, congestive heart failure, and accelerated atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases. These conditions frequently require multiple medications, raising the risk of polypharmacy, adverse drug-drug and drug-disease interactions, decreased quality of life, and increased healthcare cost in these patients. The current review of extant literature presents evidence supporting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) as one pharmacologic intervention that provides a "one-stop shop" for OSA patients because of the multiple effects GLP-1RA has on comorbidities (e.g., hypertension, diabetes, obesity, metabolic syndrome, and atherosclerotic cardiovascular diseases) that commonly co-occur with OSA. Examples of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists approved by the FDA for diabetes (some of which are also approved for obesity) are liraglutide, exenatide, lixisenatide, dulaglutide, semaglutide, and albiglutide. Prescribing of GLP-1RAs to address these multiple co-occurring conditions has enormous potential to reduce polypharmacy, cost, and adverse drug events, and to improve quality of life for patients living with OSA and diabetes. We thus strongly advocate for increased and early use of GLP-1RA in OSA patients with co-occurring diabetes and other cardiometabolic conditions common in OSA.

Effects of Metabolic Medicine and Metabolic Surgery on Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

The assessment and management of patient-reported outcomes (PROs) is considered secondary to that of cardiometabolic outcomes. When assessed, health-related quality of life (HRQOL), a PRO, can yield pertinent information that cannot be obtained from cardiometabolic assessments. For instance, physical and mental distress can be quantified and treated. Moreover, treatment convenience and satisfaction can be gaged. Behavioral modification, bariatric surgery, and pharmacotherapy can improve PROs. Typically, HRQOL is responsive to changes in weight. Specifically, weight loss and weight gain are associated with positive and negative changes in quality of life, respectively. In addition, patient satisfaction can be influenced by glycemic control. Therefore, hypoglycemia and hyperglycemic episodes can negatively affect patient satisfaction. When managing type 2 diabetes (T2D), it is important to consider how therapies impact PROs. Generally, changes in clinical outcomes mirror changes in PROs. To best manage T2D, integrating the assessment of PROs with clinical outcomes is needed.

Effects of insulin on cardiovascular events and all-cause mortality in patients with type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

In 2019, the Italian Society of Diabetology and the Italian Association of Clinical Diabetologists nominated an expert panel to develop guidelines for drug treatment of type 2 diabetes. This expert panel, after identifying the effects of glucose-lowering agents on major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), all-cause mortality, and hospitalization for heart failure (HHF) as critical outcomes, decided to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of insulin with this respect.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A MEDLINE database search was performed to identify all RCTs, up to June 1st, 2021, with duration≥52 weeks, in which insulin was compared with either placebo or active comparators. The principal endpoints were MACE and HHF (restricted for RCT reporting MACEs within their outcomes), all-cause mortality (irrespective of the inclusion of MACEs among the pre-specified outcomes). Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (MH-OR) with 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) was calculated for all the endpoints considered. Six RCTs (enrolling 8091 patients and 10,139 in the insulin and control group, respectively) were included in the analysis for MACEs and HF, and 18 in that for all-cause mortality (9760 and 11,694 patients in the insulin and control group, respectively). Treatment with insulin neither significantly increased nor reduced the risk of MACE, all-cause mortality, and HHF in comparison with placebo/active comparators (MH-OR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.97-1.23; 0.99, 95% CI 0.91, 1.08; and 0.90, 95% CI 0.78, 1.04, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis showed no significant effects of insulin on incident MACE, all-cause mortality, and HHF.

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Use in People Living with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Chronic Kidney Disease: A Narrative Review of the Key Evidence with Practical Considerations

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are incretin-mimetic agents that are effective adjuncts in the treatment of diabetes. This class of medications is also associated with promoting weight loss and a low risk of hypoglycemia, and some have been shown to be associated with a significant reduction of major cardiovascular events. Mounting evidence suggests that GLP-1 RAs have benefits beyond reducing blood glucose that include improving kidney function in people living with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD), a common microvascular complication of T2DM. Several large clinical studies, the majority of which are cardiovascular outcome trials, indicate that GLP-1 RA therapy is safe and tolerable for people living with T2DM and compromised renal function, and also suggest that GLP-1 RAs may have renoprotective properties. Although evidence from clinical trials has shown GLP-1 RAs to be safe and efficacious in people living with T2DM and renal impairment, their use is uncommon in this patient population. With continuing developments in the field of GLP-1 RA therapy, it is important for physicians to understand the benefits and practical use of GLP-1 RAs, as well as the clinical evidence, in order to achieve positive patient outcomes. Here, we review evidence on GLP-1 RA use in people living with T2DM and CKD and summarize renal outcomes from clinical studies. We provide practical considerations for GLP-1 RA use to provide an added benefit to guide treatment in this high-risk patient population.

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.

Free Versus Fixed-Ratio Combination of Basal Insulin and GLP-1 Receptor Agonists in Type 2 Diabetes Uncontrolled With GLP-1 Receptor Agonists: A Systematic Review and Indirect Treatment Comparison

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of the free up-titration of basal insulin and fixed-ratio combination (FRC) of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients inadequately controlled with GLP-1RA.

METHODS

With the use of a systematic literature review of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library databases through July 2021, randomized controlled trials that compared the free up-titration or FRC with remaining on GLP-1RA in T2DM patients uncontrolled with GLP-1RA were included. A comparison of adding basal insulin to maintaining GLP-1RA and an indirect comparison between the two strategies were conducted on the change in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), target achievement [HbA1c < 7.0%], and the risk of confirmed hypoglycemia. The Cochrane Collaboration's tool was used to assess the risk of bias.

RESULTS

Two free up-titration and two FRC trials involving 1,612 participants, all lasting 26 weeks, were included. Both approaches significantly lowered HbA1c levels (weighted mean difference [WMD] -0.75%, 95% CI -0.97 to -0.53) but increased hypoglycemic risk [risk ratio (RR) 7.59, 95% CI 3.35-17.17] compared to the unchanged GLP-1RA. No significant differences were discovered between the two methods regarding the decrease in HbA1c (WMD 0.08%, 95% CI -1.07% to 1.23%), FPG (WMD -2.29 mg/dl, 95% CI -45.07 to 40.49 mg/dl), target achievement (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.50-2.14), and hypoglycemic risk (RR 0.32, 95% CI 0.03-3.59).

