Once-weekly insulin icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec as part of a basal-bolus regimen in individuals with type 1 diabetes (ONWARDS 6): a phase 3a, randomised, open-label, treat-to-target trial.

BACKGROUND: ONWARDS 6 compared the efficacy and safety of once-weekly subcutaneous insulin icodec (icodec) and once-daily insulin degludec (degludec) in adults with type 1 diabetes. METHODS: This 52-week (26-week main phase plus a 26-week safety extension), randomised, open-label, treat-to-target, phase 3a trial was done at 99 sites across 12 countries. Adults with type 1 diabetes (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] <10·0% [86 mmol/mol]) were randomly assigned (1:1) to once-weekly icodec or once-daily degludec, both in combination with insulin aspart (two or more daily injections). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26, tested for non-inferiority (0·3 percentage point margin) in all randomly assigned participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04848480, and is now complete. FINDINGS: Between April 30 and Oct 15, 2021, of 655 participants screened, 582 participants were randomly assigned to icodec (n=290) or degludec (n=292). At week 26, from baseline values of 7·59% (icodec) and 7·63% (degludec), estimated mean changes in HbA1c were -0·47 percentage points and -0·51 percentage points, respectively (estimated treatment difference 0·05 percentage points [95% CI -0·13 to 0·23]), confirming non-inferiority of icodec to degludec (p=0·0065). Overall rate of combined clinically significant or severe hypoglycaemia (baseline to week 26) was statistically significantly higher with icodec than degludec (19·9 vs 10·4 events per patient-year of exposure; estimated rate ratio 1·9 [95% CI 1·5 to 2·3]; p<0·0001). The rate was also statistically significantly higher with icodec than degludec when evaluated over 57 weeks (52 weeks plus a 5-week follow-up period). 39 serious adverse events were reported in 24 (8%) participants receiving icodec, and 25 serious adverse events were reported in 20 (7%) participants receiving degludec. One participant in the icodec group died; this was judged unlikely to be due to the trial product. INTERPRETATION: In adults with type 1 diabetes, once-weekly icodec showed non-inferiority to once-daily degludec in HbA1c reduction at week 26, with statistically significantly higher rates of combined clinically significant or severe hypoglycaemia. For icodec, time below 3·0 mmol/L (<54 mg/dL) was at the threshold of the internationally recommended target (<1%) during weeks 22-26 and below target during weeks 48-52. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Impact of standardizing care for agitation in dementia using an integrated care pathway on an inpatient geriatric psychiatry unit.

OBJECTIVES: This study examined the effectiveness of an integrated care pathway (ICP), including a medication algorithm, to treat agitation associated with dementia. DESIGN: Analyses of data (both prospective and retrospective) collected during routine clinical care. SETTING: Geriatric Psychiatry Inpatient Unit. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with agitation associated with dementia (n = 28) who were treated as part of the implementation of the ICP and those who received treatment-as-usual (TAU) (n = 28) on the same inpatient unit before the implementation of the ICP. Two control groups of patients without dementia treated on the same unit contemporaneously to the TAU (n = 17) and ICP groups (n = 36) were included to account for any secular trends. INTERVENTION: ICP. MEASUREMENTS: Cohen Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI), Neuropsychiatric Inventory Questionnaire (NPIQ), and assessment of motor symptoms were completed during the ICP implementation. Chart review was used to obtain length of inpatient stay and rates of psychotropic polypharmacy. RESULTS: Patients in the ICP group experienced a reduction in their scores on the CMAI and NPIQ and no changes in motor symptoms. Compared to the TAU group, the ICP group had a higher chance of an earlier discharge from hospital, a lower rate of psychotropic polypharmacy, and a lower chance of having a fall during hospital stay. In contrast, these outcomes did not differ between the two control groups. CONCLUSIONS: These preliminary results suggest that an ICP can be used effectively to treat agitation associated with dementia in inpatients. A larger randomized study is needed to confirm these results.

Use of once-weekly semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes in routine clinical practice: Results from the SURE Canada multicentre, prospective, observational study.

