The Educational Impact of Web-Based, Faculty-Led Continuing Medical Education Programs in Type 2 Diabetes: A Survey Study to Analyze Changes in Knowledge, Competence, and Performance of Health Care Professionals.

BACKGROUND: The treatment landscape for type 2 diabetes (T2D) is continually evolving; therefore, ongoing education of health care professionals (HCPs) is essential. There is growing interest in measuring the impact of educational activities, such as through use of the Moore framework; however, data on the benefits of continuing medical education (CME) in the management of T2D remain limited. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate HCP satisfaction; measure improvements in knowledge, competence, and performance following short, case-based, multidisciplinary web-based CME activities; and identify the remaining educational gaps. METHODS: Two faculty-led, CME-accredited, web-based educational activities on T2D and obesity, touchIN CONVERSATION and touch MultiDisciplinary Team, were developed and made available on a free-to-access medical education website. Each activity comprised 3 videos lasting 10 to 15 minutes, which addressed learning objectives developed based on a review of published literature and faculty feedback. Participant satisfaction (Moore level 2) was evaluated using a postactivity questionnaire. For both activities, changes in knowledge and competence (Moore levels 3 and 4) were assessed using questionnaires completed by representative HCPs before or after participation in the activities. A second set of HCPs completed a questionnaire before and after engaging in activities that assessed changes in self-reported performance (Moore level 5). RESULTS: Each activity was viewed by approximately 6000 participants within 6 months. The participants expressed high levels of satisfaction (>80%) with both activities. Statistically significant improvements from baseline in knowledge and competence were reported following participation in touchIN CONVERSATION (mean score, SD before vs after activity: 4.36, 1.40 vs 5.42, 1.37; P<.001), with the proportion of learners answering at least six of 7 questions correctly, increasing from 22% (11/50) to 60% (30/50). A nonsignificant improvement in knowledge and competence was observed following participation in touch MultiDisciplinary Team (mean score, SD 4.36, 1.24 vs 4.58, 1.07; P=.35); however, baseline knowledge and competence were relatively high, where 80% of the respondents (40/50) answered at least four of 6 questions correctly. A significant improvement in HCP self-reported performance was observed in a combined analysis of both activities (mean score, SD 2.65, 1.32 vs 3.15, 1.26; P=.03), with the proportion of learners selecting the answer representing the best clinical option for all 4 questions increasing from 32% (11/34) to 59% (20/34) after the activity. Several unmet educational needs were self-reported or identified from the analysis of incorrectly answered questions, including setting individualized glycemic targets and the potential benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Short, case-based, web-based CME activities designed for HCPs to fit their clinical schedules achieved improvements in knowledge, competence, and self-reported performance in T2D management. Ongoing educational needs identified included setting individualized glycemic targets and the potential benefits of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor therapies.

Gastrointestinal Tolerability of Once-Weekly Dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg: A Post Hoc Analysis of the Incidence and Prevalence of Nausea, Vomiting, and Diarrhea in AWARD-11.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal (GI) events are the most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) reported for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist therapies. This post hoc analysis of the AWARD-11 phase 3 trial assessed the GI tolerability of dulaglutide at once-weekly doses of 1.5, 3.0, and 4.5 mg. METHODS: The AWARD-11 trial randomized patients to once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg (n = 612), 3.0 mg (n = 616), or 4.5 mg (n = 614) for 52 weeks. Patients started on dulaglutide 0.75 mg for 4 weeks before escalating stepwise every 4 weeks until the final randomized dose was reached. This study analyzes the onsets, incidences, prevalences, and severities of nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea events reported through 52 weeks. RESULTS: The highest incidences of nausea (≤ 8%), vomiting (≤ 2%), and diarrhea (≤ 4%) were primarily observed soon after the initiation of dulaglutide treatment at 0.75 mg. Incidence then declined throughout the remainder of the study, even with dose escalation to 1.5, 3.0, and 4.5 mg. Most of these GI TEAEs were mild to moderate in severity, with severe nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea events occurring in ≤ 0.6% of patients. Treatment discontinuation due to nausea was low across treatment groups (≤ 1.5%). CONCLUSIONS: The tolerability profiles of dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg were consistent with that of the 1.5-mg dose. Patients experiencing GI events were most likely to do so within 2 weeks of treatment initiation, and few patients experienced a new GI event after escalating to the 3.0-mg or 4.5-mg dose. Severe events were infrequent, and when they did occur, no relationship with dose at time of event was observed. Supplementary file1 (MP4 33880 kb).

Dulaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) prescribed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). The most frequently reported side effects of GLP-1 RAs are nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea. This analysis of a 52-week study in adult patients with T2D details the tolerability of dulaglutide injected once weekly at a dose of 1.5 mg, 3 mg, or 4.5 mg, as assessed by looking at the nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea events reported during the study. All patients started dulaglutide at 0.75 mg before escalating to 1.5 mg after 4 weeks. Depending on the group they were randomly assigned to, the patients then either remained on the 1.5-mg dose, escalated to 3 mg after another 4 weeks and remained on this dose, or escalated further to 4.5 mg after another 4 weeks. The minority of patients who experienced nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea events (less than 16% of patients in each case) generally did so at the beginning of treatment, when all groups were taking the same dose (0.75 mg). Episodes of nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea then became less frequent, even as patients escalated to each of the higher doses. Most of these events were mild to moderate in severity, and most did not cause patients to stop taking the treatment. In general, this analysis shows that, for the minority of patients who experienced nausea, vomiting, or diarrhea, these events were most likely to happen shortly after starting treatment and lessened over time, even as patients escalated to higher dulaglutide doses.

Effect of dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg on weight in patients with type 2 diabetes: Exploratory analyses of AWARD-11.

AIM: To evaluate the impact of dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg versus 1.5 mg on body weight in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) based on exploratory analyses of the AWARD-11 trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 (n = 612), 3.0 (n = 616) or 4.5 mg (n = 614) for 52 weeks. The primary objective was superiority of dulaglutide 3.0 and/or 4.5 mg over 1.5 mg in HbA1c reduction at 36 weeks. Secondary and exploratory assessments included weight reduction in the overall trial population and baseline body mass index (BMI) and HbA1c subgroups. RESULTS: At baseline, patients had a mean age of 57.1 years, HbA1c 8.6% (70 mmol/mol), weight 95.7 kg and BMI 34.2 kg/m2 . At 36 weeks, dulaglutide 3.0 and 4.5 mg were superior to 1.5 mg for weight change from baseline (1.5 mg, -3.1 kg; 3.0 mg, -4.0 kg [P = .001]; 4.5 mg, -4.7 kg [P < .001]). Higher dulaglutide doses were associated with numerically greater weight reduction compared with 1.5 mg in each baseline BMI and HbA1c subgroup. Absolute weight reduction increased with increasing BMI category, but percentage weight loss was similar between subgroups. Weight reductions with dulaglutide were greater in patients with lower versus higher baseline HbA1c. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T2D, inadequately controlled by metformin, incremental weight loss was observed with dulaglutide 1.5, 3.0 and 4.5 mg doses regardless of baseline BMI or HbA1c. Although absolute weight loss was numerically greater in patients with higher baseline BMI, percentage of weight loss was similar between BMI subgroups.

