Effects of canagliflozin versus glimepiride on adipokines and inflammatory biomarkers in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Type 2 diabetes and obesity are pro-inflammatory states associated with increased risk of cardiovascular disease. Canagliflozin, an SGLT2 inhibitor, demonstrated superiority in lowering HbA1c versus glimepiride with less hypoglycemia and greater weight reduction via loss of fat mass in a 52-week trial of type 2 diabetes patients. This post hoc, exploratory analysis assessed the effects of canagliflozin versus glimepiride on select adipokines, inflammatory biomarkers, and chemokines.

METHODS

Changes from baseline to Week 52 in serum leptin, adiponectin, IL-6, TNFα, CRP, PAI-1, VCAM-1, and MCP-1 were measured in a randomly selected subset of type 2 diabetes patients on metformin receiving canagliflozin 300 mg (n = 100) or glimepiride (n = 100) in the overall study. Correlations between change in biomarkers and change in select metabolic and anthropometric variables were assessed.

RESULTS

At Week 52, canagliflozin decreased median serum leptin by 25% (95% CI: -34%, -15%) and increased median serum adiponectin by 17% (95% CI: 11%, 23%) compared with glimepiride. There was a 22% reduction in median serum IL-6 (95% CI: -34%, -10%) and a 7% increase in median serum TNFα (95% CI: 1%, 12%) with canagliflozin versus glimepiride. No between-group differences were observed with the other biomarkers. The decrease in serum leptin with canagliflozin was correlated with change in weight (r ≥ 0.3) only; the increase in adiponectin and decrease in IL-6 with canagliflozin occurred independently of changes in HbA1c, weight, or lipids.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that canagliflozin may improve adipose tissue function and induce changes in serum leptin, adiponectin, and IL-6 that favorably impact insulin sensitivity and cardiovascular disease risk.

Oxidative Stress and Cardiovascular Risk in Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: Insights From the DCCT/EDIC Study

Background

Hyperglycemia leading to increased oxidative stress is implicated in the increased risk for the development of macrovascular and microvascular complications in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

Methods and Results

A random subcohort of 349 participants was selected from the DCCT / EDIC (Diabetes Control and Complications Trial/Epidemiology of Diabetes Interventions and Complications) cohort. This included 320 controls and 29 cardiovascular disease cases that were augmented with 98 additional known cases to yield a case cohort of 447 participants (320 controls, 127 cases). Biosamples from DCCT baseline, year 1, and closeout of DCCT , and 1 to 2 years post‐ DCCT ( EDIC years 1 and 2) were measured for markers of oxidative stress, including plasma myeloperoxidase, paraoxonase activity, urinary F 2α isoprostanes, and its metabolite, 2,3 dinor‐8 iso prostaglandin F 2α . Following adjustment for glycated hemoblobin and weighting the observations inversely proportional to the sampling selection probabilities, higher paraoxonase activity, reflective of antioxidant activity, and 2,3 dinor‐8 iso prostaglandin F 2α , an oxidative marker, were significantly associated with lower risk of cardiovascular disease (−4.5% risk for 10% higher paraoxonase, P <0.003; −5.3% risk for 10% higher 2,3 dinor‐8 iso prostaglandin F 2α , P =0.0092). In contrast, the oxidative markers myeloperoxidase and F 2α isoprostanes were not significantly associated with cardiovascular disease after adjustment for glycated hemoblobin. There were no significant differences between DCCT intensive and conventional treatment groups in the change in all biomarkers across time segments.

Conclusions

Heightened antioxidant activity (rather than diminished oxidative stress markers) is associated with lower cardiovascular disease risk in type 1 diabetes mellitus, but these biomarkers did not change over time with intensification of glycemic control.

Clinical Trial Registration

URL : https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifiers: NCT 00360815 and NCT 00360893.

