Relative contribution of basal and postprandial hyperglycaemia stratified by HbA1c categories before and after treatment intensification with dulaglutide.

AIM: To assess the effect of dulaglutide on the relative contribution of basal hyperglycaemia (BHG) and postprandial hyperglycaemia (PPHG) to overall hyperglycaemia across HbA1c categories in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Data from five phase 3 studies (N = 673) were pooled to assess the change in relative contributions of BHG and PPHG to overall hyperglycaemia across different HbA1c categories after 6 months of treatment intensification with dulaglutide 1.5 mg as monotherapy or with 1 or 2 oral medication(s) in patients with type 2 diabetes. BHG and PPHG were calculated using the area under the curve (AUC) of 7-point self-monitored plasma glucose concentration profiles. As a secondary objective, relative contribution of BHG and PPHG for dulaglutide versus liraglutide, exenatide BID and insulin glargine was assessed by individual studies at 6 months. RESULTS: In pooled data, after 6 months of treatment intensification with dulaglutide 1.5 mg, there was a significant reduction from baseline in overall hyperglycaemia (AUCoverall ) [(mean ± SE) -466.31 ± 18.32 mg*h/dL (P < 0.001)], BHG (AUCbasal ) [(mean ± SE) -371.46 ± 16.36 mg*h/dL (P < 0.001)] and PPHG (AUCpostprandial ) [(mean ± SE) -94.84 ± 7.97 mg*h/dL (P < 0.001)]. At baseline, relative contributions of BHG increased and PPHG decreased with increasing HbA1c levels. This pattern was maintained at 6 months, even as overall glycaemia improved with decreasing HbA1c values. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes, dulaglutide reduces HbA1c by lowering both basal and postprandial hyperglycaemia across various HbA1c levels.

Adherence, persistence, glycaemic control and costs among patients with type 2 diabetes initiating dulaglutide compared with liraglutide or exenatide once weekly at 12-month follow-up in a real-world setting in the United States.

AIMS: To evaluate adherence, persistence, glycaemic control and costs at 12-month follow-up for patients initiating dulaglutide versus liraglutide or exenatide once weekly. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The present retrospective observational claims study included patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and ≥ 1 pharmacy claim for dulaglutide, liraglutide or exenatide once weekly from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database. Adherence was defined as proportion of days covered ≥80%, and persistence was measured by time to discontinuation of index therapy. Change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration was assessed in a subset with pre- and post-index HbA1c results. Propensity scores were used to match the cohorts. RESULTS: The baseline characteristics were balanced for the matched cohorts, dulaglutide versus liraglutide (n = 2471) and dulaglutide versus exenatide once weekly (n = 1891). Among those initiating dulaglutide there was a significantly higher proportion of adherent patients compared with the groups initiating liraglutide (51.2% vs. 38.2%; P < 0.001) and exenatide once weekly (50.7% vs. 31.9%; P < 0.001). At 12 months, 55% of patients in the dulaglutide group versus 43.8% in the liraglutide group (P < 0.001), and 54.9% in the dulaglutide versus 34.4% in the exenatide once-weekly group (P < 0.001) were persistent. The dulaglutide group had a significantly greater reduction in HbA1c than the liraglutide group (-34.24 vs. -31.94 mmol/mol; P = 0.032), and a greater, but nonsignificant, reduction in HbA1c than the exenatide once-weekly group (-34.46 vs. -31.94 mmol/mol; P = 0.056). The diabetes-related total costs were not significantly different between the dulaglutide and the liraglutide group ($16,174 vs. $16,694; P = 0.184), and were significantly higher for dulaglutide than for exenatide once weekly ($15,768 vs. $14,615; P = 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Adherence and persistence are important considerations in patient-centric treatment selection for patients with T2D. Higher adherence and persistence for dulaglutide compared with liraglutide or exenatide once weekly are relevant criteria when choosing glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment for patients with T2D.

EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF DULAGLUTIDE IN HISPANIC/LATINO PATIENTS WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES IN THE AWARD CLINICAL PROGRAM.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this post hoc analysis was to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly dulaglutide in Hispanic/Latino patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in phase 3 AWARD trials 1 to 6. METHODS: Hispanic/Latino data at Week 26 were pooled across studies for each dulaglutide dose to analyze the change from baseline in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), percent to HbA1c goal, and adverse events (AEs). Change from baseline in HbA1c, change from baseline in weight and hypoglycemia were analyzed by Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino subgroups for each study. RESULTS: Of the 3,136 patients randomized to dulaglutide 1.5 or 0.75 mg, 949 were reported as having Hispanic/Latino ethnicity. Baseline characteristics were similar for Hispanic/Latino and overall populations, except there were slightly more Hispanic/Latino females and weight was slightly lower for Hispanic/Latino patients. Hispanic/Latino patients receiving dulaglutide 1.5 mg had a reduction in HbA1c of 1.25% (95% confidence interval [CI]: -1.35, -1.15); dulaglutide 0.75 mg had a reduction of 1.07% (95% CI: -1.18, -0.96). Reductions in HbA1c and percent to goal HbA1c <7% and ≤6.5% were similar between Hispanic/Latino patients and the overall population. Weight change and hypoglycemia were similar between Hispanic/Latino and non-Hispanic/Latino subgroups for all studies. Treatment-emergent AEs were consistent with the overall population. CONCLUSION: Dulaglutide improved glycemic control with the potential for weight loss in Hispanic/Latino patients with T2D. Dulaglutide was well tolerated and had a low risk of hypoglycemia when used without insulin secretagogues or insulin. In the Hispanic/Latino population, dulaglutide efficacy and safety was consistent with that of the overall population. ABBREVIATIONS: AE = adverse event AWARD = Assessment of Weekly AdministRation of dulaglutide in Diabetes BID = twice daily CARMELA = The Cardiovascular Risk Factor Multiple Evaluation of Latin America CI = confidence interval GLP-1 RA = glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist HbA1c = glycosylated hemoglobin T2D = type 2 diabetes.

Tirzepatide Improved Health-Related Quality of Life Compared with Insulin Lispro in Basal Insulin-Treated Adults with Type 2 Diabetes and Inadequate Glycaemic Control: A Randomised Controlled Phase 3b Trial (SURPASS-6).

INTRODUCTION: Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who require intensification of basal insulin therapy need treatment options that can improve their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and translate into better outcomes. These analyses compared patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with T2D receiving tirzepatide or insulin lispro. METHODS: The randomised, open-label, multinational, phase 3b SURPASS-6 trial (NCT04537923) was conducted at 135 medical research centres and hospitals in 15 countries and compared two recommended treatment intensification strategies in people with T2D and inadequate glycaemic control on basal insulin: addition of once-weekly tirzepatide versus addition of prandial insulin lispro. Randomisation was stratified by country, baseline glycated haemoglobin level and metformin use. PROs were measured using the Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2) acute form (secondary outcome), EQ-5D-5L, Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living (APPADL) questionnaire and Impact of Weight on Self-Perceptions (IW-SP) questionnaire (tertiary/exploratory outcomes). PROs were compared for the tirzepatide-pooled dose group (5, 10 and 15 mg) and each tirzepatide dose group versus insulin lispro at 52 weeks using the modified intention-to-treat efficacy analysis set. RESULTS: Between 19 October 2020 and 01 November 2022, 2267 people were assessed and 1428 participants with T2D were randomised. At 52 weeks, participants in the tirzepatide-pooled group had statistically significant improved scores across all SF-36v2 domains and both component summary scores compared with insulin lispro-treated participants (p < 0.05), with the largest differences observed in the general health, vitality and mental health domains. Statistically significant improved APPADL and IW-SP total scores, as well as EQ visual analogue scale and EQ-5D-5L index scores (after adjustment for baseline scores), were observed in tirzepatide-pooled participants compared with insulin lispro-treated participants. CONCLUSIONS: In adult patients with T2D and inadequate glycaemic control with basal insulin, tirzepatide treatment was associated with greater improvements in HRQoL than prandial insulin therapy in addition to clinically significant improvements in glycaemic and body weight-related parameters.

