-
1.
Effect of exenatide QW or placebo, both added to titrated insulin glargine, in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes: The DURATION-7 randomized study.
Guja, C, Frías, JP, Somogyi, A, Jabbour, S, Wang, H, Hardy, E, Rosenstock, J
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(7):1602-1614
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of adding the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist exenatide once weekly (QW) 2 mg or placebo among patients with type 2 diabetes who were inadequately controlled despite titrated insulin glargine (IG) ± metformin. METHODS This multicentre, double-blind study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02229383) randomized (1:1) patients with persistent hyperglycaemia after an 8-week titration phase (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.0%-10.5% [53-91 mmol/mol]) to exenatide QW or placebo. The primary endpoint was HbA1c change from baseline to week 28. Secondary endpoints included body weight, 2-hour postprandial glucose, and mean daily IG dose. RESULTS Of 464 randomized patients (mean: age, 58 years; HbA1c, 8.5% [69 mmol/mol]; diabetes duration, 11.3 years), 91% completed 28 weeks. Exenatide QW + IG vs placebo + IG significantly reduced HbA1c (least-squares mean difference, -0.73% [-8.0 mmol/mol]; 95% confidence interval, -0.93%, -0.53% [-10.2, -5.8 mmol/mol]; P < .001; final HbA1c, 7.55% [59 mmol/mol] and 8.24% [67 mmol/mol], respectively); body weight (-1.50 kg; -2.17, -0.84; P < .001); and 2-hour postprandial glucose (-1.52 mmol/L [-27.5 mg/dL]; -2.15, -0.90 [-38.7, -16.2]; P < .001). Significantly more exenatide QW + IG-treated patients vs placebo + IG-treated patients reached HbA1c <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) (32.5% vs 7.4%; P < .001); daily IG dose increased by 2 and 4 units, respectively. Gastrointestinal and injection-site adverse events were more frequent with exenatide QW + IG (15.1% and 7.8%, respectively) than with placebo + IG (10.8% and 3.0%, respectively); hypoglycaemia incidence was similar between the exenatide QW + IG (29.7%) and placebo + IG (29.0%) groups, with no major hypoglycaemic events. CONCLUSIONS Among patients with inadequate glycaemic control, exenatide QW significantly improved glucose control and decreased body weight, without increased hypoglycaemia or unexpected safety findings.
-
2.
Effect of prandial treatment timing adjustment, based on continuous glucose monitoring, in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with once-daily basal insulin: A randomized, phase IV study.
Ilany, J, Bhandari, H, Nabriski, D, Toledano, Y, Konvalina, N, Cohen, O
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(5):1186-1192
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate the glycaemic control achieved by prandial once-daily insulin glulisine injection timing adjustment, based on a continuous glucose monitoring sensor, in comparison to once-daily insulin glulisine injection before breakfast in patients with type 2 diabetes who are uncontrolled with once-daily basal insulin glargine. MATERIALS AND METHODS This was a 24-week open-label, randomized, controlled, multicentre trial. At the end of an 8-week period of basal insulin optimization, patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.5% and FPG < 130 mg/dL were randomized (1:1) to either arm A (no sensor) or arm B (sensor) to receive 16-week intensified prandial glulisine treatment. Patients in arm A received pre-breakfast glulisine, and patients in arm B received glulisine before the meal with the highest glucose elevation based on sensor data. The primary outcome was mean HbA1c at week 24 and secondary outcomes included rates of hypoglycaemic events and insulin dosage. RESULTS A total of 121 patients were randomized to arm A (n = 61) or arm B (n = 60). There was no difference in mean HbA1c at week 24 between arms A and B (8.5% ± 1.2% vs 8.4% ± 1.0%; P = .66). The prandial insulin glulisine dosage for arm A and arm B was 9.3 and 10.1 units, respectively (P = .39). The frequency of hypoglycaemic events did not differ between study arms (36.1% vs 51.7%; P = .08). CONCLUSION Using a CGM sensor to identify the meal with the highest glucose excursion and adjusting the timing of prandial insulin treatment did not show any advantage in terms of glycaemic control or safety in our patients.
-
3.