The INITIATOR study: pilot data on real-world clinical and economic outcomes in US patients with type 2 diabetes initiating injectable therapy

Introduction

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) progression often results in treatment intensification with injectable therapy to maintain glycemic control. Using pilot data from the Initiation of New Injectable Treatment Introduced after Anti-diabetic Therapy with Oral-only Regimens study, real-world treatment patterns among T2DM patients initiating injectable therapy with insulin glargine or liraglutide were assessed.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of claims from the OptumInsight™ (OI; January 1, 2010 to July 30, 2010) and HealthCore^® (HC; January 1, 2010 to June 1, 2010) health insurance databases. Baseline characteristics, health care resource utilization, and costs were compared between adults with T2DM initiating injectable therapy with insulin glargine pen versus liraglutide. Follow-up outcomes, including glycated hemoglobin A_1c (A1C), hypoglycemia, health care utilization, and costs, were assessed.

Results

At baseline, almost one in three liraglutide patients (OI, n = 363; HC, n = 521) had A1C <7.0%, while insulin glargine patients (OI, n = 498; HC, n = 1,188) had poorer health status, higher A1C (insulin glargine: 9.8% and 9.1% versus liraglutide: 7.9% and 7.7%, OI and HC, respectively, both P < 0.001), and were less likely to be obese (insulin glargine: 10.8% and 9.2% versus liraglutide: 17.4% and 18.8%, OI and HC, respectively, both P < 0.01). The percentage of patients experiencing a hypoglycemic event was numerically higher for insulin pen use for both cohorts (OI 4.4% versus 3.0%; HC 6.2% versus 2.3%). During follow-up, in the insulin glargine cohort, annualized diabetes-related costs remained unchanged ($8,344 versus $7,749 OI, and $7,094 versus $7,731 HC), despite a significant increase in pharmacy costs, due to non-significant decreases in medical costs, while the liraglutide cohort had a significant increase in annualized diabetes-related costs ($4,510 versus $7,731 OI, and $4,136 versus $7,111 HC; both P < 0.001) due to a non-significant increase in medical costs coupled with a significant increase in pharmacy costs.

Conclusion

These descriptive data identified differences in demographic and baseline clinical characteristics among patients initiating injectable therapies. The different health care utilization and cost patterns warrant further cost-effectiveness analysis.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-013-0074-8) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Fenofibrate-associated changes in renal function and relationship to clinical outcomes among individuals with type 2 diabetes: the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) experience

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

Fenofibrate has been noted to cause an elevation in serum creatinine in some individuals. Participants in the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Lipid Study were studied to better characterise who is at risk of an increase in creatinine level and to determine whether those with creatinine elevation have a differential risk of adverse renal or cardiovascular outcomes.

METHODS

A fenofibrate-associated creatinine increase (FACI) was defined as an increase in serum creatinine of at least 20% from baseline to month 4 in participants assigned to fenofibrate. Baseline patient characteristics, and baseline and 4-month drug, clinical, laboratory characteristics and study outcomes were examined by FACI status.

RESULTS

Of the sample, 48% of those randomised to receive fenofibrate had at least a 20% increase in serum creatinine within 4 months. In multivariable analysis, participants who were older, male, used an ACE inhibitor at baseline, used a thiazolidinedione (TZD) at 4 months post-randomisation, had baseline CVD, and had lower baseline serum creatinine and LDL-cholesterol levels were all more likely to meet the criteria for FACI. Participants in the FACI group were also more likely to have a decrease in their serum triacylglycerol level from baseline to 4 months. No differences in study outcomes were seen by FACI criteria.

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Several characteristics predict a rapid rise in serum creatinine upon starting fenofibrate. Participants who met the criteria for FACI also had a greater change in triacylglycerol levels. In the setting of careful renal function surveillance and reduction of fenofibrate dose as indicated, no increase in renal disease or cardiovascular outcome was seen in those individuals demonstrating FACI.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClincalTrials.gov: NCT00000620.

