Effective Strategies for the Prevention and Mitigation of Phosphatidylinositol-3-Kinase Inhibitor-Associated Hyperglycemia: Optimizing Patient Care.

Hyperglycemia is a common adverse event (AE) associated with phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase inhibitors (PI3Kis) and considered an on-target effect. Presence of hyperglycemia is associated with poor outcomes in patients with cancer, and there is need for further refinement of hyperglycemia prevention and mitigation strategies in patients receiving PI3Kis. In this review, the authors highlight effective strategies for preventing PI3Ki-induced hyperglycemia before and during treatment as well as hyperglycemia management. Prior to initiating treatment with PI3Ki, identify baseline risk factors of patients at increased risk for developing hyperglycemia, which include older age, obesity, and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 5.7%-6.4% (prediabetes or Type 2 diabetes). To prevent new-onset hyperglycemia, optimize blood glucose, and recommend a low-carbohydrate (60-130 g/day) diet along with regular exercise to all patients prior to initiating the PI3Ki. Prophylactic metformin may be considered in all patients starting a PI3Ki with HbA1c ≤6.4%. Although existing recommendations support monitoring fasting blood glucose (FBG) once weekly (twice-weekly for intermediate-risk, daily for high-risk patients) and HbA1c every 3 months upon initiation of PI3Ki, more frequent FBG monitoring may be considered for prompt detection of hyperglycemia. Experts also recommend considering postprandial glucose monitoring because it is an early indicator of glucose intolerance. If hyperglycemia develops, metformin (first-line) and/or sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors or thiazolidinediones (second-/third-line) are the preferred agents; consider early referral to an endocrinologist. In conclusion, hyperglycemia is a common but manageable AE associated with PI3Kis. Multidisciplinary approach to the prevention, monitoring, and management of hyperglycemia optimizes patient care and allows patients to maintain therapy on PI3Ki.

A Scalable Application of Artificial Intelligence-Driven Insulin Titration Program to Transform Type 2 Diabetes Management.

Background: Despite new pharmacotherapy, most patients with long-term type 2 diabetes are still hyperglycemic. This could have been solved by insulin with its unlimited potential efficacy, but its dynamic physiology demands frequent titrations which are overdemanding. This report provides a real-life account for a scalable transformation of diabetes care in a community-based endocrinology center by harnessing artificial intelligence-based autonomous insulin titration. Methods: The center embedded the d-Nav® technology and its dedicated clinical support. Reported outcomes include treatment efficacy/safety in the first 600 patients and use of cardiorenal-risk reduction pharmacotherapy. Findings: Patients used d-Nav for 8.2 ± 3.0 months with 82% retention. Age was 67.1 ± 11.5 years and duration of diabetes was 19.8 ± 11.0 years. During the last 3 years before d-Nav, glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) had been overall higher than 8% and at the beginning of the program it was as high as 8.6% ± 2.1% with 29.3% of the patients with HbA1c >9%. With d-Nav, HbA1c decreased to 7.3% ± 1.2% with 5.7% of patients with HbA1c >9%. During the first 3 months, d-Nav reduced total daily dose of insulin in one of every five patients due to relatively low glucose levels to minimize the risk of hypoglycemia. Glucagon like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists or dual GLP-1 and Glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) receptor agonists were prescribed in about a half of the patients and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor in a third. The frequency of hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dL) was 0.4 ± 0.6/month and severe hypoglycemia 1.7/100-patient-years. Interpretation: The use of d-Nav allowed for improvement in overall diabetes management with appropriate use of both insulin and noninsulin pharmacologic agents in a scalable way.

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 ).

