Study protocol for a prospective, multicentre study of hypercortisolism in patients with difficult-to-control type 2 diabetes (CATALYST): prevalence and treatment with mifepristone.

INTRODUCTION: Even with recent treatment advances, type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains poorly controlled for many patients, despite the best efforts to adhere to therapies and lifestyle modifications. Although estimates vary, studies indicate that in >10% of individuals with difficult-to-control T2D, hypercortisolism may be an underlying contributing cause. To better understand the prevalence of hypercortisolism and the impact of its treatment on T2D and associated comorbidities, we describe the two-part Hyper c ortisolism in P at ients with Difficult to Control Type 2 Di a betes Despite Receiving Standard-of-Care Therapies: Preva l ence and Treatment with Korl y m® (Mifepri st one) (CATALYST) trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In part 1, approximately 1000 participants with difficult-to-control T2D (haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 7.5%-11.5% despite multiple therapies) are screened with a 1 mg dexamethasone suppression test (DST). Those with post-DST cortisol >1.8 µg/dL and dexamethasone level ≥140 ng/dL are identified to have hypercortisolism (part 1 primary endpoint), have morning adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS) measured and undergo a non-contrast adrenal CT scan. Those requiring evaluation for elevated ACTH are referred for care outside the study; those with ACTH and DHEAS in the range may advance to part 2, a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the impact of treating hypercortisolism with the competitive glucocorticoid receptor antagonist mifepristone (Korlym®). Participants are randomised 2:1 to mifepristone or placebo for 24 weeks, stratified by the presence/absence of an abnormal adrenal CT scan. Mifepristone is dosed at 300 mg once daily for 4 weeks, then 600 mg daily based on tolerability and clinical improvement, with an option to increase to 900 mg. The primary endpoint of part 2 assesses changes in HbA1c in participants with hypercortisolism with or without abnormal adrenal CT scan. Secondary endpoints include changes in antidiabetes medications, cortisol-related comorbidities and quality of life. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study has been approved by Cleveland Clinic IRB (Cleveland, Ohio, USA) and Advarra IRB (Columbia, Maryland, USA). Findings will be presented at scientific meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05772169.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Consensus Statement: Comprehensive Type 2 Diabetes Management Algorithm - 2023 Update.

OBJECTIVE: This consensus statement provides (1) visual guidance in concise graphic algorithms to assist with clinical decision-making of health care professionals in the management of persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus to improve patient care and (2) a summary of details to support the visual guidance found in each algorithm. METHODS: The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology (AACE) selected a task force of medical experts who updated the 2020 AACE Comprehensive Type 2 Diabetes Management Algorithm based on the 2022 AACE Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan and consensus of task force authors. RESULTS: This algorithm for management of persons with type 2 diabetes includes 11 distinct sections: (1) Principles for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes; (2) Complications-Centric Model for the Care of Persons with Overweight/Obesity; (3) Prediabetes Algorithm; (4) Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Reduction Algorithm: Dyslipidemia; (5) Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk Reduction Algorithm: Hypertension; (6) Complications-Centric Algorithm for Glycemic Control; (7) Glucose-Centric Algorithm for Glycemic Control; (8) Algorithm for Adding/Intensifying Insulin; (9) Profiles of Antihyperglycemic Medications; (10) Profiles of Weight-Loss Medications (new); and (11) Vaccine Recommendations for Persons with Diabetes Mellitus (new), which summarizes recommendations from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CONCLUSIONS: Aligning with the 2022 AACE diabetes guideline update, this 2023 diabetes algorithm update emphasizes lifestyle modification and treatment of overweight/obesity as key pillars in the management of prediabetes and diabetes mellitus and highlights the importance of appropriate management of atherosclerotic risk factors of dyslipidemia and hypertension. One notable new theme is an emphasis on a complication-centric approach, beyond glucose levels, to frame decisions regarding first-line pharmacologic choices for the treatment of persons with diabetes. The algorithm also includes access/cost of medications as factors related to health equity to consider in clinical decision-making.

Safe and Appropriate Use of GLP-1 RAs in Treating Adult Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Macrovascular Disease.

Over the past decade, the type 2 diabetes (T2D) treatment landscape has evolved, allowing for more therapeutic options and the opportunity to tailor treatments to achieve patient treatment goals. In this video roundtable series, James LaSalle, DO; Lucia M. Novak, CRNP; and Lawrence Blonde, MD, MACE, FACP, discuss the mechanisms of action and clinical trial data for use of glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in the safe and effective primary care management of individuals with T2D and macrovascular disease.