AIM: To investigate once-weekly (OW) semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in routine clinical practice. METHODS: The SURE Canada study was a multicenter, prospective, observational study. Adults with T2D and one or more documented HbA1c values 12 weeks or less before semaglutide initiation were enrolled. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to end of study (EOS; ~30 weeks). Secondary endpoints included change in body weight (BW), waist circumference and patient-reported outcomes (PROs) and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c of less than 7.0%, weight loss (WL) of 5% or higher, and a composite of HbA1c reduction of 1% or higher and WL of 3% or higher at EOS. Data were analysed and presented for patients on semaglutide at EOS overall and for the following baseline medication subgroups: oral antihyperglycaemic drugs (OADs) only; GLP-1RA experienced; insulin ± OADs without GLP-1RA. RESULTS: In total, 452 patients initiated semaglutide and 356 completed the study on treatment. For the 452 patients, mean baseline HbA1c was 8.1%; 86 (19.0%) patients had HbA1c of less than 7.0%. Mean dose of semaglutide at EOS was 0.76 ± 0.31 mg. Mean HbA1c was reduced by 0.9%-point (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.97; 0.78). Mean BW was reduced by 4.3 kg (95% CI: 4.79; 3.76). At EOS, 46.9% of patients achieved HbA1c of less than 7.0%, 40.9% achieved WL of 5% or higher and 24.1% achieved the composite endpoint. PROs improved from baseline to EOS. No new safety concerns were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In SURE Canada, patients treated with OW semaglutide in routine clinical practice experienced clinically significant improvements in HbA1c, BW and other outcomes, supporting semaglutide use in routine clinical practice.

Acute Kidney Injury Events in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Using SGLT2 Inhibitors Versus Other Glucose-Lowering Drugs: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors slow the progression of chronic kidney disease and prevent heart failure events. However, SGLT2 inhibitors may increase the risk for acute kidney injury (AKI). Our objective was to assess whether SGLT2 inhibitor use, compared with all other glucose-lowering drugs (oGLDs), is associated with increased rates of AKI. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Adults in Manitoba, Canada, with type 2 diabetes mellitus followed up from June 2014 until March 2017. EXPOSURES: Initial SGLT2 inhibitor or oGLD use ascertained through a province-wide outpatient prescription database. OUTCOME: The primary outcome was incident AKI, identified either by an increase in serum creatinine level and/or hospital discharge codes for AKI while taking glucose-lowering drugs (on-treatment approach). ANALYTICAL APPROACH: A propensity score analysis was used to assemble groups of incident users of SGLT2 inhibitors and a 1:1 matched set of oGLD users. The rate of AKI was compared across matched groups using cause-specific hazards models. Sensitivity analyses considered exposure to be constant throughout follow-up after initiation of the drug treatment (intention-to-treat approach) or incorporated recurrent exposures (new user design). RESULTS: Comparing 4,778 incident users of SGLT2 inhibitors with 4,778 incident users of oGLDs, there were no differences observed in the primary outcome (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.40-1.03; P = 0.06) using an on-treatment approach. In neither set of sensitivity analyses were SGLT2 inhibitors associated with increased risk for AKI. LIMITATIONS: Drug choice may have been related to AKI risk, laboratory data were obtained from clinical care, and changes in adverse event reporting may have followed the US Food and Drug Administration warning. There were insufficient data to compare individual SGLT2 inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with oGLDs, SGLT2 inhibitors were not observed to be associated with increased risk for AKI in a clinical population-based cohort.

Are the cardiovascular and kidney benefits of empagliflozin influenced by baseline glucose-lowering therapy?

