Teplizumab and ß-Cell Function in Newly Diagnosed Type 1 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Teplizumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody to CD3 on T cells, is approved by the Food and Drug Administration to delay the onset of clinical type 1 diabetes (stage 3) in patients 8 years of age or older with preclinical (stage 2) disease. Whether treatment with intravenous teplizumab in patients with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes can prevent disease progression is unknown. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we assessed ß-cell preservation, clinical end points, and safety in children and adolescents who were assigned to receive teplizumab or placebo for two 12-day courses. The primary end point was the change from baseline in ß-cell function, as measured by stimulated C-peptide levels at week 78. The key secondary end points were the insulin doses that were required to meet glycemic goals, glycated hemoglobin levels, time in the target glucose range, and clinically important hypoglycemic events. RESULTS: Patients treated with teplizumab (217 patients) had significantly higher stimulated C-peptide levels than patients receiving placebo (111 patients) at week 78 (least-squares mean difference, 0.13 pmol per milliliter; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.09 to 0.17; P<0.001), and 94.9% (95% CI, 89.5 to 97.6) of patients treated with teplizumab maintained a clinically meaningful peak C-peptide level of 0.2 pmol per milliliter or greater, as compared with 79.2% (95% CI, 67.7 to 87.4) of those receiving placebo. The groups did not differ significantly with regard to the key secondary end points. Adverse events occurred primarily in association with administration of teplizumab or placebo and included headache, gastrointestinal symptoms, rash, lymphopenia, and mild cytokine release syndrome. CONCLUSIONS: Two 12-day courses of teplizumab in children and adolescents with newly diagnosed type 1 diabetes showed benefit with respect to the primary end point of preservation of ß-cell function, but no significant differences between the groups were observed with respect to the secondary end points. (Funded by Provention Bio and Sanofi; PROTECT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03875729.).

Efpeglenatide and Clinical Outcomes With and Without Concomitant Sodium-Glucose Cotransporter-2 Inhibition Use in Type 2 Diabetes: Exploratory Analysis of the AMPLITUDE-O Trial.

BACKGROUND: Both sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists reduce cardiovascular events among patients with type 2 diabetes. However, no cardiovascular outcome trial has evaluated the long-term effects of their combined use. The AMPLITUDE-O trial (Effect of Efpeglenatide on Cardiovascular Outcomes) reported that once-weekly injections of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists efpeglenatide (versus placebo) reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs); MACEs, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina hospitalization (expanded MACEs); a renal composite outcome; and MACEs or death in people with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular or renal disease. The trial uniquely stratified randomization by baseline or anticipated use of SGLT2 inhibitors and included the highest prevalence at baseline (N=618, 15.2%) of SGLT2 inhibitor use among glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist cardiovascular outcome trials to date. Its results were analyzed to estimate the combined effect of SGLT2 inhibitors and efpeglenatide on clinical outcomes. METHODS: Cardiovascular and renal outcomes were analyzed with Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for region, SGLT2 inhibitor randomization strata, and the SGLT2 inhibitor-by-treatment interaction. Continuous variables were analyzed with a mixed-effects models for repeated measures that also included an interaction term. RESULTS: The effect (hazard ratio [95% CI]) of efpeglenatide versus placebo in the absence and presence of baseline SGLT2 inhibitors on MACEs (0.74 [0.58-0.94] and 0.70 [0.37-1.30], respectively), expanded MACEs (0.77 [0.62-0.96] and 0.87 [0.51-1.48]), renal composite (0.70 [0.59-0.83] and 0.52 [0.33-0.83]), and MACEs or death (0.74 [0.59-0.93] and 0.65 [0.36-1.19]) did not differ by baseline SGLT2 inhibitor use (P for all interactions >0.2). The reduction of blood pressure, body weight, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio by efpeglenatide also appeared to be independent of concurrent SGLT2 inhibitor use (all interaction P≥0.08). Last, adverse events did not differ by baseline SGLT2 inhibitor use. CONCLUSIONS: The efficacy and safety of efpeglenatide appear to be independent of concurrent SGLT2 inhibitor use. These data support combined SGLT2 inhibitor and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist therapy in type 2 diabetes. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03496298.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly efpeglenatide in people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes: The AMPLITUDE-D, AMPLITUDE-L and AMPLITUDE-S randomized controlled trials.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-weekly (QW) efpeglenatide in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) suboptimally controlled with oral glucose-lowering drugs and/or basal insulin (BI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three phase 3, multicentre, randomized controlled trials compared the efficacy and safety of QW efpeglenatide versus dulaglutide when added to metformin (AMPLITUDE-D), efpeglenatide versus placebo when added to BI ± oral glucose-lowering drugs (AMPLITUDE-L) or metformin ± sulphonylurea (AMPLITUDE-S). All trials were terminated early by the sponsor because of funding rather than safety or efficacy concerns. RESULTS: In AMPLITUDE-D, non-inferiority of efpeglenatide to dulaglutide 1.5 mg was shown in HbA1c reduction from baseline to week 56, least squares mean treatment difference (95% CI): 4 mg, -0.03% (-0.20%, 0.14%)/-0.35 mmol/mol (-2.20, 1.49); 6 mg, -0.08% (-0.25%, 0.09%)/-0.90 mmol/mol (-2.76, 0.96). The reductions in body weight (approximately 3 kg) from baseline to week 56 were similar across all treatment groups. In AMPLITUDE-L and AMPLITUDE-S, numerically greater reduction in HbA1c and body weight were observed at all doses of efpeglenatide than placebo. American Diabetes Association level 2 hypoglycaemia (< 54 mg/dL [< 3.0 mmol/L]) was reported in few participants across all treatment groups (AMPLITUDE-D, ≤ 1%; AMPLITUDE-L, ≤ 10%; and AMPLITUDE-S, ≤ 4%). The adverse events profile was consistent with other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs); gastrointestinal adverse events were most frequent in all three studies. CONCLUSIONS: In people with T2D suboptimally controlled with oral glucose-lowering drugs and/or BI, QW efpeglenatide was non-inferior to dulaglutide in terms of HbA1c reduction and showed numerically greater improvements than placebo in glycaemic control and body weight, with safety consistent with the GLP-1 RA class.

Fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) improves ß-cell function in people with type 2 diabetes.

AIM: Multiple studies support the efficacy of combining a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) with basal insulin in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on dual/triple oral therapy. Fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin + GLP-1RA represent a further advance to facilitate management. We assessed the impact of fixed-ratio combination basal insulin + GLP-1RA treatment on ß-cell function. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We analysed data from 351 participants in the LixiLan-G trial (NCT02787551) randomized to receive iGlarLixi (insulin glargine 100 U/ml + lixisenatide) or to continue daily/weekly GLP-1RA, both on top of metformin. Participants received a 2-h meal tolerance test before randomization and at study end (26 weeks), with timed plasma glucose and C-peptide determinations. ß-cell function parameters were resolved using mathematical modelling. RESULTS: In the GLP-1RA group (n = 162), both body weight and glycated haemoglobin decreased at week 26, yet none of the insulin secretion/ß-cell function parameters changed significantly. In contrast, in the iGlarLixi group (n = 189), glycated haemoglobin decreased significantly more than in the GLP-1RA group (p < .0001) despite an increase in body weight (+1.7 ± 3.9 kg, p < .0001). Fasting and stimulated insulin secretion decreased at Week 26 (both p < .0001 vs. GLP-1RA), while ß-cell glucose sensitivity increased by a median 35% (p = .0032 vs. GLP-1RA). The incremental meal tolerance test glucose area showed a larger reduction with iGlarLixi versus GLP-1RA (p < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: In people with type 2 diabetes on metformin, 26-week treatment with iGlarLixi resulted in a marked improvement in ß-cell function concomitant with sparing of endogenous insulin release and a reduction in meal absorption.