Efficacy and safety of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors versus dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors as monotherapy or add-on to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
Wang, Z, Sun, J, Han, R, Fan, D, Dong, X, Luan, Z, Xiang, R, Zhao, M, Yang, J
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(1):113-120
Abstract
AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4is) and sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) as monotherapy or add-on to metformin (Met) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS PubMed, Embase and ClinicalTrials.gov sites were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials to assess the efficacy and safety of DPP-4is and SGLT-2is in patients with T2DM. Risk ratio (RR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) were used to evaluate outcomes. RESULTS In the analysis of 25 randomized trials, which involved 14 619 patients, SGLT-2is were associated with a significantly stronger reduction in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (WMD 0.13%, 95% credible interval [CI], 0.04%-0.22%, P = .005) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (WMD 0.80 mmol/L, 95% CI, 0.58-1.01 mmol/L, P < .00001) than were DPP-4is. However, no significant difference between the 2 drug categories was found in the risk of hypoglycaemic events (RR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.78-1.26, P = .92). SGLT-2is plus Met was associated with a more significant decrease in FPG (WMD 0.71 mmol/L, 95% CI, 0.43-1.00 mmol/L, P < .00001) than was DPP-4is plus Met. However, no differences were found in the reduction of HbA1c (WMD 0.11%, 95% CI, -0.03%-0.25%, P = .12) or the risk of hypoglycaemic events (RR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.80-1.31, P = .86). CONCLUSIONS This review revealed that, compared to DPP-4is, SGLT-2is significantly reduced HbA1c, FPG and body weight without increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia in diabetes treatment.
-
4.
Long-term safety and efficacy of tofogliflozin as add-on to insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes: Results from a 52-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, open-label extension, Phase 4 study in Japan (J-STEP/INS).
Terauchi, Y, Tamura, M, Senda, M, Gunji, R, Kaku, K
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(5):1176-1185
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIMS: To evaluate the long-term safety and efficacy of tofogliflozin as an add-on treatment to insulin over 52 weeks. MATERIALS AND METHODS This 52-week, multicentre, Phase 4 study consisted of a 16-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase and a 36-week open label extension phase (NCT02201004). Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus, aged 20 to 75 years, with suboptimal glycaemic control (7.5%-10.5%) receiving insulin monotherapy (basal-bolus, bolus, premix [low and high] and basal) or receiving combination therapy with basal insulin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor were eligible for participation. Patients who received tofogliflozin throughout the study (52 weeks) were referred to as the 'tofo-tofo group' and patients who received placebo and tofogliflozin (36 weeks) were referred to as the 'pla-tofo group'. RESULTS A total of 210 patients received treatment per randomization. Hypoglycaemia was the most common treatment-emergent adverse event (AE) (42.9% in the tofo-tofo group and 29.4% in the pla-tofo group). Patients reported genital infection, urinary tract infection, excessive urination and AEs related to volume depletion (2.1%, 2.1%, 7.1% and 10.0% of patients in the tofo-tofo group, and 0%, 1.5%, 2.9% and 7.4% of patients in the pla-tofo group, respectively). Mean HbA1c and body weight at baseline (mean changes ± standard error from baseline to Week 52) in the tofo-tofo and pla-tofo groups were 8.53% (-0.76% ± 0.077) and 8.40% (-0.73% ± 0.102); 68.84 kg (-1.52 kg ± 0.207) and 72.24 kg (-2.13 kg ± 0.313), respectively. CONCLUSIONS This study demonstrates the safety and efficacy of tofogliflozin as add-on to insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients, offering a new therapeutic solution to diabetes management.
-
5.
Short and medium-term efficacy of sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors: A meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.
Monami, M, Liistro, F, Scatena, A, Nreu, B, Mannucci, E
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(5):1213-1222
Abstract
AIMS: Sodium glucose co-transport-2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors reduce tubular glucose reabsorption, producing a reduction of blood glucose without stimulating insulin release. The aim of this meta-analysis was the systematic collection of available data from randomized trials, in order to establish the durability of the efficacy of SGLT-2 inhibitors on glycaemic control and body mass index. METHODS A meta-analysis was performed, including all trials with a duration of at least 12 weeks, comparing SGLT-2 inhibitors with non-SGLT-2 inhibitor agents in type 2 diabetes. The principal outcome was the effect of SGLT-2 inhibitors on hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) at 12, 24, 52 and 104 weeks. Data on body mass index at the same time points were also collected. RESULTS Among 66 randomized trials, HbA1c reduction at 12, 24, 52 and 104 weeks was 0.63% (0.57; 0.68, 0.63% (0.57; 0.70), 0.66% (0.57; 0.74) and 0.60% (0.40; 0.81), respectively. SGLT-2 inhibitors showed a greater efficacy than dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i). Sulfonylureas appeared to be superior to SGLT-2 inhibitors at 12 weeks, but not at 24 and 52 weeks; SGLT-2 inhibitors produced a greater reduction in HbA1c than did sulfonylureas at 104 weeks. SGLT-2 inhibitor-induced weight loss in placebo-controlled trials appeared to increase progressively with the duration of treatment. CONCLUSIONS SGLT-2 inhibitors showed a good persistence of efficacy, at least up to 2 years, with a small but significant superiority over DPP-4i. Sulfonylureas are more effective in the very short term, but less effective in the longer term.
