A randomized clinical trial to evaluate the single-dose pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of sitagliptin in pediatric patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the single-dose pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and safety of sitagliptin in pediatric patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). STUDY DESIGN: This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind evaluation of sitagliptin in 35 patients 10 to 17 years old with T2DM at 7 clinical research sites. The safety, tolerability, PK, and PD (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 [DPP-4] inhibition and aspects of glucose metabolism) of single doses of 50, 100, and 200 mg were assessed. Appropriate transformations on the PK parameters were used and back-transformed summary statistics are reported. RESULTS: Adverse experiences were reported by eight study participants; all were of mild intensity except one (intravenous site pain of moderate intensity). PK characteristics in the young patients were comparable to reference adult data, with geometric mean ratios (youths/adults) for AUC0-∞ , Cmax , and C24hr of 0.82, 1.04, and 0.74, respectively. Single doses of 50, 100, and 200 mg sitagliptin inhibited 67.2%, 73.8%, and 81.2% of plasma DPP-4 activity over 24 hours, respectively. Least squares (LS) mean glucose concentrations 2 hours after an oral glucose tolerance test or a meal tolerance test decreased in study participants treated with sitagliptin, compared to placebo, while active LS mean glucagon-like peptide 1 concentrations increased significantly at all sitagliptin doses in both tests. CONCLUSIONS: Single doses of sitagliptin as high as 200 mg were generally well tolerated in 10- to 17-year-old male and female study participants with T2DM, and a daily sitagliptin dose of 100 mg is appropriate for evaluation in Phase III safety and efficacy studies in pediatric patients with T2DM. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00730275).

Efficacy and safety of the farnesoid X receptor agonist obeticholic acid in patients with type 2 diabetes and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Obeticholic acid (OCA; INT-747, 6α-ethyl-chenodeoxycholic acid) is a semisynthetic derivative of the primary human bile acid chenodeoxycholic acid, the natural agonist of the farnesoid X receptor, which is a nuclear hormone receptor that regulates glucose and lipid metabolism. In animal models, OCA decreases insulin resistance and hepatic steatosis. METHODS: We performed a double-blind, placebo-controlled, proof-of-concept study to evaluate the effects of OCA on insulin sensitivity in patients with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Patients were randomly assigned to groups given placebo (n = 23), 25 mg OCA (n = 20), or 50 mg OCA (n = 21) once daily for 6 weeks. A 2-stage hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic insulin clamp was used to measure insulin sensitivity before and after the 6-week treatment period. We also measured levels of liver enzymes, lipid analytes, fibroblast growth factor 19, 7α-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one (a BA precursor), endogenous bile acids, and markers of liver fibrosis. RESULTS: When patients were given a low-dose insulin infusion, insulin sensitivity increased by 28.0% from baseline in the group treated with 25 mg OCA (P = .019) and 20.1% from baseline in the group treated with 50 mg OCA (P = .060). Insulin sensitivity increased by 24.5% (P = .011) in combined OCA groups, whereas it decreased by 5.5% in the placebo group. A similar pattern was observed in patients given a high-dose insulin infusion. The OCA groups had significant reductions in levels of γ-glutamyltransferase and alanine aminotransferase and dose-related weight loss. They also had increased serum levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and fibroblast growth factor 19, associated with decreased levels of 7α-hydroxy-4-cholesten-3-one and endogenous bile acids, indicating activation of farnesoid X receptor. Markers of liver fibrosis decreased significantly in the group treated with 25 mg OCA. Adverse experiences were similar among groups. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2 trial, administration of 25 or 50 mg OCA for 6 weeks was well tolerated, increased insulin sensitivity, and reduced markers of liver inflammation and fibrosis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease. Longer and larger studies are warranted. ClinicalTrials.gov, Number: NCT00501592.

Comparison of Point Accuracy Between Two Widely Used Continuous Glucose Monitoring Systems.

BACKGROUND: Safe and effective self-management of glucose levels requires immediate access to accurate data. We assessed the point accuracy of the Dexcom G7 Continuous Glucose Monitoring System (Dexcom, Inc., San Diego, CA, USA) and FreeStyle Libre 3 (Abbott Diabetes Care, Alameda, CA, USA) sensors in a head-to-head comparison. METHOD: Multicenter, single-arm, prospective, nonsignificant risk evaluation enrolled adults (≥ 18 years) with diagnosed type 1 diabetes (T1D) or type 2 diabetes (T2D). Accuracy was assessed by comparing sensor data to laboratory reference values Yellow Springs Instrument [YSI] and capillary blood glucose values. Outcome measures were differences in mean absolute relative difference (MARD), number and percentage of matched glucose pairs within ±20 mg/dL/±20 of reference values within glucose ranges: < 54, 54 to 69, 70 to 180, 181 to 250, > 250 mg/dL, and combined. RESULTS: Data from 55 adults were included in the analysis. Analysis showed significantly lower MARD with the FreeStyle Libre 3 sensor vs the Dexcom G7 sensor (8.9% vs 13.6%, respectively, P < .0001) with a higher percentage of glucose values within ±20 mg/dL/±20 of reference (91.4% vs 78.6%). The MARD values for both continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) sensors were similar during the first 12 hours; however, the FreeStyle Libre 3 MARD was notably lower than the Dexcom G7 MARD during the next 12 hours (10.0% vs 15.1%, respectively, P < .0001) and throughout the study period. CONCLUSIONS: The FreeStyle Libre 3 sensor was more accurate than the Dexcom G7 sensor in all metrics evaluated throughout the study period. This is the first head-to-head study to our knowledge that compares the flagship products currently in widespread use of the two largest CGM manufacturers.