Improved glycaemic control and weight benefit with iGlarLixi versus insulin glargine 100 U/mL in Chinese people with type 2 diabetes advancing their therapy from basal insulin plus oral antihyperglycaemic drugs: Results from the LixiLan-L-CN randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi compared with iGlar in Chinese adults with type 2 diabetes advancing therapy from basal insulin ± oral antihyperglycaemic drugs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: LixiLan-L-CN (NCT03798080) was a 30-week randomized, active-controlled, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre study. Participants were randomized 1:1 to iGlarLixi or iGlar. The primary objective was to show the superiority of iGlarLixi over iGlar in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change from baseline to Week 30. RESULTS: In total, 426 participants were randomized to iGlarLixi (n = 212) or iGlar (n = 214). Mean age was 58 years, 67% had a body mass index ≥24 kg/m2 , corresponding to overweight/obesity, and the mean diabetes duration was 12.3 years. From mean baseline HbA1c of 8.1% in both groups, greater decreases were seen with iGlarLixi versus iGlar [least squares mean difference: -0.7 (95% confidence interval: -0.9, -0.6)%; p < .0001] to final HbA1c of 6.7% and 7.4%, respectively. HbA1c <7.0% achievement was greater with iGlarLixi (63.3%) versus iGlar (29.9%; p < .0001). Mean body weight decreased with iGlarLixi and increased with iGlar [least squares mean difference: -0.9 (95% confidence interval: -1.4, -0.5) kg; p = .0001]. Hypoglycaemia incidence was similar between groups. Few gastrointestinal adverse events occurred (rated mild/moderate) with a slightly higher incidence with iGlarLixi than iGlar. CONCLUSIONS: iGlarLixi provided better glycaemic control and facilitated more participants to reach glycaemic targets alongside beneficial effects on body weight, no additional risk of hypoglycaemia, and few gastrointestinal AEs, supporting iGlarLixi use as an efficacious and well tolerated therapy option in Chinese people with long-standing T2D advancing therapy from basal insulin.

Efficacy of iGlarLixi in adults with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled (glycated haemoglobin ≥8%, ≥64 mmol/mol) on two oral antidiabetes drugs: Post hoc analysis of the LixiLan-O randomized trial.

AIMS: To assess the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi (the titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL [iGlar] plus lixisenatide [Lixi]), in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels ≥8% (≥64 mmol/mol). MATERIALS AND METHODS: The LixiLan-O study (NCT02058147) compared iGlarLixi with iGlar or Lixi in adults with T2D inadequately controlled on metformin ± a second oral antidiabetes drug (OAD). This exploratory analysis evaluated the LixiLan-O subgroup of participants with baseline HbA1c levels of ≥8% (≥64 mmol/mol) who were receiving metformin plus a second OAD at screening. RESULTS: The mean diabetes duration was 10.0 years, and the mean duration of second OAD use was 4.5 years. iGlarLixi demonstrated greater mean reductions from baseline in HbA1c and 2-hour postprandial glucose (PPG) compared with iGlar or Lixi (HbA1c -1.9% vs. -1.6% or -1.0% [-20 vs. -17 or -10 mmol/mol; 2-hour PPG -7.2 vs. -4.6 or -5.5 mmol/L). Greater proportions of participants achieved HbA1c <7% (<53 mmol/mol) with iGlarLixi versus iGlar or Lixi (67% vs. 51% or 18%), and the composite endpoints of HbA1c <7% (<53 mmol/mol) with no body weight gain (36% vs. 19% or 16%), and HbA1c <7% (<53 mmol/mol) with no body weight gain and no documented symptomatic hypoglycaemia (plasma glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L; 28% vs. 15% or 15%). The incidence rates of documented symptomatic hypoglycaemia were 29.0%, 27.9% and 12.1% for iGlarLixi, iGlar and Lixi, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Adults with T2D and HbA1c ≥64 mmol/mol (≥8%) despite two OADs at screening achieved better glycaemic control with iGlarLixi versus iGlar or Lixi, without increased risk of hypoglycaemia versus iGlar.

