A Methodological Framework for Meta-analysis and Clinical Interpretation of Subgroup Data: The Case of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events With GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and SGLT2 Inhibitors in Type 2 Diabetes.

We present a methodological framework for conducting and interpreting subgroup meta-analyses. Methodological steps comprised evaluation of clinical heterogeneity regarding the definition of subpopulations, credibility assessment of subgroup meta-analysis, and translation of relative into absolute treatment effects. We used subgroup data from type 2 diabetes cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) with glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for patients with established cardiovascular disease and those at high cardiovascular risk without manifest cardiovascular disease. First, we evaluated the variability in definitions of the subpopulations across CVOTs using major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) incidence in the placebo arm as a proxy for baseline cardiovascular risk. As baseline risk did not differ considerably across CVOTs, we conducted subgroup meta-analyses of hazard ratios (HRs) for MACE and assessed the credibility of a potential effect modification. Results suggested using the same overall relative effect for each of the two subpopulations (HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.80-0.90, for GLP-1 receptor agonists and HR 0.91, 95% CI 0.85-0.97, for SGLT2 inhibitors). Finally, we calculated 5-year absolute treatment effects (number of fewer patients with event per 1,000 patients). Treatment with GLP-1 receptor agonists resulted in 30 fewer patients with event in the subpopulation with established cardiovascular disease and 14 fewer patients with event in patients without manifest cardiovascular disease. For SGLT2 inhibitors, the respective absolute effects were 18 and 8 fewer patients with event per 1,000 patients. This framework can be applied to subgroup meta-analyses regardless of outcomes or modification variables.

Comparison of tirzepatide and dulaglutide on major adverse cardiovascular events in participants with type 2 diabetes and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease: SURPASS-CVOT design and baseline characteristics.

BACKGROUND: Tirzepatide, a once-weekly GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist, reduces blood glucose and body weight in people with type 2 diabetes. The cardiovascular (CV) safety and efficacy of tirzepatide have not been definitively assessed in a cardiovascular outcomes trial. METHODS: Tirzepatide is being studied in a randomized, double-blind, active-controlled CV outcomes trial. People with type 2 diabetes aged ≥40 years, with established atherosclerotic CV disease, HbA1c ≥7% to ≤10.5%, and body mass index ≥25 kg/m2 were randomized 1:1 to once weekly subcutaneous injection of either tirzepatide up to 15 mg or dulaglutide 1.5 mg. The primary outcome is time to first occurrence of any major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE), defined as CV death, myocardial infarction, or stroke. The trial is event-driven and planned to continue until ≥1,615 participants experience an adjudication-confirmed component of MACE. The primary analysis is noninferiority for time to first MACE of tirzepatide vs dulaglutide by demonstrating an upper confidence limit <1.05, which will also confirm superiority vs a putative placebo, and also to determine whether tirzepatide produces a greater CV benefit than dulaglutide (superiority analysis). RESULTS: Over 2 years, 13,299 people at 640 sites in 30 countries across all world regions were randomized. The mean age of randomized participants at baseline was 64.1 years, diabetes duration 14.7 years, HbA1c 8.4%, and BMI 32.6 kg/m2. Overall, 65.0% had coronary disease, of whom 47.3% reported prior myocardial infarction and 57.4% had prior coronary revascularization. 19.1% of participants had a prior stroke and 25.3% had peripheral artery disease. The trial is fully recruited and ongoing. CONCLUSION: SURPASS-CVOT will provide definitive evidence as to the CV safety and efficacy of tirzepatide as compared with dulaglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist with established CV benefit.

Prospective External Validation of an Algorithm Predicting Hourly Basal Insulin Infusion Rates from Characteristics of Patients with Type 1 Diabetes Treated with Insulin Pumps.