Efficacy and tolerability of tirzepatide, a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in patients with type 2 diabetes: A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate different dose-escalation regimens.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of tirzepatide treatment using three different dose-escalation regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive either once-weekly subcutaneous tirzepatide or placebo. The tirzepatide dose groups and dose-escalation regimens were: 12 mg (4 mg weeks 0-3; 8 mg weeks 4-7; 12 mg weeks 8-11), 15 mg-1 (2.5 mg weeks 0-1; 5 mg weeks 2-3; 10 mg weeks 4-7; 15 mg weeks 8-11) and 15 mg-2 (2.5 mg weeks 0-3; 7.5 mg weeks 4-7; 15 mg weeks 8-11). The primary objective was to compare tirzepatide with placebo in HbA1c change from baseline at 12 weeks. RESULTS: Overall, 111 patients were randomized: placebo, 26; tirzepatide 12 mg, 29; tirzepatide 15 mg-1, 28; tirzepatide 15 mg-2, 28. The mean age was 57.4 years, HbA1c 8.4% and body mass index 31.9 kg/m2 . At week 12, absolute HbA1c change from baseline (SE) was greater in the tirzepatide treatment groups compared with placebo (placebo, +0.2% [0.21]; 12 mg, -1.7% [0.19]; 15 mg-1, -2.0% [0.20]; 15 mg-2, -1.8% [0.19]). The incidence of nausea was: placebo, 7.7%; 12 mg group, 24.1%; 15 mg-1 group, 39.3%; 15 mg-2 group, 35.7%. Three patients discontinued the treatment because of adverse events, one from each of the placebo, 12 mg and 15 mg-1 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Tirzepatide treatment for 12 weeks resulted in clinically significant reductions in HbA1c. This suggests that lower starting doses and smaller dose increments are associated with a more favourable side effect profile.

Efficacy and safety of LY3298176, a novel dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist, in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomised, placebo-controlled and active comparator-controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: LY3298176 is a novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist that is being developed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of co-stimulation of the GLP-1 and GIP receptors with LY3298176 compared with placebo or selective stimulation of GLP-1 receptors with dulaglutide in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, phase 2 study, patients with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1) to receive either once-weekly subcutaneous LY3298176 (1 mg, 5 mg, 10 mg, or 15 mg), dulaglutide (1·5 mg), or placebo for 26 weeks. Assignment was stratified by baseline glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), metformin use, and body-mass index (BMI). Eligible participants (aged 18-75) had type 2 diabetes for at least 6 months (HbA1c 7·0-10·5%, inclusive), that was inadequately controlled with diet and exercise alone or with stable metformin therapy, and a BMI of 23-50 kg/m2. The primary efficacy outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population (all patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one postbaseline measurement of any outcome). Secondary endpoints, measured in the mITT on treatment dataset, were change in HbA1c from baseline to 12 weeks; change in mean bodyweight, fasting plasma glucose, waist circumference, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and triglycerides, and proportion of patients reaching the HbA1c target (≤6·5% and <7·0%) from baseline to weeks 12 and 26; and proportion of patients with at least 5% and 10% bodyweight loss from baseline to 26 weeks. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03131687. FINDINGS: Between May 24, 2017, and March 28, 2018, 555 participants were assessed for eligibility, of whom 318 were randomly assigned to one of the six treatment groups. Because two participants did not receive treatment, the modified intention-to-treat and safety populations included 316 participants. 258 (81·7%) participants completed 26 weeks of treatment, and 283 (89·6%) completed the study. At baseline, mean age was 57 years (SD 9), BMI was 32·6 kg/m2 (5·9), duration from diagnosis of diabetes was 9 years (6), HbA1c was 8·1% (1·0), 53% of patients were men, and 47% were women. At 26 weeks, the effect of LY3298176 on change in HbA1c was dose-dependent and did not plateau. Mean changes from baseline in HbA1c with LY3298176 were -1·06% for 1 mg, -1·73% for 5 mg, -1·89% for 10 mg, and -1·94% for 15 mg, compared with -0·06% for placebo (posterior mean differences [80% credible set] vs placebo: -1·00% [-1·22 to -0·79] for 1 mg, -1·67% [-1·88 to -1·46] for 5 mg, -1·83% [-2·04 to -1·61] for 10 mg, and -1·89% [-2·11 to -1·67] for 15 mg). Compared with dulaglutide (-1·21%) the posterior mean differences (80% credible set) for change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks with the LY3298176 doses were 0·15% (-0·08 to 0·38) for 1 mg, -0·52% (-0·72 to -0·31) for 5 mg, -0·67% (-0·89 to -0·46) for 10 mg, and -0·73% (-0·95 to -0·52) for 15 mg. At 26 weeks, 33-90% of patients treated with LY3298176 achieved the HbA1c target of less than 7·0% (vs 52% with dulaglutide, 12% with placebo) and 15-82% achieved the HbA1c target of at least 6·5% (vs 39% with dulaglutide, 2% with placebo). Changes in fasting plasma glucose ranged from -0·4 mmol/L to -3·4 mmol/L for LY3298176 (vs 0·9 mmol/L for placebo, -1·2 mmol/L for dulaglutide). Changes in mean bodyweight ranged from -0·9 kg to -11·3 kg for LY3298176 (vs -0·4 kg for placebo, -2·7 kg for dulaglutide). At 26 weeks, 14-71% of those treated with LY3298176 achieved the weight loss target of at least 5% (vs 22% with dulaglutide, 0% with placebo) and 6-39% achieved the weight loss target of at least 10% (vs 9% with dulaglutide, 0% with placebo). Changes in waist circumference ranged from -2·1 cm to -10·2 cm for LY3298176 (vs -1·3 cm for placebo, -2·5 cm for dulaglutide). Changes in total cholesterol ranged from 0·2 mmol/L to -0·3 mmol/L for LY3298176 (vs 0·3 mmol/L for placebo, -0·2 mmol/L for dulaglutide). Changes in HDL or LDL cholesterol did not differ between the LY3298176 and placebo groups. Changes in triglyceride concentration ranged from 0 mmol/L to -0·8 mmol/L for LY3298176 (vs 0·3 mmol/L for placebo, -0·3 mmol/L for dulaglutide). The 12-week outcomes were similar to those at 26 weeks for all secondary outcomes. 13 (4%) of 316 participants across the six treatment groups had 23 serious adverse events in total. Gastrointestinal events (nausea, diarrhoea, and vomiting) were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events. The incidence of gastrointestinal events was dose-related (23·1% for 1 mg LY3298176, 32·7% for 5 mg LY3298176, 51·0% for 10 mg LY3298176, and 66·0% for 15 mg LY3298176, 42·6% for dulaglutide, 9·8% for placebo); most events were mild to moderate in intensity and transient. Decreased appetite was the second most common adverse event (3·8% for 1 mg LY3298176, 20·0% for 5 mg LY3298176, 25·5% for 10 mg LY3298176, 18·9% for 15 mg LY3298176, 5·6% for dulaglutide, 2·0% for placebo). There were no reports of severe hypoglycaemia. One patient in the placebo group died from lung adenocarcinoma stage IV, which was unrelated to study treatment. INTERPRETATION: The dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist, LY3298176, showed significantly better efficacy with regard to glucose control and weight loss than did dulaglutide, with an acceptable safety and tolerability profile. Combined GIP and GLP-1 receptor stimulation might offer a new therapeutic option in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Capsaicin 8% Patch in Painful Diabetic Peripheral Neuropathy: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