Efficacy and safety benefits of iGlarLixi versus insulin glargine 100 U/mL or lixisenatide in Asian Pacific people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes on oral agents: The LixiLan-O-AP randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi with insulin glargine 100 units/mL (iGlar) and lixisenatide (Lixi), in Asian Pacific people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on metformin with or without a second oral antihyperglycaemic drug (OAD). MATERIALS AND METHODS: LixiLan-O-AP (NCT03798054) was a 24-week multicentre study in adults (n = 878, mean age 56.0 years, mean body mass index 26.0 kg/m2 ) with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) levels ≥53 mmol/mol (7%) and ≤97 mmol/mol (11%) on OAD(s), randomized (2:2:1) to open-label once-daily iGlarLixi, iGlar or Lixi while on continued metformin ± sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors. The primary efficacy endpoint was change in HbA1c. RESULTS: After 24 weeks, greater reductions in HbA1c from baseline (67 mmol/mol; 8.3%) were seen with iGlarLixi (-21 mmol/mol; -1.9%) compared with iGlar (-16 mmol/mol; -1.4%; P < 0.0001) and Lixi (-10 mmol/mol; -0.9%; P < 0.0001). Greater proportions of participants achieved HbA1c <53 mmol/mol (<7%) with iGlarLixi versus iGlar or Lixi (79%, 60% and 30%, respectively), overall and as composite endpoints including weight and hypoglycaemia. iGlarLixi improved 2-hour postprandial glucose versus iGlar and Lixi and mitigated the weight gain seen with iGlar (least squares mean difference -1.1 kg; P < 0.0001). Documented ≤3.9 mmol/L (≤70 mg/dL) hypoglycaemia was similar between iGlarLixi and iGlar (both 3.38 events per participant-year). The incidence rates of nausea and vomiting were lower with iGlarLixi (14% and 6%) than Lixi (21% and 11%). CONCLUSIONS: iGlarLixi achieved significant HbA1c reductions, to near-normoglycaemic levels, compared with iGlar or Lixi, with no meaningful additional risk of hypoglycaemia and mitigated body weight gain versus iGlar, with fewer gastrointestinal adverse events versus Lixi. iGlarLixi with specifically adapted ratios may provide an efficacious and well-tolerated treatment option for Asian Pacific people with T2D.

A study on pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety of lixisenatide in children and adolescents with type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and safety profile of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, lixisenatide, for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in pediatric individuals. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this Phase 1, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, ascending repeated dose study (NCT02803918), participants aged ≥10 and < 18 years were randomized 3:1 to receive once-daily lixisenatide in 2-week increments of 5, 10, and 20 µg (n = 18) or placebo (n = 5) for 6 weeks. RESULTS: Mean lixisenatide concentrations generally increased with increasing doses irrespective of anti-drug antibody (ADA) status; however, mean lixisenatide concentrations and inter-subject variability were higher for participants with positive ADA status. Improvements in fasting plasma glucose, post-prandial glucose, AUC0-4.5 , HbA1c , and body weight were observed with lixisenatide. Overall, the safety profile was consistent with the known profile in adults, with no unexpected side effects and no treatment-emergent adverse events resulting in death or discontinuation. The most common events in the lixisenatide group were vomiting (11.1%) and nausea (11.1%). No symptomatic hypoglycemia was reported in either group. No clinically significant hematologic, biochemical or vital sign abnormalities were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Mean lixisenatide concentrations generally increased with increasing dose, irrespective of ADA status. Lixisenatide was associated with improved glycemic control and a trend in body weight reduction compared with placebo. The safety and tolerability profile of repeated lixisenatide doses of up to 20 µg per day in children and adolescents with T2D was reflective of the established safety profile of lixisenatide in adults.

Switching to iGlarLixi versus continuation of a daily or weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) in insufficiently controlled type 2 diabetes: A LixiLan-G trial subgroup analysis by HbA1c and GLP-1 RA use at screening.

AIM: In people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) requiring intensification beyond glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) and oral antihyperglycaemic drugs (OADs), switching to iGlarLixi was shown to be efficacious and well-tolerated in the LixiLan-G trial. This exploratory analysis of LixiLan-G assessed the efficacy and safety of switching to iGlarLixi versus continuing GLP-1 RA therapy, stratified by screening HbA1c level (≥7.0 to ≤7.5 %; >7.5 to ≤8.0 %; >8.0 to ≤9.0 % [≥53 to ≤58 mmol/mol; >58 to ≤64 mmol/mol; >64 to ≤75 mmol/mol]) and previous GLP-1 RA regimen at screening (once/twice daily or once weekly). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Endpoints for all subgroups included: change in HbA1c, achievement of HbA1c <7 % and hypoglycaemia events. Adverse events and changes in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), 2-hour postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), 2-hour PPG excursion and weight were analysed according to previous GLP-1 RA regimen. RESULTS: Switching to iGlarLixi in all subgroups resulted in significantly greater reductions in HbA1c and proportions of participants reaching HbA1c <7 % (including with no documented hypoglycaemia) at Week 26 compared with continued GLP-1 RA treatment. Switching to iGlarLixi also led to significantly greater reductions in FPG, 2-hour PPG, and 2-hour PPG excursion, irrespective of previous GLP-1 RA regimen. Rates of hypoglycaemia were low, but slightly higher in those who switched to iGlarLixi for all subgroups. Modest weight gain was seen with iGlarLixi, irrespective of previous GLP-1 RA regimen. CONCLUSIONS: Switching to iGlarLixi improved glycaemic control, regardless of screening HbA1c or previous GLP-1 RA type, offering a simple, efficacious and well-tolerated treatment intensification option for people with T2D inadequately controlled by GLP-1 RAs and OADs.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (iGlarLixi 1:1) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs: A randomized, 26-week, open-label, multicentre study: The LixiLan JP-O2 randomized clinical trial.