CONCLUSION

In patients who failed to reach target HbA1c levels despite the GLP-1RA treatment, both strategies of adding basal insulin, free up-titration and FRC, are comparable options are comparable options.

Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Safety of Dulaglutide After Single or Multiple Doses in Chinese Healthy Subjects and Patients with T2DM: A Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Phase I Study

INTRODUCTION

This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of a single dulaglutide dose in Chinese healthy subjects and of multiple dulaglutide doses in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

This two-part, double-blind, placebo-controlled study included 16 healthy subjects randomized to receive a single dose of placebo and two of three dulaglutide doses (0.5 mg, 0.75 mg, or 1.5 mg) in three treatment periods, and 42 patients with T2DM randomized to receive placebo or one of the three dulaglutide doses once weekly for 4 weeks. Pharmacokinetics and safety parameters were assessed in all participants, and pharmacodynamics effects were investigated in patients with T2DM.

RESULTS

Following a single-dose administration of 0.5 mg, 0.75 mg, or 1.5 mg dulaglutide in healthy subjects, geometric mean maximum concentrations (C_max) were 29.4, 44.2, and 81.5 ng/mL, respectively. Following weekly administration in patients with T2DM for 4 weeks, C_max were 26.3, 41.4, and 70.2 ng/mL, respectively, with accumulation ratios of 1.33-1.39. Geometric mean for half-life of 4-5 days and median time to C_max (t_max) of approximately 48 h were observed in both study populations. Dose-proportional increases in drug exposure were observed after both single and multiple dosing. Significant reductions in baseline-corrected fasting glucose and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) were observed in patients with T2DM who received dulaglutide 0.75 mg and 1.5 mg. Dulaglutide was well tolerated, with the majority of adverse events being gastrointestinal disorders of mild severity.

CONCLUSIONS

Pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety profiles of dulaglutide demonstrated in the present study support a once-weekly dosing regimen in Chinese patients with T2DM.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01667900 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp: Results of a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, a fixed-ratio combination of basal insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist) versus IDegAsp, a co-formulation of basal insulin degludec 100 U/mL with rapid-acting insulin aspart.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. Outcomes from eligible RCTs were compared by an indirect treatment comparison using a Bayesian framework. Subanalyses of Japanese and international trials were performed.

RESULTS

Eight RCTs (duration 26-30 weeks) were included. Mean difference in HbA1c change with iGlarLixi exceeded that for IDegAsp: -0.64 (95% credible interval -1.01, -0.28) %-units (-7.0 [-11.0, -3.1] mmol/mol) for all trials, -0.39 (-0.55, -0.23) %-units (-4.3 [-6.0, -2.5] mmol/mol) for international, and -0.88 (-1.11, -0.64) %-units (-9.6 [-12.1, -7.0] mmol/mol) for Japanese trials. HbA1c target achievement (<7.0%-units [<53 mmol/mol]) was greater for iGlarLixi in all trials (odds ratio 2.50 [1.06, 5.56]) and Japanese trials (2.17 [1.27, 3.70]), but not in international trials (2.17 [0.42, 11.11]). Analyses suggesting differences in mean postmeal self-measured plasma glucose were significantly lower by 1.0-2.0 mmol/L (18-36 mg/dL) with iGlarLixi in all analyses. Bodyweight change was more favourable (1-2 kg) for iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp for all analyses (P < 0.05). Comparisons of hypoglycaemia were inconclusive owing to differences in definitions between studies. Adverse events were more frequent with iGlarLixi because of gastrointestinal intolerance.

CONCLUSIONS

iGlarLixi appears to offer clinical benefit in glucose control and bodyweight change in people needing both basal and meal-time intervention.

Evolving Concepts of Type 2 Diabetes Management

With the concept of patient-centered care in mind, this article outlines the current diabetes medications available for glucose lowering and the characteristics of each of these medications that need to be considered in shared decision-making for durable and effective therapy. Important patient characteristics such as weight, risk for hypoglycemia, cost, social determinants of health, and medical literacy need to be considered. The evidence-base informing the use of antihyperglycemic agents has changed dramatically due to 2008 FDA guidance for cardiovascular safety and cardiorenal protection with antihyperglycemic agents. New evidence supports an approach to diabetes management that addresses pre-existing cardiorenal disease.

Once-Daily Oral Semaglutide Versus Injectable GLP-1 RAs in People with Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Basal Insulin: Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

The relative efficacy and safety of once-daily oral semaglutide vs. injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled on basal insulin were assessed using network meta-analysis (NMA).

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) was performed to identify randomised controlled trials of GLP-1 RAs in this population. Data at 26 ± 4 weeks were extracted for efficacy and safety outcomes feasible for the NMA: change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c), weight and blood pressure; HbA_1c target levels (< 7.0% and ≤ 6.5%); composite endpoint; incidence of nausea, vomiting or diarrhoea. Comparators of interest were all licensed doses of dulaglutide, exenatide, liraglutide, lixisenatide and once-weekly injectable semaglutide.

RESULTS

The NMA included seven trials. Once-daily oral semaglutide 14 mg was associated with significantly greater HbA_1c reductions vs. most comparators (treatment differences: - 0.42 to - 1.32%); differences vs. once-weekly injectable semaglutide (0.5 mg and 1 mg doses) were not statistically significant. Once-daily oral semaglutide 14 mg was associated with significantly greater weight reductions vs. exenatide 2 mg and lixisenatide 20 μg (- 2.21 and - 2.39 kg respectively); non-statistically significant weight reductions in favour of once-daily oral semaglutide 14 mg were observed vs. all other comparators except once-weekly injectable semaglutide 1 mg. Similar trends were observed for the proportion of subjects achieving HbA_1c < 7.0% and ≤ 6.5% and the composite endpoint. Once-daily oral semaglutide 14 mg was associated with similar odds of experiencing nausea, vomiting or diarrhoea vs. all comparators.

CONCLUSION

Once-daily oral semaglutide 14 mg, as an add-on to basal insulin, is an efficacious treatment for reducing HbA_1c and weight and meeting glycaemic targets at 26 ± 4 weeks. Once-daily oral semaglutide 14 mg also offers the option of an oral treatment with similar or better efficacy and similar tolerability vs. most injectable GLP-1 RAs.

Exenatide Twice Daily Plus Glargine Versus Aspart 70/30 Twice Daily in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes With Inadequate Glycemic Control on Premixed Human Insulin and Metformin

OBJECTIVE

Many patients with type 2 diabetes treated with premixed insulin gradually have inadequate glycemic control and switch to a basal-bolus regimen, which raises some concerns for weight gain and increased hypoglycemic risk. Switching to combination use of glp-1 agonist and basal insulin may be an alternative option.