Multicenter Evaluation of Ultra-Rapid Lispro Insulin with Control-IQ Technology in Adults, Adolescents, and Children with Type 1 Diabetes.

Objective: To evaluate the safety and explore the efficacy of use of ultra-rapid lispro (URLi, Lyumjev) insulin in the Tandem t:slim X2 insulin pump with Control-IQ 1.5 technology in children, teenagers, and adults living with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: At 14 U.S. diabetes centers, youth and adults with T1D completed a 16-day lead-in period using lispro in a t:slim X2 insulin pump with Control-IQ 1.5 technology, followed by a 13-week period in which URLi insulin was used in the pump. Results: The trial included 179 individuals with T1D (age 6-75 years). With URLi, 1.7% (3 participants) had a severe hypoglycemia event over 13 weeks attributed to override boluses or a missed meal. No diabetic ketoacidosis events occurred. Two participants stopped URLi use because of infusion-site discomfort, and one stopped after developing a rash. Mean time 70-180 mg/dL increased from 65% ± 15% with lispro to 67% ± 13% with URLi (P = 0.004). Mean insulin treatment satisfaction questionnaire score improved from 75 ± 13 at screening to 80 ± 11 after 13 weeks of URLi use (mean difference = 6; 95% confidence interval 4-8; P < 0.001), with the greatest improvement reported for confidence avoiding symptoms of high blood sugar. Mean treatment-related impact measure-diabetes score improved from 74 ± 12 to 80 ± 12 (P < 0.001), and mean TRIM-Diabetes Device (score improved from 82 ± 11 to 86 ± 12 (P < 0.001). Conclusions: URLi use in the Tandem t:slim X2 insulin pump with Control-IQ 1.5 technology was safe for adult and pediatric participants with T1D, with quality-of-life benefits of URLi use perceived by the study participants. Clinicaltrials.gov registration: NCT05403502.

Accuracy of the Third Generation of a 14-Day Continuous Glucose Monitoring System.

INTRODUCTION: We have evaluated the performance of the FreeStyle Libre® 3 continuous glucose monitoring system (FSL3) compared to (1) the venous plasma reference for participants aged ≥ 6 years and (2) the fingerstick capillary blood glucose (BG) reference for pediatric participants aged 4 and 5 years. The analytical performance of the third-generation factory-calibrated FSL3 CGM system was compared to the plasma venous blood glucose reference using the YSI 2300 STAT PLUS Glucose and Lactate Analyzer (the YSI reference) and the self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG) reference for participants aged ≥ 6 years and participants aged 4 and 5 years, respectively. METHODS: A total of 108 participants aged ≥ 4 years with type 1 or type 2 diabetes from four sites in the USA were enrolled in the study. The data of 100 participants were ultimately evaluated. Adult participants (aged ≥ 18 years) participated in three in-clinic sessions, and pediatric participants (aged 4-17 years) participated in up to two in-clinic sessions, all stratified to provide data for days 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13 or 14 of sensor wear. Performance evaluation included accuracy measures, such as proportion of CGM values that fell within ± 20% or ± 20 mg/dL (1.1 mmol/L) of the reference glucose values, and difference measures, such as the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between the CGM and reference values. RESULTS: Data from the 100 study participants were analyzed. The overall MARD was 7.8%, and 93.4% of the CGM values were within ± 20% or ± 20 mg/dL of the YSI reference for participants aged ≥ 6 years, with 6845 CGM-YSI matched pairs. The performance was stable over the 14-day wear period. For participants aged 4-5 years, MARD was 10.0%, and 88.9% of the CGM values were within 20%/20 mg/dL compared to a SMBG reference. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: The FSL3 CGM system demonstrated accurate performance across the dynamic glycemic range during the 14-day sensor wear period.

Glycemic Outcomes During Early Use of the MiniMed™ 780G Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System with Guardian™ 4 Sensor.