AIMS: To assess efficacy and safety of 26-week treatment with insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (iGlarLixi) compared with insulin glargine U100 (iGlar) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This phase 3, multicentre, open-label, 1:1 randomized, parallel-group study compared efficacy of iGlarLixi and iGlar in patients with T2DM, HbA1c of ≥7.5% to ≤9.5% and fasting plasma glucose ≤10.0 mmol/L (180 mg/dL). The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26. RESULTS: Patients were randomized to iGlarLixi (n = 260) or iGlar (n = 261) (mean age 59.7 years, baseline BMI 26.04 kg/m2 , and HbA1c 8.04% [64.4 mmol/mol]). HbA1c reduction was significantly greater with iGlarLixi (-1.40% [-15.3 mmol/mol]) than with iGlar (-0.76% [-8.3 mmol/mol]). Significantly more iGlarLixi patients reached HbA1c <7% at week 26 (71.5% vs 38.5%, P < .0001), with significantly lower weight gain (LS mean difference -1.06 kg, P < .0001). Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (plasma glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L [70 mg/dL]) was recorded in 14.2% of patients with iGlarLixi and 12.3% with iGlar. No severe hypoglycemia was reported in either group. Other than the expected gastrointestinal issues associated with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, we found no major difference in the incidence of TEAEs. CONCLUSIONS: HbA1c reduction was significantly greater with iGlarLixi than with iGlar; significantly more patients achieved HbA1c <7%, with no additional risk of hypoglycemia and without weight gain. iGlarLixi (1:1) provided an effective treatment option for Japanese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled on OADs. Clinical Trial Number: NCT02752828.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine/lixisenatide fixed-ratio combination (iGlarLixi) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on basal insulin and oral antidiabetic drugs: The LixiLan JP-L randomized clinical trial.

AIMS: To assess efficacy and safety of fixed-ratio (1:1) combination insulin glargine and lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) compared to insulin glargine U100 (iGlar), with metformin, in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on basal insulin and oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 26-week, randomized, open-label study compared iGlarLixi to iGlar, both with metformin in adult Japanese patients with T2DM and hemoglobin (Hb) A1c ≥7.5% to ≤9.5%, treated with basal insulin and 1 or 2 OADs. Five hundred and twelve patients were randomized after a 12-week run-in, when iGlar was introduced and/or further titrated and OADs other than metformin were stopped. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26. RESULTS: iGlarLixi (n = 255) demonstrated significantly greater reductions in HbA1c (-1.27%) than iGlar (n = 257, -0.53%) (LS mean difference: -0.74%, P < .0001) at week 26, confirming the superiority of iGlarLixi. Significantly, more iGlarLixi patients reached target HbA1c <7% at week 26 (51.8% vs 16.0% for iGlar). iGlarLixi patients lost weight in contrast to iGlar patients (-0.51 kg vs +0.55 kg). Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (plasma glucose ≤ 3.9 mmol/L) was observed in 18.8% of iGlarLixi patients vs 16.7% of iGlar patients. iGlarLixi patients had more gastrointestinal-related adverse events than iGlar patients (33.3% vs 8.6%), primarily nausea (16.9% vs 0.8%). However, the treatment was generally well-tolerated. CONCLUSIONS: A once-daily injection of iGlarLixi with metformin is an effective, well-tolerated, and simple therapeutic intervention providing significant improvement in glycemic control in Japanese patients with T2DM inadequately controlled on basal insulin and up to two OADs. Clinical Trial Number: NCT02752412.

Efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus insulin glargine 100 U/mL in Asia Pacific insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes: The EDITION AP randomized controlled trial.