AIMS: In the EMPA-REG OUTCOME® trial, the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin when given in addition to standard care improved cardiovascular (CV) and renal outcomes, and reduced mortality. Trial participants were on a variety of glucose-lowering therapies at baseline, some of which could potentially affect CV risk. This analysis investigated whether the use of background diabetes therapy affected the risk of CV death, hospitalizations for heart failure, and progression of chronic kidney disease, among patients treated with empagliflozin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients meeting inclusion and exclusion criteria were randomized to placebo, empagliflozin 10 mg or empagliflozin 25 mg; glucose-lowering therapy was to remain unchanged for 12 weeks and then adjusted to achieve glycaemic control according to local guidelines. Differences in risk of cardio-renal outcomes between empagliflozin and placebo by baseline use of metformin, sulphonylurea (SU) and insulin were assessed using a Cox proportional hazards model. RESULTS: Of 7020 eligible patients, 74% were receiving metformin, 43% SU and 48% insulin at baseline (each alone or in combination); the most common regimens were metformin plus SU (20%) and metformin plus insulin (20%). Empagliflozin reduced the risk of CV death irrespective of the use of: metformin [with: hazard ratio (HR) 0.71 (95% confidence interval, CI, 0.54-0.94); without: 0.46 (0.32-0.68); Pinteraction = 0.07]; SU [with: HR 0.64 (0.44-0.92); without: 0.61 (0.46-0.81); Pinteraction = 0.85]; or insulin [with: HR 0.63 (0.46-0.85); without: 0.61 (0.44-0.85); Pinteraction = 0.92]. Reductions in three-point major adverse CV events, hospitalizations for heart failure, and all-cause mortality were consistent across subgroups of baseline therapies. Empagliflozin reduced the risks of incident or worsening nephropathy versus placebo irrespective of the use of SU or insulin at baseline (Pinteraction > 0.05), but there was a greater reduction in this risk for patients not using metformin [HR 0.47 (95% CI 0.37-0.59)] versus those using metformin [HR 0.68 (95% CI 0.58-0.79)] at baseline (Pinteraction = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of empagliflozin to antihyperglycaemic regimens of patients with type 2 diabetes and CV disease consistently reduced their risks of adverse CV outcomes and mortality irrespective of baseline use of metformin, SU or insulin. For chronic kidney disease progression, there may be a larger benefit from empagliflozin in those patients who are not using metformin.

Positioning sulphonylureas in a modern treatment algorithm for patients with type 2 diabetes: Expert opinion from a European consensus panel.

The large number of pharmacological agents available to treat type 2 diabetes (T2D) makes choosing the optimal drug for any given patient a complex task. Because newer agents offer several advantages, whether and when sulphonylureas (SUs) should still be used to treat T2D is controversial. Published treatment guidelines and recommendations should govern the general approach to diabetes management. However, expert opinions can aid in better understanding local practices and in formulating individual choices. The current consensus paper aims to provide additional guidance on the use of SUs in T2D. We summarize current local treatment guidelines in European countries, showing that SUs are still widely proposed as second-line treatment after metformin and are often ranked at the same level as newer glucose-lowering medications. Strong evidence now shows that sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are associated with low hypoglycaemia risk, promote weight loss, and exert a positive impact on vascular, cardiac and renal endpoints. Thus, using SUs in place of SGLT-2is and GLP-1RAs may deprive patients of key advantages and potentially important cardiorenal benefits. In subjects with ascertained cardiovascular disease or at very high cardiovascular risk, SGLT-2is and/or GLP-1RAs should be used as part of diabetes management, in the absence of contraindications. Routine utilization of SUs as second-line agents continues to be acceptable in resource-constrained settings.

Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Regulatory guidance specifies the need to establish cardiovascular safety of new diabetes therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to rule out excess cardiovascular risk. The cardiovascular effects of semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue with an extended half-life of approximately 1 week, in type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned 3297 patients with type 2 diabetes who were on a standard-care regimen to receive once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 mg or 1.0 mg) or placebo for 104 weeks. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. We hypothesized that semaglutide would be noninferior to placebo for the primary outcome. The noninferiority margin was 1.8 for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. RESULTS: At baseline, 2735 of the patients (83.0%) had established cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, or both. The primary outcome occurred in 108 of 1648 patients (6.6%) in the semaglutide group and in 146 of 1649 patients (8.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.95; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 2.9% of the patients receiving semaglutide and in 3.9% of those receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; P=0.12); nonfatal stroke occurred in 1.6% and 2.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.99; P=0.04). Rates of death from cardiovascular causes were similar in the two groups. Rates of new or worsening nephropathy were lower in the semaglutide group, but rates of retinopathy complications (vitreous hemorrhage, blindness, or conditions requiring treatment with an intravitreal agent or photocoagulation) were significantly higher (hazard ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.78; P=0.02). Fewer serious adverse events occurred in the semaglutide group, although more patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes who were at high cardiovascular risk, the rate of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was significantly lower among patients receiving semaglutide than among those receiving placebo, an outcome that confirmed the noninferiority of semaglutide. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; SUSTAIN-6 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01720446 .).

Sodium-glucose co-transporter inhibitors, their role in type 1 diabetes treatment and a risk mitigation strategy for preventing diabetic ketoacidosis: The STOP DKA Protocol.