American Association of Clinical Endocrinology Clinical Practice Guideline: Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan-2022 Update.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this clinical practice guideline is to provide updated and new evidence-based recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes mellitus to clinicians, diabetes-care teams, other health care professionals and stakeholders, and individuals with diabetes and their caregivers. METHODS: The American Association of Clinical Endocrinology selected a task force of medical experts and staff who updated and assessed clinical questions and recommendations from the prior 2015 version of this guideline and conducted literature searches for relevant scientific papers published from January 1, 2015, through May 15, 2022. Selected studies from results of literature searches composed the evidence base to update 2015 recommendations as well as to develop new recommendations based on review of clinical evidence, current practice, expertise, and consensus, according to established American Association of Clinical Endocrinology protocol for guideline development. RESULTS: This guideline includes 170 updated and new evidence-based clinical practice recommendations for the comprehensive care of persons with diabetes. Recommendations are divided into four sections: (1) screening, diagnosis, glycemic targets, and glycemic monitoring; (2) comorbidities and complications, including obesity and management with lifestyle, nutrition, and bariatric surgery, hypertension, dyslipidemia, retinopathy, neuropathy, diabetic kidney disease, and cardiovascular disease; (3) management of prediabetes, type 2 diabetes with antihyperglycemic pharmacotherapy and glycemic targets, type 1 diabetes with insulin therapy, hypoglycemia, hospitalized persons, and women with diabetes in pregnancy; (4) education and new topics regarding diabetes and infertility, nutritional supplements, secondary diabetes, social determinants of health, and virtual care, as well as updated recommendations on cancer risk, nonpharmacologic components of pediatric care plans, depression, education and team approach, occupational risk, role of sleep medicine, and vaccinations in persons with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: This updated clinical practice guideline provides evidence-based recommendations to assist with person-centered, team-based clinical decision-making to improve the care of persons with diabetes mellitus.

A new era for oral peptides: SNAC and the development of oral semaglutide for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) were first introduced for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in 2005. Despite the high efficacy and other benefits of GLP-1RAs, their uptake was initially limited by the fact that they could only be administered by injection. Semaglutide is a human GLP-1 analog that has been shown to significantly improve glycemic control and reduce body weight, in addition to improving cardiovascular outcomes, in patients with T2D. First approved as a once-weekly subcutaneous injection, semaglutide was considered an ideal peptide candidate for oral delivery with a permeation enhancer on account of its low molecular weight, long half-life, and high potency. An oral formulation of semaglutide was therefore developed by co-formulating semaglutide with sodium N-(8-[2-hydroxybenzoyl]amino)caprylate, a well-characterized transcellular permeation enhancer, to produce the first orally administered GLP-1RA. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed that stable steady-state concentrations could be achieved with once-daily dosing owing to the long half-life of oral semaglutide. Upper gastrointestinal disease and renal and hepatic impairment did not affect the pharmacokinetic profile. In the phase III PIONEER clinical trial program, oral semaglutide was shown to reduce glycated hemoglobin and body weight compared with placebo and active comparators in patients with T2D, with no new safety signals reported. Cardiovascular efficacy and safety are currently being assessed in a dedicated outcomes trial. The development of an oral GLP-1RA represents a significant milestone in the management of T2D, providing an additional efficacious treatment option for patients.

Concomitant iGlarLixi and Sodium-Glucose Co-transporter-2 Inhibitor Therapy in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: LixiLan-G Trial and Real-World Evidence Results.