BACKGROUND: We previously published an algorithm predicting 24 h basal insulin infusion profiles in insulin pump-treated subjects with type 1 diabetes profiles from six subject characteristics. This algorithm was to be externally validated in an independent environment and patient population. METHODS: Thirty-two patients with pump-treated type diabetes were switched to their individually algorithm-derived basal insulin infusion profile, and the appropriateness of fasting glycemic control was scrutinized by means of a supervised 24 h fast. Primary endpoint was appropriate fasting glycemic control according to pre-defined criteria in at least 80% of the cohort. RESULTS: In 24 out of 32 patients switching to the algorithm-derived basal insulin infusion rate and undergoing a 24-h fasting period, appropriate glycemic control was achieved (=75%, lower than the pre-defined threshold of 80%), two patients discontinued the fast due to hyperglycemia, and six finished the fasting period, however, with inappropriate fasting glycemic control (entirely due to hyperglycemic episodes). There were no obvious differences in baseline characteristics between those with appropriate vs. inappropriate fasting glycemic control on the basal insulin infusion rate provided by the algorithm. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, when testing fasting glycemic control with an algorithm-derived individual basal insulin infusion profile during a 24 h fasting period in a cohort unrelated in terms of the hospital environment and catchment area, the success rate was lower than a pre-defined threshold for concluding utility of this algorithm. Therefore, applying this algorithm in order to initiate or optimize basal insulin infusion profiles in type 1 diabetes cannot be generally recommended.

Impact of concomitant oral glucose-lowering medications on the success of basal insulin titration in insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes: a systematic analysis.

Basal insulin treatment for type 2 diabetes is usually initiated on a background of oral glucose-lowering medications (OGLM). We wanted to examine the influence of various OGLMs on fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) values achieved after titration. A PubMed literature search retrieved 42 publications (clinical trials introducing basal insulin in 17 433 insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes on a defined background of OGLM) and reporting FPG, HbA1c, target achievement, hypoglycemic events, and insulin doses. 60 individual study arms were grouped by OGLM (combinations) allowed during the titration process: (a) metformin only; (b) sulfonylureas only; (c) metformin and sulfonylureas; or (d) metformin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors. For all OGLM categories, weighted means and SD were calculated for baseline and end-of-treatment FPG, HbA1c, target achievement, incidence of hypoglycemic events, and insulin doses. Primary end point was a difference in FPG after titration between OGLM categories. Statistics: analysis of variance and post hoc comparisons. Sulfonylureas, alone or in combination with metformin, impair the titration of basal insulin (insulin doses 30%-40% lower, more hypoglycemic episodes), thus leading to poorer final glycemic control (p<0.05 for FPG and HbA1c after titration). Conversely, adding a DPP-4 inhibitor to metformin is superior to metformin alone (p<0.05 for FPG and HbA1c achieved) in patients with type 2 diabetes initiating basal insulin therapy. In conclusion, OGLM are a major determinant of the success of basal insulin therapy. Sulfonylureas impair, while DPP-4 inhibitors (added to metformin) may facilitate the achievement of ambitious fasting glucose targets. PROSPERO registration number CRD42019134821.

Incretin hormones and type 2 diabetes.

Incretin hormones (glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide [GIP] and glucagon-like peptide-1 [GLP-1]) play a role in the pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes. Along with their derivatives they have shown therapeutic success in type 2 diabetes, with the potential for further improvements in glycaemic, cardiorenal and body weight-related outcomes. In type 2 diabetes, the incretin effect (greater insulin secretory response after oral glucose than with 'isoglycaemic' i.v. glucose, i.e. with an identical glycaemic stimulus) is markedly reduced or absent. This appears to be because of a reduced ability of GIP to stimulate insulin secretion, related either to an overall impairment of beta cell function or to specific defects in the GIP signalling pathway. It is likely that a reduced incretin effect impacts on postprandial glycaemic excursions and, thus, may play a role in the deterioration of glycaemic control. In contrast, the insulinotropic potency of GLP-1 appears to be much less impaired, such that exogenous GLP-1 can stimulate insulin secretion, suppress glucagon secretion and reduce plasma glucose concentrations in the fasting and postprandial states. This has led to the development of incretin-based glucose-lowering medications (selective GLP-1 receptor agonists or, more recently, co-agonists, e.g. that stimulate GIP and GLP-1 receptors). Tirzepatide (a GIP/GLP-1 receptor co-agonist), for example, reduces HbA1c and body weight in individuals with type 2 diabetes more effectively than selective GLP-1 receptor agonists (e.g. semaglutide). The mechanisms by which GIP receptor agonism may contribute to better glycaemic control and weight loss after long-term exposure to tirzepatide are a matter of active research and may change the pessimistic view that developed after the disappointing lack of insulinotropic activity in people with type 2 diabetes when exposed to GIP in short-term experiments. Future medications that stimulate incretin hormone and other receptors simultaneously may have the potential to further increase the ability to control plasma glucose concentrations and induce weight loss.