-
6.
Effects on the glucagon response to hypoglycaemia during DPP-4 inhibition in elderly subjects with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, placebo-controlled study.
Farngren, J, Persson, M, Ahrén, B
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(8):1911-1920
Abstract
AIMS: Maintainance of glucagon response to hypoglycaemia is important as a safeguard against hypoglycaemia during glucose-lowering therapy in type 2 diabetes. During recent years, DPP-4 (dipeptidyl peptidase-4) inhibition has become more commonly used in elderly patients. However, whether DPP-4 inhibition affects the glucagon response to hypoglycaemia in the elderly is not known and was the aim of this study. METHODS In a single-centre, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled crossover study, 28 subjects with metformin-treated type 2 diabetes (17 male, 11 female; mean age, 74 years [range 65-86]; mean HbA1c, 51.5 mmol/mol [6.9%]) received sitagliptin (100 mg once daily) as add-on therapy or placebo for 4 weeks with a 4-week washout period in between. After each treatment period, the subjects underwent a standard breakfast test, followed by a 2-step hyperinsulinaemic hypoglycaemic clamp (target 3.5 and 3.0 mmol/L), followed by lunch. RESULTS Glucagon levels after breakfast and lunch, and the glucagon response at 3.5 mmol/L, were lower after sitagliptin than after placebo. However, the glucagon response to hypoglycaemia at 3.1 mmol/L did not differ significantly between the two. Similarly, the noradrenaline, adrenaline and cortisol responses were lower with sitagliptin than with placebo at 3.5 mmol/L, but not at 3.1 mmol/L glucose. Responses in pancreatic polypeptide did not differ between the two. CONCLUSIONS Elderly subjects with metformin-treated type 2 diabetes have lower glucagon levels at 3.5 mmol/L glucose, but maintain the glucagon response to hypoglycaemia at 3.1 mmol/L during DPP-4 inhibition, which safeguards against hypoglycaemia and may contribute to decreasing the risk of hypoglycaemia by DPP-4 inhibition in this age group.
-
7.
Critical Care Management of Stress-Induced Hyperglycemia.
Vanhorebeek, I, Gunst, J, Van den Berghe, G
Current diabetes reports. 2018;(4):17
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW We discuss key studies that have set the scene for the debate on the efficacy and safety of tight glycemic control in critically ill patients, highlighting important differences among them, and describe the ensuing search towards strategies for safer glucose control. RECENT FINDINGS Differences in level of glycemic control, glucose measurement and insulin administration, expertise, and nutritional management may explain the divergent outcomes of the landmark studies on tight glycemic control in critical illness. Regarding strategies towards safer glucose control, several computerized algorithms have shown promise, but lack validation in adequately powered outcome studies. Real-time continuous glucose monitoring and closed loop blood glucose control systems are not up to the task yet due to technical challenges, though recent advances are promising. Alternatives for insulin have only been investigated in small feasibility studies. Severe hyperglycemia in critically ill patients generally is not tolerated anymore, but the optimal blood glucose target may depend on the specific patient and logistic context.
-
8.
The challenges of achieving postprandial glucose control using closed-loop systems in patients with type 1 diabetes.
Gingras, V, Taleb, N, Roy-Fleming, A, Legault, L, Rabasa-Lhoret, R
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(2):245-256
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
For patients with type 1 diabetes, closed-loop delivery systems (CLS) combining an insulin pump, a glucose sensor and a dosing algorithm allowing a dynamic hormonal infusion have been shown to improve glucose control when compared with conventional therapy. Yet, reducing glucose excursion and simplification of prandial insulin doses remain a challenge. The objective of this literature review is to examine current meal-time strategies in the context of automated delivery systems in adults and children with type 1 diabetes. Current challenges and considerations for post-meal glucose control will also be discussed. Despite promising results with meal detection, the fully automated CLS has yet failed to provide comparable glucose control to CLS with carbohydrate-matched bolus in the post-meal period. The latter strategy has been efficient in controlling post-meal glucose using different algorithms and in various settings, but at the cost of a meal carbohydrate counting burden for patients. Further improvements in meal detection algorithms or simplified meal-priming boluses may represent interesting avenues. The greatest challenges remain in regards to the pharmacokinetic and dynamic profiles of available rapid insulins as well as sensor accuracy and lag-time. New and upcoming faster acting insulins could provide important benefits. Multi-hormone CLS (eg, dual-hormone combining insulin with glucagon or pramlintide) and adjunctive therapy (eg, GLP-1 and SGLT2 inhibitors) also represent promising options. Meal glucose control with the artificial pancreas remains an important challenge for which the optimal strategy is still to be determined.
