Early-Onset Type 2 Diabetes and Tirzepatide Treatment: A Post Hoc Analysis From the SURPASS Clinical Trial Program.

OBJECTIVE: We evaluated baseline characteristics of participants with early-onset type 2 diabetes (T2D) from the SURPASS program and tirzepatide's effects on glycemic control, body weight (BW), and cardiometabolic markers. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This post hoc analysis compared baseline characteristics and changes in mean HbA1c, BW, waist circumference (WC), lipids, and blood pressure (BP) in 3,792 participants with early-onset versus later-onset T2D at week 40 (A Study of Tirzepatide [LY3298176] in Participants With Type 2 Diabetes Not Controlled With Diet and Exercise Alone [SURPASS-1] and A Study of Tirzepatide [LY3298176] Versus Semaglutide Once Weekly as Add-on Therapy to Metformin in Participants With Type 2 Diabetes [SURPASS-2]) or week 52 (A Study of Tirzepatide [LY3298176] Versus Insulin Degludec in Participants With Type 2 Diabetes [SURPASS-3]). Analyses were performed by study on data from participants while on assigned treatment without rescue medication in case of persistent hyperglycemia. RESULTS: At baseline in SURPASS-2, participants with early-onset versus later-onset T2D were younger with longer diabetes duration (9 vs. 7 years, P < 0.001) higher glycemic levels (8.5% vs. 8.2%, P < 0.001), higher BW (97 vs. 93 kg, P < 0.001) and BMI (35 vs. 34 kg/m2, P < 0.001), and a similarly abnormal lipid profile (e.g., triglycerides 167 vs. 156 mg/dL). At week 40, similar improvements in HbA1c (-2.6% vs. -2.4%), BW (-14 vs. -13 kg), WC (-10 vs. -10 cm), triglycerides (-26% vs. -24%), HDL (7% vs. 7%), and systolic BP (-6 vs. -7 mmHg) were observed in both subgroups with tirzepatide. CONCLUSIONS: Despite younger age, participants with early-onset T2D from the SURPASS program had higher glycemic levels and worse overall metabolic health at baseline versus those with later-onset T2D. In this post hoc analysis, similar improvements in HbA1c, BW, and cardiometabolic markers were observed with tirzepatide, irrespective of age at T2D diagnosis. Future studies are needed to determine long-term outcomes of tirzepatide in early-onset T2D.

Effects of Tirzepatide Versus Basal Insulins in People With Type 2 Diabetes and Different Baseline Glycemic Patterns: Post Hoc Analyses of the SURPASS-3 and SURPASS-4 Trials.

OBJECTIVE: This post hoc analysis assessed change from baseline to week 52 in glycemic parameters for tirzepatide (5, 10, 15 mg) versus insulin degludec (SURPASS-3 trial) and glargine (SURPASS-4 trial) in people with type 2 diabetes and different baseline glycemic patterns, based on fasting serum glucose (FSG) and postprandial glucose (PPG) values. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Participant subgroups with low FSG/low PPG, low FSG/high PPG, high FSG/low PPG, and high FSG/high PPG were defined according to the median values of these measures. RESULTS: All tirzepatide doses and basal insulins were associated with decreased HbA1c, FSG, and PPG values from baseline to week 52 in all subgroups (P < 0.05). Within each subgroup, HbA1c and PPG decreases were greater with tirzepatide than insulin (P < 0.05). FSG decreases were generally similar. There were no differential treatment effects by FSG/PPG subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis, tirzepatide was associated with superior glycemic control compared with insulin, irrespective of baseline glycemic pattern.

Relationship between body weight change and glycaemic control with tirzepatide treatment in people with type 2 diabetes: A post hoc assessment of the SURPASS clinical trial programme.

AIM: To assess the relationship between HbA1c and body weight reductions with tirzepatide treatment (5, 10 or 15 mg). MATERIALS AND METHODS: HbA1c and body weight data at 40 weeks (SURPASS-1, -2 and -5) and 52 weeks (SURPASS-3 and -4) were analysed by trial. RESULTS: Across the SURPASS clinical trials, HbA1c reductions from baseline were observed in 96%-99%, 98%-99% and 94%-99% of participants treated with tirzepatide 5, 10 and 15 mg, respectively. Moreover, 87%-94%, 88%-95% and 88%-97% of participants, respectively, experienced weight loss associated with HbA1c reductions. Statistically significant associations (correlation coefficients ranging from 0.1438 to 0.3130 across studies; P ≤ .038) between HbA1c and body weight changes were observed with tirzepatide in SURPASS-2, -3, -4 (all doses) and -5 (tirzepatide 5 mg only). CONCLUSIONS: In this post hoc analysis, consistent reductions in both HbA1c and body weight were observed in most participants treated with tirzepatide at doses of 5, 10 or 15 mg. A statistically significant but modest association between HbA1c and body weight change was observed in SURPASS-2, SURPASS-3 and SURPASS-4, suggesting that both weight-independent and weight-dependent mechanisms are responsible for the tirzepatide-induced improvement in glycaemic control.