METHODS

After a 12-week premixed human insulin 70/30 dosage optimization period, 200 patients with HbA1c of 7.0% to 10.0% were randomized into 24-week treatment groups with exenatide twice a day plus glargine or with aspart 70/30 twice a day.

RESULTS

After 24 weeks, the patients receiving exenatide plus glargine (n = 90) had improved HbA1c control compared with those receiving aspart 70/30 (n = 90) (least squares mean change: ‒0.59 vs ‒0.13%; difference [95% CI]: ‒0.45 [‒0.74 to ‒0.17]) in the full analysis set population. Weight decreased 3.5 kg with exenatide and decreased 0.4 kg with aspart 70/30 (P < .001). The insulin dose was reduced 10.7 units/day (95% CI, ‒12.2 to ‒9.2 units; P < .001) with exenatide, and increased 9.7 units/day (95% CI, 8.2 to 11.2 units; P < .001) with aspart 70/30. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal adverse effects in the exenatide group (nausea [21%], vomiting [16%], diarrhea [13%]). The incidence of hypoglycemia was similar in 2 groups (27% for exenatide and 38% for aspart 70/30; P = .1).

CONCLUSION

In premixed human insulin‒treated patients with type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycemic control, switching to exenatide twice a day plus glargine was superior to aspart 70/30 twice a day for glycemic and weight control.

GLP-1 receptor agonists in the treatment of type 2 diabetes - state-of-the-art

BACKGROUND

GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) with exenatide b.i.d. first approved to treat type 2 diabetes in 2005 have been further developed to yield effective compounds/preparations that have overcome the original problem of rapid elimination (short half-life), initially necessitating short intervals between injections (twice daily for exenatide b.i.d.).

SCOPE OF REVIEW

To summarize current knowledge about GLP-1 receptor agonist.

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS

At present, GLP-1 RAs are injected twice daily (exenatide b.i.d.), once daily (lixisenatide and liraglutide), or once weekly (exenatide once weekly, dulaglutide, albiglutide, and semaglutide). A daily oral preparation of semaglutide, which has demonstrated clinical effectiveness close to the once-weekly subcutaneous preparation, was recently approved. All GLP-1 RAs share common mechanisms of action: augmentation of hyperglycemia-induced insulin secretion, suppression of glucagon secretion at hyper- or euglycemia, deceleration of gastric emptying preventing large post-meal glycemic increments, and a reduction in calorie intake and body weight. Short-acting agents (exenatide b.i.d., lixisenatide) have reduced effectiveness on overnight and fasting plasma glucose, but maintain their effect on gastric emptying during long-term treatment. Long-acting GLP-1 RAs (liraglutide, once-weekly exenatide, dulaglutide, albiglutide, and semaglutide) have more profound effects on overnight and fasting plasma glucose and HbA1c, both on a background of oral glucose-lowering agents and in combination with basal insulin. Effects on gastric emptying decrease over time (tachyphylaxis). Given a similar, if not superior, effectiveness for HbA1c reduction with additional weight reduction and no intrinsic risk of hypoglycemic episodes, GLP-1RAs are recommended as the preferred first injectable glucose-lowering therapy for type 2 diabetes, even before insulin treatment. However, GLP-1 RAs can be combined with (basal) insulin in either free- or fixed-dose preparations. More recently developed agents, in particular semaglutide, are characterized by greater efficacy with respect to lowering plasma glucose as well as body weight. Since 2016, several cardiovascular (CV) outcome studies have shown that GLP-1 RAs can effectively prevent CV events such as acute myocardial infarction or stroke and associated mortality. Therefore, guidelines particularly recommend treatment with GLP-1 RAs in patients with pre-existing atherosclerotic vascular disease (for example, previous CV events). The evidence of similar effects in lower-risk subjects is not quite as strong. Since sodium/glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitor treatment reduces CV events as well (with the effect mainly driven by a reduction in heart failure complications), the individual risk of ischemic or heart failure complications should guide the choice of treatment. GLP-1 RAs may also help prevent renal complications of type 2 diabetes. Other active research areas in the field of GLP-1 RAs are the definition of subgroups within the type 2 diabetes population who particularly benefit from treatment with GLP-1 RAs. These include pharmacogenomic approaches and the characterization of non-responders. Novel indications for GLP-1 RAs outside type 2 diabetes, such as type 1 diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases, and psoriasis, are being explored. Thus, within 15 years of their initial introduction, GLP-1 RAs have become a well-established class of glucose-lowering agents that has the potential for further development and growing impact for treating type 2 diabetes and potentially other diseases.

Delphi-Based Consensus on Treatment Intensification in Type 2 Diabetes Subjects Failing Basal Insulin Supported Oral Treatment: Focus on Basal Insulin + GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Combination Therapies

INTRODUCTION

The aim of this study was to elaborate a consensus on treatment intensification strategies in patients with type 2 diabetes failing basal insulin supported oral therapy (BOT). The panel focused on glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and basal insulin (BI) combinations.

METHODS

The authors developed a Delphi questionnaire organized into ten statements and 77 items that focused on: the definition of BOT and BOT failure, intensification strategies, fixed-dose combinations in general and the BI/GLP-1RA fixed combination. The survey was administered in two rounds to a panel of 80 Italian diabetes specialists, who rated their level of agreement with each item on a 5-point Likert scale. Consensus was predefined as > 66% of the panel agreeing/disagreeing on any given item.

RESULTS

Consensus was achieved for 71 of the 77 items. The panel agreed that the use of sulfonylureas in the BOT regimen is inappropriate. BOT failure was defined as individualized targets not being met for glycated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose and/or postprandial plasma glucose. There was agreement that postprandial hyperglycaemia and/or presence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia or weight gain define BOT failure. Addition of a GLP-1RA to BI therapy was considered to be the best option for BOT intensification. There was consensus for the use of BI/GLP-1RA fixed combinations as valuable options to increase compliance and safely improve glycaemic control. The panel agreed in considering the fixed-ratio combination insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) to be preferable to the fixed-ratio combination insulin glargine/lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) in the control of glycaemia, body weight and cardiovascular risk.

CONCLUSION

According to this Delphi consensus, the addition of a GLP-1RA may be the best option to intensify BOT. The BI/GLP-1RA fixed combinations may increase compliance and optimize the advantages of each of these molecules.