AIM: To compare the efficacy and safety of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 in insulin-naïve people with type 2 diabetes in Asia Pacific. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this open-label, randomized, active-controlled, 26-week study, insulin-naïve participants with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with non-insulin antihyperglycaemic drugs were randomized (2:1) to Gla-300 or Gla-100. The initial daily dose of basal insulin was 0.2 U/kg and was adjusted at least weekly for 8-12 weeks to a target fasting self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG) of 4.4-5.6 mmol/L. RESULTS: Of the 604 participants randomized, 570 (Gla-300, n = 375; Gla-100, n = 195) completed the study. Non-inferiority of Gla-300 versus Gla-100 in HbA1c reduction from baseline to week 26 was confirmed. In the Gla-300 and Gla-100 groups, 51.1% and 52.2% of participants achieved the HbA1c target of <7.0% (rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.98 [0.84 to 1.14]) and 19.1% and 21.9% achieved the target without hypoglycaemia during the last 12 weeks of treatment (rate ratio [95% CI]: 0.87 [0.63 to 1.20]). Changes in fasting plasma glucose and 24-hour average eight-point SMPG were comparable between groups. Incidence of hypoglycaemia at any time of day was similar between treatment groups at week 26, but incidence of any nocturnal hypoglycaemia was numerically lower with Gla-300 than Gla-100 over the initial 12-week titration period and 26-week on-treatment period. Rates of adverse events were similar between groups and low for serious adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Glycaemic control of Gla-300 is non-inferior to Gla-100 with a similar or lower incidence and proportion of hypoglycaemia in people with type 2 diabetes in Asia Pacific, reinforcing the results in the global EDITION programme.

Lower risk of severe hypoglycaemia with insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus glargine 100 U/mL in participants with type 1 diabetes: A meta-analysis of 6-month phase 3 clinical trials.

Severe hypoglycaemia (SH) remains a challenge to people with type 1 diabetes (T1DM), and new-generation basal insulins may improve patient outcomes. This post hoc meta-analysis explored the risk of SH with insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) versus glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100) in a pooled population with T1DM from three randomized, multicentre, 6-month similarly designed phase 3 trials: EDITION 4, EDITION JP 1 and EDITION JUNIOR. Endpoints included incidence and time to first occurrence of SH. Among 629 and 626 participants randomized to Gla-300 and Gla-100, respectively, glycated haemoglobin reductions were similar. Fewer participants experienced ≥1 SH event with Gla-300 (6.2%) than with Gla-100 (9.3%). From baseline to month 6, the risk of a first SH event was lower with Gla-300: hazard ratio 0.65 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.44-0.98; stratified log-rank test P = 0.038]. SH event rates were numerically lower with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 from baseline to month 6 [relative risk (RR) 0.80 (95% CI 0.49-1.29); P = 0.356] and baseline to week 8 [RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.37-1.44); P = 0.369]. Thus, Gla-300 demonstrated similar glycaemic control with lower risk of SH versus Gla-100, particularly during the titration period.

Impact of disease duration and ß-cell reserve on the efficacy of switching to iGlarLixi in adults with type 2 diabetes on glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist therapy: Exploratory analyses from the LixiLan-G trial.

AIM: To evaluate the efficacy of iGlarLixi by C-peptide levels and duration of diabetes in an exploratory analysis of the LixiLan-G study. METHODS: LixiLan-G was a 26-week, randomized, open-label study in adults with type diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled while on a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), with metformin, with or without pioglitazone and/or a sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor. This analysis investigated the efficacy of switching to iGlarLixi by fasting baseline quartile C-peptide levels and baseline quartile of duration of T2D compared with continued GLP-1 RA use. RESULTS: Change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to week 26 was significantly greater with iGlarLixi compared with continued GLP-1 RAs across all fasting C-peptide quartiles (-1.00% to -1.06% vs. -0.23% to -0.54% range, respectively) and irrespective of all T2D duration quartiles (-0.94% to -1.07% vs. -0.25% to -0.50% range). A significantly greater proportion of participants in the iGlarLixi arm achieved an HbA1c of <7% across all C-peptide quartiles (51%-73% range) than in the GLP-1 RA arm (19%-32% range). The greatest reductions in HbA1c in participants receiving iGlarLixi were observed in those with the shortest duration of disease, although consistently greater than reductions observed with continued GLP-1 RAs. Reductions in HbA1c were comparable across C-peptide quartiles within the iGlarLixi arm. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that iGlarLixi is an effective treatment option, irrespective of C-peptide levels or duration of diabetes, in adults with insufficiently controlled T2D receiving GLP-1 RAs.