Efficacy of once-weekly tirzepatide versus once-daily insulin degludec on glycaemic control measured by continuous glucose monitoring in adults with type 2 diabetes (SURPASS-3 CGM): a substudy of the randomised, open-label, parallel-group, phase 3 SURPASS-3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Tirzepatide is a novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and GLP-1 receptor agonist under development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. In this study, we used continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) to compare the 24 h glucose profile for participants given tirzepatide compared with those given insulin degludec. METHODS: This substudy of the open-label, parallel-group, phase 3 SURPASS-3 trial, was done at 45 sites across six countries (Hungary, Poland, Romania, Spain, Ukraine, and the USA). Eligible participants in the main study were adults with type 2 diabetes, a baseline HbA1c of 7·0-10·5% (53-91 mmol/mol), and a BMI of 25 kg/m2 or more, who were insulin-naive, and treated with metformin alone or in combination with a SGLT2 inhibitor for at least 3 months before screening. Participants in the main study were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive once-weekly subcutaneous injection of tirzepatide 5 mg, 10 mg, or 15 mg, or once-daily subcutaneous injection of titrated insulin degludec (100 U/mL), using an interactive web-response system. Participants were stratified by country, HbA1c concentration, and concomitant oral antihyperglycaemic medication. A subset of these patients with a normal wake-sleep cycle were enrolled into this substudy, and interstitial glucose values were collected by CGM for approximately 7 days at baseline, 24 weeks, and 52 weeks. The primary outcome was to compare pooled participants assigned to 10 mg and 15 mg tirzepatide versus insulin degludec for the proportion of time that CGM values were in the tight target range (71-140 mg/dL) at 52 weeks, assessed in all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had an evaluable CGM session at either baseline or after baseline. The secondary outcomes were to compare tirzepatide (5 mg, 10 mg, and 15 mg) versus insulin degludec for the proportion and duration of time in tight target range at 24 and 52 weeks. This was a substudy of the trial registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03882970, and is complete. FINDINGS: From April 1 to Nov 27, 2019, 313 participants were screened for eligibility, 243 of whom were enrolled in CGM substudy (tirzepatide 5 mg, n=64; tirzepatide 10 mg, n=51; tirzepatide 15 mg, n=73; and insulin degludec, n=55). Patients given once-weekly tirzepatide (pooled 10 mg and 15 mg groups) had a greater proportion of time in tight target range compared with patients given insulin degludec (estimated treatment difference 25% [95% CI 16-33]; p<0·0001). Participants assigned to tirzepatide spent significantly more time in tight target range at 52 weeks compared with those assigned to insulin degludec (5 mg 12% [1-22], p=0·031; 10 mg 24% [13-35], p<0·0001; and 15 mg 25% [14-35], p<0·0001). Participants assigned to tirzepatide 10 mg and 15 mg, but not to tirzepatide 5 mg, spent significantly more time in tight target range at 24 weeks compared with insulin degludec (10 mg 19% [8-30], p=0·0008; 15 mg 21% [11-31], p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Once-weekly treatment with tirzepatide showed superior glycaemic control measured using CGM compared with insulin degludec in participants with type 2 diabetes on metformin, with or without a SGLT2 inhibitor. These new data provide additional evidence to the effect of tirzepatide and potential for achieving glycaemic targets without increase of hypoglycaemic risk compared with a basal insulin. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Consistent findings in glycaemic control, body weight and hypoglycaemia with iGlarLixi (insulin glargine/lixisenatide titratable fixed-ratio combination) vs insulin glargine across baseline HbA1c, BMI and diabetes duration categories in the LixiLan-L trial.

AIMS: To assess the impact of baseline characteristics on clinical outcomes in the LixiLan-L trial, a randomized open-label trial designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, a novel fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U (iGlar) plus lixisenatide, in comparison with iGlar over 30 weeks in a population of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on a previous regimen of basal insulin alone or in combination with 1 or 2 oral glucose-lowering drugs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this exploratory analysis of LixiLan-L (N = 736), efficacy outcomes were assessed within population subgroups derived from the following baseline characteristics: glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c; <8%, ≥8% (<64, ≥64 mmol/mol)]; duration of T2DM (<10, ≥10 years); body mass index (<30, ≥30 kg/m2 ). Furthermore, the incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia with plasma glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L (≤70 mg/dL) was also analysed according to the same subgroups. RESULTS: Compared with the iGlar treatment group, patients treated with iGlarLixi showed consistently greater reductions in HbA1c during the treatment period, with higher percentages of patients achieving the HbA1c target level of <7% (<53 mmol/mol) in all of the subpopulations tested (P < .0001 for all), having consistent mitigation of body weight gain and with no major differences in the incidence of hypoglycaemia. CONCLUSIONS: iGlarLixi consistently improved glycaemic control compared with iGlar in all baseline characteristic subgroups of patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with insulin, including difficult-to-treat subgroups of patients with long duration of diabetes, obesity and high HbA1c. Clinical trial number: NCT02058160 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Diurnal glucose exposure profiles of patients treated with lixisenatide before breakfast or the main meal of the day: An analysis using continuous glucose monitoring.