Deintensification of basal-bolus insulin after initiation of GLP-1RA in patients with type 2 diabetes under routine care

AIMS

We evaluated de-intensification of basal-bolus insulin (BBI) after initiation of a GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) under routine care.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

This retrospective, multicenter study conducted at outpatient clinics in North-East Italy collected data on patients with T2D on BBI who initiated a GLP-1RA. Patients were divided according to whether they de-intensified BBI at the end of observation by stopping prandial insulin.

RESULTS

We included 425 patients with mean age of 61.3 years and 13 years of diabetes duration. Baseline HbA1c was 8.6% and BMI was 35.5 kg/m². After 14 months. 58.6% of patients de-intensified BBI after initiating GLP-1RA: they were younger, had a shorter disease duration, lower HbA1c and insulin dose, and less frequent microangiopathy than those who continued BBI. A probability estimation based on these variables was validated in an independent cohort of 40 patients. Body weight improved in both groups, but HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose significantly declined only among patients who de-intensified BBI. Patients who de-intensified BBI and persisted on GLP-1RA at the last observation (80.7%) had greater HbA1c reductions.

CONCLUSION

Under routine care, GLP-1RA initiation frequently allowed discontinuing BBI, especially among patients with shorter disease duration, lower insulin requirement, and better glucose control.

Glucose variability and diabetes complications: Risk factor or biomarker? Can we disentangle the "Gordian Knot"?

« Variability in glucose homoeostasis » is a better description than « glycaemic variability » as it encompasses two categories of dysglycaemic disorders: i) the short-term daily glucose fluctuations and ii) long-term weekly, monthly or quarterly changes in either HbA1c, fasting or postprandial plasma glucose. Presently, the relationship between the "variability in glucose homoeostasis" and diabetes complications has never been fully clarified because studies are either observational or limited to retrospective analysis of trials not primarily designed to address this issue. Despite the absence of definitive evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs), it is most likely that acute and long-term glucose homoeostasis "cycling", akin to weight and blood pressure "cycling" in obese and hypertensive individuals, are additional risk factors for diabetes complications in the presence of sustained ambient hyperglycaemia. As hypoglycaemic events are strongly associated with short- and long-term glucose variability, two relevant messages can be formulated. Firstly, due consideration should be given to avoid within-day glucose fluctuations in excess of 36% (coefficient of variation) at least for minimizing the inconvenience and dangers associated with hypoglycaemia. Secondly, it seems appropriate to consider that variability in glucose homoeostasis is not only associated with cardiovascular events but is also a causative risk factor via hypoglycaemic episodes as intermediary step. Untangling the" Gordian Knot", to provide confirmation about the impact of variability in glucose homoeostasis and diabetes complications remains a daunting prospect.

Stress-Induced Hyperglycaemia in Non-Diabetic Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: From Molecular Mechanisms to New Therapeutic Perspectives

Stress-induced hyperglycaemia (SIH) at hospital admission for acute coronary syndrome is associated with poor outcome, especially in patients without known diabetes. Nevertheless, insulin treatment in these subjects was not correlated with the reduction of mortality. This is likely due to the fact that SIH in the context of an acute coronary syndrome, compared to that in known diabetes, represents an epiphenomenon of other pathological conditions, such as adrenergic and renin-angiotensin system over-activity, hyperglucagonaemia, increase of circulating free fatty acids and pancreatic beta-cell dysfunction, which are not completely reversed by insulin therapy and so worsen the prognosis. Thus, SIH may be considered not only as a biomarker of organ damage, but also as an indicator of a more complex therapeutic strategy in these subjects. The aim of this review is to analyse the molecular mechanisms by which SIH may favour a worse prognosis in non-diabetic patients with acute coronary syndrome and identify new therapeutic strategies, in addition to insulin therapy, for a more appropriate treatment and improved outcomes.

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.

Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: Synopsis of the 2020 American Diabetes Association's Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes Clinical Guideline

DESCRIPTION

The American Diabetes Association (ADA) updates the Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes annually to provide clinicians, patients, researchers, payers, and other interested parties with evidence-based recommendations for the diagnosis and management of diabetes.

METHODS

To develop the 2020 Standards, the ADA Professional Practice Committee, comprising physicians, adult and pediatric endocrinologists, diabetes educators, registered dietitians, epidemiologists, pharmacists, and public health experts, continuously searched MEDLINE (English language only) from 15 October 2018 through August-September 2019 for pertinent studies, including high-quality trials that addressed pharmacologic management of type 2 diabetes. The committee selected and reviewed the studies, developed the recommendations, and solicited feedback from the larger clinical community.

RECOMMENDATIONS

This synopsis focuses on guidance relating to the pharmacologic treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes. Recommendations address oral and noninsulin injectable therapies, insulin treatment, and combination injectable therapies. Results of recent large trials with cardiovascular and renal outcomes are emphasized.

Impact of a Weekly Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist, Albiglutide, on Glycemic Control and on Reducing Prandial Insulin Use in Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Multiple Insulin Therapy: A Randomized Trial

OBJECTIVE

The principle of replacing prandial insulin lispro with a once-weekly glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) for type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a multiple daily insulin injections regimen was tested with albiglutide.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this treat-to-target study, basal plus prandial insulin was optimized over 4 weeks before participants were randomized (1:1) to albiglutide plus optimized basal insulin glargine and lispro (dose reduced by 50% at randomization; subsequently, lispro injections were fully discontinued 4 weeks later) (n = 402) or to continued optimized lispro plus optimized glargine (n = 412).

RESULTS

Mean ± SD HbA_1c at baseline, 7.8 ± 0.6% (61 ± 7 mmol/mol) in the albiglutide + glargine group and 7.7 ± 0.6% (60 ± 7 mmol/mol) in the lispro + glargine group, was reduced at week 26 to 6.7 ± 0.8% (49 ± 8 mmol/mol) and 6.6 ± 0.8% (48 ± 8 mmol/mol), respectively (least squares [LS] difference 0.06% [95% CI -0.05 to 0.17]; noninferiority P < 0.0001). In the albiglutide + glargine group, 218 participants (54%) replaced all prandial insulin without reintroducing lispro up to week 26. Total daily prandial insulin dose was similar at baseline but was lower by 62 units/day (95% CI -65.9 to -57.8; P < 0.0001) at week 26 in the albiglutide + glargine group, and the total number of weekly injections was also reduced from 29 to 13 per week. Less severe/documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (57.2% vs. 75.0%) occurred in the albiglutide + glargine group with meaningful weight differences (LS mean ± SE -2.0 ± 0.2 vs. +2.4 ± 0.2 kg; P < 0.0001) vs. lispro + glargine. Gastrointestinal adverse events were higher with albiglutide + glargine (26% vs. 13%).