Efficacy and safety of lixisenatide in a predominantly Asian population with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled with basal insulin: The GetGoal-L-C randomized trial.

AIMS: To assess the effects on glycaemic control of lixisenatide vs placebo as add-on treatment to basal insulin (BI) ± metformin and effects on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction in patients with insufficiently controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D). METHODS: Patients (n = 448) with inadequately controlled T2D were randomized (1:1) to lixisenatide or placebo as add-on to BI ± metformin for 24 weeks after an 8-week run-in phase, during which BI was titrated to a target self-monitored plasma glucose (SMPG; 4.4-5.6 mmol/L). The primary endpoint was absolute change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24. Secondary efficacy endpoints included: percentage of responders; changes in 2-hour postprandial plasma glucose (PPG); 7-point SMPG (daily average); body weight (BW); total daily BI dose; fasting plasma glucose; and safety assessments. RESULTS: Baseline demographics were similar in the two treatment groups. After insulin optimization during run-in, lixisenatide was superior to placebo in mean change from baseline (7.9% [standard deviation {s.d.}, 0.66] and 7.9% [0.70], respectively) to week 24 in HbA1c (least squares mean [standard error {s.e.}] change -0.62% [0.09] vs -0.11% [0.09]; P < .0001, respectively) and higher proportions of patients achieved HbA1c targets. Two-hour PPG, daily mean SMPG and mean BW were reduced further and daily BI dose was lower with lixisenatide than placebo (-1.12 kg vs 0.04 kg [P < .0001]; -3.0 U vs -1.9 U [P = .0033], respectively). Treatment-emergent adverse events were greater with lixisenatide than placebo (63.8% vs 40.8%, respectively). The incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia was similar (lixisenatide 15.6% vs placebo 13.5%). CONCLUSIONS: In Asian patients insufficiently controlled on BI ± metformin, lixisenatide was superior to placebo in glycaemic control, with a tolerability profile in line with other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01632163 (clinicaltrials.gov).

Impact of baseline glycated haemoglobin, diabetes duration and body mass index on clinical outcomes in the LixiLan-O trial testing a titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine/lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) vs insulin glargine and lixisenatide monocomponents.

To determine whether baseline characteristics had an impact on clinical outcomes in the LixiLan-O trial (N = 1170), we compared the efficacy and safety of iGlarLixi, a titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U (iGlar) and lixisenatide (Lixi) with iGlar or Lixi alone in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on oral therapy. Subgroups according to baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c; <8% or ≥8% [<64 or ≥64 mmol/mol]), T2DM disease duration (<7 or ≥7 years) and body mass index (BMI; <30 or ≥30 kg/m2 ) were investigated. In all subpopulations, iGlarLixi was consistently statistically superior to iGlar and Lixi alone in reducing HbA1c from baseline to week 30; higher proportions of patients achieved HbA1c <7% (<53 mmol/mol) with iGlarLixi vs iGlar and Lixi alone. Compared with iGlar, iGlarLixi resulted in a substantial decrease in 2-hour postprandial plasma glucose levels, and mitigation of weight gain, with no differences among subpopulations in incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia. iGlarLixi consistently improved glycaemic control compared with iGlar and Lixi alone, without weight gain or increase in hypoglycaemic risk compared with iGlar in the subpopulations tested, regardless of baseline HbA1c, disease duration and BMI.

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).

Efficacy and safety of lixisenatide in elderly (≥65 years old) and very elderly (≥75 years old) patients with type 2 diabetes: an analysis from the GetGoal phase III programme.