INTRODUCTION: iGlarLixi, the once-daily fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/ml and lixisenatide, robustly improves glycaemic control in adults with type 2 diabetes irrespective of previous treatment [oral antihyperglycaemic drugs (OADs), basal insulin or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs)]. Sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) are a recommended treatment option for people with type 2 diabetes with cardiovascular disease, kidney disease and/or heart failure because of their cardio- and renoprotective benefits. Herein, we assessed the effects of concomitant iGlarLixi and SGLT2i therapy. METHODS: We conducted subgroup analyses according to SGLT2i use in: (1) adults with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes on GLP-1 RAs and OADs switching to iGlarLixi in the 26-week LixiLan-G randomised controlled trial (RCT; NCT02787551) and (2) adults switching to or adding iGlarLixi in a 6-month, retrospective real-world evidence (RWE) observational study using data from the US Optum-Humedica electronic medical records database. Changes in HbA1c and hypoglycaemia prevalence and event rates were assessed. RESULTS: There were no major differences in baseline characteristics for those who initiated iGlarLixi while already using SGLT2i (n = 346) and those initiating iGlarLixi without concomitant SGLT2i therapy (n = 1285). HbA1c reductions from baseline to time of assessment and hypoglycaemia prevalence and event rates were similar for iGlarLixi users regardless of SGLT2i therapy. CONCLUSION: Evidence from an RCT and an RWE analysis supports the efficacy/effectiveness and safety of iGlarLixi when used concomitantly with SGLT2i. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02787551.

People with type 2 diabetes require glucose-lowering drugs to attain and maintain blood glucose control, with many eventually requiring injectable therapies. iGlarLixi combines two injectable therapies (basal insulin glargine and a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, lixisenatide) into a single fixed-ratio daily injection and has previously been shown to provide robust improvements in blood glucose control. However, previous studies have not assessed the potential effect that simultaneous use of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) therapy may have on iGlarLixi therapy. This is of interest because SGLT2is are a widely used oral blood-glucose-lowering therapy that also have a beneficial effect in people with type 2 diabetes who have cardiovascular or kidney disease or have risk factors for the development or progression of these conditions. Therefore, this study assessed whether there were relevant differences in terms of blood glucose control and safety when initiating iGlarLixi in people treated with SGLT2i versus initiating iGlarLixi in people not receiving SGLT2i. Results showed that iGlarLixi provided similarly good glucose control and safety profiles, regardless of whether SGLT2is were used or not, thereby supporting the simultaneous use of these two therapies.

Efficacy of liraglutide added to sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes, stratified by baseline characteristics: Post-hoc analysis of LIRA-ADD2SGLT2i.

AIMS: The LIRA-ADD2SGLT2i trial demonstrated that liraglutide + sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2is) ± metformin significantly improved glycaemic control (not body weight) versus placebo in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This post-hoc analysis assessed whether baseline characteristics influenced these findings. MATERIALS AND METHODS: LIRA-ADD2SGLT2i (NCT02964247) was a placebo-controlled, double-blind, multinational trial, wherein participants received liraglutide (≤1.8 mg/day) or placebo (randomized 2:1). Changes from baseline to week 26 in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), body weight and waist circumference stratified by HbA1c, body mass index (BMI), diabetes duration, duration of pre-trial SGLT2i use and Homeostatic Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance (HOMA-IR) were analysed. These five baseline characteristics were divided into tertiles, and the treatment effect was evaluated using the trial product estimand. RESULTS: Data from all 303 participants were analysed. There was a significant interaction between baseline HbA1c tertiles (7.0%-<7.6%; 7.6%-8.1%; ≥8.2%-9.5%) and glycaemic control at week 26 (p[interaction]  = .011), with the lowest HbA1c estimated treatment difference (95% confidence interval) observed in patients with lowest baseline HbA1c [-0.20% (-0.59, 0.19); -0.68% (-1.03, -0.33); -0.98% (-1.33, -0.64), respectively]. There were no significant interactions in glycaemic control across baseline BMI, diabetes duration, insulin resistance determined by HOMA-IR or SGLT2i use duration (p[interaction] > .05, all). Across the five characteristics assessed, no significant interactions were found for body weight or waist circumference changes from baseline (p[interaction] > .05, all). CONCLUSION: For individuals with T2D and inadequate glycaemic control despite therapy with SGLT2is ± metformin, liraglutide 1.8 mg would provide an effective treatment intensification option, irrespective of HbA1c, BMI, diabetes duration, insulin resistance determined by HOMA-IR and SGLT2i use duration.