BACKGROUND: In the parent study of this analysis, patients with type 2 diabetes received lixisenatide before breakfast or the main meal of the day. This substudy was designed to examine the effect of lixisenatide administered before breakfast or the main meal of the day on continuously assessed 24-hour patient glucose profiles. METHODS: A subset of patients from the parent study underwent 2 14-day periods of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) at the start and end of the 24-week study. Ambulatory glucose profile analysis was used to measure changes over time in detailed aspects of the glucose profiles. The breakfast group consumed a standardized meal during both CGM periods to determine change in 4-hour glycemic response. RESULTS: Data were available for 69 patients in the substudy, 40 from the original breakfast group and 29 from the main meal group. Between baseline and end of study, mean (standard deviation) total glucose exposure decreased from 4198.1 (652.3) to 3681.2 (699.6) mg/dL*24 h in the breakfast group (P < .0001) and from 4127.9 (876.8) to 3880.9 (1165.0) mg/dL*24 h in the main meal group (P = .0224). For patients included in the substudy, HbA1c decreased by approximately 0.6% in both groups. Mean (standard deviation) 4-hour total glucose exposure fell by 168.9 (158.4) mg/dL*4 h (P < .0001) from baseline. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis demonstrates that lixisenatide has beneficial effects on components of the 24-hour glucose profile, which endure beyond the meal at which it is administered. Continuous glucose monitoring analysis detects changes not captured using HbA1c alone.

Efficacy and Safety of LixiLan, a Titratable Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine Plus Lixisenatide in Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Basal Insulin and Metformin: The LixiLan-L Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of LixiLan (iGlarLixi), a novel, titratable, fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine (iGlar) (100 units) and lixisenatide, compared with iGlar in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin with or without up to two oral glucose-lowering agents. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: After a 6-week run-in when iGlar was introduced and/or further titrated, and oral antidiabetic drugs other than metformin were stopped, 736 basal insulin-treated patients (mean diabetes duration 12 years, BMI 31 kg/m2) were randomized 1:1 to open-label, once-daily iGlarLixi or iGlar, both titrated to fasting plasma glucose <100 mg/dL (<5.6 mmol/L) up to a maximum dose of 60 units/day. The primary outcome was change in HbA1c levels at 30 weeks. RESULTS: HbA1c decreased from 8.5% (69 mmol/mol) to 8.1% (65 mmol/mol) during the run-in period. After randomization, iGlarLixi showed greater reductions in HbA1c from baseline compared with iGlar (-1.1% vs. -0.6%, P < 0.0001), reaching a mean final HbA1c of 6.9% (52 mmol/mol) compared with 7.5% (58 mmol/mol) for iGlar. HbA1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol) was achieved in 55% of iGlarLixi patients compared with 30% on iGlar. Mean body weight decreased by 0.7 kg with iGlarLixi and increased by 0.7 kg with iGlar (1.4 kg difference, P < 0.0001). Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (≤70 mg/dL) was comparable between groups. Mild gastrointestinal adverse effects were very low but more frequent with iGlarLixi. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with iGlar, a substantially higher proportion of iGlarLixi-treated patients achieved glycemic targets with a beneficial effect on body weight, no additional risk of hypoglycemia, and low levels of gastrointestinal adverse effects in inadequately controlled, basal insulin-treated, long-standing type 2 diabetes.