FUNDING

The ACCORD Trial was supported by grants (N01-HC-95178, N01-HC-95179, N01-HC-95180, N01-HC-95181, N01-HC-95182, N01-HC-95183, N01-HC-95184, IAA-Y1-HC-9035 and IAA-Y1-HC-1010) from the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; by the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, the National Institute on Aging, and the National Eye Institute; by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; by General Clinical Research Centers and by the Clinical and Translational Science Awards. Abbott Laboratories, Amylin Pharmaceutical, AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals LP, Bayer HealthCare LLC, Closer Healthcare, GlaxoSmithKline Pharmaceuticals, King Pharmaceuticals, Merck, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Novo Nordisk, Omron Healthcare, sanofi-aventis US and Takeda Pharmaceuticals provided study medications, equipment or supplies.

Exenatide once-weekly clinical development: safety and efficacy across a range of background therapies

In patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), the physiologic glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) response, which is involved in glucose regulation through several mechanisms, is dysfunctional. GLP-1 receptor agonists can fill an unmet therapeutic need in the treatment of T2DM: improving glycemic control without increasing the risk of hypoglycemia (except with concomitant sulfonylureas) and reducing weight in a substantial proportion of patients. GLP-1 receptor agonists have impacted established disease treatment algorithms for T2DM. For example, in 2009 the American Diabetes Association and European Association for the Study of Diabetes revised their consensus treatment algorithm to incorporate GLP-1 receptor agonists. GLP-1 receptor agonists were originally represented by exenatide BID (ExBID), a short-acting agent requiring twice-daily injections at mealtime. The longer-acting agent liraglutide, requiring once-daily injections, recently received regulatory approval. Several other long-acting agents are in clinical development, one of which is the once-weekly formulation of exenatide (exenatide once weekly [ExQW]). This article reviews the clinical development of ExQW in the DURATION program. Patients in theses clinical trials were receiving various background treatments, ranging from lifestyle therapy to combination oral therapy, although the majority (68%) received metformin monotherapy. Specifically, safety, glycemic control, and weight were compared in patients treated with ExQW versus ExBID, sitagliptin, pioglitazone, or insulin glargine. Moreover, measures of β-cell function, cardiovascular risk, inflammation, and hepatic health were investigated. During ExQW clinical development, consistent clinical efficacy (glycosylated hemoglobin, -1.5% to -1.9%; weight, -2 kg to -4 kg) and safety data were observed in patients with T2DM treated with ExQW.

Comparison of a novel insulin bolus-patch with pen/syringe injection to deliver mealtime insulin for efficacy, preference, and quality of life in adults with diabetes: a randomized, crossover, multicenter study

OBJECTIVE

This study compared the efficacy, safety, device satisfaction, and quality of life (QOL) in people with diabetes using an insulin bolus-patch versus current devices (pen/syringe) to deliver mealtime insulin.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Thirty-eight subjects with diabetes (26 with type 1 and 12 with type 2) were randomized to bolus-patch or current injection device (55% pen and 45% syringe) to deliver mealtime insulin in a multicenter, 6-week crossover study. Efficacy was assessed by equivalence in mean daily seven-point blood glucose (MDBG). Safety assessments included severe hypoglycemia episodes, adverse device effects (ADEs), and adverse events (AEs). Device satisfaction was determined by the validated Insulin Delivery System Rating Questionnaire (IDSRQ) and QOL by the validated Diabetes Specific QOL Scale (DSQOLS).

RESULTS

Using bolus-patch, MDBG (mean±SE) was equivalent to that using pen/syringe (8.61±0.28 vs. 9.02±0.26 mmol/L; P=0.098). SD of the seven-point blood glucose measurements was lower using bolus-patch (3.18±0.18 vs. 3.63±0.17 mmol/L; P=0.004), as was the coefficient of variation (CV) (37.2±1.7 vs. 40.3±1.7%; P=0.046). Hemoglobin A1c, 1,5-anhydroglucitol, fructosamine, and insulin use were similar between groups. There were no severe hypoglycemia episodes or serious ADEs. Between-device AEs were comparable. Subjects scored better on six of seven subscales on the DSQOLS and five of six subscales on the IDSRQ while using bolus-patch versus pen/syringe. At study completion, 76% of subjects would choose to switch to bolus-patch (P=0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Delivery of mealtime insulin with bolus-patch compared with pen/syringe resulted in equivalent MDBG, lower SD and CV of seven-point blood glucose measurements, good safety, significant device satisfaction, and improved QOL.