Improving Management of Type 2 Diabetes Using Home-Based Telemonitoring: Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is present in 10.5% of the US population and accounts for 14.3% of all office-based physician visits made by adults. Despite this established office-based approach, the disease and its adverse outcomes including glycemic control and clinical events tend to worsen over time. Available home technology now provides accurate, reliable data that can be transmitted directly to the electronic medical record. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to evaluate the impact of a virtual, home-based diabetes management program on clinical measures of diabetes control compared to usual care. METHODS: We evaluated glycemic control and other diabetes-related measures after 1 year in 763 patients with type 2 diabetes enrolled into a home-based digital medicine diabetes program and compared them to 794 patients matched for age, sex, race, BMI, hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and insulin use in a usual care group after 1 year. Digital medicine patients completed questionnaires online, received medication management and lifestyle recommendations from a clinical pharmacist or advanced practice provider and a health coach, and were asked to submit blood glucose readings using a commercially available Bluetooth-enabled glucose meter that transmitted data directly to the electronic medical record. RESULTS: After 1 year, usual care patients demonstrated no significant changes in HbA1c (mean 7.3, SE 1.7 to mean 7.3, SE 1.6; P=.41) or changes in the proportion of patients with HbA1c≥9.0 (n=117, 15% to n=113, 14%; P=.51). Digital medicine patients demonstrated improvements in HbA1c (mean 7.3, SE 1.5 to mean 6.9, SE 1.2; P<.001) and significant changes in the proportion of patients with HbA1c≥9.0 (n=107, 14% to n=49, 6%; P<.001), diabetes distress (n=198, 26% to n=122, 16%; P<.001), and hypoglycemic episodes (n=313, 41.1% to n=91, 11.9%; P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: A digital diabetes program is associated with significant improvement in glycemic control and other diabetes measures. The use of a virtual health intervention using connected devices was widely accepted across a broad range of ethnic diversity, ages, and levels of health literacy.

Secondary metformin monotherapy failure in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

INTRODUCTION: To assess secondary metformin monotherapy (MM) failure in a real-world type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) cohort. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Using the IQVIA Electronic Medical Record (formerly GE Centricity) database, adults with T2DM who initiated MM between January 1, 2012 and June 30, 2016 and achieved glycemic control (hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) <7% (53 mmol/mol); index date) were analyzed. Secondary MM failure was defined in two ways: loss of glycemic control (HbA1c ≥7% (53 mmol/mol)) and treatment change (addition or switch of antihyperglycemic agent). Multivariable logistic regression models assessed the association between secondary MM failure and sociodemographic and clinical factors. RESULTS: The analysis included 4775 patients initiating MM. 32.9% and 19.2% experienced secondary MM failure at 24 months measured as loss of glycemic control and treatment change, respectively. Multivariable logistic regression found that women (OR=1.3, 95% CI 1.1 to 1.5) compared with men, lower Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) (OR=0.89, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.93), and lower baseline HbA1c (OR=0.93, 95% CI 0.88 to 0.98) were associated with increased likelihood of loss of glycemic control. Lower CCI was associated with increased likelihood of treatment change (OR=0.78, 95% CI 0.75 to 0.82). CONCLUSIONS: The observed frequency of secondary MM failure underscores the importance of the American Diabetes Association's recommendation for glycemic monitoring of at least every 6 months so that timely therapeutic adjustments can be made.

Insulin glargine 300 units/mL for the treatment of individuals with type 2 diabetes in the real world: A review of the DELIVER programme.

Evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) has shown that second-generation basal insulin (BI) analogues, insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) and insulin degludec (IDeg), provide similar glycaemic control, with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia compared with the first-generation BI analogue insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the highly selected participants and frequent follow-up of RCTs may not be truly representative of real-life clinical practice. It is important to assess the safety and effectiveness of these second-generation BI analogues in real-life clinical practice settings. The DELIVER programme utilized electronic healthcare records from the United States to compare clinical outcomes in people with T2D who received either Gla-300 or other BI analogues in real-world clinical practice. This review provides a concise overview of the results of the DELIVER studies. Overall, Gla-300 provided similar antihyperglycaemic effectiveness and a lower risk of hypoglycaemia versus the first-generation BI analogues Gla-100 and insulin detemir in people with T2D who had switched BIs. In those who were insulin-naïve, initiation with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 was associated with significantly better antihyperglycaemic effectiveness and similar or lower hypoglycaemic risk. Both glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia risk were also shown to be similar with Gla-300 and IDeg, in people who had switched BIs and in those who were insulin-naïve. In addition, the DELIVER 2 study reported that people with T2D who switched to Gla-300 had reduced healthcare resource utilization, with an overall saving of US$1439 per person per year compared with those who switched to another BI analogue. Overall, the real-world DELIVER programme showed that the glycaemic control with a low risk of hypoglycaemia observed with Gla-300 in RCTs was also seen in standard clinical practice.