Basal insulin, which controls blood sugar at times when not eating but when the body still needs energy, may not provide sufficient glycaemic control for some people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). These people require additional therapy to improve their health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and achieve better outcomes. This phase 3 study (SURPASS-6) compared patient-reported outcomes, including HRQoL, between people with T2D on basal insulin receiving additional therapy with tirzepatide or insulin lispro (a fast-acting insulin analogue mealtime injection). Patient-reported outcomes were assessed using several validated measures ­ the Short Form-36 Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2) acute form (a measure of HRQoL), the EQ-5D-5L (a measure of overall health status), the Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living (APPADL) questionnaire and the Impact of Weight on Self-Perceptions (IW-SP) questionnaire. The results in the two treatment groups were compared at the end of the treatment period (52 weeks). At 52 weeks, participants in the tirzepatide group had statistically significant improved scores across all HRQoL aspects measured by the SF-36v2 compared with participants in the insulin lispro group, with the largest differences observed in general health, vitality and bodily pain. Statistically significant improved EQ-5D-5L, APPADL and IW-SP scores were also observed in participants in the tirzepatide group compared with the insulin lispro group. In adults with T2D who require therapy in addition to basal insulin, tirzepatide treatment was associated with greater improvements in HRQoL than mealtime insulin therapy, as well as clinically significant improvements in blood sugar and body weight control.

Tirzepatide as Monotherapy Improved Markers of Beta-cell Function and Insulin Sensitivity in Type 2 Diabetes (SURPASS-1).

Context: Tirzepatide is a glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist approved for treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). SURPASS-1, a phase 3 trial of tirzepatide monotherapy in people with early T2D, enables evaluating effects of tirzepatide on pancreatic beta-cell function and insulin sensitivity (IS) without other background antihyperglycemic medications. Objective: Explore changes in biomarkers of beta-cell function and IS with tirzepatide monotherapy. Design: Post hoc analyses of fasting biomarkers with analysis of variance and mixed model repeated measures. Setting: Forty-seven sites in 4 countries. Patients: Four hundred seventy-eight T2D participants. Intervention: Tirzepatide (5, 10, 15 mg), placebo. Main Outcome Measures: Analyze biomarkers of beta-cell function and IS at 40 weeks. Results: At 40 weeks, markers of beta-cell function improved with tirzepatide monotherapy vs placebo with reductions from baseline in fasting proinsulin levels (49-55% vs -0.6%) and in intact proinsulin/C-peptide ratios (47-49% vs -0.1%) (P < .001, all doses vs placebo). Increases from baseline in homeostatic model assessment for beta-cell function (computed with C-peptide) (77-92% vs -1.4%) and decreases in glucose-adjusted glucagon levels (37-44% vs +4.8%) were observed with tirzepatide vs placebo (P < .001, all doses vs placebo). IS improved as indicated by reductions from baseline in homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (9-23% vs +14.7%) and fasting insulin levels (2-12% vs +15%), and increases in total adiponectin (16-23% vs -0.2%) and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 2 (38-70% vs +4.1%) with tirzepatide vs placebo at 40 weeks (P ≤ .031, all doses vs placebo, except for fasting insulin levels with tirzepatide 10 mg). Conclusions: As monotherapy for early T2D, tirzepatide achieved significant improvements in biomarkers of both pancreatic beta-cell function and IS.

Achieving Normoglycemia With Tirzepatide: Analysis of SURPASS 1-4 Trials.

OBJECTIVE: Tirzepatide is a novel single-molecule glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide/glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, which demonstrated unprecedented improvements in glycemic control and body weight reduction, in the SURPASS phase 3 program. In this exploratory analysis, we aimed to characterize tirzepatide-treated participants who achieved HbA1c <5.7% and evaluate changes in clinical markers associated with long-term cardiometabolic health. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Baseline characteristics and change from baseline to week 40 for several efficacy and safety parameters were analyzed according to HbA1c attainment category (<5.7%, 5.7-6.5%, and >6.5%) using descriptive statistics in participants taking ≥75% of treatment doses, without rescue medication, in the SURPASS 1-4 trials (N = 3,229). Logistic regression models with tirzepatide doses adjusted as a covariate were used to obtain odds ratios and assess the impact of patient characteristics achieving an HbA1c <5.7%. RESULTS: Tirzepatide-treated participants who achieved HbA1c <5.7% were slightly younger, with a shorter duration of diabetes and lower HbA1c value at baseline compared with those who did not achieve HbA1c <5.7%. In addition, they showed greater improvements in HbA1c, body weight, waist circumference, blood pressure, liver enzymes, and lipid parameters without increasing hypoglycemia risk. CONCLUSIONS: Normoglycemia was unprecedently achieved in a significant proportion of participants in the SURPASS clinical program, without increasing hypoglycemia risk, and was associated with an overall improvement in metabolic health.

Patient-Reported Outcomes in People with Type 2 Diabetes Receiving Tirzepatide in the SURPASS Clinical Trial Programme.