CONCLUSIONS

A once-weekly GLP-1RA was able to substitute for prandial insulin in 54% of people, substantially reducing the number of prandial insulin injections; glycemic control improved, with the added benefits of weight loss and less hypoglycemia in the GLP-1RA arm. Replacing prandial insulin with a weekly GLP-1RA can simplify basal plus prandial insulin treatments and achieve better outcomes in type 2 diabetes.

Efficacy and Safety of Short- and Long-Acting Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists on a Background of Basal Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy and safety of short- and long-acting glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), both used in combination with basal insulin, in patients with type 2 diabetes.

DATA SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials comparing the coadministration of short- or long-acting GLP-1 RAs and basal insulin with basal insulin ± placebo were identified (PubMed search). Of 974 identified publications, 14 clinical trials were included. Eight trials examined short-acting and six long-acting GLP-1 RAs.

DATA EXTRACTION AND DATA SYNTHESIS

Differences in HbA_1c, fasting plasma glucose, body weight, and adverse events were compared between studies using short- or long-acting GLP-1 RAs by random-effects meta-analysis.

LIMITATIONS

There were relatively small numbers of available publications, some heterogeneity regarding protocols, and differences in the GLP-1 RA compound used.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-acting GLP-1 RAs more effectively reduced HbA_1c (∆ -6 mmol/mol [95% CI -10; -2], P = 0.007), fasting plasma glucose (∆ -0.7 mmol/L [-1.2; -0.3], P = 0.007), and body weight (∆ -1.4 kg [-2.2; -0.6], P = 0.002) and raised the proportion of patients achieving an HbA_1c target <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) (P = 0.03) more than the short-acting ones. Patients reporting symptomatic (P = 0.048) but not severe (P = 0.96) hypoglycemia were fewer with long- versus short-acting GLP-1 RAs added to insulin. A lower proportion of patients reported nausea (-52%, P < 0.0001) or vomiting (-36%, P = 0.0002) with long-acting GLP-1 RAs. Overall, GLP-1 RAs improved HbA_1c, fasting plasma glucose, and body weight when added to basal insulin. However, long-acting GLP-1 RAs were significantly more effective for glycemic and body weight control and displayed better gastrointestinal tolerability.

Rationale for Timely Insulin Therapy in Type 2 Diabetes Within the Framework of Individualised Treatment: 2020 Update

Type 2 diabetes is characterised by chronic hyperglycaemia and variable degrees of insulin deficiency and resistance. Hyperglycaemia and elevated fatty acids exert harmful effects on β-cell function, regeneration and apoptosis (gluco-lipotoxicity). Furthermore, chronic hyperglycaemia triggers a vicious cycle of insulin resistance, low-grade inflammation and a cascade of pro-atherogenic processes. Thus, timely near to normal glucose control is of utmost importance in the management of type 2 diabetes and prevention of micro- and macroangiopathy. The majority of patients are multimorbid and obese, with critical comorbidities such as cardiovascular disease, heart failure and chronic kidney disease. Recently published guidelines therefore recommend patient-centred risk/benefit-balanced use of oral glucose-lowering drugs or a glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, or switching to insulin with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) out of target. This article covers the indications of early insulin treatment to prevent diabetes-related complications, particularly in subgroups with severe insulin deficit, and to achieve recovery of residual β-cell function. Furthermore, the individualised, risk/benefit-balanced, timely initiation of insulin as second and third option is analysed. Timely insulin initiation may prevent diabetes progression, reduce diabetes-related complications and has less serious adverse effects. Basal insulin is the preferred option in most clinical situations with consequences of undertreatment of chronic hyperglycaemia.

Risk of hypoglycaemia associated with professional, recreational, and traffic-related activities in patients with type 2 diabetes: a cross-sectional study by questionnaire

AIMS

We aimed to quantify the exposure to physical exercise associated with professional, recreational, or traffic-related activities in patients with type 2 diabetes, which may provoke or aggravate hypoglycaemic episodes, and to assess whether such risks determine the choice of medications minimizing the risk of hypoglycaemia.

METHODS

In total, 203 patients with type 2 diabetes (98 women, 105 men, age 65 [56;72; median, inter-quartile range] years, diabetes duration 10 [5;15] years) were recruited from a German diabetes practice. A questionnaire assessed their engagement in professional, recreational, or traffic-related activities. The prescription insulin or sulphonylureas was quantified in relation to the number of such activities.

RESULTS

63.5% of the patients were treated with insulin, 7.4% with sulphonylureas, and 70.9% with either. Sixty-six patients (22.7%) were professionally active: 36 (54.4%) of those were professionally exposed to risky behaviour (14 [31.8%] patients with exposure to multiple risks and 20 (30.3%) who experienced hypoglycaemic episodes in the past year). In total, 194 (95.6%) patients were exposed to risky behaviour during recreational activities, 129 (63.6%) to multiple ones. All patients were exposed to traffic-related activities, 144 (70.9%) were exposed to more than being pedestrian, and 24 (11.8%) experienced hypoglycaemic episodes while in traffic.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with type 2 diabetes are exposed to risks associated with professional, recreational, and traffic-related activities. We recommend a careful assessment of such risks before glucose-lowering medications with a potential for provoking hypoglycaemic episodes are prescribed.

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.

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

INTRODUCTION

IDegLira is a fixed-ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide indicated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). We report the first real-world study describing change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) among US patients who initiated IDegLira. The aim of the study was to observe and describe changes in glycemic control and weight in patients initiating IDegLira in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

Patients in the Practice Fusion electronic medical record database who initiated treatment with IDegLira between March 2017 and June 2018 were identified (n = 1384). To be included in the analyses, the study population needed to meet age, time in database pre- and post-initiation, and availability of HbA1c data at baseline and follow-up requirements. Data were analyzed according to baseline therapy subgroups and whether patients were intensifying (primary analysis group) or simplifying (secondary analysis group) their diabetes treatment. Changes in clinical outcomes from baseline were evaluated by paired t tests and linear regression.