Background: Safety and significant improvement in overall glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and percentage of time spent in (TIR), below (TBR), and above (TAR) glucose range were demonstrated in the pivotal trial of adolescents and adults using the MiniMed™ advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system with the adjunctive, calibration-required Guardian™ Sensor 3. The present study evaluated early outcomes of continued access study (CAS) participants who transitioned from the pivotal trial investigational system to the approved MiniMed™ 780G system with the non-adjunctive, calibration-free Guardian™ 4 Sensor (MM780G+G4S). Study data were presented alongside those of real-world MM780G+G4S users from Europe, the Middle East, and Africa. Methods: The CAS participants (N = 109, aged 7-17 years and N = 67, aged >17 years) used the MM780G+G4S for 3 months and data of real-world MM780G+G4S system users (N = 10,204 aged ≤15 years and N = 26,099 aged >15 years) were uploaded from September 22, 2021 to December 02, 2022. At least 10 days of real-world continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) data were required for analyses. Glycemic metrics, delivered insulin and system use/interactions underwent descriptive analyses. Results: Time in AHCL and CGM use were >90% for all groups. AHCL exits averaged 0.1/day and there were few blood glucose measurements (BGMs) (0.8/day-1.0/day). Adults in both cohorts met most consensus recommendations for glycemic targets. Pediatric groups met recommendations for %TIR and %TBR, although not those for mean glucose variability and %TAR, possibly due to low use of recommended glucose target (100 mg/dL) and active insulin time (2 h) settings (28.4% in the CAS cohort and 9.4% in the real-world cohort). The CAS pediatric and adult A1C were 7.2% ± 0.7% and 6.8% ± 0.7%, respectively, and there were no serious adverse events. Conclusions: Early clinical use of the MM780G+G4S was safe and involved minimal BGMs and AHCL exits. Consistent with real-world pediatric and adult use, outcomes were associated with achievement of recommended glycemic targets. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT03959423.

Improved Glycemia with Hybrid Closed-Loop Versus Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion Therapy: Results from a Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objective: To evaluate safety and effectiveness of MiniMed™ 670G hybrid closed loop (HCL) in comparison with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) therapy for 6 months in persons with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: Adults (aged 18-80 years), adolescents, and children (aged 2-17 years) with T1D who were using CSII therapy were enrolled and randomized (1:1) to 6 months of HCL intervention (n = 151, mean age of 39.9 ± 19.8 years) or CSII without continuous glucose monitoring (n = 151, 35.7 ± 18.4 years). Primary effectiveness endpoints included change in A1C for Group 1 (baseline A1C >8.0%), from baseline to the end of study, and difference in the end of study percentage of time spent below 70 mg/dL (%TBR <70 mg/dL) for Group 2 (baseline A1C ≤8.0%), to show superiority of HCL intervention versus control. Secondary effectiveness endpoints were change in A1C and %TBR <70 mg/dL for Group 2 and Group 1, respectively, to show noninferiority of HCL intervention versus control. Primary safety endpoints were rates of severe hypoglycemia and diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Results: Change in A1C and difference in %TBR <70 mg/dL for the overall group were significantly improved, in favor of HCL intervention. In addition, a significant mean (95% confidence interval) change in A1C was observed for both Group 1 (-0.8% [-1.1% to -0.4%], P < 0.0001) and Group 2 (-0.3% [-0.5% to -0.1%], P < 0.0001), in favor of HCL intervention. The same was observed for difference in %TBR <70 mg/dL for Group 1 (-2.2% [-3.6% to -0.9%]) and Group 2 (-4.9% [-6.3% to -3.6%]) (P < 0.0001 for both). There was one DKA event during run-in and six severe hypoglycemic events: two during run-in and four during study (HCL: n = 0 and CSII: n = 4 [6.08 per 100 patient-years]). Conclusions: This RCT demonstrates that the MiniMed 670G HCL safely and significantly improved A1C and %TBR <70 mg/dL compared with CSII control in persons with T1D, irrespective of baseline A1C level.

Safety and Glycemic Outcomes During the MiniMedTM Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Pivotal Trial in Children and Adolescents with Type 1 Diabetes.

Background: During MiniMed™ advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) use by adolescents and adults in the pivotal trial, glycated hemoglobin (A1C) was significantly reduced, time spent in range (TIR) was significantly increased, and there were no episodes of severe hypoglycemia or diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). The present study investigated the same primary safety and effectiveness endpoints during AHCL use by a younger cohort with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Methods: An intention-to-treat population (N = 160, aged 7-17 years) with T1D was enrolled in a single-arm study at 13 investigational centers. There was a run-in period (∼25 days) using HCL or sensor-augmented pump with/without predictive low-glucose management, followed by a 3-month study period with AHCL activated at two glucose targets (GTs; 100 and 120 mg/dL) for ∼45 days each. The mean ± standard deviation values of A1C, TIR, mean sensor glucose (SG), coefficient of variation (CV) of SG, time at SG ranges, and insulin delivered between run-in and study were analyzed (Wilcoxon signed-rank test or t-test). Results: Compared with baseline, AHCL use was associated with reduced A1C from 7.9 ± 0.9% (N = 160) to 7.4 ± 0.7% (N = 136) (P < 0.001) and overall TIR increased from the run-in 59.4 ± 11.8% to 70.3 ± 6.5% by end of study (P < 0.001), without change in CV, time spent below range (TBR) <70 mg/dL, or TBR <54 mg/dL. Relative to longer active insulin time (AIT) settings (N = 52), an AIT of 2 h (N = 19) with the 100 mg/dL GT increased mean TIR to 73.4%, reduced TBR <70 mg/dL from 3.5% to 2.2%, and reduced time spent above range (TAR) >180 mg/dL from 28.7% to 24.4%. During AHCL use, there was no severe hypoglycemia or DKA. Conclusions: In children and adolescents with T1D, MiniMed AHCL system use was safe, A1C was lower, and TIR was increased. The lowest GT and shortest AIT were associated with the highest TIR and lowest TBR and TAR, all of which met consensus-recommended glycemic targets. ClinicalTrials.gov ID: NCT03959423.