Switching to iGlarLixi versus continuation of a daily or weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) in insufficiently controlled type 2 diabetes: A LixiLan-G trial subgroup analysis by HbA1c and GLP-1 RA use at screening.

AIM: In people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) requiring intensification beyond glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and oral antihyperglycaemic drugs (OADs), switching to iGlarLixi was shown to be efficacious and well-tolerated in the LixiLan-G trial. This exploratory analysis of LixiLan-G assessed the efficacy and safety of switching to iGlarLixi versus continuing GLP-1 RA therapy, stratified by screening HbA1c level (≥7.0 to ≤7.5 %; >7.5 to ≤8.0 %; >8.0 to ≤9.0 % [≥53 to ≤58 mmol/mol; >58 to ≤64 mmol/mol; >64 to ≤75 mmol/mol]) and previous GLP-1 RA regimen at screening (once/twice daily or once weekly). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Endpoints for all subgroups included: change in HbA1c, achievement of HbA1c <7 % and hypoglycaemia events. Adverse events and changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-hour postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), 2-hour PPG excursion and weight were analysed according to previous GLP-1 RA regimen. RESULTS: Switching to iGlarLixi in all subgroups resulted in significantly greater reductions in HbA1c and proportions of participants reaching HbA1c <7 % (including with no documented hypoglycaemia) at Week 26 compared with continued GLP-1 RA treatment. Switching to iGlarLixi also led to significantly greater reductions in FPG, 2-hour PPG, and 2-hour PPG excursion, irrespective of previous GLP-1 RA regimen. Rates of hypoglycaemia were low, but slightly higher in those who switched to iGlarLixi for all subgroups. Modest weight gain was seen with iGlarLixi, irrespective of previous GLP-1 RA regimen. CONCLUSIONS: Switching to iGlarLixi improved glycaemic control, regardless of screening HbA1c or previous GLP-1 RA type, offering a simple, efficacious and well-tolerated treatment intensification option for people with T2D inadequately controlled by GLP-1 RAs and OADs.

Translating iGlarLixi Evidence for the Management of Frequent Clinical Scenarios in Type 2 Diabetes.

Treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires progressive therapy intensification to reach and maintain individualized glycemic targets. iGlarLixi, a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL (iGlar) and lixisenatide (Lixi), has been shown to provide robust HbA1c reductions allowing more people to reach HbA1c targets compared with separate administration of iGlar or Lixi. The purpose of this review is to help clinicians understand treatment intensification using iGlarLixi by presenting typical clinical scenarios supported by research evidence. These cases will focus on individuals with T2D inadequately controlled by oral antihyperglycemic drugs, basal insulin, or glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), and take into consideration T2D duration, body mass index, incidence of adverse events, and regimen simplicity. Clinical evidence on the efficacy, effectiveness, and safety of iGlarLixi from randomized controlled trials and real-world studies will be discussed in the context of these cases.

Durable Effects of iGlarLixi Up to 52 Weeks in Type 2 Diabetes: The LixiLan-G Extension Study.

OBJECTIVE: In the LixiLan-G trial, switching to iGlarLixi, a once-daily titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 units/mL and the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) lixisenatide, improved glucose control in type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with GLP-1 RAs over 26 weeks versus continuing prior GLP-1 RA. A prespecified, 26-week, single-arm extension of LixiLan-G aimed to determine the durability of iGlarLixi efficacy and safety over 52 weeks. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Participants with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled by GLP-1 RAs (glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] 7-9% [53-75 mmol/mol]) were initially randomized to switch to iGlarLixi or continue prior GLP-1 RA. Those randomized to iGlarLixi who completed the 26-week primary end point period could continue iGlarLixi open-label treatment over a 26-week extension to assess durability of efficacy and safety. RESULTS: Glycemic control achieved with iGlarLixi at week 26 (mean HbA1c 6.7% [50 mmol/mol]) was maintained at week 52 (mean HbA1c 6.7% [50 mmol/mol]; mean ± SD change from baseline at week 52: -1.0 ± 0.9% [11 ± 10 mmol/mol]). Proportions of participants reaching HbA1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) with iGlarLixi were similar at week 26 (62%) and 52 (64%), as were those reaching this target without documented symptomatic (<3.0 mmol/L) hypoglycemia (57% and 58%). Safety of iGlarLixi was similar at weeks 26 and 52, with low rates of documented symptomatic hypoglycemia and gastrointestinal events. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi at the end of the 26-week randomized treatment period was maintained over the 26-week extension period in the LixiLan-G trial.