Recent phase 3 clinical trials have evaluated the impact of adding sodium-glucose co-transporter (SGLT) inhibitors to the type 1 diabetes armamentarium. These trials studied SGLT2 inhibitors (dapagliflozin and empagliflozin) and a dual SGLT1 and SGLT2 inhibitor (sotagliflozin), and demonstrated that these oral non-insulin antihyperglycaemic medications are able not only to improve glycaemic control, but also to reduce body weight and extend time in range without increasing rates of hypoglycaemia in type 1 diabetes. Diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA) is a feature of type 1 diabetes and the risk is increased when SGLT inhibitors are used in type 1 diabetes. To minimize the risk of DKA and still gain the multiple benefits, we developed the "STOP DKA Protocol ", an easily accessible and practical tool, that provides a risk mitigation strategy for reducing DKA in patients with type 1 diabetes being treated with SGLT inhibitors.

Short-term cost-utility of degludec versus glargine U100 for patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk of hypoglycaemia and cardiovascular events: A Canadian setting (DEVOTE 9).

AIMS: To evaluate the short-term cost-effectiveness of insulin degludec (degludec) vs insulin glargine 100 units/mL (glargine U100) from a Canadian public healthcare payer perspective in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who are at high risk of cardiovascular events and hypoglycaemia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A decision analytic model was developed to estimate costs (2017 Canadian dollars [CAD]) and clinical outcomes (quality-adjusted life years [QALYs]) with degludec vs glargine U100 over a 2-year time horizon. The model captured first major adverse cardiovascular event, death, severe hypoglycaemia and insulin dosing. Clinical outcomes were informed by a post hoc subgroup analysis of the DEVOTE trial (NCT01959529), which compared the cardiovascular safety of degludec and glargine U100 in patients with T2D who are at high cardiovascular risk. High hypoglycaemia risk was defined as the top quartile of patients (n = 1887) based on an index of baseline hypoglycaemia risk factors. RESULTS: In patients at high hypoglycaemia risk, degludec was associated with mean cost savings (CAD 129 per patient) relative to glargine U100, driven by a lower incidence of non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke and severe hypoglycaemia, which offset the slightly higher cost of treatment with degludec. A reduced risk of cardiovascular death and severe hypoglycaemia resulted in improved effectiveness (+0.0132 QALYs) with degludec relative to glargine U100. In sensitivity analyses, changes to the vast majority of model parameters did not materially affect model outcomes. CONCLUSION: Over a 2-year period, degludec improved clinical outcomes at a lower cost as compared to glargine U100 in patients with T2D at high risk of cardiovascular events and hypoglycaemia.

CANadian CAnagliflozin REgistry: Effectiveness and safety of canagliflozin in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in Canadian clinical practice.

AIM: There is limited information concerning the effects of canagliflozin (CANA), a sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor (SGLT2i) in a real-world clinical setting in Canada. CanCARE is a 12-month, prospective, observational analysis to demonstrate the effectiveness and safety of CANA in usual clinical practice in Canada. MATERIALS AND METHODS: SGLT2i-naïve adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) (n = 527) on a stable antihyperglycemic agent (AHA) regimen with glycated hemoglobin (A1C) ≥ 7%, an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73m2 , were initiated on CANA as part of their usual treatment approach, and were followed for a period of 12 months. The primary effectiveness objective was the mean change in HbA1c from baseline to 6 and 12 months. RESULTS: Significant improvement from baseline in mean HbA1c levels were observed at 6 months (-0.90%; 95% CI, -1.02, -0.78) and at 12 months (-1.04%; 95% CI, -1.15, -0.92), regardless of duration of diabetes or background AHA treatment regimen. Similarly, significant decreases in systolic blood pressure (-4.65 mm Hg); body weight (-3.24 kg), waist circumference (-2.91 cm) and body mass index (-1.15 kg/m2 ) were observed at 12 months. Additionally, 40.5% of patients achieved the double endpoint (≥0.5% HbA1c reduction and ≥ 3% weight loss), while 24.3% of patients achieved the triple composite endpoint (≥0.5% HbA1c reduction, ≥3% weight loss and ≥ 4 mm Hg systolic blood pressure reduction). No unexpected adverse events were reported. CONCLUSION: CANA provided sustained clinically meaningful improvements in cardiometabolic parameters in this study in a real-world setting, confirming findings from randomized controlled trials.

Gabapentin and pregabalin to treat aggressivity in dementia: a systematic review and illustrative case report.