Accuracy of a 14-Day Factory-Calibrated Continuous Glucose Monitoring System With Advanced Algorithm in Pediatric and Adult Population With Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we evaluated the analytical performance of the second-generation factory-calibrated FreeStyle Libre Flash Glucose Monitoring (FreeStyle Libre 2) System compared to plasma venous blood glucose reference, Yellow Springs Instrument 2300 (YSI). METHODS: The study enrolled participants aged four and above with type 1 or type 2 diabetes at seven sites in the United States. Adult participants (18+ years) participated in three in-clinic sessions and pediatric participants (4-17 years) participated in up to two in-clinic sessions stratified to provide data for days 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 12, 13, or 14 of sensor wear. Participants aged 11+ underwent supervised glycemic manipulation during in-clinic sessions to achieve glucose levels across the measurement range of the System. Performance evaluation included accuracy measures such as the proportion of continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) values that were within ±20% or ±20 mg/dL of reference glucose values, and bias measures such as the mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between CGM and reference values. RESULTS: Data from the 144 adults and 129 pediatric participants were analyzed. Percent of sensor results within ±20%/20 mg/dL of YSI reference were 93.2% and 92.1%, and MARD was 9.2% and 9.7% for the adults and pediatric participants, respectively. The System performed well in the hypoglycemic range, with 94.3% of the results for the adult population and 96.1% of the data for pediatric population being within 15 mg/dL of the YSI reference. The time lag was 2.4 ± 4.6 minutes for adults and 2.1 ± 5.0 minutes for pediatrics. CONCLUSIONS: The System demonstrated improved analytical accuracy performance across the dynamic range during the 14-day sensor wear period as compared to the previous-generation device.NCT#: NCT03607448 and NCT03820050.

Accuracy and Safety of Dexcom G7 Continuous Glucose Monitoring in Adults with Diabetes.

Background: We evaluated the accuracy and safety of a seventh generation (G7) Dexcom continuous glucose monitor (CGM) during 10.5 days of use in adults with diabetes. Methods: Adults with either type 1 or type 2 diabetes (on intensive insulin therapy or not) participated at 12 investigational sites in the United States. In-clinic visits were conducted on days 1 or 2, 4 or 7, and on the second half of day 10 or the first half of day 11 for frequent comparisons with comparator blood glucose measurements obtained with the YSI 2300 Stat Plus glucose analyzer. Participants wore sensors concurrently on the upper arm and abdomen. Accuracy evaluation included the proportion of CGM values within 15% of comparator glucose levels >100 mg/dL or within 15 mg/dL of comparator levels ≤100 mg/dL (%15/15), along with the %20/20 and %30/30 agreement rates. The mean absolute relative difference (MARD) between temporally matched CGM and comparator values was also calculated. Results: Data from 316 participants (619 sensors, 77,774 matched pairs) were analyzed. For arm- and abdomen-placed sensors, overall MARDs were 8.2% and 9.1%, respectively. Overall %15/15, %20/20, and %30/30 agreement rates were 89.6%, 95.3%, and 98.8% for arm-placed sensors and were 85.5%, 93.2%, and 98.1% for abdomen-placed sensors. Across days of wear, glucose concentration ranges, and rates of change, %20/20 agreement rates varied by no more than 9% from the overall %20/20. No serious adverse events were reported. Conclusions: The G7 CGM provides accurate glucose readings with single-digit MARD with arm or abdomen placement in adults with diabetes. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04794478.

Aldafermin in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (ALPINE 2/3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial.