-
9.
Safety and efficacy of once-weekly semaglutide vs additional oral antidiabetic drugs in Japanese people with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes: A randomized trial.
Kaku, K, Yamada, Y, Watada, H, Abiko, A, Nishida, T, Zacho, J, Kiyosue, A
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(5):1202-1212
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide as monotherapy or combined with an oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) vs an additional OAD added to background therapy in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled on diet/exercise or OAD monotherapy. METHODS In this phase III, open-label trial, adults with T2D were randomized 2:2:1 to semaglutide 0.5 mg or 1.0 mg, or one additional OAD (a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, biguanide, sulphonylurea, glinide, α-glucosidase inhibitor or thiazolidinedione) with a different mode of action from that of background therapy. The primary endpoint was number of adverse events (AEs) after 56 weeks. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment arms (601 randomized). More AEs were reported in the semaglutide 0.5 mg (86.2%) and 1.0 mg (88.0%) groups than in the additional OAD group (71.7%). These were typically mild/moderate. Gastrointestinal AEs were most frequent with semaglutide, which diminished over time. The mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration (baseline 8.1%) was significantly reduced with semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg vs additional OAD (1.7% and 2.0% vs 0.7%, respectively; estimated treatment difference [ETD] vs additional OAD -1.08% and -1.37%, both P < .0001). Body weight (baseline 71.5 kg) was reduced by 1.4 kg and 3.2 kg with semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg, vs a 0.4-kg increase with additional OAD (ETD -1.84 kg and -3.59 kg; both P < .0001). For semaglutide-treated participants, >80% achieved an HbA1c concentration <7.0% (Japanese Diabetes Society target). CONCLUSIONS Semaglutide was well tolerated, with no new safety issues identified. Semaglutide treatment significantly reduced HbA1c and body weight vs additional OAD treatment in Japanese people with T2D.
-
10.
Ertugliflozin plus sitagliptin versus either individual agent over 52 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with metformin: The VERTIS FACTORIAL randomized trial.
Pratley, RE, Eldor, R, Raji, A, Golm, G, Huyck, SB, Qiu, Y, Sunga, S, Johnson, J, Terra, SG, Mancuso, JP, et al
Diabetes, obesity & metabolism. 2018;(5):1111-1120
-
-
Free full text
-
Abstract
AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin and sitagliptin co-administration vs the individual agents in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin. METHODS In this study (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02099110), patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥7.5% and ≤11.0% (≥58 and ≤97 mmol/mol) with metformin ≥1500 mg/d (n = 1233) were randomized to ertugliflozin 5 (E5) or 15 (E15) mg/d, sitagliptin 100 mg/d (S100) or to co-administration of E5/S100 or E15/S100. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 26. RESULTS At Week 26, least squares mean HbA1c reductions from baseline were greater with E5/S100 (-1.5%) and E15/S100 (-1.5%) than with individual agents (-1.0%, -1.1% and -1.1% for E5, E15 and S100, respectively; P < .001 for all comparisons). HbA1c <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) was achieved by 26.4%, 31.9%, 32.8%, 52.3% and 49.2% of patients in the E5, E15, S100, E5/S100 and E15/S100 groups, respectively. Fasting plasma glucose reductions were significantly greater with E5/S100 and E15/S100 compared with individual agents. Body weight and systolic blood pressure (SBP) significantly decreased with E5/S100 and E15/S100 vs S100 alone. Glycaemic control, body weight and SBP effects of ertugliflozin were maintained to Week 52. Genital mycotic infections were more common among ertugliflozin-treated patients compared with those treated with S100. Incidences of symptomatic hypoglycaemia and adverse events related to hypovolaemia or urinary tract infection were similar among groups. CONCLUSIONS In patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes while using metformin, co-administration of ertugliflozin and sitagliptin provided more effective glycaemic control through 52 weeks compared with the individual agents.