Weight-dependent and weight-independent effects of dulaglutide on blood pressure in patients with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists may experience reductions in weight and blood pressure. The primary objective of the current study was to determine the weight-dependent and weight-independent effects of ~ 6 months treatment with dulaglutide 1.5 mg treatment in participants with T2D. METHODS: Mediation analysis was conducted for five randomized, placebo-controlled trials of dulaglutide 1.5 mg to estimate the weight-dependent (i.e., mediated by weight) and weight-independent effects from dulaglutide vs. placebo on change from baseline for systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and pulse pressure. A random-effects meta-analysis combined these results. To investigate a dose response between dulaglutide 4.5 mg and placebo, mediation analysis was first conducted in AWARD-11 to estimate the weight-dependent and weight-independent effects of dulaglutide 4.5 mg vs. 1.5 mg, followed by an indirect comparison with the mediation result for dulaglutide 1.5 mg vs. placebo. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were largely similar across the trials. In the mediation meta-analysis of placebo-controlled trials, the total treatment effect of dulaglutide 1.5 mg after placebo-adjustment on SBP was - 2.6 mmHg (95% CI - 3.8, - 1.5; p < 0.001) and was attributed to both a weight-dependent effect (- 0.9 mmHg; 95% CI: - 1.4, - 0.5; p < 0.001) and a weight-independent effect (- 1.5 mmHg; 95% CI: - 2.6, - 0.3; p = 0.01), accounting for 36% and 64% of the total effect, respectively. For pulse pressure, the total treatment effect of dulaglutide (- 2.5 mmHg; 95% CI: - 3.5, - 1.5; p < 0.001) was 14% weight-dependent and 86% weight-independent. For DBP there was limited impact of dulaglutide treatment, with only a small weight-mediated effect. Dulaglutide 4.5 mg demonstrated an effect on reduction in SBP and pulse pressure beyond that of dulaglutide 1.5 mg which was primarily weight mediated. CONCLUSIONS: Dulaglutide 1.5 mg reduced SBP and pulse pressure in people with T2D across the placebo-controlled trials in the AWARD program. While up to one third of the effect of dulaglutide 1.5 mg on SBP and pulse pressure was due to weight reduction, the majority was independent of weight. A greater understanding of the pleotropic effects of GLP-1 RA that contribute to reduction in blood pressure could support developing future approaches for treating hypertension. Trial registrations (clinicaltrials.gov) NCT01064687, NCT00734474, NCT01769378, NCT02597049, NCT01149421, NCT03495102.

Efficacy and safety outcomes of dulaglutide by baseline HbA1c: A post hoc analysis of the REWIND trial.

AIM: To assess cardiovascular, glycaemic, weight and safety outcomes of long-term treatment with dulaglutide 1.5 mg compared with placebo in patients with a baseline HbA1c of less than 7% versus 7% or higher. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Intention-to-treat analyses were performed on REWIND participants with a baseline HbA1c measurement, using Cox proportional hazards regression and mixed model for repeated measures. Subgroup analyses with factors for baseline HbA1c categories and their interaction with treatment group, as well as analyses within the HbA1c subgroups, were conducted. Additionally, sensitivity analyses were performed for baseline HbA1c subgroups of 6.5% or less and more than 6.5%. RESULTS: Of the 9876 eligible participants, 3921 and 5955 had a baseline HbA1c of less than 7% and 7% or higher, respectively. Mean baseline HbA1c was 6.3% and 8.0% and the mean duration of diabetes was 9.0 and 11.6 years in the respective subgroups. The less than 7% subgroup was slightly older and less frequently insulin-treated. There was no evidence of a differential dulaglutide treatment effect on body mass index (BMI) reduction, cardiovascular or safety outcomes of interest between the baseline HbA1c subgroups. Treatment-by-baseline HbA1c group interaction was significant for HbA1c change from baseline (P < .001), with a greater reduction in the subgroup with higher baseline HbA1c values. Sensitivity analyses by baseline HbA1c subgroups of 6.5% or less and more than 6.5% showed similar results. CONCLUSIONS: The reduced incidence of cardiovascular events, and the reduction in BMI in participants treated with once-weekly dulaglutide, were independent of the baseline HbA1c level. Conversely, participants with a higher baseline HbA1c level had greater reductions in HbA1c. Dulaglutide has a positive benefit-risk profile and can be considered in patients with comparatively well-controlled HbA1c levels seeking optimal metabolic control and cardiovascular benefits.