Design of FLAT-SUGAR: Randomized Trial of Prandial Insulin Versus Prandial GLP-1 Receptor Agonist Together With Basal Insulin and Metformin for High-Risk Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: Glycemic variability may contribute to adverse medical outcomes of type 2 diabetes, but prior therapies have had limited success in controlling glycemic fluctuations, and the hypothesis has not been adequately tested. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: People with insulin-requiring type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk were enrolled during a run-in period on basal-bolus insulin (BBI), and 102 were randomized to continued BBI or to basal insulin with a prandial GLP-1 receptor agonist (GLIPULIN) group, each seeking to maintain HbA(1c) levels between 6.7% and 7.3% (50-56 mmol/mol) for 6 months. The primary outcome measure was glycemic variability assessed by continuous glucose monitoring; other measures were HbA(1c), weight, circulating markers of inflammation and cardiovascular risk, albuminuria, and electrocardiographic patterns assessed by Holter monitoring. RESULTS: At randomization, the mean age of the population was 62 years, median duration of diabetes 15 years, mean BMI 34 kg/m(2), and mean HbA(1c) 7.9% (63 mmol/mol). Thirty-three percent had a prior cardiovascular event, 18% had microalbuminuria, and 3% had macroalbuminuria. At baseline, the continuous glucose monitoring coefficient of variation for glucose levels was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: FLAT-SUGAR is a proof-of-concept study testing whether, in a population of individuals with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk, the GLIPULIN regimen can limit glycemic variability more effectively than BBI, reduce levels of cardiovascular risk markers, and favorably alter albuminuria and electrocardiographic patterns. We successfully randomized a population that has sufficient power to answer the primary question, address several secondary ones, and complete the protocol as designed.

Alogliptin after acute coronary syndrome in patients with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: To assess potentially elevated cardiovascular risk related to new antihyperglycemic drugs in patients with type 2 diabetes, regulatory agencies require a comprehensive evaluation of the cardiovascular safety profile of new antidiabetic therapies. We assessed cardiovascular outcomes with alogliptin, a new inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4), as compared with placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes who had had a recent acute coronary syndrome. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients with type 2 diabetes and either an acute myocardial infarction or unstable angina requiring hospitalization within the previous 15 to 90 days to receive alogliptin or placebo in addition to existing antihyperglycemic and cardiovascular drug therapy. The study design was a double-blind, noninferiority trial with a prespecified noninferiority margin of 1.3 for the hazard ratio for the primary end point of a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. RESULTS: A total of 5380 patients underwent randomization and were followed for up to 40 months (median, 18 months). A primary end-point event occurred in 305 patients assigned to alogliptin (11.3%) and in 316 patients assigned to placebo (11.8%) (hazard ratio, 0.96; upper boundary of the one-sided repeated confidence interval, 1.16; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Glycated hemoglobin levels were significantly lower with alogliptin than with placebo (mean difference, -0.36 percentage points; P<0.001). Incidences of hypoglycemia, cancer, pancreatitis, and initiation of dialysis were similar with alogliptin and placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with type 2 diabetes who had had a recent acute coronary syndrome, the rates of major adverse cardiovascular events were not increased with the DPP-4 inhibitor alogliptin as compared with placebo. (Funded by Takeda Development Center Americas; EXAMINE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00968708.).