This 12-week study evaluated the efficacy and safety of capsaicin 8% patch versus placebo patch in painful diabetic peripheral neuropathy (PDPN). Patients aged 18 years or older with PDPN were randomized (1:1) to one 30-minute treatment (capsaicin 8% patch or placebo patch) to painful areas of the feet. Overall, 369 patients were randomized (capsaicin 8% patch, n = 186; placebo patch, n = 183). Percentage reduction in average daily pain score from baseline to between weeks 2 through 8 (the primary end point) was statistically significant for capsaicin 8% patch versus placebo (-27.4% vs -20.9%; P = .025); improvements in pain were observed from week 2 onward. Versus placebo, patients treated with capsaicin 8% patch had a shorter median time to treatment response (19 vs 72 days) and modest improvements in sleep interference scores from baseline to between weeks 2 through 8 (P = .030) and weeks 2 through 12 (P = .020). Apart from application site reactions, treatment-emergent adverse events were similar between groups. No indications of deterioration in sensory perception of sharp, cold, warm, or vibration stimuli were observed. In patients with PDPN, capsaicin 8% patch treatment provided modest pain relief and sleep quality improvements versus a placebo patch, similar in magnitude to other treatments with known efficacy, but without systemic side effects or sensory deterioration. PERSPECTIVE: To our knowledge, this is the first study of the capsaicin 8% patch versus placebo in patients with PDPN to show that one 30-minute capsaicin treatment provides modest improvements in pain and sleep quality. Results confirm the clinical utility of the capsaicin 8% patch in the diabetic population.