Pharmacokinetic and dose-finding studies on efpeglenatide in patients with type 2 diabetes.

AIM: To assess the efficacy, safety and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic properties of efpeglenatide, a long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trials were conducted. The single-dose study (n = 48) was a first-in-patient, sequential dose-escalation study. Patients received a single subcutaneous injection of efpeglenatide (2-100 µg/kg) or placebo. The repeated-dose study (n = 71) was a multiple-ascending-dose trial. Patients received weekly (1, 2 or 4 mg once weekly; 8-week period) or monthly (8, 12 or 16 mg once monthly; 9-week period) subcutaneous injections of efpeglenatide or placebo (without titration). RESULTS: Both studies demonstrated dose-proportional increases in efpeglenatide serum concentrations. The median time to attain maximum serum concentration (tmax ) for efpeglenatide ranged from 72 to 144 hours in the single-dose study and from 48 to 120 hours in the repeated-dose study (following final dose). Geometric mean t1/2 ranged from 135 to 180 hours across studies. Peak-to-trough ratios in the repeated-dose study ranged from 1.3 to 1.4 with once-weekly dosing and from 5.9 to 12.9 with once-monthly dosing. Following a single dose of efpeglenatide 14-100 µg/kg, fasting plasma glucose and postprandial plasma glucose levels were decreased at week 1 and remained below baseline levels for ≥3 weeks post-dosing. Repeated doses of efpeglenatide led to significant reductions in glycated haemoglobin vs placebo. In both studies, efpeglenatide was generally well tolerated. Gastrointestinal disorders were the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events in efpeglenatide-treated patients. CONCLUSIONS: The delayed tmax, long half-life, and low peak-to-trough ratios observed demonstrate potential for improved efficacy and dosing flexibility, with good tolerability of efpeglenatide in patients with T2D.

Efficacy and safety of once-monthly efpeglenatide in patients with type 2 diabetes: Results of a phase 2 placebo-controlled, 16-week randomized dose-finding study.

AIMS: To determine the optimal dose(s) of once-monthly administration of efpeglenatide, a long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled on metformin. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase 2, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial (NCT02081118), patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to subcutaneous efpeglenatide (8, 12 or 16 mg once monthly; n = 158) or placebo (n = 51). The 16-week treatment period included a 4-week titration phase with once-weekly efpeglenatide 4 mg, followed by one dose of efpeglenatide 8 mg once monthly and two doses of the assigned once-monthly dose. The primary endpoint was change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to week 17. RESULTS: All efpeglenatide doses significantly reduced HbA1c versus placebo (P < 0.0001 for all). Overall, the least squares mean difference in HbA1c reductions between efpeglenatide and placebo was -7.7 mmol/mol (-0.71%; baseline to week 17). At week 17, a significantly greater proportion of efpeglenatide patients had an HbA1c level <53 mmol/mol (<7%) versus placebo (48.7% vs. 30.6%; P = 0.0320). Significant body weight loss occurred across all efpeglenatide doses (placebo-corrected reduction -2.0 kg [efpeglenatide overall]; P = 0.0003). The safety profile was consistent with GLP-1RAs, with gastrointestinal (GI) disorders being the most common treatment-emergent adverse events. Fluctuations in effects on glucose levels and rates of GI events occurred between peak and trough efpeglenatide concentrations. CONCLUSIONS: Efpeglenatide once monthly (following once-weekly titration) has significant benefits with regard to HbA1c and weight reduction versus placebo in patients with T2D. Further studies are needed to evaluate the long-term efficacy and safety of efpeglenatide once monthly.

Body weight management and safety with efpeglenatide in adults without diabetes: A phase II randomized study.

AIM: To evaluate the safety of efpeglenatide, a long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA), and its effects on body weight management in adults without diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase II, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, participants with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 or ≥27 kg/m2 with comorbidity were randomized 1:1:1:1:1 to efpeglenatide (4 mg once weekly, 6 mg once weekly, 6 mg once every 2 wk, or 8 mg once every 2 wk; n = 237) or placebo (n = 60) in combination with a hypocaloric diet. The primary endpoint was body weight change from baseline after 20 wk of treatment, assessed using a mixed-effect model with repeated measures with an unstructured covariance matrix over all post-screening visits; treatment comparisons were based on least squares mean estimates. RESULTS: Over 20 wk, all doses of efpeglenatide significantly reduced body weight from baseline versus placebo (P < 0.0001), with placebo-adjusted reductions ranging between -6.3 kg (6 mg once every 2 wk) and -7.2 kg (6 mg once weekly). Greater proportions of efpeglenatide-treated participants had body weight loss of ≥5% or ≥10% versus placebo (P < 0.01, all comparisons). Efpeglenatide led to significant improvements in glycaemic variables (fasting plasma glucose and glycated haemoglobin) and lipid profiles (cholesterol, triglycerides) versus placebo. Rates of study discontinuations as a result of adverse events ranged from 5% to 19% with efpeglenatide. Gastrointestinal effects were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Efpeglenatide once weekly and once every 2 wk led to significant body weight reduction and improved glycaemic and lipid variables versus placebo. It was also well tolerated for weight management in adults without diabetes.