Characteristics predicting the efficacy of SGLT-2 inhibitors versus GLP-1 receptor agonists on major adverse cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a meta-analysis study.

BACKGROUND: Recent large clinical trials have demonstrated cardiovascular benefits of similar overall magnitude for sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor (SGLT-2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) therapy in subjects with type 2 diabetes. We sought to identify subgroups based on baseline characteristics with a differential response to either SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA. METHODS: PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, and EMBASE were searched from 2008 to 2022 for SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA randomized trials that reported 3-point major adverse cardiovascular events (3P-MACE). Baseline clinical and biochemical characteristics included age, sex, body mass index (BMI), HbA1c, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), albuminuria, preexisting cardiovascular disease (CVD), and heart failure (HF). Absolute and relative risk reductions (ARR and RRR) regarding incidence rates for 3P-MACE with a 95% confidence interval were calculated. The association of average baseline characteristics in each study with the ARR and RRR for 3P-MACE was investigated by meta-regression analyses (random-effects model, assuming inter-study heterogeneity). Meta-analysis was also conducted to investigate whether the efficacy of SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA on 3P-MACE reduction could differ according to the patient's characteristics (e.g., HbA1c above/below cutoff). RESULTS: After a critical assessment of 1,172 articles, 13 cardiovascular outcome trials with a total of 111,565 participants were selected. In meta-regression analysis, the more patients with reduced eGFR in the studies, the greater ARR by SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA therapy. Similarly, in the meta-analysis, SGLT-2i therapy tended to be more effective in reducing 3P-MACE in people with eGFR < 60 ml/min/1.73 m2 than in those with normal renal function (ARR - 0.90 [-1.44 to - 0.37] vs. - 0.17 [-0.34 to - 0.01] events/100 person-years). Furthermore, people with albuminuria tended to respond better to SGLT-2i therapy than those with normoalbuminuria. However, this was not the case for the GLP-1RA treatment. Other factors including age, sex, BMI, HbA1c, and preexisting CVD or HF did not affect the efficacy of either SGLT-2i or GLP-1RA treatment on the ARR or RRR of 3P-MACE. CONCLUSIONS: Because decreased eGFR [significant] and albuminuria [trend] were found to predict a better efficacy for SGLT-2i in 3P-MACE reduction, this class of drug should be preferred in such patients. However, GLP-1RA may be considered for patients with normal eGFR because it showed better efficacy than SGLT-2i in this subgroup [trend].

Gut hormone co-agonists for the treatment of obesity: from bench to bedside.

The discovery and development of so-called gut hormone co-agonists as a new class of drugs for the treatment of diabetes and obesity is considered a transformative breakthrough in the field. Combining action profiles of multiple gastrointestinal hormones within a single molecule, these novel therapeutics achieve synergistic metabolic benefits. The first such compound, reported in 2009, was based on balanced co-agonism at glucagon and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptors. Today, several classes of gut hormone co-agonists are in development and advancing through clinical trials, including dual GLP-1-glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) co-agonists (first described in 2013), and triple GIP-GLP-1-glucagon co-agonists (initially designed in 2015). The GLP-1-GIP co-agonist tirzepatide was approved in 2022 by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, providing superior HbA1c reductions compared to basal insulin or selective GLP-1 receptor agonists. Tirzepatide also achieved unprecedented weight loss of up to 22.5%-similar to results achieved with some types of bariatric surgery-in non-diabetic individuals with obesity. In this Perspective, we summarize the discovery, development, mechanisms of action and clinical efficacy of the different types of gut hormone co-agonists, and discuss potential challenges, limitations and future developments.