Effect of expanded dulaglutide weekly doses (3.0 mg and 4.5 mg) on cardiovascular disease risk factors in participants with type 2 diabetes at increased cardiovascular disease risk: a post hoc analysis of the AWARD-11 study.

AIMS: This post hoc analysis investigated the effect of dulaglutide on cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk factors in subgroups of participants at increased CVD risk in the AWARD-11 study. METHODS: Participants who received once weekly dulaglutide 1.5, 3.0 or 4.5 mg for 52 weeks were categorized according to their baseline Framingham CVD risk category [low (N = 295), medium (N = 481) and high (N = 1054) risk], as well as their baseline CVD risk according to the REWIND study eligibility criteria (N = 953). Serum lipids and vital signs were assessed at baseline and at 52 weeks. Data were analysed as least squares mean percentage change from baseline for lipids and least squares mean change from baseline for vital signs. RESULTS: Demographic and baseline clinical characteristics were balanced across doses within the CVD risk groups. In the high Framingham CVD risk and REWIND-like groups, dulaglutide resulted in dose-related decreases in total cholesterol (≤6.0%), non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (≤8.8%), very-low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (≤19.4%) and triglycerides (≤21.5%), with little change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure decreased up to 5.6 mmHg and 1.6 mmHg, respectively, and heart rate increased up to 2 beats/min. CONCLUSIONS: This post hoc analysis suggests the magnitude of the favourable effects of dulaglutide 3.0 mg and 4.5 mg on several cardiometabolic CVD risk factors was similar to, if not greater than, those of dulaglutide 1.5 mg among participants with type 2 diabetes and increased CVD risk. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identifier: NCT03495102.

Correction to: A Budget Impact and Cost Per Additional Responder Analysis for Baricitinib for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis in Patients with an Inadequate Response to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in the USA.

Due to a single error in the annual cost of sarilumab the following needs to be corrected in the article.

A Budget Impact and Cost Per Additional Responder Analysis for Baricitinib for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Rheumatoid Arthritis in Patients with an Inadequate Response to Tumor Necrosis Factor Inhibitors in the USA.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Baricitinib is a selective and reversible Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitor indicated for the treatment of adult patients with moderately to severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA) who have had an inadequate response to one or more tumor necrosis factor inhibitors (TNFis) and has been shown to improve multiple clinical and patient-reported outcomes. However, it is unclear what the budgetary impact would be for US commercial payers to add baricitinib to their formulary and how the efficacy of baricitinib compares to other disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs) with a similar indication. METHODS: A budget impact model (BIM) was developed for a hypothetical population of 1 million plan members that compared a world without and with baricitinib. A retrospective observational study was carried out to estimate market utilization of advanced therapies. Number needed to treat (NNT) and cost per additional responder were calculated for American College of Rheumatology (ACR) 20%/50%/70% improvement criteria (ACR20/50/70) response outcomes combining cost estimates from the BIM and efficacy values from a network meta-analysis (NMA). The model included costs related to drug acquisition and monitoring costs. RESULTS: Adding baricitinib would save a commercial payer $US169,742 for second-line therapy and $US135,471 for third-line therapy over a 2-year time horizon (all costs correspond to 2019 US dollars). Cost savings were driven by baricitinib drawing market share away from more expensive comparators. The NMA, based on nine studies, found no statistically significant differences in the median treatment difference between baricitinib and comparators except for versus a conventional synthetic DMARD (csDMARD), and thus NNT versus a csDMARD was similar. The cost per additional responder for baricitinib in patients with inadequate response to a TNFi was substantially lower than all other treatments for all three ACR response criteria at 12 weeks (ACR20: $US129,672; ACR50: $US237,732; ACR70: $US475,464), and among the lowest at 24 weeks (ACR20: $US167,811; ACR50: $US259,344; ACR70: $US570,557). CONCLUSIONS: Baricitinib, compared to other DMARDs, was a less expensive option (- $US0.01 incremental cost per member per month in second- and third-line therapy over a 2-year time horizon) with comparable efficacy in patients with inadequate response to TNFi. Adding baricitinib to formulary would likely be cost saving for US payers and expands treatment options for these patients.

Safety of baricitinib in East Asian patients with moderate-to-severe active rheumatoid arthritis: An integrated analysis from clinical trials.

