Findings for iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30 confirmed in groups of people with type 2 diabetes with different biomedical characteristics.

AIM: To report prespecified and post hoc analyses of the SoliMix dataset exploring the impact of baseline participant characteristics on the original SoliMix study outcomes, to enable informed treatment choices for people with different biomedical characteristics. METHODS: SoliMix (EudraCT 2017-003370-13) compared once-daily iGlarLixi (a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL and the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide) with twice-daily BIAsp 30 (30% insulin aspart and 70% insulin aspart protamine). In this analysis, the original primary outcomes of noninferiority of iGlarLixi versus BIAsp 30 in terms of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change and superiority in terms of body weight change, together with change in basal insulin dose and hypoglycaemia outcomes, were investigated by baseline age, duration of diabetes, insulin dose, HbA1c level, body mass index (BMI), and renal function. RESULTS: No evidence of difference in comparative treatment effect was detected across baseline age, duration of diabetes, insulin dose, HbA1c level, BMI and renal function subgroups for any endpoint (all heterogeneity P > 0.05), except American Diabetes Association Level 2 hypoglycaemia event rate when stratified by insulin dose (P = 0.011), which may be a chance difference given multiple testing and the small numbers of Level 2 events. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment effects of iGlarLixi were consistent irrespective of baseline HbA1c, insulin dose, BMI, age, duration of diabetes and renal function, supporting the use of iGlarLixi as an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment option in people with type 2 diabetes with a wide range of biomedical characteristics.

Efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp: Results of a systematic literature review and indirect treatment comparison.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, a fixed-ratio combination of basal insulin glargine 100 U/mL and lixisenatide (glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist) versus IDegAsp, a co-formulation of basal insulin degludec 100 U/mL with rapid-acting insulin aspart. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A systematic literature search of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) was performed. Outcomes from eligible RCTs were compared by an indirect treatment comparison using a Bayesian framework. Subanalyses of Japanese and international trials were performed. RESULTS: Eight RCTs (duration 26-30 weeks) were included. Mean difference in HbA1c change with iGlarLixi exceeded that for IDegAsp: -0.64 (95% credible interval -1.01, -0.28) %-units (-7.0 [-11.0, -3.1] mmol/mol) for all trials, -0.39 (-0.55, -0.23) %-units (-4.3 [-6.0, -2.5] mmol/mol) for international, and -0.88 (-1.11, -0.64) %-units (-9.6 [-12.1, -7.0] mmol/mol) for Japanese trials. HbA1c target achievement (<7.0%-units [<53 mmol/mol]) was greater for iGlarLixi in all trials (odds ratio 2.50 [1.06, 5.56]) and Japanese trials (2.17 [1.27, 3.70]), but not in international trials (2.17 [0.42, 11.11]). Analyses suggesting differences in mean postmeal self-measured plasma glucose were significantly lower by 1.0-2.0 mmol/L (18-36 mg/dL) with iGlarLixi in all analyses. Bodyweight change was more favourable (1-2 kg) for iGlarLixi versus IDegAsp for all analyses (P < 0.05). Comparisons of hypoglycaemia were inconclusive owing to differences in definitions between studies. Adverse events were more frequent with iGlarLixi because of gastrointestinal intolerance. CONCLUSIONS: iGlarLixi appears to offer clinical benefit in glucose control and bodyweight change in people needing both basal and meal-time intervention.

Hypoglycaemia risk with insulin glargine 300 U/mL compared with glargine 100 U/mL across different baseline fasting C-peptide levels in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes: A post hoc analysis of the EDITION 3 trial.