Efficacy and safety of efpeglenatide in key patient subgroups from the BALANCE randomized trial, stratified by pre-diabetes status, BMI, and age at baseline.

INTRODUCTION: Efpeglenatide is a long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist being developed to improve glycemic control in type 2 diabetes (T2D). In the BALANCE 205 study (NCT02075281), efpeglenatide significantly reduced body weight versus placebo in patients with obesity, or overweight with comorbidities, and without T2D. These subanalyses explore the efficacy and safety of efpeglenatide in subgroups of patients with pre-diabetes and stratified by body mass index (BMI) or age from the BALANCE study. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: The 20-week BALANCE study randomized patients with BMI ≥30 kg/m2 or ≥27 kg/m2 with comorbidities, and without diabetes, to efpeglenatide 4 mg or 6 mg once weekly, 6 mg or 8 mg once every 2 weeks, or placebo. For these subanalyses, patients were stratified by pre-diabetes status (glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 5.7%-6.4% (39-46 mmol/mol) or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) 100-125 mg/dL) and by BMI or age < or ≥ median values (34.9 kg/m2 and 44 years, respectively) at baseline. RESULTS: In patients with pre-diabetes at baseline, all efpeglenatide doses led to greater proportions of patients reverting to normoglycemia (40.6%-64.3%) versus placebo (10.0%), and greater reductions in HbA1c (0.30%-0.38%), FPG (7.7-14.1 mg/dL), and weight (5.6-7.3 kg) versus placebo (nominal p<0.05 for all). In patients with BMI or age < or ≥ median, greater reductions in weight were observed with all efpeglenatide doses versus placebo (nominal p<0.01 for all). The most common adverse events in patients receiving efpeglenatide across patient subgroups were gastrointestinal adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: These results are consistent with the overall BALANCE population and suggest beneficial effects of efpeglenatide on glycemic control and body weight regardless of pre-diabetes status, age, or BMI at baseline. The effects of efpeglenatide on glycemic control in patients with pre-diabetes suggest it might help reduce the likelihood of at-risk patients developing diabetes.

Effects of efpeglenatide versus liraglutide on gastric emptying, glucose metabolism and beta-cell function in people with type 2 diabetes: an exploratory, randomized phase Ib study.

INTRODUCTION: To evaluate the effects of efpeglenatide, a long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), on gastric emptying, glucose metabolism, and islet beta-cell function versus liraglutide and placebo in people with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This phase Ib study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02059564) randomized participants (n=47) to three cohorts. Within the first two cohorts, participants were randomized to placebo, efpeglenatide 6 mg weekly (QW; first cohort), or efpeglenatide 16 mg monthly (QM; second cohort). The third cohort received liraglutide 1.8 mg daily (QD). Gastric emptying was assessed through the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of acetaminophen at baseline and steady state. Glucose metabolism and beta-cell function were assessed based on mixed-meal tolerance testing and a graded glucose infusion procedure. RESULTS: Treatment duration was approximately 3 months for efpeglenatide 16 mg QM and 1 month for efpeglenatide 6 mg QW and liraglutide. At peak drug concentrations, efpeglenatide 6 mg QW was non-inferior to liraglutide 1.8 mg QD in delaying gastric emptying, as assessed by acetaminophen PK (lower bound of 90% CI for the efpeglenatide:liraglutide ratio >0.8 for area under the curve (AUC)0-120, AUC0-180, AUC0-360 and maximum concentration (Cmax)). Efpeglenatide 16 mg QM did not decrease the rate of gastric emptying to as great an extent as liraglutide (ie, non-inferiority was not shown). Compared with liraglutide, both efpeglenatide dosing regimens demonstrated comparable or more favorable glucometabolic effects and improved beta-cell function. All gastrointestinal adverse events reported with efpeglenatide were mild or moderate in severity and transient over treatment and follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The glucometabolic effects of efpeglenatide 6 mg QW and 16 mg QM were comparable to liraglutide. Additional studies are necessary to further examine these benefits of efpeglenatide. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02059564.