CVOT Summit 2022 Report: new cardiovascular, kidney, and glycemic outcomes.

The 8th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial (CVOT) Summit on Cardiovascular, Kidney, and Glycemic Outcomes was held virtually on November 10-12, 2022. Following the tradition of previous summits, this reference congress served as a platform for in-depth discussion and exchange on recently completed outcomes trials as well as key trials important to the cardiovascular (CV) field. This year's focus was on the results of the DELIVER, EMPA-KIDNEY and SURMOUNT-1 trials and their implications for the treatment of heart failure (HF) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) with sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and obesity with glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists. A broad audience of primary care physicians, diabetologists, endocrinologists, cardiologists, and nephrologists participated online in discussions on new consensus recommendations and guideline updates on type 2 diabetes (T2D) and CKD management, overcoming clinical inertia, glycemic markers, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), novel insulin preparations, combination therapy, and reclassification of T2D. The impact of cardiovascular outcomes on the design of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) trials, as well as the impact of real-world evidence (RWE) studies on the confirmation of CVOT outcomes and clinical trial design, were also intensively discussed. The 9th Cardiovascular Outcome Trial Summit will be held virtually on November 23-24, 2023 ( http://www.cvot.org ).

Effects of Initial Combinations of Gemigliptin Plus Metformin Compared with Glimepiride Plus Metformin on Gut Microbiota and Glucose Regulation in Obese Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: The INTESTINE Study.

The efficacy and safety of medications can be affected by alterations in gut microbiota in human beings. Among antidiabetic medications, incretin-based therapy such as dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors might affect gut microbiomes, which are related to glucose metabolism. This was a randomized, controlled, active-competitor study that aimed to compare the effects of combinations of gemigliptin−metformin vs. glimepiride−metformin as initial therapies on gut microbiota and glucose homeostasis in drug-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes. Seventy drug-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes (mean age, 52.2 years) with a glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level ≥7.5% were assigned to either gemigliptin−metformin or glimepiride−metformin combination therapies for 24 weeks. Changes in gut microbiota, biomarkers linked to glucose regulation, body composition, and amino acid blood levels were investigated. Although both treatments decreased the HbA1c levels significantly, the gemigliptin−metformin group achieved HbA1c ≤ 7.0% without hypoglycemia or weight gain more effectively than did the glimepiride−metformin group (59% vs. 24%; p < 0.05). At the phylum level, the Firmicutes/Bacteroidetes ratio tended to decrease after gemigliptin−metformin therapy (p = 0.065), with a notable depletion of taxa belonging to Firmicutes, including Lactobacillus, Ruminococcus torques, and Streptococcus (all p < 0.05). However, regardless of the treatment modality, a distinct difference in the overall gut microbiome composition was noted between patients who reached the HbA1c target goal and those who did not (p < 0.001). Treatment with gemigliptin−metformin resulted in a higher achievement of the glycemic target without hypoglycemia or weight gain, better than with glimepiride−metformin; these improvements might be related to beneficial changes in gut microbiota.

Meta-analysis of head-to-head clinical trials comparing incretin-based glucose-lowering medications and basal insulin: An update including recently developed glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and the glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide/GLP-1 receptor co-agonist tirzepatide.