AIMS: The prevalence of dementia is rising as life expectancy increases globally. Behavioural and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD), including agitation and aggression, are common, presenting a challenge to clinicians and caregivers. METHODS: Following PRISMA guidelines, we systematically reviewed evidence for gabapentin and pregabalin against BPSD symptoms of agitation or aggression in any dementia, using six databases (Pubmed, CINHL, PsychINFO, HealthStar, Embase, and Web of Science). Complementing this formal systematic review, an illustrative case of a patient with BPSD in mixed Alzheimer's/vascular dementia, who appeared to derive benefits in terms of symptom control and functioning from the introduction of gabapentin titrated up to 3600 mg day-1 alongside other interventions, is presented. RESULTS: Twenty-four relevant articles were identified in the systematic review. There were no randomized trials. Fifteen papers were original case series/case reports of patients treated with these compounds, encompassing 87 patients given gabapentin and six given pregabalin. In 12 of 15 papers, drug treatment was effective in the majority of cases. The remaining nine papers were solely reviews, of which two were described as systematic but predated PRISMA guidelines. Preliminary low-grade evidence based on case series and case reviews suggests possible benefit of gabapentin and pregabalin in patients with BPSD in Alzheimer's disease. These benefits cannot be confirmed until well-powered randomized controlled trials are undertaken. Evidence in frontotemporal dementia is lacking. CONCLUSION: Gabapentin and pregabalin could be considered for BPSD when medications having stronger evidence bases (risperidone, other antipsychotics, carbamazepine and citalopram) have been ineffective or present unacceptable risks of adverse outcomes.

DEVOTE 3: temporal relationships between severe hypoglycaemia, cardiovascular outcomes and mortality.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: The double-blind Trial Comparing Cardiovascular Safety of Insulin Degludec vs Insulin Glargine in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes at High Risk of Cardiovascular Events (DEVOTE) assessed the cardiovascular safety of insulin degludec. The incidence and rates of adjudicated severe hypoglycaemia, and all-cause mortality were also determined. This paper reports a secondary analysis investigating associations of severe hypoglycaemia with cardiovascular outcomes and mortality. METHODS: In DEVOTE, patients with type 2 diabetes were randomised to receive either insulin degludec or insulin glargine U100 (100 units/ml) once daily (between dinner and bedtime) in an event-driven, double-blind, treat-to-target cardiovascular outcomes trial. The primary outcome was the first occurrence of an adjudicated major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction or non-fatal stroke). Adjudicated severe hypoglycaemia was the pre-specified secondary outcome. In the present analysis, the associations of severe hypoglycaemia with both MACE and all-cause mortality was evaluated in the pooled trial population using time-to-event analyses, with severe hypoglycaemia as a time-dependent variable and randomised treatment as a fixed factor. An investigation with interaction terms indicated that the effect of severe hypoglycaemia on the risk of MACE and all-cause mortality were the same for both treatment arms, and so the temporal association for severe hypoglycaemia with subsequent MACE and all-cause mortality is reported for the pooled population. RESULTS: There was a non-significant difference in the risk of MACE for individuals who had vs those who had not experienced severe hypoglycaemia during the trial (HR 1.38, 95% CI 0.96, 1.96; p = 0.080) and therefore there was no temporal relationship between severe hypoglycaemia and MACE. There was a significantly higher risk of all-cause mortality for patients who had vs those who had not experienced severe hypoglycaemia during the trial (HR 2.51, 95% CI 1.79, 3.50; p < 0.001). There was a higher risk of all-cause mortality 15, 30, 60, 90, 180 and 365 days after experiencing severe hypoglycaemia compared with not experiencing severe hypoglycaemia in the same time interval. The association between severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality was maintained after adjustment for the following baseline characteristics: age, sex, HbA1c, BMI, diabetes duration, insulin regimen, hepatic impairment, renal status and cardiovascular risk group. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: The results from these analyses demonstrate an association between severe hypoglycaemia and all-cause mortality. Furthermore, they indicate that patients who experienced severe hypoglycaemia were particularly at greater risk of death in the short term after the hypoglycaemic episode. These findings indicate that severe hypoglycaemia is associated with higher subsequent mortality; however, they cannot answer the question as to whether severe hypoglycaemia serves as a risk marker for adverse outcomes or whether there is a direct causal effect. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01959529.