INTRODUCTION: Tirzepatide, a novel glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, is approved for glycaemic control for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). The SURPASS-1 to -5 clinical trials assessed the efficacy of once weekly tirzepatide (5, 10 and 15 mg) versus placebo or active comparators (semaglutide 1 mg, insulin degludec and insulin glargine) in T2D. We evaluated patient-reported outcomes (PROs) that measured overall quality of life (QoL), treatment satisfaction and weight-related attributes across the five SURPASS studies. METHODS: PRO instruments utilised at baseline and primary timepoint (40 weeks for SURPASS-1, -2 and -5; 52 weeks for SURPASS-3 and -4) or early termination visit were EQ-5D-5L (SURPASS-1 to -5); Impact of Weight on Self-Perceptions (SURPASS-1 to -5); Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living (SURPASS-1 to -5); Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (SURPASS-2 to -5); and Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite Clinical Trials Version (SURPASS-2 only). RESULTS: Across all five studies at week 40/52, tirzepatide improved patients' QoL measured by general health and weight-related PROs over the comparator. Generally, higher doses of tirzepatide resulted in greater increases in PRO scores. CONCLUSION: Overall, tirzepatide produced significant health and weight-related QoL improvements versus comparators in the five SURPASS studies. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: SURPASS-1: NCT03954834; SURPASS-2: NCT03987919; SURPASS-3: NCT03882970; SURPASS-4: NCT03730662; SURPASS-5: NCT04039503.

Tirzepatide is the first glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist approved for the treatment of people with type 2 diabetes. The SURPASS-1 to -5 clinical trials evaluated the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide (5, 10 and 15 mg) compared with placebo or active comparators (including semaglutide 1 mg and basal insulins) in people with type 2 diabetes. We evaluated other outcomes reported by patients that measured overall quality of life, treatment satisfaction and weight-related attributes across the five SURPASS studies.Five validated questionnaires were completed by patients at the beginning and end of the clinical trials, which was after 40 weeks for SURPASS-1, -2 and -5 and after 52 weeks for SURPASS-3 and -4, or when the person left the trial if this was before the official end. These questionnaires were EQ-5D-5L (SURPASS-1 to -5); Impact of Weight on Self-Perceptions (SURPASS-1 to -5); Ability to Perform Physical Activities of Daily Living (SURPASS-1 to -5); Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (SURPASS-2 to -5); and Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite Clinical Trials Version (SURPASS-2 only).Across all five studies, treatment with tirzepatide resulted in greater improvements in people's quality of life at the end of the study compared with placebo or treatment with the comparators. Generally, higher doses of tirzepatide resulted in greater increases in questionnaire scores than lower doses of tirzepatide.Overall, tirzepatide 5, 10 or 15 mg treatment resulted in significant health- and weight-related quality of life improvements versus comparators in the five SURPASS studies.

Exit Interviews Examining the Patient Experience in Clinical Trials of Tirzepatide for Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes.

INTRODUCTION: Qualitative exit interviews can supplement clinical trial results by providing a rich and detailed picture of the patient's experience, while highlighting the treatment benefits that are meaningful to patients. Exit interviews can be particularly useful for providing insight into newer medications when less is known about the patient's subjective experience of treatment. Tirzepatide is a novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist for type 2 diabetes mellitus. The purpose of this study was to conduct exit interviews with patients following participation in two trials to better understand the impact of tirzepatide from the patients' point of view. METHODS: Telephone interviews were conducted with patients with type 2 diabetes treated with tirzepatide soon after completing one of two trials (SURPASS-2, SURPASS-3). Interviews, conducted according to a semi-structured interview guide, were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed following a content analysis approach using ATLAS.ti. RESULTS: A total of 28 patients (64% female; mean age 57.6 years) completed interviews. All participants (100%) reported at least one treatment benefit. Patients provided descriptions of treatment benefits, including improved glycemic control (reported by 96% of the sample), weight loss (93%), decreased appetite (79%), and increased energy (79%), as indicated by qualitative coding. All participants said these treatment-related changes mattered to them. Patients described improvements in quality of life and daily activities associated with these treatment benefits. Despite adverse events reported by some patients (most commonly nausea, reported by 13 patients), all 28 said they would recommend tirzepatide to others, and 27 said they would be willing to continue treatment. Examples of representative quotations are presented for descriptions of treatment benefits, quality-of-life impact, and adverse events. DISCUSSION: The current results indicate that treatment benefits observed in clinical trials of tirzepatide are important to patients. As demonstrated in quotations from patients, the most enthusiastic descriptions of treatment outcomes focused on the weight loss associated with tirzepatide. The study also highlights the usefulness of exit interviews, which can supplement quantitative trial data by showing how these benefits have a meaningful impact on patients' quality of life.