Once-Weekly Efpeglenatide Dose-Range Effects on Glycemic Control and Body Weight in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes on Metformin or Drug Naive, Referenced to Liraglutide.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of once-weekly efpeglenatide, a long-acting glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), in early type 2 diabetes (T2D) (drug naive or on metformin monotherapy). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: EXCEED 203 was a 12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group, dose-ranging study of efpeglenatide once weekly referenced to open-label liraglutide 1.8 mg (exploratory analysis). Participants, ∼90% on metformin monotherapy, were randomized to one of five efpeglenatide doses (0.3, 1, 2, 3, or 4 mg q.w.; n = 181), placebo (n = 37), or liraglutide (≤1.8 mg daily; n = 36). The primary efficacy end point was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 13. RESULTS: From a baseline HbA1c of 7.7-8.0% (61.0-63.9 mmol/mol), all efpeglenatide doses ≥1 mg significantly reduced HbA1c versus placebo (placebo-adjusted least squares [LS] mean changes 0.6-1.2%, P < 0.05 for all) to a final HbA1c of 6.3-6.8% (45.4-50.6 mmol/mol); masked efpeglenatide 4 mg was noninferior to open-label liraglutide. Greater proportions treated with efpeglenatide ≥1 mg than placebo achieved HbA1c <7% (61-72% vs. 24%, P < 0.05 for all), and greater reductions in body weight were observed with efpeglenatide 3 and 4 mg versus placebo (placebo-adjusted LS mean differences -1.4 and -2.0 kg, respectively, P < 0.05 for both). Rates of nausea and vomiting were consistent with other GLP-1 RAs and rapidly subsided after the initial 2 weeks. No neutralizing antibodies were detected with efpeglenatide. CONCLUSIONS: Efpeglenatide once weekly led to significant reductions in HbA1c and weight, with a safety profile consistent with the GLP-1 RA class in patients with early T2D mostly on metformin monotherapy.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide monotherapy versus placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 1): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multinational, multicentre phase 3a trial.

BACKGROUND: Despite a broad range of pharmacological options for the treatment of type 2 diabetes, optimum glycaemic control remains challenging for many patients and new therapies are necessary. Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue in phase 3 development for type 2 diabetes. We assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of semaglutide monotherapy, compared with placebo, in treatment-naive patients with type 2 diabetes who had insufficient glycaemic control with diet and exercise alone. METHODS: We did a double-blind, randomised, parallel-group, international, placebo-controlled phase 3a trial (SUSTAIN 1) at 72 sites in Canada, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, South Africa, UK, and USA (including hospitals, clinical research units, and private offices). Eligible participants were treatment-naive individuals aged 18 years or older with type 2 diabetes treated with only diet and exercise alone for at least 30 days before screening, with a baseline HbA1c of 7·0%-10·0% (53-86 mmol/mol). We randomly assigned participants (2:2:1:1) to either once-weekly subcutaneously injected semaglutide (0·5 mg or 1·0 mg), or volume-matched placebo (0·5 mg or 1·0 mg), for 30 weeks via prefilled PDS290 pen-injectors. Participants did their own injections and were encouraged to administer them on the same day of each week in the same area of their body; the time of day and proximity of meal times was not specified. We did the randomisation with an interactive voice or web response system. Investigators, participants, and the funder of the study remained masked throughout the trial. The primary endpoint was the change in mean HbA1c from baseline to week 30, and the confirmatory secondary endpoint was the change in mean bodyweight from baseline to week 30. We assessed efficacy and safety in the modified intention-to-treat population (ie, all participants who were exposed to at least one dose of study drug); both placebo groups were pooled for assessment. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02054897. FINDINGS: Between February 3, 2014, and August 21, 2014, we randomly assigned 388 participants to treatment; 387 received at least one dose of study medication (128 0·5 mg semaglutide, 130 1·0 mg semaglutide, 129 placebo). 17 (13%) of those assigned to 0·5 mg semaglutide, 16 (12%) assigned to 1·0 mg semaglutide, and 14 (11%) assigned to placebo discontinued treatment; the main reason for discontinuation was gastrointestinal adverse events such as nausea. Mean baseline HbA1c was 8·05% (SD 0·85); at week 30, HbA1c significantly decreased by 1·45% (95% CI -1·65 to -1·26) with 0·5 mg semaglutide (estimated treatment difference vs placebo -1·43%, 95% CI -1·71 to -1·15; p<0·0001), significantly decreased by 1·55% (-1·74 to -1·36) with 1·0 mg semaglutide (estimated treatment difference vs placebo -1·53%, -1·81 to -1·25; p<0·0001), and non-significantly decreased by 0·02% (-0·23 to 0·18) with placebo. Mean baseline bodyweight was 91·93 kg (SD 23·83); at week 30, bodyweight significantly decreased by 3·73 kg (95% CI -4·54 to -2·91) with 0·5 mg semaglutide (estimated treatment difference vs placebo -2·75 kg, 95% CI -3·92 to -1·58; p<0·0001), significantly decreased by 4·53 kg (-5·34 to -3·72) with 1·0 mg semaglutide (estimated treatment difference vs placebo -3·56 kg, -4·74 to -2·38; p<0·0001), and non-significantly decreased by 0·98 kg (-1·82 to -0·13) with placebo. No deaths were reported in any of the study groups and most reported adverse events were of mild or moderate severity. The most frequently reported adverse events in both semaglutide groups were gastrointestinal in nature: nausea was reported in 26 (20%) who received 0·5 mg semaglutide, 31 (24%) who received 1·0 mg semaglutide, and 10 (8%) who received placebo, and diarrhoea was reported in 16 (13%) who received 0·5 mg semaglutide, 14 (11%) who received 1·0 mg semaglutide, and three (2%) who received placebo. INTERPRETATION: Semaglutide significantly improved HbA1c and bodyweight in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with placebo, and showed a similar safety profile to currently available GLP-1 receptor agonists, representing a potential treatment option for such patients. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk A/S, Denmark.