Achieving glycaemic control without weight gain, hypoglycaemia, or gastrointestinal adverse events in type 2 diabetes in the SUSTAIN clinical trial programme.

AIM: To evaluate the potential for semaglutide to help people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) achieve glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) targets while avoiding unwanted outcomes, such as weight gain, hypoglycaemia and gastrointestinal (GI) side effects. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the phase IIIa SUSTAIN 1 to 5 clinical trials were analysed. Participants had inadequately controlled T2D and were drug-naïve (SUSTAIN 1) or on a range of background treatments (SUSTAIN 2 to 5). The main protocol-specified composite endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving HbA1c <53 mmol/mol (7.0%) at end of treatment (30 or 56 weeks) without weight gain and with no severe or blood glucose (BG)-confirmed symptomatic hypoglycaemia. A post hoc composite endpoint was the proportion of participants achieving the primary composite endpoint without moderate or severe GI adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: Across the SUSTAIN trials 1 to 5, 3918 participants with T2D were randomized to once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 mg, 1.0 mg, or comparators (placebo, sitagliptin 100 mg, exenatide extended release 2.0 mg or insulin glargine). The proportion of participants achieving HbA1c <53 mmol/mol (7.0%) with no weight gain and no severe/BG-confirmed symptomatic hypoglycaemia was 47% to 66% (semaglutide 0.5 mg) and 57% to 74% (semaglutide 1.0 mg) vs 7% to 19% (placebo) and 16% to 29% (active comparators; all P < .0001). More participants achieved the primary composite endpoint with no moderate or severe GI AEs with semaglutide vs comparators (all P < .0001). CONCLUSION: Semaglutide helped more people with T2D achieve HbA1c targets than did comparators in the SUSTAIN 1 to 5 trials, while avoiding unwanted outcomes such as weight gain, hypoglycaemia and GI side effects.

Prospective study evaluating the use of nasal glucagon for the treatment of moderate to severe hypoglycaemia in adults with type 1 diabetes in a real-world setting.

In the present multicentre, open-label, prospective, phase III study, we evaluated the real-world effectiveness and ease of use of nasal glucagon (NG) in the treatment of moderate/severe hypoglycaemic events (HEs) in adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Patients and caregivers were taught how to use NG (3 mg) to treat moderate/severe HEs, record the time taken to awaken or return to normal status, and measure blood glucose (BG) levels over time. Questionnaires were used to collect information about adverse events and ease of use of NG. In the efficacy analysis population, 69 patients experienced 157 HEs. In 95.7% patients, HEs resolved within 30 minutes of NG administration. In all the 12 severe HEs, patients awakened or returned to normal status within 15 minutes of NG administration without additional external medical help. Most caregivers reported that NG was easy to use. Most adverse events were local and of low to moderate severity. In this study, a single, 3-mg dose of NG demonstrated real-life effectiveness in treating moderate and severe HEs in adults with T1D. NG was well tolerated and easy to use.

Once-weekly dulaglutide versus bedtime insulin glargine, both in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 2 diabetes (AWARD-4): a randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: For patients with type 2 diabetes who do not achieve target glycaemic control with conventional insulin treatment, advancing to a basal-bolus insulin regimen is often recommended. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide with that of insulin glargine, both combined with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We did this 52 week, randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority trial at 105 study sites in 15 countries. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with conventional insulin treatment were randomly assigned (1:1:1), via a computer-generated randomisation sequence with an interactive voice-response system, to receive once-weekly dulaglutide 1·5 mg, dulaglutide 0·75 mg, or daily bedtime glargine. Randomisation was stratified by country and metformin use. Participants and study investigators were not masked to treatment allocation, but were unaware of dulaglutide dose assignment. The primary outcome was a change in glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to week 26, with a 0·4% non-inferiority margin. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01191268. FINDINGS: Between Dec 9, 2010, and Sept 21, 2012, we randomly assigned 884 patients to receive dulaglutide 1·5 mg (n=295), dulaglutide 0·75 mg (n=293), or glargine (n=296). At 26 weeks, the adjusted mean change in HbA1c was greater in patients receiving dulaglutide 1·5 mg (-1·64% [95% CI -1·78 to -1·50], -17·93 mmol/mol [-19·44 to -16·42]) and dulaglutide 0·75 mg (-1·59% [-1·73 to -1·45], -17·38 mmol/mol [-18·89 to -15·87]) than in those receiving glargine (-1·41% [-1·55 to -1·27], -15·41 mmol/mol [-16·92 to -13·90]). The adjusted mean difference versus glargine was -0·22% (95% CI -0·38 to -0·07, -2·40 mmol/mol [-4·15 to -0·77]; p=0·005) for dulaglutide 1·5 mg and -0·17% (-0·33 to -0·02, -1·86 mmol/mol [-3·61 to -0·22]; p=0·015) for dulaglutide 0·75 mg. Five (<1%) patients died after randomisation because of septicaemia (n=1 in the dulaglutide 1·5 mg group); pneumonia (n=1 in the dulaglutide 0·75 mg group); cardiogenic shock; ventricular fibrillation; and an unknown cause (n=3 in the glargine group). We recorded serious adverse events in 27 (9%) patients in the dulaglutide 1·5 mg group, 44 (15%) patients in the dulaglutide 0·75 mg group, and 54 (18%) patients in the glargine group. The most frequent adverse events, arising more often with dulaglutide than glargine, were nausea, diarrhoea, and vomiting. INTERPRETATION: Dulaglutide in combination with lispro resulted in a significantly greater improvement in glycaemic control than did glargine and represents a new treatment option for patients unable to achieve glycaemic targets with conventional insulin treatment. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes and stage 3 nephropathy.