RESULTS

The overall study population comprised 296 patients, of whom 206 were included in the primary analysis group and 90 were included in the secondary analysis group. In the adjusted analyses, there was a reduction in HbA1c of - 1.1% in the primary analysis group, with the HbA1c reduction in all prior therapy groups ranging from - 0.8% for those previously on basal insulin to - 1.0% for those previously on non-injectable therapy (p < 0.0001 for all). In a similar adjusted analysis, there was a statistically significant but small (1.0 lb/0.45 kg) change in weight in the primary analysis group. In the secondary analysis, patients previously on more than one injection daily switched to a more simplified therapy without compromising on glycemic control (HbA1c change of - 0.16%).

CONCLUSION

Consistent with previous real-world studies, IDegLira lowered HbA1c across different background prior glucose-lowering therapies, with minimal impact on weight.

Acupuncture for patients with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists-induced nausea and vomiting: A systematic review protocol

INTRODUCTION

The glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) class agent has grown rapidly in the last decade due to its effects on lowering HbA1c and weight and the low possibility of hypoglycemia. However, GLP-1 RAs are not devoid of adverse effects among which nausea and vomiting rank first, which reduce adherence to treatment. Accumulated evidences proved that acupuncture can properly treat nausea and vomiting caused by various reasons. The study aims at assessing the safety and effectiveness exhibited by acupuncture treatment for patients with nausea and vomiting induced by GLP-1 RAs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Articles that have been identified via electronically searching databases of MEDLINE, Nature, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, WorldSciNet, EMbase, Science Online, AMED, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, the Wanfang Databse and China Biology Medicine Disc and the Chongqing VIP Chinese Science and Technology Periodical Database from their inception of to December 31, 2019 will be incorporated into the systematic review. The review only adopts Chinese and English. It will also pay attention to searching resources of qualified studies, relevant conference proceedings, potential reference list, as well as related system reviews. Two researchers will take charge of completing the selection of research, the extraction of data as well as the assessment of research quality independently. A random- or fixed-effects model will be employed to synthesize data combining the heterogeneity test. The primary outcomes will be nausea and vomiting, seen from the objective and self-reported assessment. Data analysis will be performed via the RevMan 5 software, and GRADE will help to assess the evidence level. The heterogeneity level will determine whether the random-effects model or the fixed-effects model will be used. The 2 categories will adopt risk ratio (RR) or odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). Continuous variables will adopt the weighted mean difference or standardized mean difference and 95% CI. Meta-analysis will not be conducted if no assessment, like subgroup analysis, is able to explain existing meaningful heterogeneity. The subgroup analysis shall carefully consider each subgroup in certain case.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The systematic review does not involve the evaluation of patients' individual information or patients' right; thus, there is no need to gain the approval from ethical institution. The article will be published in journals reviewed by peers and present at related conference.Registration: Open Science Framework (OSF) Preregistration. 2020, April 8. osf.io/3fgu8.

Effect of Hemoglobin A1c Reduction or Weight Reduction on Blood Pressure in Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibitor Treatment in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis

Background Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) have shown their beneficial effects on cardiovascular outcomes and multiple cardiovascular risk factors, including hypertension. However, the mechanism of blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects of these agents has not been elucidated. This study aims to evaluate the effect of hemoglobin A1c reduction or body weight reduction with GLP-1RA treatment and SGLT2i treatment on BP changes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods and Results Studies were identified by a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register until June 2019. Meta-regression analysis was performed to evaluate the association between hemoglobin A1c reduction or body weight reduction and changes of BP. A total of 184 trials were included. Both GLP-1RA and SGLT2i led to significant reductions in systolic BP (weighted mean difference, -2.856 and -4.331 mm Hg, respectively; P<0.001 for both) and diastolic BP (weighted mean difference, -0.898 and -2.279 mm Hg, respectively; P<0.001 for both). For both drug classes, hemoglobin A1c reduction was not independently associated with systolic BP reduction or diastolic BP reduction. In GLP-1RA treatment, weight reduction was positively associated with systolic BP reduction and diastolic BP reduction (β=0.821 and β=0.287, respectively; P<0.001 for both). In SGLT2i treatment, weight loss was significantly associated with systolic BP reduction (β=0.820; P=0.001) but was not associated with diastolic BP reduction. Conclusions Treatment with GLP-1RA and SGLT2i led to significant reductions in BP in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Weight reduction was significantly and independently associated with BP reductions in GLP-1RA treatment and SGLT2i treatment.

Achieving postprandial glucose control with lixisenatide improves glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes on basal insulin: a post-hoc analysis of pooled data

Background

To examine the impact on glycemic control of achieving postprandial glucose (PPG) target with lixisenatide, a once-daily glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist approved in the US, in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on basal insulin, an agent that primarily targets fasting plasma glucose.

Methods

A post hoc pooled analysis was conducted using clinical trial data extracted from the intent-to-treat subpopulation of patients with T2D who participated in the 24-week, phase 3, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 2-arm parallel-group, multicenter GetGoal-L (NCT00715624), GetGoal-Duo 1 (NCT00975286) and GetGoal-L Asia trials (NCT00866658).

Results

Data from 587 lixisenatide-treated patients and 484 placebo-treated patients were included. Patients on lixisenatide were more likely to achieve a PPG target of < 10 mmol/L (< 180 mg/dL) than placebo-treated patients (P < 0.001), regardless of baseline fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels. More importantly, those who reached the PPG target experienced a significantly greater reduction in mean HbA1c, were more likely to achieve HbA1c target of < 53 mmol/mol (< 7.0%), and experienced weight loss. Those outcomes were achieved with no significant differences in the risk of symptomatic hypoglycemia compared with placebo.

Conclusion

Compared with placebo, addition of lixisenatide to basal insulin improved HbA1c and reduced PPG, without increasing hypoglycemia risk. These findings highlight the importance of PPG control in the management of T2D, and provide evidence that adding an agent to basal insulin therapy that also impacts PPG has therapeutic value for patients who are not meeting glycemic targets.

Trial registration

NCT00715624. Registered 15 July 2008, NCT00975286. Registered 11 September 2009, NCT00866658. Registered 20 March 2009.

Pharmacologic Approaches to Glycemic Treatment: Standards of Medical Care in Diabetes-2020

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/dc20-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/dc20-SINT). Readers who wish to comment on the Standards of Care are invited to do so at professional.diabetes.org/SOC.

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.