Performance evaluation and labeling comprehension of a new blood glucose monitoring system with integrated information management

BACKGROUND

This study evaluated performance and product labeling of CONTOUR® USB, a new blood glucose monitoring system (BGMS) with integrated diabetes management software and a universal serial bus (USB) port, in the hands of untrained lay users and health care professionals (HCPs).

METHOD

Subjects and HCPs tested subject's finger stick capillary blood in parallel using CONTOUR USB meters; deep finger stick blood was tested on a Yellow Springs Instruments (YSI) glucose analyzer for reference. Duplicate results by both subjects and HCPs were obtained to assess system precision. System accuracy was assessed according to International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 15197:2003 guidelines [within ±15 mg/dl of mean YSI results (samples <75 mg/dl) and ±20% (samples ≥75 mg/dl)]. Clinical accuracy was determined by Parkes error grid analysis. Subject labeling comprehension was assessed by HCP ratings of subject proficiency. Key system features and ease-of-use were evaluated by subject questionnaires.

RESULTS

All subjects who completed the study (N = 74) successfully performed blood glucose measurements, connected the meter to a laptop computer, and used key features of the system. The system was accurate; 98.6% (146/148) of subject results and 96.6% (143/148) of HCP results exceeded ISO 15197:2003 criteria. All subject and HCP results were clinically accurate (97.3%; zone A) or associated with benign errors (2.7%; zone B). The majority of subjects rated features of the BGMS as "very good" or "excellent."

CONCLUSIONS

CONTOUR USB exceeded ISO 15197:2003 system performance criteria in the hands of untrained lay users. Subjects understood the product labeling, found the system easy to use, and successfully performed blood glucose testing.

Effect of intensive glycemic lowering on health-related quality of life in type 2 diabetes: ACCORD trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effect of intensive versus standard glycemic control strategies on health-related quality of life (HRQL) in a substudy of the Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes (ACCORD) trial.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A randomly selected subsample of 2,053 ACCORD participants enrolled in the HRQL substudy was assessed at baseline and 12-, 36-, and 48-month visits. HRQL assessment included general health status (the 36-Item Short Form Health Survey [SF-36]), diabetes symptoms (the Diabetes Symptom Distress Checklist), depression (Patient Health Questionnaire [PHQ]-9), and treatment satisfaction (Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire [DTSQ]). Repeated-measures ANOVA models were used to estimate change in HRQL outcomes by treatment group over 48 months adjusting for model covariates. The effects of early discontinuation of the ACCORD intensive glycemic control arm on study results were explored.

RESULTS

A total of 1,956 (95%) completed the self-report HRQL instrument(s) at baseline. The intensive arm had a larger decrease in SF-36 physical health component score than the standard arm (-1.6 vs. -1.1, P = 0.0345). Treatment satisfaction (DTSQ) showed larger improvement with intensive than standard (P = 0.0004). There were no differences in mean scores of the Diabetes Symptom Checklist and PHQ-9. Effects of participant transition following discontinuation of the intensive arm on HRQL were not significant.

CONCLUSIONS

The ACCORD trial strategy of intensive glycemic control did not lead to benefits in HRQL and was associated with modest improvement in diabetes treatment satisfaction. Thus patient acceptability was apparently not compromised with intensive and complex interventions such as those used in ACCORD.

One year of liraglutide treatment offers sustained and more effective glycaemic control and weight reduction compared with sitagliptin, both in combination with metformin, in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomised, parallel-group, open-label trial

AIM

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of once-daily human glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue liraglutide with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin, each added to metformin, over 52 weeks in individuals with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

In an open-label, parallel-group trial, metformin-treated participants were randomised to liraglutide 1.2 mg/day (n=225), liraglutide 1.8 mg/day (n=221) or sitagliptin 100 mg/day (n=219) for 26 weeks (main phase). Participants continued the same treatment in a 26-week extension.