The relationship between baseline fasting C-peptide (FCP) and glucose control was examined in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral antihyperglycaemic drugs commencing basal insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) or 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in the absence of sulfonylurea/glinides. Participants with FCP measurement from the EDITION 3 trial (n = 867) were stratified according to baseline FCP (≤0.40, >0.40-1.20, >1.20 nmol/L); 11.0%, 70.9% and 18.1% contributed to each group. Glycaemic control, body weight, insulin dose and hypoglycaemia were determined at 26 weeks. Glycaemic control (HbA1c, FPG) at 26 weeks was similar in each FCP group between insulins. However, end-of-study insulin dose was greater with higher FCP for both insulins. More people with lower baseline FCP experienced hypoglycaemia with both insulins, but with numerically lower incidence for Gla-300 versus Gla-100 across all FCP groups for all definitions (time periods and levels) of hypoglycaemia. This suggests that Gla-300 might be particularly advantageous for people who are at higher risk of hypoglycaemia.

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.

Commencing insulin glargine 100 U/mL therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes: Determinants of achievement of HbA1c goal less than 7.0.

AIMS: To identify factors associated with achievement of glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) target at 24 weeks after commencing basal insulin therapy in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Post-hoc pooled analysis of 16 randomized, treat-to-target trials involving individuals with T2DM inadequately controlled with oral anti-hyperglycaemic drugs (n = 3415) initiated on once-daily insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). Clinical outcomes were assessed by HbA1c response at 24 weeks and individuals were classified as "good responders" with HbA1c <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) or as "poor responders" with HbA1c ≥7.0% (≥53 mmol/mol). Univariable and multivariable stepwise logistic regression analyses were performed to identify predictive factors for attaining HbA1c <7.0%. RESULTS: Lower levels of baseline HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and post-prandial plasma glucose (PPG), higher body mass index (BMI), shorter diabetes duration and male sex were associated with a good glycaemic response, but not age or baseline C-peptide levels. Gla-100 dose (U/kg) was highest in the poor-responder group, which had the fewest hypoglycaemia episodes. Univariable analysis for achievement of HbA1c <7.0% confirmed these observations. Multivariable analysis retained baseline HbA1c, body weight, BMI, sex, 2-hours PPG and diabetes duration as predictors of a good response. Continued use of sulfonylureas, hypoglycaemia and change in body weight were indicative of poor response. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline HbA1c was the strongest determinant for achieving target HbA1c <7.0% by supplementary Gla-100 therapy, while sex and BMI were also useful indicators. However, age and C-peptide levels at baseline did not predict glycaemic response to the introduction of basal insulin.

Glycaemic control and hypoglycaemia during 12 months of randomized treatment with insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus glargine 100 U/mL in people with type 1 diabetes (EDITION 4).

AIMS: Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) offers a flatter pharmacodynamic profile than insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). We have compared these insulins over 1 year in people with type 1 diabetes (T1DM). METHODS: EDITION 4 was a 6-month, multicentre, randomized, open-label phase 3 study. People with T1DM who completed the 6 months continued randomized Gla-300 or Gla-100 once daily, morning or evening, for a further 6 months. RESULTS: Among 549 participants randomized, 444 completed the 12-month study period (Gla-300, 80%; Gla-100, 82%). Mean HbA1c decreased similarly from baseline to month 12 in the 2 treatment groups (difference, 0.02 [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.17]) %-units [0.2 (-1.5 to 1.9) mmol/mol]), to a mean of 7.86 %-units (62.4 mmol/mol) in both groups. For morning vs evening injection, there was no difference in HbA1c change over 12 months for Gla-100, but a significantly larger decrease in HbA1c was observed in the Gla-300 morning group than in the Gla-300 evening group (difference, -0.25 [-0.47 to -0.04] %-units [-2.7 (-5.2 to -0.4) mmol/mol]). Mean glucose from the 8-point SMPG profiles decreased from baseline, and was similar between the 2 treatment groups. Basal insulin dose was 20% higher with Gla-300 than with Gla-100, while hypoglycaemia event rates, analysed at night, over 24 hours, or according to different glycaemic thresholds, did not differ between treatment groups, regardless of injection time. Adverse event profiles did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In T1DM, Gla-300 provides glucose control comparable to that of Gla-100, and can be given at any time of day.