OBJECTIVE: To assess comparative efficacy, safety and tolerability of injectable incretin-based glucose-lowering medications (IBGLMs) versus basal insulin treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: We performed an updated meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of head-to-head comparisons of IBGLMs (short- and long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 [GLP-1] receptor agonists [GLP-1RAs] and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide [GIP]/GLP-1 receptor co-agonist tirzepatide) versus basal insulin using a PubMed database search (April 2022). The primary endpoint was difference in reduction of glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c ) versus baseline between pooled IBGLMs (fixed-effects meta-analysis) and their subgroups (random-effects meta-analysis) versus basal insulin treatment (mean differences). Secondary endpoints were fasting plasma glucose, body weight, HbA1c target achievement, hypoglycaemia, blood pressure and lipids. Risk of bias assessment was performed using Jadad scores and the Risk of Bias tool 2.0. RESULTS: In all, 20 studies, representing 47 study arms and 11 843 patients, were eligible. Compared with basal insulin, IGBLMs lowered HbA1c by 0.48 (0.45-0.52)% more than did basal insulin treatment. This effect was driven by pooled long-acting GLP-1RAs (ΔHbA1c -0.25 [-0.38; -0.11]%) and the only GIP/GLP-1 receptor co-agonist, tirzepatide (pooled doses; ΔHbA1c -0.90 [-1.06; -0.75]%), while short-acting GLP-1RAs were equally effective compared with basal insulin (P = 0.90). All IBGLM subgroups achieved significantly lower body weight versus insulin treatment (-4.6 [-4.7; -4.4] kg), in particular tirzepatide (-12.0 [-13.8; -10.1] kg). IBGLMs significantly reduced hypoglycaemia and blood pressure and improved lipid variables. Risk of bias was low. IBGLM treatment was associated with more nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea and study medication discontinuation. CONCLUSIONS: Recently introduced, highly effective IBGLMs were superior to basal insulin treatment, reinforcing the recommendation that IBGLMs should be considered as the first injectable treatment for most patients with type 2 diabetes.

Comparison of Insulin-Treated Patients with Ambiguous Diabetes Type with Definite Type 1 and Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Subjects: A Clinical Perspective.

In clinical practice, the distinction between type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM) and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) can be challenging, leaving patients with "ambiguous" diabetes type. Insulin-treated patients (n=115) previously diagnosed with T2DM had to be re-classified based on clinical phenotype and laboratory results, and were operationally defined as having an ambiguous diabetes type. They were compared against patients with definite T1DM and T2DM regarding 12 clinical and laboratory features typically different between diabetes types. Characteristics of patients with ambiguous diabetes type, representing approximately 6% of all patients with T1DM or T2DM seen at our specialized clinic, fell in between those of patients with definite T1DM and T2DM, both regarding individual features and with respect to a novel classification based on multi-variable regression analysis (P<0.0001). In conclusion, a substantial proportion of diabetes patients in a tertiary care centre presented with an "ambiguous" diabetes type. Their clinical characteristics fall in between those of definite T1DM or T2DM patients.

Statistical power for MACE and individual secondary endpoints in cardiovascular outcomes trials for type 2 diabetes: a systematic review.

Cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs) with novel drugs to treat type 2 diabetes have uniformly chosen the composite "major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE)" as their primary endpoint, but they also report hazard ratios for individual cardiovascular outcomes (myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular death, all-cause death, hospitalization for heart failure). We wanted to scrutinize the power to identify significant differences with respect to individual as compared to composite outcomes. We estimated post hoc the statistical power to detect significant differences of 10-25% for published studies, comparing the proportions of patients with an event (two-sided log-rank tests). For MACE, the power to detect a 15% difference ranged from 82.3 to 100.0% for larger trials, but was only 69.1 and 50.5 for smaller, preliminary trials (SUSTAIN-6 and PIONEER-6). For individual endpoints, the power, as a rule, was substantially lower. In conclusion, cardiovascular outcomes trials had appropriate power to detect significant reductions in hazard ratios with respect to the primary endpoint, but not for individual cardiovascular outcomes. This was particularly the case for small, preliminary studies. Our results call for caution when comparing results regarding individual endpoints between CVOTs, if the aim is to identify heterogeneity within or between medication classes.