AIM: We evaluated the safety of baricitinib in an East Asian (EA) patient population with moderate-to-severely active rheumatoid arthritis (RA), through an integrated sub-analysis of data from the overall baricitinib RA clinical program. METHODS: Data from EA patients who received any dose of baricitinib from five completed studies (1 Phase 2, 4 Phase 3) and an ongoing long-term extension study were pooled up to 1 September, 2016. Exposure-adjusted incidence rates (EAIR) and incidence rates (IRs), both per 100 patient-years (PY), were calculated. RESULTS: This analysis included 740 EA patients with 1294 PY of total baricitinib exposure (maximum 3.5 years). Overall, 109 patients discontinued baricitinib due to adverse events (AEs); EAIR: 8.4. No deaths were reported in this cohort. Serious AEs were reported by 125 patients (EAIR: 9.7). Serious infections were the most common serious AEs (n = 53, IR: 4.15). IR of herpes zoster infection was 6.2; the majority of events were of mild-to-moderate severity. Three cases (IR: 0.23) of tuberculosis were reported. The IRs of malignancy (excluding non-melanoma skin cancer) was 0.99 and EAIR specifically of lymphoma was 0.1. The IR of major adverse cardiovascular events was 0.26, and deep vein thrombosis was reported in four patients (EAIR: 0.3). Two cases of gastrointestinal perforations (EAIR: 0.2) were reported. CONCLUSION: Integrated data show that baricitinib is well-tolerated in EA patients with moderate-to-severely active RA in the context of demonstrated efficacy, which is generally consistent with safety results of the overall study population.

Weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving once-weekly dulaglutide plus insulin lispro or insulin glargine plus insulin lispro: A post-hoc analysis of the AWARD-4 study across baseline body mass index subgroups.

AIMS: Insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity are challenged in achieving body weight stability or reduction, in addition to glycaemic control. Post-hoc analyses of body weight and insulin dose data from the AWARD-4 trial involved comparison of treatment with once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg (N = 295) or 0.75 mg (N = 293) and treatment with daily insulin glargine (N = 296), each with prandial insulin lispro (± metformin). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Changes in weight and in the proportion of patients without weight gain or with weight loss of at least 3%, 5% or 10% or composites of HbA1c less than 7% without weight gain and weight loss of at least 3% after 52 weeks were compared between the dulaglutide (either dose) groups and the insulin glargine group, overall and by baseline BMI (<30, 30-<35, ≥35 kg/m2 ), using analysis of covariance and logistic regression, including interaction terms. RESULTS: The following parameters were statistically significant (P < 0.01) in favour of the dulaglutide-treated groups, at lower mean total daily insulin doses, vs the insulin glargine group. The achieved targets were more pronounced with dulaglutide 1.5 mg than with insulin glargine: LSM weight change difference, -3.23 kg; proportion of patients without weight gain, 49.0% vs 19.0%; proportion of patients with weight loss ≥3%, 21.7% vs 5.7% or with weight loss ≥5%, 10.5% vs 2.4%; proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% without weight gain, 26.2% vs 7.9%; proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% and weight loss ≥3%, 11.9% vs 1.4%, respectively. Treatment effect for these parameters was not significantly different across BMI categories. CONCLUSIONS: Larger proportions of patients in late-stage T2D needing treatment intensification achieved glycemic control without weight gain or with weight loss at lower insulin doses with once-weekly dulaglutide plus daily prandial insulin than with a basal-bolus insulin regimen, overall and across all three BMI subgroups.

Achilles tendon lengthening for ankle equinus deformity in hemophiliacs: 23 patients followed for 1-24 years.

BACKGROUND: Bleeding in the calf or ankle joint may lead to ankle equinus deformity, particularly in childhood and during adolescence. We assessed the long-term functional and radiographic results after Achilles tendon lengthening for ankle equinus deformity in hemophiliacs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1975 and 1986, 30 hemophilic patients with pes equinus were surgically managed by Achilles tendon lengthening. Of these, 23 were followed up prospectively twice a year for an average of 13 (1-24) years. The mean age at operation was 29 (12-46) years. The clinical results were documented according to the score of the Advisory Committee of the World Federation of Hemophilia (WFH), while radio-graphs were evaluated using the Pettersson score. On average, preoperative ankle equinus deformity was 21 (5-55) degrees. Mean range of motion was 21 (5-42) degrees prior to surgery. RESULTS: At the first postoperative examination 1 year after surgery, 21/23 cases were improved, and 9/21 reached dorsiflexion to at least neutral position. At the last follow-up, ankle equinus deformity was 10 (4-20) degrees on average. 20/23 patients still showed significant improvement compared to their condition before surgery. 7 patients still had complete correction of the equinus deformity, while mean range of motion decreased constantly over the observation period. The clinical score was significantly improved 1 year after surgery and diminished only slightly afterwards. Radio-graphic outcome deteriorated, with scores rising from 4.3 (1-10) points preoperatively to 7.3 (3-12) points at last follow-up. INTERPRETATION: Most patients treated for hemophilic pes equinus by Achilles tendon lengthening experienced long-term benefit concerning the equinus deformity, but gradually lost overall movement of the ankle joint. Progression of the ankle arthropathy cannot be hindered.