The Effects of Once-Weekly Dulaglutide and Insulin Glargine on Glucose Fluctuation in Poorly Oral-Antidiabetic Controlled Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Aim. To compare the effects of once-weekly Dulaglutide with once-daily glargine in poorly oral-antidiabetic controlled patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Method. A total of 25 patients with T2DM admitted into Department of Endocrinology from December 2012 to August 2013 were randomly assigned into two groups: Dulaglutide group (n = 16) and glargine group (n = 9). All patients received either Dulaglutide or glargine treatments for 52 weeks. Continuous glucose monitoring systems (CGMS) were applied to them for two 72 h periods at before and after the treatment each. Patient general clinical data were collected and analyzed. Result. Fast blood glucose (FBG) of the glargine group declined more significantly than the Dulaglutide group after treatment (p < 0.05). The mean blood glucose (MBG), standard deviation of blood glucose (SDBG), mean amplitude of glycemic excursion (MAGE) within a day, the largest amplitude of glycemic excursion (LAGE), M-value, absolute means of daily difference (MODD) of glycemic excursion, the percentage of time (≤2.8 mmol/L, ≤3.9 mmol/L, ≥10.0 mmol/L, ≥13.9 mmol/L, 3.9-7.8 mmol/L, and 9-10.0 mmol/L), maximum glycemic value, and minimum glycemic value were similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). The incidence of hypoglycemia was also similar between the two groups (p > 0.05). Though serum levels of TNF-α, IL-6, and 8-PGF2α all decreased, significant reduction was found in TNF-α and 8-PGF2α. TNF-α was only significantly reduced in the Dulaglutide group, while 8-PGF2α was seen in both groups. Conclusion. For T2DM patients with poorly controlled oral antidiabetic drugs, once-weekly Dulaglutide not only has the same effect on glucose fluctuation as once-daily glargine but also significantly reduced TNF-α and 8-PGF2α after a 52 week treatment protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01648582.

Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1)

BACKGROUND

The glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is a multifaceted hormone with broad pharmacological potential. Among the numerous metabolic effects of GLP-1 are the glucose-dependent stimulation of insulin secretion, decrease of gastric emptying, inhibition of food intake, increase of natriuresis and diuresis, and modulation of rodent β-cell proliferation. GLP-1 also has cardio- and neuroprotective effects, decreases inflammation and apoptosis, and has implications for learning and memory, reward behavior, and palatability. Biochemically modified for enhanced potency and sustained action, GLP-1 receptor agonists are successfully in clinical use for the treatment of type-2 diabetes, and several GLP-1-based pharmacotherapies are in clinical evaluation for the treatment of obesity.

SCOPE OF REVIEW

In this review, we provide a detailed overview on the multifaceted nature of GLP-1 and its pharmacology and discuss its therapeutic implications on various diseases.

MAJOR CONCLUSIONS

Since its discovery, GLP-1 has emerged as a pleiotropic hormone with a myriad of metabolic functions that go well beyond its classical identification as an incretin hormone. The numerous beneficial effects of GLP-1 render this hormone an interesting candidate for the development of pharmacotherapies to treat obesity, diabetes, and neurodegenerative disorders.

A randomized trial comparing the efficacy and safety of treating patients with type 2 diabetes and highly elevated HbA1c levels with basal-bolus insulin or a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist plus basal insulin: The SIMPLE study

AIM

To compare the efficacy and safety of a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP1RA) plus basal insulin versus basal-bolus insulin treatment in patients with very uncontrolled type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The SIMPLE study was a 6-month pragmatic, randomized, open-label trial testing the effectiveness of two approaches to treat patients with type 2 diabetes and HbA1c ≥10%. We randomized patients to detemir plus liraglutide or detemir plus aspart (before each meal). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c; changes in body weight, insulin dose, hypoglycaemia and diabetes-related quality-of-life were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

We randomized 120 participants aged 47.4 ± 9.5 years, Hispanic 40%, African American 42%, diabetes duration 10 [25th-75th percentile (6 to 15)] years, body mass index 37.2 ± 10.3 kg/m² . HbA1c decreased more with GLP1RA plus basal insulin [12.2% (95% CI 11.8% to 12.6%) to 8.1% (95% CI 7.4% to 8.7%)] compared with basal-bolus insulin [11.8% (95% CI 11.5% to 12.2%) to 8.8% (95% CI 88.1% to 9.55%)]; estimated treatment difference (ETD) of -1.1% (95% CI -2.0% to -0.1%) (non-inferiority margin 0.4% and P = .0001, superiority P = .026). Compared with basal-bolus insulin, treatment with GLP1RA plus basal insulin led to a body weight ETD of -3.7 kg (95% CI -5.8 to -1.5; P = .001), fewer patients experiencing hypoglycaemia [66.1% vs 35.2% (P = .002)], and greater improvements in general/current health perception, treatment satisfaction, and fear of hypoglycaemia, while taking a lower total daily dose of insulin [estimated treatment ratio 0.68 (95% CI 0.55 to 0.84)].

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with HbA1c ≥10% treatment with GLP1RA plus basal insulin, compared with basal-bolus insulin, resulted in better glycaemic control and body weight, lower insulin dosage and hypoglycaemia, and improved quality of life. This treatment strategy is an effective and safe alternative to a basal-bolus insulin regimen.

Initial injectable therapy in type 2 diabetes: Key considerations when choosing between glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists and insulin

Managing type 2 diabetes is complex and necessitates careful consideration of patient factors such as engagement in self-care, comorbidities and costs. Since type 2 diabetes is a progressive disease, many patients will require injectable agents, usually insulin. Recent ADA-EASD guidelines recommend glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) as first injectable therapy in most cases. The basis for this recommendation is the similar glycemic efficacy of GLP-1 RAs and insulin, but with GLP-1 RAs promoting weight loss instead of weight gain, at lower hypoglycemia risk, and with cardiovascular benefits in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease. GLP-1 RAs also reduce burden of glucose self-monitoring. However, tolerability and costs are important considerations, and notably, rates of drug discontinuation are often higher for GLP-1 RAs than basal insulin. To minimize risk of gastrointestinal symptoms patients should be started on lowest doses of GLP-1 RAs and up-titrated slowly. Overall healthcare costs may be lower with GLP-1 RAs compared to insulin. Though patient-level costs may still be prohibitive, GLP-1 RAs can replace 50-80 units of insulin daily and reduce costs associated with glucose self-monitoring. Decisions regarding initiating injectable therapy should be individualized. This review provides a framework to guide decision-making in the real-world setting.