Efficacy and safety of MK-1293 insulin glargine compared with originator insulin glargine (Lantus) in type 1 diabetes: A randomized, open-label clinical trial.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of MK-1293 insulin glargine (Mk-Gla; 100 U/mL) with originator insulin glargine, Lantus (Sa-Gla), in people with type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This phase 3, randomized, active-controlled, open-label, 52-week study (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02059161) enrolled 508 people with T1DM (HbA1c ≤11.0%; 97 mmol/mol) taking basal and prandial insulin. Participants were randomized 1:1 to once-daily Mk-Gla (n = 245) or Sa-Gla (n = 263). Dose titration of basal insulin was by a pre-breakfast plasma glucose dosing algorithm. The primary efficacy objective was assessment of the non-inferiority of HbA1c change from baseline (margin of 0.40% [4.4 mmol/mol]) for Mk-Gla compared with Sa-Gla over 24 weeks. The primary safety objective was assessment of anti-insulin antibody development over 24 weeks. RESULTS: The least squares (LS) mean HbA1c change from baseline at week 24 was -0.62 (95% CI -0.79, -0.45)% (-6.8 [-8.7, -4.9] mmol/mol) and -0.66 (-0.82, -0.50)% (-7.2 [-9.0, -5.4] mmol/mol) for Mk-Gla and Sa-Gla. The LS mean HbA1c difference was 0.04 (-0.11, 0.19)% (0.4 [-1.2, 2.0] mmol/mol) for Mk-Gla minus Sa-Gla, meeting the primary and secondary objective criteria for non-inferiority and equivalence. Week 24 mean insulin glargine dose for Mk-Gla and Sa-Gla was 0.46 and 0.48 U/kg, respectively. Similarity of HbA1c response and basal insulin dose trajectory persisted over the 52 weeks. Safety and tolerability, including anti-insulin antibody responses, hypoglycaemia, adverse events and body weight, were similar between insulins over the 52-week study duration. CONCLUSIONS: Mk-Gla and Sa-Gla exhibited similar efficacy and safety over 52 weeks in people with T1DM. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02059161.

Efficacy and safety of MK-1293 insulin glargine compared with originator insulin glargine (Lantus) in type 2 diabetes: A randomized, open-label clinical trial.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of MK-1293 insulin glargine (Mk-Gla) and Lantus (Sa-Gla) in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This Phase 3, randomized, active-controlled, open-label, 24-week clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT02059187) enrolled 531 participants with T2DM (HbA1c ≤11.0%) either eligible for or currently taking basal insulin (≥10 U/day). Participants were randomized 1:1 to once-daily Mk-Gla (n = 263) or Sa-Gla (n = 263). Titration of insulin was guided by a fasting plasma glucose (FPG)-based dosing algorithm. The primary efficacy objective was to demonstrate the non-inferiority of change from baseline in HbA1c (margin of 0.40% [4.4 mmol/mol]) with Mk-Gla versus Sa-Gla after 24 weeks. The primary safety objective was anti-insulin antibody development after 24 weeks. RESULTS: For Mk-Gla and Sa-Gla, the least squares (LS) mean HbA1c change from baseline (95% CI) was -1.28 (-1.41, -1.15)% (-14.0 [-15.4, -12.6] mmol/mol) and -1.30 (-1.43, -1.18)% (-14.2 [-15.6, -12.8] mmol/mol). The LS mean HbA1c difference (Mk-Gla minus Sa-Gla) was 0.03 (-0.12, 0.18)% (0.3 [-1.4, 1.9] mmol/mol), meeting non-inferiority and equivalence (secondary objective) criteria. Insulin doses, FPG, and seven-point plasma glucose profiles were similar between groups. Safety and tolerability, including anti-insulin antibody responses, hypoglycaemia, adverse events and body weight, were similar between insulins. The efficacy and safety of Mk-Gla and Sa-Gla were similar both in participants who were insulin-treated or insulin-naïve at baseline. CONCLUSIONS: Mk-Gla and Sa-Gla demonstrated similar efficacy and safety over 24 weeks of treatment in people with T2DM.