Effects of exenatide vs. metformin on endothelial function in obese patients with pre-diabetes: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist treatment may improve endothelial function via direct and indirect mechanisms. We compared the acute and chronic effects of the GLP-1 receptor agonist exenatide vs. metformin on endothelial function in patients with obesity and pre-diabetes. METHODS: We performed a randomized, open-label, clinical trial in 50 non-diabetic individuals (mean age 58.5 ± 10.0; 38 females) with abdominal obesity and either impaired fasting glucose, elevated HbA1c, or impaired glucose tolerance (IGT) who were randomized to receive 3-months of exenatide or metformin. Microvascular endothelial function, assessed by digital reactive hyperemia (reactive hyperemic index: RHI), C-reactive protein (CRP), circulating oxidized LDL (oxLDL), and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 (VCAM-1) were measured at baseline and 3-months. Seven subjects with IGT participated in a sub-study comparing the effects of pre-administration of exenatide and metformin on postprandial endothelial function. RESULTS: There were no differences for the change in RHI (Δ exenatide: 0.01 ± 0.68 vs. Δ metformin: -0.17 ± 0.72, P = 0.348), CRP, oxLDL, or VCAM-1 between exenatide and metformin treatment. Triglycerides were reduced more with exenatide compared to metformin (Δ exenatide: -25.5 ± 45.7 mg/dL vs. Δ metformin: -2.9 ± 22.8 mg/dL, P = 0.032). In the sub-study, there was no difference in postprandial RHI between exenatide and metformin. CONCLUSIONS: Three months of exenatide therapy had similar effects on microvascular endothelial function, markers of inflammation, oxidative stress, and vascular activation, as metformin, in patients with obesity and pre-diabetes. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: This study is registered on http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/: NCT00546728.

Baseline factors associated with glycemic control and weight loss when exenatide twice daily is added to optimized insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine variables associated with glycemic and body weight responses when adding exenatide to basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Exploratory subgroup analyses based on baseline A1C, disease duration, and BMI of a 30-week study comparing exenatide twice daily to placebo, added to optimized insulin glargine (intent-to-treat analysis: 137 exenatide; 122 placebo). RESULTS: Exenatide participants had greater A1C reductions compared with optimized insulin glargine alone, irrespective of baseline A1C (P < 0.001). Exenatide participants with longer diabetes duration and those with lower BMI had greater A1C reductions (P < 0.01). Exenatide participants lost more weight, regardless of baseline A1C or BMI (P < 0.05). Exenatide participants with longer diabetes duration lost the most weight (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Exenatide added to optimized basal insulin was associated with improved glycemic control and weight loss, irrespective of baseline A1C, diabetes duration, and BMI. Changes were evident in modestly obese patients and in those with longer diabetes duration.

Exenatide BID Observational Study (ExOS): results for primary and secondary endpoints of a prospective research study to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of exenatide BID use in patients with type 2 diabetes in a real-world setting.

OBJECTIVE: The Exenatide BID Observational Study (ExOS) was designed to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of exenatide BID use in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in a real-world clinical practice setting in the United States. METHODS: Patients were enrolled from 74 practice sites from 9/2007 through 1/2009 and followed for 12 months. The primary effectiveness endpoint was achieving or maintaining hemoglobin A1C of ≤7.0%, or an absolute drop of 0.5% from baseline. Secondary measures included absolute and percentage change from baseline for a variety of clinical measures (lipid markers, weight, BMI, etc.), and quality of life (QOL) was assessed using the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life (IWQOL)-Lite. RESULTS: A total of 452 patients were included in the primary study population. At baseline, patients (60% female) had mean (SD) age of 55 (11), T2D duration of 9 (8) years, HbA1c of 8.0 (1.7) %, and body mass index (BMI) of 38.2 (7.4) kg/m(2). Family history of T2D was reported in 73.9% of patients. Hypertension was reported in 61.5% of patients, and 47.1% had hyperlipidemia. The HbA1c goal was achieved in 76.3% of the 118 patients with A1C measurements available at 12 months (P < 0.0001). Patients with available clinical measurements achieved significant improvements in HbA1c, weight, BMI, and QOL measurements at 12 months. A mean improvement of 4.56 was seen in the total IWQOL-Lite score at 12 months (P = 0.001). The single-arm design of this study is a limitation; however, the overall objective of the study was to observe patients on exenatide BID therapy over time, comparing their status at endpoint to baseline, rather than to make comparisons among different drug therapies. CONCLUSIONS: The Exenatide BID Observational Study supports the clinical effectiveness of exenatide BID observed in previous clinical trials and retrospective database studies.

The safety of incretin-based therapies--review of the scientific evidence.