Characteristics Associated with the Choice of First Injectable Therapy Among US Patients With Type 2 Diabetes.

PURPOSE: The objective of this retrospective observational study was to describe and identify clinical and demographic characteristics associated with the choice of first injectable therapy (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist [GLP-1-RA] or basal insulin) among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). METHODS: This analysis included adults naive to injectable therapy with T2DM who initiated a GLP-1-RA or basal insulin (index date) between November 2014 and February 2016 using data from the Practice Fusion Electronic Health Record database. Patients with T2DM, ≥1 office visit between 6 and 18 months before the index date, and with ≥1 glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) result in the 6-month preindex (baseline) period were included. A generalized boosted regression model was used to determine the patient characteristics most influential in the selection of a GLP-1-RA or basal insulin as first injectable therapy. Sensitivity analysis was performed by using bootstrapped logistic regression. FINDINGS: The study included 3546 and 7507 GLP-1-RA and basal insulin initiators, respectively. At baseline, GLP-1-RA initiators were significantly younger (mean, 58 vs 63 years), had lower HbA1c values (mean, 8.2% vs 9.1%), lower Diabetes Complications Severity Index (DCSI) scores (mean, 1.0 vs 1.7), and a higher body mass index (BMI) (mean, 36 vs 33 kg/m2) compared with basal insulin initiators. Variables selected by using the generalized boosted regression model with the highest relative importance (≥5%) in the selection of GLP-1-RA or basal insulin were HbA1c level (20.43%), BMI (17.73%), age (12.21%), prior prescription of a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (9.17%), and DCSI score (8.39%). The same variables, as well as race, were selected by using stepwise logistic regression in all the bootstrapped samples. Patients who were older (adjusted odds ratio [OR], 0.975 [95% CI, 0.971-0.979]) and had higher HbA1c values (OR, 0.741 [95% CI, 0.721-0.761]) and DCSI scores (OR, 0.870 [95% CI, 0.848-0.892]) were significantly less likely to be prescribed a GLP-1-RA compared with basal insulin. Patients with higher BMI (OR, 1.046 [95% CI, 1.040-1.053]) and previous prescription of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (OR, 2.633 [95% CI, 2.224-2.982]) were significantly more likely to be prescribed a GLP-1-RA. IMPLICATIONS: The clinically relevant differences observed between the 2 patient populations suggest that GLP-1-RAs and basal insulin are prescribed to different types of patients with T2DM. Examining patients' demographic and clinical characteristics may be important in assisting physicians in the choice of patient-centered injectable treatment regimens.

Safety and efficacy of dulaglutide, a once weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist, for the management of type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is an increasingly common endocrine disorder that is characterized by chronic hyperglycemia and tissue compartment abnormalities, including macrovascular and microvascular complications. More than 90% of patients with T2D will be diagnosed and treated in the primary care setting. One of the relatively recent additions to the increasing array of approved antidiabetic medications is the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist class. Mechanisms of action for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists include: 1) stimulation of insulin secretion through ß-cells, though only when glucose levels are elevated (hence, minimizing risk for hypoglycemia); 2) blunting of glucagon secretion; 3) increased satiety; and 4) decreased rate of release of gastric contents into the small intestine, thereby reducing glycemic load. Recent T2D treatment guidelines encourage individualization of therapy. Many patients still do not achieve optimal glycemic control. Therefore, other treatment options are important. METHODS: A literature search was performed using PubMed and MEDSCAPE to retrieve abstracts and articles pertinent to topics discussed in this review. Original research articles, reviews, and clinical trial manuscripts were identified based on relevance. Only English language articles were considered. Results In 3 phase 3 registration trials in patients with T2D, once-weekly dulaglutide demonstrated superior efficacy at the primary endpoint to metformin as monotherapy, to sitagliptin as add-on to metformin, and to exenatide twice daily as add-on to metformin and pioglitazone. The safety profile of dulaglutide in these trials is similar to currently available glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, characterized predominantly by gastrointestinal symptoms (ie, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea). Based on these results, once-weekly dulaglutide should be a relevant additional treatment option for the management of T2D.