RESULTS

Liraglutide (1.2 or 1.8 mg) was superior to sitagliptin for reducing HbA(1c) from baseline (8.4-8.5%) to 52 weeks: -1.29% and -1.51% vs. -0.88% respectively. Estimated mean treatment differences between liraglutide and sitagliptin were as follows: -0.40% (95% confidence interval -0.59 to -0.22) for 1.2 mg and -0.63% (-0.81 to -0.44) for 1.8 mg (both p<0.0001). Weight loss was greater with liraglutide 1.2 mg (-2.78 kg) and 1.8 mg (-3.68 kg) than sitagliptin (-1.16 kg) (both p<0.0001). Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire scores increased significantly more with liraglutide 1.8 mg than with sitagliptin (p=0.03). Proportions of participants reporting adverse events were generally comparable; minor hypoglycaemia was 8.1%, 8.3% and 6.4% for liraglutide 1.2 mg, 1.8 mg and sitagliptin respectively. Gastrointestinal side effects, mainly nausea, initially occurred more frequently with liraglutide, but declined after several weeks.

CONCLUSION

  Liraglutide provides greater sustained glycaemic control and body weight reduction over 52 weeks. Treatment satisfaction was significantly greater with 1.8 mg liraglutide, similar to 26-week results. The safety profiles of liraglutide and sitagliptin are consistent with previous reports.

Liraglutide improves treatment satisfaction in people with Type 2 diabetes compared with sitagliptin, each as an add on to metformin

AIMS

Patient-reported outcomes from clinical trials offer insight into the impact of disease on health-related quality of life, including treatment satisfaction. This patient-reported outcomes evaluation was a substudy of a 26-week randomized, open-label trial comparing the once-daily injectable human GLP-1 analogue liraglutide with once-daily oral sitagliptin, both added to metformin. The patient reported outcomes substudy aimed to evaluate treatment satisfaction using the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) at baseline and 26 weeks.

METHODS

In the main 26-week randomized, open-label study (n =658), liraglutide, 1.2 or 1.8 mg, injected with a pen, led to greater HbA1c reduction than oral sitagliptin, 100 mg once daily, both added to metformin = 1500 mg daily: mean HbA1c reduction was 1.5, 1.2 and 0.9% (7, 10 and 14 mmol/mol) for liraglutide 1.8 mg, 1.2 mg and sitagliptin, respectively (P < 0.0001 for both liraglutide doses vs. sitagliptin) and liraglutide patients lost more weight (3 vs.1 kg; P < 0.0001). In this patient-reported outcomes substudy (liraglutide 1.8 mg, n = 171; 1.2 mg, n = 164; sitagliptin, n = 170) DTSQ scores were analyzed by ANCOVA with treatment and country as fixed effects and baseline value as covariate.

RESULTS

Overall treatment satisfaction, calculated by adding satisfaction scores for `current treatment', `convenience', `flexibility', `understanding', `recommend', and `continue', improved in all groups at 26 weeks; greater improvement with liraglutide (4.35 and 3.51 vs. 2.96; P = 0.03 for liraglutide 1.8 mg vs. sitagliptin) may reflect greater HbA1c reduction and weight loss. Patients perceived themselves to be hyperglycaemic significantly less frequently with liraglutide 1.8 mg (difference = -0.88; P < 0.0001) and 1.2 mg ( -0.49; P = 0.01). Perceived frequency of hypoglycaemia was similar across all groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Injectable liraglutide may lead to greater treatment satisfaction than oral sitagliptin, potentially by facilitating greater improvement in glycaemic control, weight loss and/ or perception of greater treatment efficacy.

A new-generation ultra-long-acting basal insulin with a bolus boost compared with insulin glargine in insulin-naive people with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble coformulation of the novel basal analog insulin degludec (IDeg: 70%) and insulin aspart (IAsp: 30%). We compared the safety and efficacy of IDegAsp, an alternative formulation (AF) (55% IDeg and 45% IAsp), and insulin glargine (IGlar) in insulin-naïve subjects with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this 16-week, open-label trial, subjects (mean age 59.1 years, A1C 8.5%, BMI 30.3 kg/m(2)) were randomized to once-daily IDegAsp (n = 59), AF (n = 59), or IGlar (n = 60), all in combination with metformin. Insulin was administered before the evening meal and dose-titrated to a fasting plasma glucose (FPG) target of 4.0-6.0 mmol/L.