Methodology of a reevaluation of cardiovascular outcomes in the RECORD trial: study design and conduct.

BACKGROUND: In 2010, after regulatory review of rosiglitazone licensing, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requested a reevaluation of cardiovascular end points in the RECORD trial. METHODS: Automated screening of the original clinical trial database and manual case report form review were performed to identify all potential cardiovascular and noncardiovascular deaths, and nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI) and stroke events. Search techniques were used to find participants lost to follow-up, and sites were queried for additional source documents. Suspected events underwent blinded adjudication using both original RECORD end point definitions and new FDA end point definitions, before analysis by the Duke Clinical Research Institute. RESULTS: The reevaluation effort included an additional 328 person-years of follow-up. Automated screening identified 396 suspected deaths, 2,052 suspected MIs, and 468 suspected strokes. Manual review of documents by Duke Clinical Research Institute clinical events classification (CEC) coordinators identified an additional 31 suspected deaths, 49 suspected MIs, and 28 suspected strokes. There were 127 CEC queries issued requesting additional information on suspected deaths; 43 were closed with no site response, 61 were closed with a response that no additional data were available, and additional data were received for 23. Seventy CEC queries were issued requesting additional information for suspected MI and stroke events; 31 were closed with no site response, 20 were closed with a response that no additional data were available, and 19 resulted in additional data. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive procedures were used for rigorous event reascertainment and readjudication in a previously completed open-label, global clinical trial. These procedures used in this unique situation were consistent with other common approaches in the field, were enhanced to address the FDA concerns about the original RECORD trial results, and could be considered by clinical trialists designing event readjudication protocols for drug development programs that have been completed.

Results of a reevaluation of cardiovascular outcomes in the RECORD trial.

BACKGROUND: The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) required a reevaluation of cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in the RECORD trial. This provided an opportunity to assess the implications of event adjudication by 2 groups and quantify the differences as well as to use new FDA end point definitions in development. METHODS: Original data were used to systematically identify all potential deaths, myocardial infarctions (MIs), and strokes. Site investigators were approached for additional source documents and information about participants lost to follow-up. Suspected events were adjudicated using standard procedures, and the results were compared with the original trial outcomes. RESULTS: Follow-up for mortality was 25,833 person-years, including an additional 328 person-years identified during the reevaluation effort. A total of 184 CV or unknown-cause deaths (88 rosiglitazone, 96 metformin/sulfonylurea), 128 participants with an MI (68 rosiglitazone, 60 metformin/sulfonylurea), and 113 participants with a stroke (50 rosiglitazone, 63 metformin/sulfonylurea) were included. The hazard ratio (HR) for rosiglitazone versus metformin/sulfonylurea for the end point of CV (or unknown cause) death, MI, or stroke was 0.95 (95% CI 0.78-1.17) compared with 0.93 (95% CI 0.74-1.15) for the original RECORD results. Treatment comparisons for MI (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.80-1.59) and mortality (HR 0.86, 95% CI 0.68-1.08) were also the same compared with the original RECORD results. Sensitivity analyses were also consistent with the original RECORD results. Analyses using the FDA definitions showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: Only a modest number of additional person-years of follow-up were ascertained from this reevaluation of CV end points in RECORD. Observed HRs and CIs from these analyses using the original RECORD or new FDA end point definitions showed similar treatment effects of rosiglitazone compared with the original RECORD results.

Macrovascular and microvascular outcomes after beginning of insulin versus additional oral glucose-lowering therapy in people with type 2 diabetes: an observational study.