The good companions: insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in type 2 diabetes. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

We provided an updated systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the metabolic effects of combination therapy of insulin and GLP-1RA (combo) in comparison with other injectable therapy. We searched PubMed, Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials, Scholar, and ClinicalTrials.gov for RCTs evaluating changes in HbA1c (primary outcome), proportion of patients at HbA1c target <7%, hypoglycaemia, and weight change (secondary end-points). We included 36 RCTs involving 14,636 patients. Compared with comparator therapies (overall analysis), the combo led to a significant HbA1c reduction (=-0.49%, 95% CI -0.61 to -0.38%, P < 0.001), more patients at HbA1c target [relative risk, (RR) = 1.77, 95% CI, 1.56, 2.01, P < 0.001], similar hypoglycaemic events (RR = 1.03, 95% CI, 0.88, 1.19, P = 0.728), and reduction in body weight (-2.5 Kg, 95% CI -3.1 to -1.8 kg, P < 0.001), with high heterogeneity in each analysis. The quality of the evidence was low for three of the considered outcomes. Compared with intensified insulin regimens (basal-plus/basal-bolus) the combo produced similar glycemic control with reduction of both hypoglycaemia, and body weight. Combination therapy of GLP-1RA and insulin could represent a valuable treatment strategy to improve glycemic control in the management of type 2 diabetes.

Novel GLP-1 Analog Supaglutide Stimulates Insulin Secretion in Mouse and Human Islet Beta-Cells and Improves Glucose Homeostasis in Diabetic Mice

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), an incretin hormone plays an important role in regulating glucose homeostasis. The therapeutic use of native GLP-1 is inadequate due to its short in vivo half-life. We recently developed a novel GLP-1 mimetics supaglutide, and demonstrated that this formulation retained native GLP-1 biological activities and possessed long-lasting GLP-1 actions. In this study, we further examined its abilities in regulating blood glucose in diabetic mice. We found that supaglutide stimulated insulin secretion in both mouse and human islets in a dose-dependent fashion. Oral glucose tolerance test conducted in normal ICR mice showed that supaglutide significantly decreased postprandial glucose excursions in a dose-dependent fashion. In type 2 diabetic db/db mice, a single-dose injection of supaglutide significantly decreased blood glucose levels, and this efficacy was lasted for at least 72 h in a dose-dependent fashion. During a 4-weeks intervention course supaglutide (twice injections per week) dose-dependently and significantly decreased fasting and random blood glucose levels in hyperglycemic db/db mice. Supaglutide, at a dose of 1.2 mg/kg, significantly reduced serum fructosamine levels. This was associated with significant enlargement of beta-cell mass, increased pancreatic insulin content, and increased plasma insulin level. Notably, during the intervention course supaglutide significantly reduced body-weight gain in these obese diabetic mice, associated with reduced fat mass (but not the lean mass), improved lipid profile, i.e., declined serum triglyceride, and free fatty acid levels compared to the placebo control. These finding reveals that supaglutide exerts beneficial effects in regulating blood glucose and lipid homeostasis in diabetic db/db mice.

Impact of dose capping in insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination trials in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

The LixiLan clinical trials of insulin glargine (iGlar)/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (iGlarLixi) investigated the safety and efficacy of iGlarLixi versus iGlar: LixiLan-O (NCT02058147) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) and LixiLan-L (NCT02058160) in patients with T2D inadequately controlled on basal insulin ± OADs. In these two trials, both iGlar and iGlarLixi were titrated to a maximum (capped) dose of 60 units. We evaluated whether this may have affected the reported glycemic efficacy of iGlar, and the glycemic differences observed between treatment with iGlarLixi and iGlar.

METHODS

The efficacy of iGlar under uncapped conditions was simulated in a two-step approach. First, a model characterizing the relationship between iGlar dose and fasting self-measured plasma glucose (f-SMPG) was developed. Then, the relationship between glycated hemoglobin A1_c (A1C) and f-SMPG was established to translate simulated f-SMPG responses to A1C responses.

RESULTS

Most patients achieved stable f-SMPG at ∼60 units/day, with no further reduction with increasing insulin dose. In comparisons of observed/capped and simulated/uncapped changes in mean A1C from baseline to Week 30, iGlarLixi consistently demonstrated treatment benefit compared with iGlar. Uncapping resulted in a slightly higher mean iGlar dose in both LixiLan-O (+0.72 units) and LixiLan-L (+2.1 units), without marked impact on f-SMPG or A1C change from baseline.

CONCLUSION

Uncapping the iGlar dose in LixiLan-O and LixiLan-L would not have led to significant improvements in mean A1C reduction in the iGlar arm, supporting the conclusion that iGlarLixi provides additional, clinically relevant glycemic control versus iGlar alone.

Rationale for a titratable fixed-ratio co-formulation of a basal insulin analog and a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist in patients with type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Achieving and maintaining recommended glycemic targets, including those for glycated hemoglobin A1c (A1C), is key to improving outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). As fasting plasma glucose and postprandial glucose contribute to overall A1C, targeting both is essential for sustaining glycemic control.

METHODS

This review examines the complementary mechanisms of action of glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and basal insulin; they both enhance glucose-stimulated insulin release and suppress glucagon secretion. GLP-1 receptor agonists also slow gastric emptying and increase satiety.

RESULTS

Adding a GLP-1 receptor agonist to therapy with a basal insulin analog has been associated with improved overall glycemic control, with comparable risk of hypoglycemia and no weight gain. Titratable fixed-ratio co-formulations of basal insulin and a GLP-1 receptor agonist have been shown to improve glycemic control, with less complex dosing schedules, possibly increasing treatment adherence. The slow titration of fixed-ratio co-formulations has been shown to reduce the occurrence and severity of gastrointestinal adverse events associated with the use of a separate GLP-1 receptor agonist. Titratable fixed-ratio co-formulations also mitigate insulin-associated weight gain, and show a comparable risk of hypoglycemia to basal insulin use alone.

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy and safety of titratable fixed-ratio co-formulations have been demonstrated for insulin degludec/liraglutide and insulin glargine/lixisenatide in the DUAL and LixiLan trials, respectively, in both insulin-naive and -experienced patients. Titratable fixed-ratio co-formulations represent an attractive treatment option for many patients with T2D.