RESULTS

After 16 weeks, mean A1C decreased in all groups to comparable levels (IDegAsp: 7.0%; AF: 7.2%; IGlar: 7.1%). A similar proportion of subjects achieved A1C <7.0% without confirmed hypoglycemia in the last 4 weeks of treatment (IDegAsp: 51%; AF: 47%; IGlar: 50%). Mean 2-h postdinner plasma glucose increase was lower for IDegAsp (0.13 mmol/L) and AF (0.24 mmol/L) than IGlar (1.63 mmol/L), whereas mean FPG was similar (IDegAsp: 6.8 mmol/L; AF: 7.4 mmol/L; IGlar: 7.0 mmol/L). Hypoglycemia rates were lower for IDegAsp and IGlar than AF (1.2, 0.7, and 2.4 events/patient year). Nocturnal hypoglycemic events occurred rarely for IDegAsp (1 event) and IGlar (3 events) compared with AF (27 events).

CONCLUSIONS

In this proof-of-concept trial, once-daily IDegAsp was safe, well tolerated, and provided comparable overall glycemic control to IGlar at similar low rates of hypoglycemia, but better postdinner plasma glucose control.

Effect of intensive treatment of hyperglycaemia on microvascular outcomes in type 2 diabetes: an analysis of the ACCORD randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Hyperglycaemia is associated with increased risk of cardiovascular complications in people with type 2 diabetes. We investigated whether reduction of blood glucose concentration decreases the rate of microvascular complications in people with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

ACCORD was a parallel-group, randomised trial done in 77 clinical sites in North America. People with diabetes, high HbA(1c) concentrations (>7.5%), and cardiovascular disease (or >or=2 cardiovascular risk factors) were randomly assigned by central randomisation to intensive (target haemoglobin A(1c) [HbA(1c)] of <6.0%) or standard (7.0-7.9%) glycaemic therapy. In this analysis, the prespecified composite outcomes were: dialysis or renal transplantation, high serum creatinine (>291.7 micromol/L), or retinal photocoagulation or vitrectomy (first composite outcome); or peripheral neuropathy plus the first composite outcome (second composite outcome). 13 prespecified secondary measures of kidney, eye, and peripheral nerve function were also assessed. Investigators and participants were aware of treatment group assignment. Analysis was done for all patients who were assessed for microvascular outcomes, on the basis of treatment assignment, irrespective of treatments received or compliance to therapies. ACCORD is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00000620.

FINDINGS

10 251 patients were randomly assigned, 5128 to the intensive glycaemia control group and 5123 to standard group. Intensive therapy was stopped before study end because of higher mortality in that group, and patients were transitioned to standard therapy. At transition, the first composite outcome was recorded in 443 of 5107 patients in the intensive group versus 444 of 5108 in the standard group (HR 1.00, 95% CI 0.88-1.14; p=1.00), and the second composite outcome was noted in 1591 of 5107 versus 1659 of 5108 (0.96, 0.89-1.02; p=0.19). Results were similar at study end (first composite outcome 556 of 5119 vs 586 of 5115 [HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.85-1.07, p=0.42]; and second 1956 of 5119 vs 2046 of 5115, respectively [0.95, 0.89-1.01, p=0.12]). Intensive therapy did not reduce the risk of advanced measures of microvascular outcomes, but delayed the onset of albuminuria and some measures of eye complications and neuropathy. Seven secondary measures at study end favoured intensive therapy (p<0.05).

INTERPRETATION

Microvascular benefits of intensive therapy should be weighed against the increase in total and cardiovascular disease-related mortality, increased weight gain, and high risk for severe hypoglycaemia.

FUNDING

US National Institutes of Health; National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute; National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases; National Institute on Aging; National Eye Institute; Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; and General Clinical Research Centers.