PURPOSE: In type 2 diabetes, the optimal stage to introduce insulin can be unclear. We compared the incidence of subsequent vascular disease between treatment regimens, that is, adding another oral glucose-lowering drug (OGLD) versus starting insulin treatment. METHODS: People with poor control on OGLDs who intensified treatment (2000-2007) were grouped by number of baseline OGLDs. Two composite endpoints, of macrovascular disease (all-cause mortality, myocardial infarction, acute coronary syndrome and stroke) and of microvascular disease (peripheral neuropathy, nephropathy or retinopathy), together with HbA(1c) and weight change over a year, were compared in those beginning insulin versus an additional OGLD. All data came from The Health Information Network UK primary care database. RESULTS: After exclusions, 14,904 people intensified treatment from one OGLD, 7231 from two and 978 from three, 9, 41 and 90%, respectively, started insulin. Average follow-up was 3.5 years. The adjusted hazard ratios for macrovascular events, OGLD versus insulin, were 0.53 (95%CI 0.42, 0.69) from one baseline treatment, 0.85 (0.70 1.04) from two and 1.07 (0.50, 2.30) from three, with no difference in risk of microvascular disease in any comparison. Mean body weight increased, and mean HbA(1c) fell across groups; the only significant adjusted comparison was greater weight increase when commencing insulin from one OGLD. CONCLUSIONS: Starting insulin rather than adding another OGLD to double or triple oral therapy did not significantly increase the incidence of vascular events. Beginning insulin from one OGLD was uncommon. More incident macrovascular disease in this group may be caused by residual confounding.

Heart failure events with rosiglitazone in type 2 diabetes: data from the RECORD clinical trial.

AIMS: Thiazolidinediones are insulin sensitizers, and are associated with fluid retention and increased risk of heart failure (HF) in people with type 2 diabetes. We assessed fatal and non-fatal HF events and their outcome, and identified HF predictors in the RECORD (Rosiglitazone Evaluated for Cardiac Outcomes and Regulation of glycaemia in Diabetes) trial population. METHODS AND RESULTS: In a multicentre, open-label study, we randomized 4447 people with type 2 diabetes on metformin or sulfonylurea monotherapy with a mean HbA(1c) of 7.9% to add-on rosiglitazone (n = 2220) or to a combination of metformin and sulfonylurea (n = 2227) and followed them over 5.5 years on average. Heart failure hospitalizations and deaths were adjudicated by a Clinical Endpoint Committee using pre-specified criteria. Independent predictors of HF events were identified out of a group of 30 pre-specified clinical, demographic, and biological variables. In the rosiglitazone group, the risk of HF death or hospitalization was doubled: HR = 2.10 (95% CI, 1.35-3.27): the excess HF event rate was 2.6 (1.1-4.1) per 1000 person-years. An excess in HF deaths was observed (10 vs. two), including four HF deaths as first HF events. By contrast, there was no increase in cardiovascular mortality or hospitalization (HR = 0.99, 95% CI, 0.85-1.16) or in cardiovascular deaths (60 vs. 71). Independent predictors of HF were rosiglitazone assignment, age, urinary albumin : creatinine ratio, body mass index, and systolic blood pressure at baseline. A history of previous cardiovascular disease was not predictive of HF. Duration of HF hospitalization and rate of HF re-hospitalization were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION: These findings confirm the increased risk of HF events in people treated with rosiglitazone and support the recommendation that this agent should not continue to be used in people developing symptomatic HF while using the medication. Close follow-up for the risk of HF should be offered to elderly people, people with markedly increased body mass index, people with microalbuminuria/proteinuria, and people with increased systolic blood pressure.

Insulin therapy development beyond 100 years.

The first insulin preparation capable of consistently lowering blood glucose was developed in 1921. But 100 years later, blood glucose control with insulin in people with diabetes is nearly universally suboptimal, with essentially the same molecule still delivered by the same inappropriate subcutaneous injection route. Bypassing this route with oral administration appears to have become technologically feasible, accelerating over the past 50 years, either with packaged insulin peptides or by chemical insulin mimetics. Some of the problems of prospective unregulated absorption of insulin into the circulation from subcutaneous depots might be overcome with glucose-responsive insulins. Approaches to these problems could be modification of the peptide by adducts, or the use of nanoparticles or insulin patches, which deliver insulin according to glucose concentration. Some attention has been paid to targeting insulin preferentially to different organs, either by molecular engineering of insulin, or with adducts. But all these approaches still have problems in even beginning to match the responsiveness of physiological insulin delivery to metabolic requirements, both prandially and basally. As would be expected, for all these technically complex approaches, many examples of abandoned development can be found. Meanwhile, it is becoming possible to change the duration of action of subcutaneous injected insulin analogues to act even more rapidly for meals, and towards weekly insulin for basal administration. The state of the art of all these approaches, and the barriers to success, are reviewed here.

Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes in oral agent combination therapy for type 2 diabetes (RECORD): a multicentre, randomised, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Rosiglitazone is an insulin sensitiser used in combination with metformin, a sulfonylurea, or both, for lowering blood glucose in people with type 2 diabetes. We assessed cardiovascular outcomes after addition of rosiglitazone to either metformin or sulfonylurea compared with the combination of the two over 5-7 years of follow-up. We also assessed comparative safety. METHODS: In a multicentre, open-label trial, 4447 patients with type 2 diabetes on metformin or sulfonylurea monotherapy with mean haemoglobin A(1c) (HbA(1c)) of 7.9% were randomly assigned to addition of rosiglitazone (n=2220) or to a combination of metformin and sulfonylurea (active control group, n=2227). The primary endpoint was cardiovascular hospitalisation or cardiovascular death, with a hazard ratio (HR) non-inferiority margin of 1.20. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00379769. FINDINGS: 321 people in the rosiglitazone group and 323 in the active control group experienced the primary outcome during a mean 5.5-year follow-up, meeting the criterion of non-inferiority (HR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85-1.16). HR was 0.84 (0.59-1.18) for cardiovascular death, 1.14 (0.80-1.63) for myocardial infarction, and 0.72 (0.49-1.06) for stroke. Heart failure causing admission to hospital or death occurred in 61 people in the rosiglitazone group and 29 in the active control group (HR 2.10, 1.35-3.27, risk difference per 1000 person-years 2.6, 1.1-4.1). Upper and distal lower limb fracture rates were increased mainly in women randomly assigned to rosiglitazone. Mean HbA(1c) was lower in the rosiglitazone group than in the control group at 5 years. INTERPRETATION: Addition of rosiglitazone to glucose-lowering therapy in people with type 2 diabetes is confirmed to increase the risk of heart failure and of some fractures, mainly in women. Although the data are inconclusive about any possible effect on myocardial infarction, rosiglitazone does not increase the risk of overall cardiovascular morbidity or mortality compared with standard glucose-lowering drugs. FUNDING: GlaxoSmithKline plc, UK.

Rosiglitazone evaluated for cardiovascular outcomes--an interim analysis.

BACKGROUND: A recent meta-analysis raised concern regarding an increased risk of myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes associated with rosiglitazone treatment of type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We conducted an unplanned interim analysis of a randomized, multicenter, open-label, noninferiority trial involving 4447 patients with type 2 diabetes who had inadequate glycemic control while receiving metformin or sulfonylurea, in which 2220 patients were assigned to receive add-on rosiglitazone (rosiglitazone group), and 2227 to receive a combination of metformin plus sulfonylurea (control group). The primary end point was hospitalization or death from cardiovascular causes. RESULTS: Because the mean follow-up was only 3.75 years, our interim analysis had limited statistical power to detect treatment differences. A total of 217 patients in the rosiglitazone group and 202 patients in the control group had the adjudicated primary end point (hazard ratio, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.89 to 1.31). After the inclusion of end points pending adjudication, the hazard ratio was 1.11 (95% CI, 0.93 to 1.32). There were no statistically significant differences between the rosiglitazone group and the control group regarding myocardial infarction and death from cardiovascular causes or any cause. There were more patients with heart failure in the rosiglitazone group than in the control group (hazard ratio, 2.15; 95% CI, 1.30 to 3.57). CONCLUSIONS: Our interim findings from this ongoing study were inconclusive regarding the effect of rosiglitazone on the overall risk of hospitalization or death from cardiovascular causes. There was no evidence of any increase in death from either cardiovascular causes or all causes. Rosiglitazone was associated with an increased risk of heart failure. The data were insufficient to determine whether the drug was associated with an increase in the risk of myocardial infarction. (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00379769 [ClinicalTrials.gov].).