CONTEXT: Antidiabetic therapies based on potentiation of incretin action are now widely used; however, understanding of their long-term safety remains incomplete. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched articles in PubMed for data assessing the safety of incretin-based therapies. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Three major areas of interest are reviewed: incretin action in the cardiovascular system, pancreatitis, and cancer. Incretin therapies reduce weight gain, minimize hypoglycemia, decrease inflammation, and are cardioprotective in preclinical studies. However, data permitting conclusions about whether incretin therapies modify the development of cardiovascular events in humans are not available. Case reports link incretin therapies to pancreatitis, but retrospective case control studies do not associate pancreatitis with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors. Preclinical studies of pancreatitis have yielded conflicting results, and mechanisms linking incretin receptor activation to pancreatic inflammation have not yet been forthcoming. GLP-1R activation promotes C-cell hyperplasia and medullary thyroid cancer in rodents; however, long-term clinical studies of sufficient size and duration to permit conclusions regarding cancer and incretin therapeutics have not yet been completed. CONCLUSIONS: The available data on incretin action and incidence of cardiovascular events, pancreatitis, or cancer are not yet sufficient or robust enough to permit firm conclusions regarding associations with incretin-based therapies in humans with diabetes. The forthcoming results of long-term cardiovascular safety studies should provide more conclusive information about the safety of GLP-1R agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in diabetic patients.

Exenatide bid observational study (ExOS): baseline population characteristics of a prospective research study to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of exenatide bid use in patients with type 2 diabetes in a real-world setting.

OBJECTIVES: To describe the Exenatide Observational Study (ExOS) and patients initiating exenatide therapy in a real-world clinical practice setting. METHODS: ExOS is a prospective, single-arm, multicenter, observational study to assess the effectiveness of up to 24 months of exenatide therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Patients with T2D ≥18 years of age, who initiated exenatide therapy, were eligible. The primary effectiveness endpoint is achieving or maintaining hemoglobin A1C of ≤7.0%, or an absolute drop of 0.5% from baseline. Secondary objective measures evaluate the absolute and percentage changes from baseline for a variety of clinical measures (lipid markers, weight, BMI, etc.) and quality of life (QOL) is assessed using the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life (IWQOL)-Lite. RESULTS: On average, the baseline population (n = 531) was aged 55 years, predominantly female (62%), white (79%), educated, obese (mean BMI 39 kg/m(2)), with mean HbA(1c), blood pressure, total cholesterol, and triglyceride values of 8.0%, 129/76 mmHg, 174 mg/dL, and 197 mg/dL, respectively. A total of 28% entered the study with HbA(1c) ≤7.0% and 67% were being treated with oral antihyperglycemic drug(s) (OAD) only [1 (28.4%), 2 (28.4%), >2 (10.2%)], or some form of insulin ±OADs (19%), and ≥50% were on a cholesterol-lowering drug(s) ± antihypertensive medication(s). The single-arm design of this study is a limitation; however, the overall objective of the ongoing study is to observe patients on exenatide therapy over time, comparing their status at endpoint to baseline, rather than to make comparisons among different drug therapies. CONCLUSIONS: Patients treated with exenatide tended to be obese, middle-aged women on various combinations of OADs and/or insulin who often had hypertension and/or dyslipidemia. Further planned analyses will provide the largest sample of prospective data on outcomes of exenatide therapy for up to 24 months in this usual-care population.