Liraglutide versus sitagliptin for patients with type 2 diabetes who did not have adequate glycaemic control with metformin: a 26-week, randomised, parallel-group, open-label trial

BACKGROUND

Agonists of the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor provide pharmacological levels of GLP-1 activity, whereas dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors increase concentrations of endogenous GLP-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the human GLP-1 analogue liraglutide versus the DPP-4 inhibitor sitagliptin, as adjunct treatments to metformin, in individuals with type 2 diabetes who did not achieve adequate glycaemic control with metformin alone.

METHODS

In this parallel-group, open-label trial, participants (aged 18-80 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus who had inadequate glycaemic control (glycosylated haemoglobin [HbA(1c)] 7.5-10.0%) on metformin (>or=1500 mg daily for >or=3 months) were enrolled and treated at office-based sites in Europe, the USA, and Canada. Participants were randomly allocated to receive 26 weeks' treatment with 1.2 mg (n=225) or 1.8 mg (n=221) subcutaneous liraglutide once daily, or 100 mg oral sitagliptin once daily (n=219). The primary endpoint was change in HbA(1c) from baseline to week 26. The efficacy of liraglutide versus sitagliptin was assessed hierarchically by a non-inferiority comparison, with a margin of 0.4%, followed by a superiority comparison. Analyses were done on the full analysis set with missing values imputed by last observation carried forward; seven patients assigned to liraglutide did not receive treatment and thus did not meet criteria for inclusion in the full analysis set. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00700817.

FINDINGS

Greater lowering of mean HbA(1c) (8.5% at baseline) was achieved with 1.8 mg liraglutide (-1.50%, 95% CI -1.63 to -1.37, n=218) and 1.2 mg liraglutide (-1.24%, -1.37 to -1.11, n=221) than with sitagliptin (-0.90%, -1.03 to -0.77, n=219). Estimated mean treatment differences for liraglutide versus sitagliptin were -0.60% (95% CI -0.77 to -0.43, p<0.0001) for 1.8 mg and -0.34% (-0.51 to -0.16, p<0.0001) for 1.2 mg liraglutide. Nausea was more common with liraglutide (59 [27%] patients on 1.8 mg; 46 [21%] on 1.2 mg) than with sitagliptin (10 [5%]). Minor hypoglycaemia was recorded in about 5% of participants in each treatment group.

INTERPRETATION

Liraglutide was superior to sitagliptin for reduction of HbA(1c), and was well tolerated with minimum risk of hypoglycaemia. These findings support the use of liraglutide as an effective GLP-1 agent to add to metformin.

FUNDING

Novo Nordisk.

A comparison between simplified and intensive dose-titration algorithms using AIR inhaled insulin for insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes in a randomized noninferiority trial

BACKGROUND

Insulin initiation and optimization is a challenge for patients with type 2 diabetes. Our objective was to determine whether safety and efficacy of AIR inhaled insulin (Eli Lilly and Co., Indianapolis, IN) (AIR is a registered trademark of Alkermes, Inc., Cambridge, MA) using a simplified regimen was noninferior to an intensive regimen.

METHODS

This was an open-label, randomized study in insulin-naive adults not optimally controlled by oral antihyperglycemic medications. Simplified titration included a 6 U per meal AIR insulin starting dose. Individual doses were adjusted at mealtime in 2-U increments from the previous day's four-point self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) (total < or =6 U). Starting Air insulin doses for intensive titration were based on fasting blood glucose, gender, height, and weight. Patients conducted four-point SMBG daily for the study duration. Insulin doses were titrated based on the previous 3 days' mean SMBG (total < or =8 U).

RESULTS

End point hemoglobin A1C (A1C) was 7.07 +/- 0.09% and 6.87 +/- 0.09% for simplified (n = 178) and intensive (n = 180) algorithms, respectively. Noninferiority between algorithms was not established. The fasting blood glucose (least squares mean +/- standard error) values for the simplified (137.27 +/- 3.42 mg/dL) and intensive (133.13 +/- 3.42 mg/dL) algorithms were comparable. Safety profiles were comparable. The hypoglycemic rate at 4, 8, 12, and 24 weeks was higher in patients receiving intensive titration (all P < .0001). The nocturnal hypoglycemic rate for patients receiving intensive titration was higher than for those receiving simplified titration at 8 (P < 0.015) and 12 weeks (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Noninferiority between the algorithms, as measured by A1C, was not demonstrated. This finding re-emphasizes the difficulty of identifying optimal, simplified insulin regimens for patients.