BACKGROUND: Non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) is characterised by hepatic steatosis, inflammation, and injury, and is associated with an increased risk of liver transplantation and death. NASH affects more than 16 million people in the USA, and there is no approved therapy. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of aldafermin, an engineered analogue of the gut hormone fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19). METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b study (ALPINE 2/3) in patients with biopsy-confirmed NASH and stage 2 or 3 fibrosis, we randomly assigned patients stratified by fibrosis stage in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to receive placebo, aldafermin 0·3 mg, 1·0 mg, or 3·0 mg once daily for 24 weeks at 30 study sites in the USA. Patients, investigators, the funder, and all other staff, were masked to treatment assignment throughout the study. The primary endpoint was an improvement in liver fibrosis of at least one stage with no worsening of NASH at week 24. Analyses were done by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03912532, and has been completed. FINDINGS: Between May 16, 2019, and Sept 4, 2020, 786 patients were screened, of whom 171 were randomly assigned to a treatment group and included in the intention-to-treat population: 43 in the 0·3 mg aldafermin group, 42 in the 1·0 mg group, 43 in the 3·0 mg group, and 43 in the placebo group. In total, 145 (85%) of patients completed treatment. At week 24, among patients with biopsies at both baseline and week 24, was seven (19%) of 36 patients in the placebo group, 11 (31%) of 36 in the 0·3 mg aldafermin group (difference 90% CI 12% [-9 to 33]; p=0·11), five (15%) of 34 patients in the 1·0 mg group (difference -5% [-24 to 13]; p=0·80), and 11 (30%) of 37 patients in the 3·0 mg group (difference 10% [-9 to 30]; p=0·12) had an improvement in liver fibrosis of at least one stage with no worsening of NASH, without meeting the prespecified significance for dose response (p=0·55). Adverse events were mostly mild or moderate in severity. Diarrhoea occurred in six (14%) of 43 patients in the placebo group, three (7%) of 43 patients in the 0·3 mg aldafermin group, five (12%) of 41 patients in the 1·0 mg group, and ten (23%) of 43 patients in the 3·0 mg group. Incidences of serious adverse events and discontinuations owing to adverse events were similar between groups. INTERPRETATION: Aldafermin was generally well tolerated but did not produce a significant dose response on fibrosis improvement of at least one stage with no worsening of NASH, despite positive effects on a number of secondary endpoints. The findings of this trial may have implications for the design of future NASH trials. FUNDING: NGM Biopharmaceuticals.

Safety and Glycemic Outcomes During the MiniMed™ Advanced Hybrid Closed-Loop System Pivotal Trial in Adolescents and Adults with Type 1 Diabetes.

Introduction: This trial assessed safety and effectiveness of an advanced hybrid closed-loop (AHCL) system with automated basal (Auto Basal) and automated bolus correction (Auto Correction) in adolescents and adults with type 1 diabetes (T1D). Materials and Methods: This multicenter single-arm study involved an intent-to-treat population of 157 individuals (39 adolescents aged 14-21 years and 118 adults aged ≥22-75 years) with T1D. Study participants used the MiniMed™ AHCL system during a baseline run-in period in which sensor-augmented pump +/- predictive low glucose management or Auto Basal was enabled for ∼14 days. Thereafter, Auto Basal and Auto Correction were enabled for a study phase (∼90 days), with glucose target set to 100 or 120 mg/dL for ∼45 days, followed by the other target for ∼45 days. Study endpoints included safety events and change in mean A1C, time in range (TIR, 70-180 mg/dL) and time below range (TBR, <70 mg/dL). Run-in and study phase values were compared using Wilcoxon signed-rank test or paired t-test. Results: Overall group time spent in closed loop averaged 94.9% ± 5.4% and involved only 1.2 ± 0.8 exits per week. Compared with run-in, AHCL reduced A1C from 7.5% ± 0.8% to 7.0% ± 0.5% (<0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test, n = 155), TIR increased from 68.8% ± 10.5% to 74.5% ± 6.9% (<0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test), and TBR reduced from 3.3% ± 2.9% to 2.3% ± 1.7% (<0.001, Wilcoxon signed-rank test). Similar benefits to glycemia were observed for each age group and were more pronounced for the nighttime (12 AM-6 AM). The 100 mg/dL target increased TIR to 75.4% (n = 155), which was further optimized at a lower active insulin time (AIT) setting (i.e., 2 h), without increasing TBR. There were no severe hypoglycemic or diabetic ketoacidosis events during the study phase. Conclusions: These findings show that the MiniMed AHCL system is safe and allows for achievement of recommended glycemic targets in adolescents and adults with T1D. Adjustments in target and AIT settings may further optimize glycemia and improve user experience. Clinical Trial Registration number: NCT03959423.