Use of twice-daily exenatide in Basal insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Insulin replacement in diabetes often requires prandial intervention to reach hemoglobin A1(c) (HbA1(c)) targets. OBJECTIVE: To test whether twice-daily exenatide injections reduce HbA1(c) levels more than placebo in people receiving insulin glargine. DESIGN: Parallel, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, blocked and stratified by HbA1(c) level at site, performed from October 2008 to January 2010. Participants, investigators, and personnel conducting the study were masked to treatment assignments. (ClinicalTrials.gov registration number: NCT00765817) SETTING: 59 centers in 5 countries. PATIENTS: Adults with type 2 diabetes and an HbA1(c) level of 7.1% to 10.5% who were receiving insulin glargine alone or in combination with metformin or pioglitazone (or both agents). INTERVENTION: Assignment by a centralized, computer-generated, random-sequence interactive voice-response system to exenatide, 10 µg twice daily, or placebo for 30 weeks. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was change in HbA1(c) level. Secondary outcomes included the percentage of participants with HbA1(c) values of 7.0% or less and 6.5% or less, 7-point self-monitored glucose profiles, body weight, waist circumference, insulin dose, hypoglycemia, and adverse events. RESULTS: 112 of 138 exenatide recipients and 101 of 123 placebo recipients completed the study. The HbA1(c) level decreased by 1.74% with exenatide and 1.04% with placebo (between-group difference, -0.69% [95% CI, -0.93% to -0.46%]; P < 0.001). Weight decreased by 1.8 kg with exenatide and increased by 1.0 kg with placebo (between-group difference, -2.7 kg [CI, -3.7 to -1.7]). Average increases in insulin dosage with exenatide and placebo were 13 U/d and 20 U/d. The estimated rate of minor hypoglycemia was similar between groups. Thirteen exenatide recipients and 1 placebo recipient discontinued the study because of adverse events (P < 0.010); rates of nausea (41% vs. 8%), diarrhea (18% vs. 8%), vomiting (18% vs. 4%), headache (14% vs. 4%), and constipation (10% vs. 2%) were higher with exenatide than with placebo. LIMITATIONS: The study was of short duration. There were slight imbalances between groups at baseline in terms of sex, use of concomitant glucose-lowering medications, and HbA1(c) levels, and more exenatide recipients than placebo recipients withdrew because of adverse events. CONCLUSION: Adding twice-daily exenatide injections improved glycemic control without increased hypoglycemia or weight gain in participants with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes who were receiving insulin glargine treatment. Adverse events of exenatide included nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, headache, and constipation. PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Alliance of Eli Lilly and Company and Amylin Pharmaceuticals.

Diabetes and cancer: a consensus report.

Epidemiologic evidence suggests that cancer incidence is associated with diabetes as well as certain diabetes risk factors and diabetes treatments. This consensus statement of experts assembled jointly by the American Diabetes Association and the American Cancer Society reviews the state of science concerning 1) the association between diabetes and cancer incidence or prognosis, 2) risk factors common to both diabetes and cancer, 3) possible biologic links between diabetes and cancer risk, and 4) whether diabetes treatments influence risk of cancer or cancer prognosis. In addition, key unanswered questions for future research are posed.

Diabetes and cancer: a consensus report.

Epidemiologic evidence suggests that cancer incidence is associated with diabetes as well as certain diabetes risk factors and treatments. This consensus statement of experts assembled jointly by the American Diabetes Association and the American Cancer Society reviews the state of science concerning 1) the association between diabetes and cancer incidence or prognosis; 2) risk factors common to both diabetes and cancer; 3) possible biologic links between diabetes and cancer risk; and 4) whether diabetes treatments influence the risk of cancer or cancer prognosis. In addition, key unanswered questions for future research are posed.