Diurnal glucose patterns of exenatide once weekly: a 1-year study using continuous glucose monitoring with ambulatory glucose profile analysis

OBJECTIVE

To use continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to characterize diurnal glucose patterns produced by a novel formulation of exenatide consisting of biodegradable polymeric microspheres that entrap exenatide and provide extended release enabling once-weekly administration.

METHODS

We performed a subgroup analysis of patients with type 2 diabetes who participated in a multicenter trial (DURATION-1: Effects of Exenatide Long-Acting Release on Glucose Control and Safety in Subjects With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus) comparing once-weekly with twice-daily formulations of exenatide. We are the only center to use CGM with ambulatory glucose profile (AGP) analysis to characterize glucose exposure, variability, and stability in participants assigned to exenatide once weekly.

RESULTS

Seven of the 303 patients in the larger study population were included in the subgroup analysis. Mean age (57.6 +/- 7 years), weight (102 +/- 17 kg), body mass index (34 +/- 3 kg/m2), and duration of diabetes (5 +/- 2 years) were comparable to characteristics of the larger study population. At 30 weeks and 52 weeks, participants treated with exenatide once weekly had a mean reduction in hemoglobin A1c level of 1.3 +/- 0.3% and 1.0 +/- 0.3%, respectively (P<.05). CGM analysis revealed a significant (P<.01) decrease in diurnal glucose exposure for 4 participants during nocturnal and daytime periods. Excess glucose exposure (compared with reference values) decreased in 6 of 7 participants, as did glucose variability. Glucose stability improved in 5 participants. The percentage of glucose values less than 70 mg/dL initially increased during the first half of the study then decreased to baseline levels by study end.

CONCLUSIONS

Individual glucose profiles revealed that changes in hemoglobin A1c did not consistently parallel alterations in glucose exposure, variability, and stability. AGPs provided a visual representation of improved glucose responses to exenatide once weekly.

Characterizing glucose exposure for individuals with normal glucose tolerance using continuous glucose monitoring and ambulatory glucose profile analysis

BACKGROUND

Efforts to mimic euglycemia depend upon targets from epidemiologic studies that rely on episodic measurements reduced to statistical summaries, leaving open the question, "What is normal glycemia?" We postulated that portrayal of euglycemia was possible through application of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) and a novel analytical tool, the ambulatory glucose profile (AGP).

METHODS

Individuals with normal glucose tolerance (NGT) and with diabetes used CGM for 30 days. AGP analysis, which graphs CGM data by time without regard to date, was used to characterize glucose exposure, variability, and stability.

RESULTS

Sixty-two subjects completed the study, employing CGM for 28 +/- 4 days averaging 99 +/- 18 (range, 33-125) readings per day. NGT subjects (n = 32) had a mean CGM of 102 +/- 7 mg/dL, ranging between 94 and 117 mg/dL and averaging 105 +/- 8 mg/dL daytime and 97 +/- 6 mg/dL overnight. Glucose variability, as expressed by the interquartile range, was 21 +/- 4 mg/dL (range, 14-29 mg/dL). Stability in glycemic control (hourly change in the median) for NGT subjects averaged 3 +/- 1 mg/dL/h. Subjects with diabetes (n = 30) were significantly higher on all glycemic characteristics with the exception of the percentage of hypoglycemic (CGM <70 mg/dL) episodes for type 2 diabetes (2.9%), compared to 2.7% for subjects with NGT.

CONCLUSIONS

CGM technologies enabled collection of verified data under normal living conditions, providing an exceptional vantage point from which to obtain important clinical information. This will facilitate an understanding of the range of euglycemic patterns, provide a sensitive means of detecting impaired glucose tolerance, and help set realistic treatment goals for individuals with diabetes.