Real-World Comparative Effectiveness of Canagliflozin Versus Empagliflozin and Dapagliflozin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: While several sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are approved as an adjunct to diet and exercise to improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), there are no clinical trial data providing head-to-head comparisons of the efficacy and safety of these therapies. Real-world analyses can provide valuable evidence on the effectiveness of competing treatments. This study compared the real-world glycemic effectiveness of SGLT2 inhibitors in individuals with T2DM. METHODS: Patients who initiated canagliflozin 300 mg versus empagliflozin 25 mg or dapagliflozin 10 mg were identified from the Optum® De-identified Clinformatics® Extended Data Mart-Date of Death database and propensity score matched. Achievement of HbA1c < 8.0% (Healthcare Effectiveness Data and Information Set [HEDIS] target) and > 9.0% (HEDIS poor control) after 6 months of treatment was calculated. RESULTS: Post-baseline HbA1c was similar in the canagliflozin and empagliflozin cohorts (7.65% versus 7.57%), as was percent of patients with HbA1c < 8.0% or > 9.0%. Post-baseline HbA1c was lower with canagliflozin versus dapagliflozin (7.58% versus 7.74%; P = 0.0247). The canagliflozin cohort was more likely to achieve HbA1c < 8.0% than the dapagliflozin cohort (P = 0.0292); the likelihood of achieving HbA1c > 9.0% was similar. CONCLUSION: In patients with T2DM, HbA1c outcomes were similar with canagliflozin and empagliflozin. Patients on canagliflozin versus dapagliflozin were more likely to have a lower HbA1c and reach HbA1c < 8.0% after 6 months. These results may provide important information for clinicians as they decide the appropriate treatment for their patients with T2DM.

Glycemic Control Following GLP-1 RA or Basal Insulin Initiation in Real-World Practice: A Retrospective, Observational, Longitudinal Cohort Study.

INTRODUCTION: Injectable therapies such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and basal insulin (BI) are well-established agents for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This study aimed to investigate real-world effectiveness of GLP-1 RAs or BI in adults with T2D poorly controlled on oral antihyperglycemic drugs (OADs). METHODS: This was a retrospective, observational, longitudinal cohort study of adults with T2D from the US Optum Humedica® database and UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink, who initiated either injectable between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2016. Baseline characteristics, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) change, and cumulative percentage reaching HbA1c < 7% in 24 months after initiation were analyzed in four patient cohorts. RESULTS: In the US and UK databases, respectively, 20,836 and 5508 patients initiated GLP-1 RAs and 60,598 and 5083 initiated BI. Baseline mean HbA1c at initiation ranged between 8.8% and 10.3% across all cohorts. In all cohorts, a decrease of HbA1c occurred 3-6 months after initiation. The cumulative percentage of patients reaching HbA1c < 7% showed the greatest probability in the first 12 months (15-40% of patients across cohorts at 12 months), particularly in the first 6 months after initiation. The probability of reaching glycemic control diminished after the second quarter. The proportion of patients reaching HbA1c < 7% in both GLP-1 RA and BI cohorts at 12 months was < 25% if baseline HbA1c was ≥ 9%. CONCLUSIONS: For adults with T2D inadequately controlled on OADs, this analysis reveals an unmet clinical need. Initiation of first injectable therapy did not occur until HbA1c was considerably above target, when control is harder to achieve. Results suggest that in individuals with baseline HbA1c ≥ 9.0%, only a minority are likely to achieve an HbA1c < 7% with a GLP-1 RA or BI alone.

Clinical review of the efficacy and safety of oral semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with other oral antihyperglycemic agents and placebo.