Efficacy and safety of exenatide once weekly versus sitagliptin or pioglitazone as an adjunct to metformin for treatment of type 2 diabetes (DURATION-2): a randomised trial.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with type 2 diabetes begin pharmacotherapy with metformin, but eventually need additional treatment. We assessed the safety and efficacy of once weekly exenatide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, versus maximum approved doses of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, sitagliptin, or the thiazolidinedione, pioglitazone, in patients treated with metformin. METHODS: In this 26-week randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, superiority trial, patients with type 2 diabetes who had been treated with metformin, and at baseline had mean glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)) of 8.5% (SD 1.1), fasting plasma glucose of 9.1 mmol/L (2.6), and weight of 88.0 kg (20.1), were enrolled and treated at 72 sites in the USA, India, and Mexico. Patients were randomly assigned to receive: 2 mg injected exenatide once weekly plus oral placebo once daily; 100 mg oral sitagliptin once daily plus injected placebo once weekly; or 45 mg oral pioglitazone once daily plus injected placebo once weekly. Primary endpoint was change in HbA(1c) between baseline and week 26. Analysis was by intention to treat, for all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00637273. FINDINGS: 170 patients were assigned to receive once weekly exenatide, 172 to receive sitagliptin, and 172 to receive pioglitazone. 491 patients received at least one dose of study drug and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis (160 on exenatide, 166 on sitagliptin, and 165 on pioglitazone). Treatment with exenatide reduced HbA(1c) (least square mean -1.5%, 95% CI -1.7 to -1.4) significantly more than did sitagliptin (-0.9%, -1.1 to -0.7) or pioglitazone (-1.2%, -1.4 to -1.0). Treatment differences were -0.6% (95% CI -0.9 to -0.4, p<0.0001) for exenatide versus sitagliptin, and -0.3% (-0.6 to -0.1, p=0.0165) for exenatide versus pioglitazone. Weight loss with exenatide (-2.3 kg, 95% CI-2.9 to -1.7) was significantly greater than with sitagliptin (difference -1.5 kg, 95% CI -2.4 to -0.7, p=0.0002) or pioglitazone (difference -5.1 kg, -5.9 to -4.3, p<0.0001). No episodes of major hypoglycaemia occurred. The most frequent adverse events with exenatide and sitagliptin were nausea (n=38, 24%, and n=16, 10%, respectively) and diarrhoea (n=29, 18%, and n=16, 10%, respectively); upper-respiratory-tract infection (n=17, 10%) and peripheral oedema (n=13, 8%) were the most frequent events with pioglitazone. INTERPRETATION: The goal of many clinicians who manage diabetes is to achieve optimum glucose control alongside weight loss and a minimum number of hypoglycaemic episodes. Addition of exenatide once weekly to metformin achieved this goal more often than did addition of maximum daily doses of either sitagliptin or pioglitazone. FUNDING: Amylin Pharmaceuticals and Eli Lilly.

Effects of exenatide combined with lifestyle modification in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of a lifestyle modification program plus exenatide versus lifestyle modification program plus placebo on weight loss in overweight or obese participants with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin and/or sulfonylurea. METHODS: In this 24-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 194 patients participated in a lifestyle modification program, consisting of goals of 600 kcal/day deficit and physical activity of at least 2.5 hours/week. Participants were randomized to 5 microg exenatide twice daily injection + lifestyle modification program (n = 96) or placebo + lifestyle modification program (n = 98), and after 4 weeks increased their exenatide dose to 10 microg twice daily or volume equivalent of placebo. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics: (mean +/- standard deviation) age, 54.8 +/- 9.5 years; weight, 95.5 +/- 16.0 kg; hemoglobin A(1c), 7.6 +/- 0.8%. At 24 weeks (least squares mean +/- standard error), treatments showed similar decreases in caloric intake (-378 +/- 58 vs -295 +/- 58 kcal/day, exenatide + lifestyle modification program vs placebo + lifestyle modification program, P = .27) and increases in exercise-derived energy expenditure. Exenatide + lifestyle modification program showed greater change in weight (-6.16 +/- 0.54 kg vs -3.97 +/- 0.52 kg, P = .003), hemoglobin A(1c) (-1.21 +/- 0.09% vs -0.73 +/- 0.09%, P <.0001), systolic (-9.44 +/- 1.40 vs -1.97 +/- 1.40 mm Hg, P <.001) and diastolic blood pressure (-2.22 +/- 1.00 vs 0.47 +/- 0.99 mm Hg, P = .04). Nausea was reported more for exenatide + lifestyle modification program than placebo + lifestyle modification program (44.8% vs 19.4%, respectively, P <.001), with no difference in withdrawal rates due to adverse events (4.2% vs 5.1%, respectively, P = 1.0) or rates of hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: When combined with lifestyle modification, exenatide treatment led to significant weight loss, improved glycemic control, and decreased blood pressure compared with lifestyle modification alone in overweight or obese participants with type 2 diabetes on metformin and/or sulfonylurea treatment.