A study of endothelial function and circulating asymmetric dimethylarginine levels in people with Type 1 diabetes without macrovascular disease or microalbuminuria.

BACKGROUND: Asymmetric dimethylarginine (ADMA) is a competitive inhibitor of endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS) that is associated with endothelial dysfunction, and is a risk marker for cardiovascular disease, a significant problem in Type 1 diabetes. The aim of the present study was to measure circulating ADMA, and define its association with endothelial dysfunction and endothelial markers in people with Type 1 diabetes with low likelihood of macrovascular disease. METHODS: Sixty-one young people with Type 1 diabetes without macrovascular disease or nephropathy and 62 healthy volunteers underwent brachial artery flow-mediated dilatation (FMD) and assay of plasma ADMA and adhesion molecules. RESULTS: Age, gender, BMI, lipid profile and renal function were similar in the two groups. People with Type 1 diabetes had impaired FMD compared to healthy controls (5.0 +/- 0.4 vs 8.9 +/- 0.4%; p < 0.001). Plasma ADMA levels were significantly lower in the people with diabetes compared to healthy controls (0.52 +/- 0.12 vs 0.66 +/- 0.20 micromol/l, p < 0.001). Plasma ICAM-1, E-selectin and PAI-1 levels were significantly higher in people with diabetes compared to healthy controls (median 201 (IQR 172-226) vs 180 (156-216) microg/l, p = 0.027; 44.2 (32.6-60.9) vs. 33.1 (22.4-51.0) microg/l; p = 0.003 and 70.8 (33.3-85.5) vs 46.3 (23.9-76.8) microg/l, p = 0.035). Plasma ADMA and VCAM-1 levels were positively correlated (r = 0.37, p = 0.003) in people with diabetes. There was no correlation between the plasma ADMA and FMD. CONCLUSION: ADMA levels are not associated with endothelial dysfunction in young adults with Type 1 diabetes without microalbuminuria or known macrovascular disease. This suggests that the impaired endothelial function in these individuals is not a result of eNOS inhibition by ADMA.

Effect of the addition of rosiglitazone to metformin or sulfonylureas versus metformin/sulfonylurea combination therapy on ambulatory blood pressure in people with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial (the RECORD study).

BACKGROUND: Hypertension and type 2 diabetes are common co-morbidities. Preliminary studies suggest that thiazolidinediones reduce blood pressure (BP). We therefore used ambulatory BP to quantify BP lowering at 6-12 months with rosiglitazone used in combination with metformin or sulfonylureas compared to metformin and sulfonylureas in people with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: Participants (n = 759) in the multicentre RECORD study were studied. Those taking metformin were randomized (open label) to add-on rosiglitazone or sulfonylureas, and those on sulfonylurea to add-on rosiglitazone or metformin. RESULTS: 24-Hour ambulatory BP was measured at baseline, 6 months and 12 months. At 6 and 12 months, reductions in 24-hour ambulatory systolic BP (sBP) were greater with rosiglitazone versus metformin (difference at 6 months 2.7 [95% CI 0.5-4.9] mmHg, p = 0.015; 12 months 2.5 [95% CI 0.2-4.8] mmHg, p = 0.031). Corresponding changes for ambulatory diastolic BP (dBP) were comparable (6 months 2.7 [95% CI 1.4-4.0] mmHg, p < 0.001; 12 months 3.1 [95% CI 1.8-4.5] mmHg, p < 0.001). Similar differences were observed for rosiglitazone versus sulfonylureas at 12 months (sBP 2.7 [95% CI 0.5-4.9] mmHg, p = 0.016; dBP 2.1 [95% CI 0.7-3.4] mmHg, p = 0.003), but differences were smaller and/or not statistically significant at 6 months (sBP 1.5 [95% CI -0.6 to 3.6] mmHg, p = NS; dBP 1.3 [95% CI 0.0-2.5] mmHg, p = 0.049). Changes in BP were not accompanied by compensatory increases in heart rate, did not correlate with basal insulin sensitivity estimates and were not explained by changes in antihypertensive therapy between the various strata. CONCLUSION: When added to metformin or a sulfonylurea, 12-month treatment with rosiglitazone reduces ambulatory BP to a greater extent than when metformin and a sulfonylurea are combined. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00379769 http://clinicaltrials.gov/