Tirzepatide, a dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor co-agonist for the treatment of type 2 diabetes with unmatched effectiveness regrading glycaemic control and body weight reduction.

Tirzepatide is the first dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor co-agonist approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in the USA, Europe, and the UAE. Tirzepatide is an acylated peptide engineered to activate the GIP and GLP-1 receptors, key mediators of insulin secretion that are also expressed in regions of the brain that regulate food intake. Five clinical trials in type 2-diabetic subjects (SURPASS 1-5) have shown that tirzepatide at 5-15 mg per week reduces both HbA1c (1.24 to 2.58%) and body weight (5.4-11.7 kg) by amounts unprecedented for a single agent. A sizable proportion of patients (23.0 to 62.4%) reached an HbA1c of < 5.7% (which is the upper limit of the normal range indicating normoglycaemia), and 20.7 to 68.4% lost more than 10% of their baseline body weight. Tirzepatide was significantly more effective in reducing HbA1c and body weight than the selective GLP-1 RA semaglutide (1.0 mg per week), and titrated basal insulin. Adverse events related to tirzepatide were similar to what has been reported for selective GLP-1RA, mainly nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea, and constipation, that were more common at higher doses. Cardiovascular events have been adjudicated across the whole study program, and MACE-4 (nonfatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, cardiovascular death and hospital admission for angina) events tended to be reduced over up to a 2 year-period, albeit with low numbers of events. For none of the cardiovascular events analysed (MACE-4, or its components) was a hazard ratio > 1.0 vs. pooled comparators found in a meta-analysis covering the whole clinical trial program, and the upper bounds of the confidence intervals for MACE were < 1.3, fulfilling conventional definitions of cardiovascular safety. Tirzepatide was found to improve insulin sensitivity and insulin secretory responses to a greater extent than semaglutide, and this was associated with lower prandial insulin and glucagon concentrations. Both drugs caused similar reductions in appetite, although tirzepatide caused greater weight loss. While the clinical effects of tirzepatide have been very encouraging, important questions remain as to the mechanism of action. While GIP reduces food intake and body weight in rodents, these effects have not been demonstrated in humans. Moreover, it remains to be shown that GIPR agonism can improve insulin secretion in type 2 diabetic patients who have been noted in previous studies to be unresponsive to GIP. Certainly, the apparent advantage of tirzepatide, a dual incretin agonist, over GLP-1RA will spark renewed interest in the therapeutic potential of GIP in type 2 diabetes, obesity and related co-morbidities.

Impact of the Fasting Plasma Glucose Titration Target on the Success of Basal Insulin Titration in Insulin-Naïve Patients with Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Analysis.

Background/Aim: We aimed to examine beneficial and adverse outcomes of basal insulin titration performed with different fasting plasma glucose (FPG) titration targets (TT). Methods: A PubMed literature search retrieved 43 reported prospective clinical trials introducing basal insulin in 17643 insulin-naïve patients with type 2 diabetes reporting fasting plasma glucose (FPG), HbA1c, target achievement, hypoglycemic events, and insulin doses. 61 individual study arms were grouped by fasting plasma glucose titration target (TT; 1: ≤5.0 mmol/l/90 mg/dl; 2: 5.01-5.6 mmol/l/90-100 mg/dl; and 3: ≥5.61 mmol/l/101 mg/dl). Weighted means and their standard deviations were calculated for baseline and end-of-treatment FPG (primary endpoint), HbA1c, target achievement, hypoglycemic events, insulin doses, and body weight gain and compared over a duration of 31 ± 10 weeks. Results: Achieved FPG and HbA1c at the end of the study were significantly lower (by up to 0.8 mmol/l or 0.23%, respectively) with more ambitious TTs (p < 0.0001), leading to better HbA1c target achievement with more ambitious TTs (by up to 14.6% for HbA1c ≤ 6.5%), without increasing the risk for hypoglycemic episodes. Conclusions: Aiming for a lower FPG TT improves glycemic control without increasing the risk for hypoglycemia.