Episodic Real-Time CGM Use in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Results of a Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Resistance to initiating insulin therapy is common for people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) using multiple oral agents, resulting in sustained poor glycemic control. We explored a non-pharmacologic option and examined whether adults with T2D and elevated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) who were using multiple, non-insulin antihyperglycemics could obtain glycemic benefit from limited, episodic use of real-time continuous glucose monitoring (rtCGM). METHODS: A randomized, pilot trial enrolled patients with T2D who were using two or more non-insulin therapies and had HbA1c values of 7.8-10.5%. Following a baseline, 10-day, blinded CGM session, participants were randomized 2:1, rtCGM or self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG). Medication changes were not made during the 12-week study unless required for safety; benefits would result from lifestyle changes. The rtCGM group used unblinded rtCGM for three sessions at weeks 0, 4, and 8, and the control group managed diabetes with SMBG and wore blinded rtCGM at week 8. Glycemic endpoints were assessed. RESULTS: Seventy participants were enrolled from eight North American sites and data were available from 68 (n = 45 rtCGM; n = 23 SMBG). Median (IQR) baseline HbA1c was 8.4 (0.8)% and 8.3 (1.2)% and median (IQR) change in HbA1c at week 12 was - 0.5 (1.3)% and - 0.2 (1.1)% for the rtCGM and SMBG groups, respectively (between-group difference p = 0.74). More than one-third (34.1%) of the rtCGM group vs 17.4% of the SMBG group reached the HbA1c goal of less than 7.5% at week 12 (between-group difference p = 0.12). Compared to run-in, mean (SD) time in range (TIR 70-180 mg/dL) at week 8 increased for the rtCGM group (56.3 [24.5]% vs 63.1 [25.5]%) while it decreased for the SMBG group (68.4 [21.5]% vs 55.1 [30.3]%). HbA1c reductions were not sustained at month 9. CONCLUSION: In this pilot study, limited episodic rtCGM use in people failing multiple non-insulin therapies resulted in modest, short-term glycemic benefits.

Safety and effectiveness of REALIZE adjustable gastric band: 5-year prospective study.

BACKGROUND: The long-term safety results of the REALIZE (Ethicon Endo-Surgery, Inc., Cincinnati, OH) adjustable gastric band collected in this prospective, multicenter study in patients with morbid obesity are presented. OBJECTIVES: To determine the reoperation rate, including band revisions, replacements, and explants, resulting from a serious adverse device-related event through years 4 and 5. Various efficacy measures were also assessed as secondary objectives. SETTING: Nine academic and/or private institutions. METHODS: The participating institutions enrolled 303 patients, who were then assessed on an annual basis, with 231 patients completing 5 years of follow-up. The study parameters included reoperation rates, changes in percentage of excess weight loss (%EWL), and changes in body mass index (BMI), as well as parameters of diabetes and dyslipidemia. Quality of life was assessed using the Short Form (SF)-36 and the Impact of Weight on Quality of Life-Lite questionnaires. RESULTS: The reoperation rate due to a serious adverse event in this population at 5 years after implantation with the REALIZE gastric band was 8.9%. The most common serious adverse event was band slippage, which affected 6.9% of the study population. The mean %EWL was 35.6% ± 26.84%, and the decrease in mean BMI was -7.01 ± 5.45 kg/m2 at 5 years. Patients experienced improvements in mean glycated hemoglobin and serum lipid levels, in addition to improvements in the quality of life measures. CONCLUSION: No new safety concerns were identified during the 5 years of follow-up. Although the results of this study did not meet the predefined safety criteria of 8% or less, the safety profile and long-term effectiveness observed in this study are consistent with those in the current literature.

Year two assessment of fenofibric acid and moderate-dose statin combination: a phase 3, open-label, extension study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Long-term (>1 year) safety and efficacy studies of combination lipid therapy are lacking. This year 2 study evaluated fenofibric acid 135 mg in combination with moderate-dose statin (rosuvastatin 20 mg, simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 40 mg) in patients with mixed dyslipidaemia. METHODS: This was a phase 3, open-label, year 2 extension study in patients who had completed one of three double-blind, 12-week, controlled studies and the subsequent open-label, year 1 extension study. Patients in this study had mixed dyslipidaemia (high-density lipoprotein cholesterol [HDL-C] <40 mg/dL [<1.02 mmol/L] for men or <50 mg/dL [<1.28 mmol/L] for women, triglycerides [TG] > or =150 mg/dL [> or =1.69 mmol/L], and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] > or =130 mg/dL [> or =3.37 mmol/L]) at the start of the controlled study, and had completed the year 1 extension study. Treatment was once-daily oral coadministration of fenofibric acid 135 mg and moderate-dose statin (rosuvastatin 20 mg, simvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 40 mg), and was identical to the treatment received in the year 1 study. The year 2 population safety data were summarized for the entire duration of fenofibric acid + statin therapy. Efficacy data were summarized by combination therapy group, as well as pooled across combination therapies, and summarized across the controlled and open-label studies. RESULTS: Of the 310 patients enrolled into the year 2 study, 287 (93%) completed therapy. The mean cumulative exposure to combination therapy was 743 days across the studies. Adverse event rates were similar for all three combination therapy groups. No deaths or treatment-related serious adverse events occurred. The incidence of discontinuation due to adverse events was 2.9% overall. Rhabdomyolysis was not reported in any group. Overall, fenofibric acid + moderate-dose statin for > or =2 years resulted in sustained improvements in HDL-C (+17.4%), TG (-46.4%) and LDL-C (-40.4%). CONCLUSIONS: This long-term study demonstrated that fenofibric acid + moderate-dose statin was generally well tolerated with no new or unexpected safety concerns, and resulted in comprehensive and sustained lipid improvements in patients with mixed dyslipidaemia.