BACKGROUND/AIMS: Some sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are approved for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of ≥45 ml/min/1.73 m(2). The efficacy and safety of canagliflozin, an approved SGLT2 inhibitor, was evaluated in patients with stage 3 chronic kidney disease (CKD; eGFR ≥30 to <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)). METHODS: This analysis used integrated data from four randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 studies that enrolled patients with T2DM and stage 3 CKD. RESULTS are presented for the overall population as well as subgroups with stage 3a CKD (eGFR ≥45 and <60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)) and stage 3b CKD (eGFR ≥30 and <45 ml/min/1.73 m(2)). RESULTS: Among all subjects studied with stage 3 CKD, placebo-subtracted reductions in HbA1c (-0.38 and -0.47%; p < 0.001), body weight (-1.6 and -1.9%; p < 0.001), and systolic blood pressure (-2.8 and -4.4 mm Hg; p < 0.01) were seen with canagliflozin 100 and 300 mg, respectively. Decreases in HbA1c, body weight, and systolic blood pressure were examined in the stage 3a and 3b CKD subgroups, with greater decreases in HbA1c, -0.47% (-0.61, -0.32) and body weight in subjects in stage 3a CKD, -1.8% (-2.3, -1.2) with canagliflozin 100 mg. Initial declines in eGFR were seen early following treatment initiation with canagliflozin, but trended towards baseline over time. The most common adverse events with canagliflozin included genital mycotic infections and adverse events related to reduced intravascular volume likely secondary to osmotic diuresis. CONCLUSION: In subjects with T2DM and stage 3 CKD, canagliflozin reduced HbA1c, body weight, and blood pressure, and was generally well tolerated.

Dosing irregularities and self-treated hypoglycemia in type 2 diabetes: results from the Canadian cohort of an international survey of patients and healthcare professionals.

OBJECTIVE: Despite their importance in achieving good glycemic control, few real-world data on insulin dosing irregularities and hypoglycemia are available. The multinational, online Global Attitude of Patients and Physicians (GAPP2) survey was conducted to address this situation. METHODS: Insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes and healthcare professionals (HCPs) who treat such patients were surveyed in an online cross-sectional study. This article summarizes findings from a sample of the online population in a Canadian cohort of 156 patients and 202 HCPs. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients completed the questionnaires; 26% reported experiencing a dosing irregularity (missed, mistimed or reduced a basal insulin dose) in the previous 30 days. Up to 60% reported risk for hypoglycemia as the reason for intentional dosing irregularities. Of all patients, 80% reported experiencing a self-treated hypoglycemic event, and 33% recalled having at least 1 event in the previous month. HCPs recorded similar levels of patient-reported dosing irregularities. Over 90% indicated they recommended patients to temporarily reduce their insulin doses to deal with hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: A sizeable minority of patients experienced dosing irregularities and self-treated hypoglycemia in this Canadian cohort. The data suggest that HCPs who completed the survey are aware of this and of the need to provide education and support for patients who regularly miss, mistime or reduce insulin doses. Although the desire to prevent hypoglycemic events is understandable and important, HCPs need to ensure fear of hypoglycemia does not compromise optimal diabetes management.