Oral semaglutide is a tablet formulation of a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), recently approved in the USA and other countries. This paper reviews data from clinical trials (PIONEER 1, 2, 3, and 7) comparing oral semaglutide (once-daily doses of 3, 7, or 14 mg) with either once-daily placebo, empagliflozin 25 mg, or sitagliptin 100 mg. After 26 weeks in PIONEER 1, patients randomized to 3, 7, or 14 mg doses of oral semaglutide monotherapy had statistically significant reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1 c) of 0.9%, 1.2%, and 1.4%, respectively, versus 0.3% with placebo. In the active-comparator studies, oral semaglutide 14 mg provided better glycemic control than empagliflozin or sitagliptin after 26 weeks, with durable effects. Body weight reductions were significantly greater with oral semaglutide than with placebo and sitagliptin. However, body weight reductions with oral semaglutide 14 mg versus empagliflozin 25 mg were not significantly different. Gastrointestinal adverse events (AEs) with oral semaglutide were mostly mild-to-moderate, occurred early in the course of treatment, and abated over time. Across these trials, 5-13% and 15-20% of patients experienced nausea with oral semaglutide 7 and 14 mg, respectively, and 2.3-3.4% and 5.1-8.0%, respectively, discontinued treatment due to gastrointestinal AEs. Severe or blood glucose-confirmed symptomatic hypoglycemia occurred infrequently with oral semaglutide and was seen most often in patients taking concomitant sulfonylureas. Findings from these trials indicate that the addition of oral semaglutide reduces HbA1 c and body weight and is associated with a low risk of hypoglycemia. Oral semaglutide represents an additional option for treating people with type 2 diabetes in primary care, with the potential to expand the numbers of patients benefiting from GLP-1RAs beyond that currently seen with injectable formulations.

Insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (iGlarLixi) compared with premix or addition of meal-time insulin to basal insulin in people with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide, relative to premix insulin and other insulin options through network meta-analysis. METHODS: A systematic literature search identified randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing iGlarLixi, premix insulin or basal insulin (BI) in combination with meal-time insulin, in people inadequately controlled with BI. Eligible RCTs were compared using Bayesian network meta-analysis. RESULTS: Eight RCTs, some open-label, involving 3538 participants, with a study duration of 24-30 weeks were included. The estimated difference in HbA1c reduction with iGlarLixi compared with premix insulin was -0.50%-units (95% credible interval: -0.93 to -0.06) with 98% probability of iGlarLixi being superior to premix. Estimates for iGlarLixi versus meal-time + BI (thrice-daily meal-time insulin + basal) and basal-plus (once-daily meal-time insulin + BI) were -0.35 (-0.89 to +0.13)%-units and -0.68 (-1.18 to -0.17)%-units with probabilities of real difference of 94% and 99%, respectively. Safety outcome analysis suggested that iGlarLixi had lower rates of both confirmed and documented symptomatic hypoglycaemia compared with premix insulin (probabilities of 85% and 93%, respectively) and lower weight gain (probability 98%). CONCLUSIONS: iGlarLixi showed similar or improved efficacy and safety versus other intensification choices from BI included in this study, providing a clinically relevant treatment option in people with type 2 diabetes not well controlled on BI.

Efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi versus IDegLira in adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists: a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison.

AIMS: To estimate the relative treatment effect between the fixed-ratio combinations iGlarLixi and IDegLira (glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist with basal insulin) in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature review of randomized controlled trials followed by an indirect treatment comparison was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of the available fixed-ratio combinations. Main outcomes were glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change and target achievement [<6.5% and <7.0% (<48 and <53 mmol/mol)], fasting plasma glucose, self-monitored plasma glucose, body weight, and incidence and rate of hypoglycaemia. RESULTS: From 4850 abstracts screened, 78 qualified for full-text article review and two randomized controlled trials were included. Baseline characteristics were similar in the two studies. The mean difference at 26 weeks between IDegLira and iGlarLixi was -0.36 (95% credible intervals -0.58, -0.14) % [-3.9 (-6.3, -1.5) mmol/mol] for HbA1c and -1.0 (-1.6, -0.4) mmol/L for fasting plasma glucose. No significant differences were found in HbA1c target attainment, preprandial or postprandial self-monitored plasma glucose, or body weight change. Formal comparisons of hypoglycaemia were limited by differences in definitions between the studies: in non-sulphonylurea users, incidence was 28% for IDegLira ('confirmed' at ≤3.1 mmol/L); for iGlarLixi, incidence was 9% ('documented symptomatic' at <3.0 mmol/L). CONCLUSIONS: Results of this indirect treatment comparison using two studies suggest iGlarLixi and IDegLira appear to offer similar benefits for HbA1c target achievement. However, the findings suggest differences in other glycaemia results and hypoglycaemia, which may reflect differences in study design and titration approaches.