Differences in glucose tolerance between fixed-dose antihypertensive drug combinations in people with metabolic syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: We sought to test the hypothesis that a fixed-dose combination of trandolapril/verapamil-SR (T/V) is superior to a fixed-dose combination of losartan/hydrochlorothiazide (L/H) on glucose tolerance in hypertensive patients with impaired glucose tolerance (IGT). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized, open-label, blinded-end points design was used to assess the effects of a T/V versus L/H combination in patients with IGT and hypertension (n = 240) followed for up to 1 year. Doses were titrated to a systolic blood pressure <130 mmHg. Primary outcome was change from baseline in a 2-h glucose on oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) at study end (mean [+/-SD] at follow-up, 46.9 +/- 13.5 weeks). Secondary outcomes included changes in insulin sensitivity, office and 24-h ambulatory blood pressure, incidence of new-onset diabetes, lipids, and inflammatory markers. Data are expressed as means +/- SE unless otherwise noted. RESULTS: Changes at study end were noted in 2-h OGTT glucose (T/V -0.21 +/- 0.36 vs. L/H +1.44 +/- 0.36 mmol/l; P < 0.001) and insulin level (-30.13 +/- 38.38 vs. +84.86 +/- 38.33 pmol/l, respectively; P = 0.025). Worsening of insulin resistance occurred by week 12 (T/V 0.000 +/- 0.001 vs. L/H -0.005 +/- 0.001; P = 0.016). A higher incidence of new-onset diabetes (T/V 11.0 vs. L/H 26.6%; P = 0.002) and HbA1c >7% (2.6 vs. 9.6%, respectively; P = 0.05) occurred at study end. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with IGT, normal kidney function, and hypertension, the fixed-dose combination of T/V reduces the risk of new-onset diabetes compared with an L/H-based therapy.

Effect of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin as monotherapy on glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy and safety of once-daily oral sitagliptin as monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 741 patients (baseline HbA(1c) [A1C] 8.0%) were randomized to sitagliptin 100 or 200 mg or placebo for 24 weeks. RESULTS: Sitagliptin 100 and 200 mg produced significant (P < 0.001) placebo-subtracted reductions in A1C (-0.79 and -0.94%, respectively) and fasting plasma glucose (-1.0 mmol/l [-17.1 mg/dl] and -1.2 mmol/l [-21.3 mg/dl], respectively). Patients with baseline A1C >or=9% had greater reductions in placebo-subtracted A1C with sitagliptin 100 and 200 mg (-1.52 and -1.50%, respectively) than those with baseline A1C <8% (-0.57 and -0.65%) or >or=8 to <9.0% (-0.80 and -1.13%, respectively). In a meal tolerance test, sitagliptin 100 and 200 mg significantly decreased 2-h postprandial glucose (PPG) (placebo-subtracted PPG -2.6 mmol/l [-46.7 mg/dl] and -3.0 mmol/l [-54.1 mg/dl], respectively). Results for the above key efficacy parameters were not significantly different between sitagliptin doses. Homeostasis model assessment of beta-cell function and proinsulin-to-insulin ratio improved with sitagliptin. The incidence of hypoglycemia was similar, and overall gastrointestinal adverse experiences were slightly higher with sitagliptin. No meaningful body weight changes from baseline were observed with sitagliptin 100 (-0.2 kg) or 200 mg (-0.1 kg). The body weight change with placebo (-1.1 kg) was significantly (P < 0.01) different from that observed with sitagliptin. CONCLUSIONS: In this 24-week study, once-daily sitagliptin monotherapy improved glycemic control in the fasting and postprandial states, improved measures of beta-cell function, and was well tolerated in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Effect of single oral doses of sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, on incretin and plasma glucose levels after an oral glucose tolerance test in patients with type 2 diabetes.

CONTEXT: In response to a meal, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide (GIP) are released and modulate glycemic control. Normally these incretins are rapidly degraded by dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4). DPP-4 inhibitors are a novel class of oral antihyperglycemic agents in development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The degree of DPP-4 inhibition and the level of active incretin augmentation required for glucose lowering efficacy after an oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) were evaluated. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to examine the pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and tolerability of sitagliptin. DESIGN: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, three-period, single-dose crossover study. SETTING: The study was conducted at six investigational sites. PATIENTS: The study population consisted of 58 patients with type 2 diabetes who were not on antihyperglycemic agents. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions included sitagliptin 25 mg, sitagliptin 200 mg, or placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Measurements included plasma DPP-4 activity; post-OGTT glucose excursion; active and total incretin GIP levels; insulin, C-peptide, and glucagon concentrations; and sitagliptin pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Sitagliptin dose-dependently inhibited plasma DPP-4 activity over 24 h, enhanced active GLP-1 and GIP levels, increased insulin/C-peptide, decreased glucagon, and reduced glycemic excursion after OGTTs administered at 2 and 24 h after single oral 25- or 200-mg doses of sitagliptin. Sitagliptin was generally well tolerated, with no hypoglycemic events. CONCLUSIONS: In this study in patients with type 2 diabetes, near maximal glucose-lowering efficacy of sitagliptin after single oral doses was associated with inhibition of plasma DPP-4 activity of 80% or greater, corresponding to a plasma sitagliptin concentration of 100 nm or greater, and an augmentation of active GLP-1 and GIP levels of 2-fold or higher after an OGTT.