Management of type 2 diabetes, obesity, or nonalcoholic steatohepatitis with high-dose GLP-1 receptor agonists and GLP-1 receptor-based co-agonists.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D), obesity, and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease/nonalacoholic steatohepatitis (NAFLD/NASH) share mutual causalities. Medications that may offer clinical benefits to all three conditions are being developed. Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are approved for the management of T2D and obesity and there is great interest in evaluating higher doses of available GLP-1RAs and developing novel GLP-1RA-based co-agonists to provide greater reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight as well as modifying NAFLD/NASH complications in clinically meaningful ways. High-dose GLP-1RAs and multi-hormonal strategies including GLP-1R agonism have either already been approved or are in development for managing T2D, obesity, or NASH. We provide a mechanistic outline with a detailed summary of the available clinical data and ongoing trials that are adjudicating the impact of high-dose GLP-1RAs, unimolecular, and multimolecular GLP-1R-based co-agonists in populations living with T2D, obesity, or NASH. The available trial findings are aligned with preclinical observations, showing clinical efficacy and safety thus providing optimism for the expansion of GLP-1R-based drug classes for managing the triad of T2D, obesity and NASH. Development, access, and wide-spread utilization of these new therapeutic approaches will offer important opportunities to markedly improve the collective global burden of T2D, obesity, and NASH.

Long-term efficacy of dapagliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving high doses of insulin: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Dapagliflozin, a selective inhibitor of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2, may improve glycemic control with a lower dose of insulin and attenuate the associated weight gain in patients with inadequate control despite high doses of insulin. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding dapagliflozin therapy in patients whose type 2 diabetes mellitus is inadequately controlled with insulin with or without oral antidiabetic drugs. DESIGN: A 24-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial followed by a 24-week extension period. An additional 56-week extension period is ongoing. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00673231) SETTING: 126 centers in Europe and North America from 30 April 2008 to 19 November 2009. PATIENTS: 808 patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus receiving at least 30 U of insulin daily, with or without up to 2 oral antidiabetic drugs. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1:1 ratio and allocated with a computer-generated scheme to receive placebo or 2.5, 5, or 10 mg of dapagliflozin, once daily, for 48 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was change in hemoglobin A(1c) from baseline to 24 weeks. Secondary outcomes included changes in body weight, insulin dose, and fasting plasma glucose level at 24 weeks and during the 24-week extension period. Adverse events were evaluated throughout both 24-week periods. RESULTS: 800 patients were analyzed. After 24 weeks, mean hemoglobin A(1c) decreased by 0.79% to 0.96% with dapagliflozin compared with 0.39% with placebo (mean difference, -0.40% [95% CI, -0.54% to -0.25%] in the 2.5-mg group, -0.49% [CI, -0.65% to -0.34%] in the 5-mg group, and -0.57% [CI, -0.72% to -0.42%] in the 10-mg group). Daily insulin dose decreased by 0.63 to 1.95 U with dapagliflozin and increased by 5.65 U with placebo (mean difference, -7.60 U [CI, -10.32 to -4.87 U] in the 2.5-mg group, -6.28 U [CI, -8.99 to -3.58 U] in the 5-mg group, and -6.82 U [CI, -9.56 to -4.09 U] in the 10-mg group). Body weight decreased by 0.92 to 1.61 kg with dapagliflozin and increased by 0.43 kg with placebo (mean differences, -1.35 kg [CI, -1.90 to -0.80 kg] in the 2.5-mg group, -1.42 kg [CI, -1.97 to -0.88 kg] in the 5-mg group, and -2.04 kg [CI, -2.59 to -1.48 kg] in the 10-mg group). These effects were maintained at 48 weeks. Compared with the placebo group, patients in the pooled dapagliflozin groups had a higher rate of hypoglycemic episodes (56.6% vs. 51.8%), events suggesting genital infection (9.0% vs. 2.5%), and events suggesting urinary tract infection (9.7% vs. 5.1%). LIMITATION: Insulin doses were not titrated to target, and the study was not designed to evaluate long-term safety. CONCLUSION: Dapagliflozin improves glycemic control, stabilizes insulin dosing, and reduces weight without increasing major hypoglycemic episodes in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: AstraZeneca and Bristol-Myers Squibb.