Three-year data from 5 HARMONY phase 3 clinical trials of albiglutide in type 2 diabetes mellitus: Long-term efficacy with or without rescue therapy.

AIMS: Diabetes therapies that provide durable glycaemic control for people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) are needed. We present efficacy results of albiglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, in people with T2DM over a 3-year period. METHODS: Five of the 8 HARMONY phase 3 trials, comparing albiglutide with other therapies or placebo across a spectrum of clinical care, lasted for a preplanned 3years. Participants with uncontrolled hyperglycaemia who met predetermined criteria could receive rescue medication. The ability to remain on study medication without needing additional rescue was an efficacy measure. Glycaemic measures and body weight were analysed in 2 populations: those who remained rescue-free and all participants. RESULTS: Participants (n=3132) were randomised to albiglutide or comparator. A greater proportion of participants who received albiglutide remained rescue-free (55-71%) compared with placebo (35-51%; p<0.001 to p=0.002). The proportion of rescue-free participants with albiglutide did not differ from glimepiride or insulin glargine, was higher than with sitagliptin (p=0.013), and lower than with pioglitazone (p=0.045). At 3years, albiglutide was associated with clinically significant reductions in hyperglycaemia (eg, rescue-free participants: HbA1c -0.52% [SE0.11] to -0.98% [0.12]; -5.7mmol/mol [1.2] to -10.7mmol/mol [1.3] and all participants: HbA1c -0.29% [0.11] to-0.92% [0.13]; -3.2mmol/mol [1.2] to -10.1mmol/mol [1.4]). Albiglutide was also associated with modest reductions in body weight vs pioglitazone, glimepiride, and insulin glargine, which were associated with weight gain. CONCLUSION: These 3-year efficacy data support long-term use of albiglutide in the management of people with T2DM. ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00849056, NCT00849017, NCT00838903, NCT00838916, NCT00839527.

A model of long-term metabolic progression of type 2 diabetes mellitus for evaluating treatment strategies.

AIM: To develop a novel metabolic computer model of the natural lifetime progression of type 2 diabetes that generates dynamic risk factor trajectories consistent with prespecified lifetime therapeutic strategies, in order to enhance the long-term economic and outcome modelling of type 2 diabetes and its complications. METHODS: The main model drivers of progressive disease were changes in insulin sensitivity and islet beta-cell function derived from an analysis of follow-up results from the Belfast Diet Study. These were related to clinical measures through an adaptation of the homeostasis model assessment. Established causal relationships estimating body mass index, lipids and blood pressure from measures of glycaemia and plasma insulin were calibrated using Third National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (USA) data, standardizing for age, sex, ethnicity and smoking. The effects of individual interventions were calibrated using published trial evidence, in line with the current understanding of the main modes of action of each agent. RESULTS: A comparison of the effects of common therapies using the model showed both similarities and differences. Large improvements in glycaemic control from lifestyle modifications, further enhanced by oral glucose-lowering drugs or insulin, were reproduced. Projections comparing lifetime therapeutic strategies suggest that simple guidelines may not always be valid. CONCLUSION: This novel mathematical model using evidence from the long-term natural history of type 2 diabetes is able to project the expected effects of various antihyperglycaemic therapies. Coupled with an economic model, this metabolic model may provide a mechanism for healthcare professionals and policymakers to evaluate different long-term strategies for the management of type 2 diabetes.