Effects of pioglitazone on lipid and lipoprotein profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia after treatment conversion from rosiglitazone while continuing stable statin therapy.

The aim of this study was to evaluate changes in lipid profiles in patients with type 2 diabetes after treatment conversion from rosiglitazone to pioglitazone while maintaining stable statin and other lipid-altering therapies. A total of 305 patients were enrolled in this open-label study. Patients had been taking stable dosages of rosiglitazone and statins for > 90 days. At baseline, patients discontinued rosiglitazone and started pioglitazone 30 mg/day, but continued statins and other lipid-altering therapies. The primary end point was change from baseline in fasting triglyceride levels. At 17 weeks after treatment conversion, patients had significant reductions in triglycerides (-15.2%), total cholesterol (-9.0%), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle concentration (-189 nmol/L), and increases in LDL cholesterol (+2.2%), high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol (+1.8%), and LDL particle diameter (+0.23 nm). In conclusion, after treatment conversion from rosiglitazone to pioglitazone while maintaining stable statin therapy, patients with type 2 diabetes had marked improvements in lipid profiles along with stable glycaemic control.

Control of postprandial plasma glucose by an oral insulin product (HIM2) in patients with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this exploratory study were to assess the postprandial glucose-lowering effects and evaluate the safety and tolerability of single, escalating doses of an oral insulin product, hexyl-insulin monoconjugate 2 (HIM2), in patients with type 2 diabetes. Subcutaneous insulin and oral placebo were also administered for comparison. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Eighteen patients with type 2 diabetes were enrolled in this randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled, three-way crossover, dose-escalation study. A single dose of each of the following study drugs was administered to each patient on 3 separate days: oral HIM2 (at one of three dose levels: 0.375, 0.5, or 1.0 mg/kg), subcutaneous regular insulin (8 units Humulin R), and oral placebo. At 30 min after dosing, patients ingested a standardized test meal (16 oz/720 calories of Boost Plus). Serial blood samples were collected for determination of plasma glucose and insulin concentrations during the 4-h postdose period. RESULTS: The mean glucose area under the curve for 0 to 240 min (AUC(0-240)) values were lower following administration of 0.5 and 1.0 mg/kg HIM2 vs. placebo (1,097.1 vs. 1,196.9 and 801.1 vs. 992.1 mg x h(-1) x dl(-1), respectively). This difference was statistically significant at the 1.0-mg/kg HIM2 dose level. Insulin exposure, as measured by insulin AUC(0-240) values, for the 0.375-, 0.5-, and 1.0-mg/kg dose levels of HIM2 were 169.9, 193.1, and 230.8 micro U x h(-1) x ml(-1), respectively; insulin AUC(0-240) values for placebo were 165.8, 196.1, and 169.2 micro U x h(-1) x ml(-1), respectively. The mean glucose AUC(0-240) values were similar following administration of 0.5 and 1.0 mg/kg HIM2 vs. subcutaneous insulin (1,097.1 vs. 1,048.0 and 801.1 vs. 875.2 mg x h(-1) x dl(-1), respectively). For pooled data from the 0.5- and 1.0-mg/kg dose groups, the HIM2/subcutaneous insulin ratios for the 2-h postprandial glucose concentration (0.97, 95% CI 0.90-1.06), maximum postprandial glucose concentration (0.99, 95% CI 0.93-1.06), and glucose AUC(0-240) (0.98, 95% CI 0.9-1.06) were within 10% of unity, implying glucodynamic equivalence. Although HIM2 (0.5 and 1.0 mg/kg) and subcutaneous insulin (8 units) provided comparable control of postprandial plasma glucose concentrations, HIM2 resulted in peripheral insulin concentrations that were lower than subcutaneous insulin (mean insulin AUC(0-240) of 193.1 vs. 233.6 and 230.8 vs. 270.3 micro U x h(-1) x ml(-1), respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Single, oral doses of HIM2 were safe and well tolerated. HIM2 (0.5 and 1.0 mg/kg) was more effective than placebo and as effective as subcutaneous regular insulin (8 units) at controlling postprandial glycemia with respect to the following parameters: 2-h postprandial glucose concentration, maximum glucose concentration, and glucose AUC(0-240). This occurred even though peripheral insulin concentrations were lower following the administration of HIM2 (0.5 and 1.0 mg/kg) than subcutaneous insulin. Thus, HIM2 therapy may control postprandial glycemia without causing peripheral hyperinsulinemia in patients with type 2 diabetes.