BACKGROUND: The objective of this article is to evaluate the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of lixisenatide (subcutaneous injection) in elderly (≥65 years old) and very elderly (≥75 years old) patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: We conducted a phase I, single-centre, open-label study to evaluate the safety and pharmacokinetics of a single lixisenatide 20 µg dose and a pooled analysis of six randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III studies (12-month or 24-month duration) that evaluated glycaemic parameters and safety in patients receiving lixisenatide 20 µg once daily or placebo. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetics study included 36 healthy subjects, including 18 elderly healthy subjects (≥65 years old) and 18 matched young healthy subjects (18-45 years old). The pooled analysis included 3188 patients, including 2565 patients <65 years old and 623 patients ≥65 years old (including 79 patients ≥75 years old). Mean exposure with lixisenatide 20 µg was ~30% higher in elderly than in young subjects, and the terminal half-life was prolonged by ~1.6 times. Maximum concentration (C(max)) and time to C(max) (t(max)) were comparable in both groups. Equal numbers of elderly and young subjects reported treatment-emergent adverse events, the majority of which were gastrointestinal disorders. In the pooled analysis, lixisenatide 20 µg once daily provided significant reductions in HbA1c versus placebo for all age groups. There was a similar incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events across all age groups (range: 69-73%). The incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia was generally comparable between lixisenatide-treated and placebo-treated patients. CONCLUSION: These data suggest that lixisenatide is effective and well tolerated in elderly and very elderly patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Lixisenatide treatment improves glycaemic control in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on metformin with or without sulfonylurea: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 24-week trial (GetGoal-M-Asia).

BACKGROUND: This study assessed the efficacy and safety of the once-daily glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, lixisenatide, in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on metformin ± sulfonylurea. METHODS: In this 24-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multinational study, patients were randomized to lixisenatide 20 µg once daily or placebo. The primary endpoint was absolute change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c ) from baseline to week 24. RESULTS: A total of 391 patients were randomized. Lixisenatide significantly reduced HbA1c levels compared with placebo (LS mean difference: -0.36%, p = 0.0004). A significantly higher proportion of lixisenatide-treated patients achieved HbA1c targets of <7% (p = 0.003) and ≤6.5% (p = 0.001) versus placebo. Lixisenatide was associated with a statistically significant reduction in 2-h postprandial plasma glucose after a standardized breakfast versus placebo (LS mean difference: -4.28 mmol/L, p < 0.0001) and a significant reduction in fasting plasma glucose (p = 0.0109). There was no difference in weight loss versus placebo, with a modest reduction in body weight reported for both groups (lixisenatide: -1.50 kg, placebo: -1.24 kg; p = 0.296). The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was 64.3% with lixisenatide versus 47.4% with placebo, with serious TEAEs reported in 1.5% versus 2.1% of patients, respectively. The most common TEAE in the lixisenatide group was nausea (16.3% vs 2.6% with placebo). The incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia was 5.6% with lixisenatide treatment and 2.6% with placebo (p = 0.1321), with no severe symptomatic hypoglycaemia events reported. CONCLUSIONS: In Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus insufficiently controlled on metformin ± sulfonylurea, lixisenatide significantly improved glycaemic control and was well tolerated during the 24-week study.

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly Efpeglenatide Monotherapy Versus Placebo in Type 2 Diabetes: The AMPLITUDE-M Randomized Controlled Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and safety of the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) efpeglenatide versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with diet and exercise alone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: AMPLITUDE-M was a phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial that randomized adults with type 2 diabetes suboptimally controlled with diet and exercise alone to once-weekly efpeglenatide (2, 4, or 6 mg) or placebo for up to 56 weeks. The primary objective was to demonstrate the superiority of efpeglenatide versus placebo for HbA1c reduction at week 30. Secondary objectives included changes in other measures of glycemic control and body weight at weeks 30 and 56. RESULTS: At week 30, HbA1c was reduced from a baseline of 8.1% (65 mmol/mol) to 6.9% (52 mmol/mol), 6.6% (49 mmol/mol), and 6.4% (47 mmol/mol) with efpeglenatide 2, 4, and 6 mg, respectively. Least squares mean HbA1c reductions from baseline were statistically superior for each efpeglenatide dose versus placebo (2 mg, -0.5% [95% CI -0.9, -0.2; P = 0.0054]; 4 mg, -0.8% [-1.2, -0.5; P < 0.0001]; 6 mg, -1.0% [-1.4, -0.7; P < 0.0001]). A greater proportion of efpeglenatide-treated patients (all doses) achieved HbA1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) versus placebo by week 30 (P < 0.0001 for all), and significant reductions in body weight and fasting plasma glucose were also observed for efpeglenatide (4 and 6 mg doses) versus placebo at week 30 (P < 0.05 for all). Consistent with the GLP-1 RA class, gastrointestinal adverse events were most commonly reported; these were generally transient and mild/moderate in severity. Few patients reported hypoglycemia. CONCLUSIONS: As monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes, once-weekly efpeglenatide significantly improved glycemic control and body weight with a safety and tolerability profile similar to that of other GLP-1 RAs.