The dynamic relationship between current and previous severe hypoglycemic events: a lagged dependent variable analysis among patients with type 2 diabetes who have initiated basal insulin.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Past studies have found episodes of severe hypoglycemia (SH) to be serially dependent. Those studies, however, only considered the impact of a single (index) event on future risk; few have analyzed SH risk as it evolves over time in the presence (or absence) of continuing events. The objective of this study was to determine the dynamic risks of SH events conditional on preceding SH events among patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who have initiated basal insulin. METHODS: We used an electronic health records database from the United States that included encounter and laboratory data and clinical notes on T2D patients who initiated basal insulin therapy between 2008 and 2011 and to identify SH events. We used a repeated-measures lagged dependent variable logistic regression model to estimate the impact of SH in one quarter on the risk of SH in the next quarter. RESULTS: We identified 7235 patients with T2D who initiated basal insulin. Patients who experienced ≥1 SH event during any quarter were more likely to have ≥1 SH event during the subsequent quarter than those who did not (predicted probabilities of 7.4% and 1.0%, respectively; p < 0.01). This effect was stronger than the impact of history of SH before starting basal insulin (predicted probabilities of 1.0% and 3.2%, respectively; p < 0.01) or of a history of SH during the titration period (predicted probabilities of 1.1% and 2.8%, respectively; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of experiencing a SH event is highly dependent on a patient's immediate history of SH events and therefore the value of preventing one SH event may be substantial. These results can inform patient care by providing clinicians with dynamic data on a patient's risk of SH, which in turn can facilitate appropriate adjustment of the risk-benefit ratio for individualized patient care. These results should, however, be interpreted in light of the key limitations of our study: not all SH events may have been captured or coded in the database, data on filled prescriptions were not available, we were unable to adjust for basal insulin dose, and the post-titration follow-up period could have divided into time units other than quarters (3 month blocks) resulting in potentially different conclusions. Further real-world studies on how to best to identify patients at risk for SH events based on the presence of recent SH events, rather than on more distant 'prior' events, can help healthcare providers to better manage patients starting basal insulin.

New developments in insulin therapy for type 2 diabetes.

Insulin has classically been considered a treatment of last resort for individuals with type 2 diabetes, delayed until all other efforts by the patient and healthcare provider have failed. Recent treatment guidelines recommend the use of insulin, in particular basal insulin, as part of a treatment regimen earlier in the disease process. Many patients are reticent about initiating insulin, so therapies that allow insulin treatment to be more tailored to individual needs are likely to result in greater acceptance and patient adherence with therapy. To meet this need, a range of insulin products are in development that aim to increase absorption rate or prolong the duration of action, reduce peak variability and weight gain associated with insulin treatment, and offer alternative delivery methods. This review describes insulin products in clinical development, new combination therapies, and new devices for insulin delivery.

Identifying and meeting the challenges of insulin therapy in type 2 diabetes.

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a chronic illness that requires clinical recognition and treatment of the dual pathophysiologic entities of altered glycemic control and insulin resistance to reduce the risk of long-term micro- and macrovascular complications. Although insulin is one of the most effective and widely used therapeutic options in the management of diabetes, it is used by less than one-half of patients for whom it is recommended. Clinician-, patient-, and health care system-related challenges present numerous obstacles to insulin use in T2DM. Clinicians must remain informed about new insulin products, emerging technologies, and treatment options that have the potential to improve adherence to insulin therapy while optimizing glycemic control and mitigating the risks of therapy. Patient-related challenges may be overcome by actively listening to the patient's fears and concerns regarding insulin therapy and by educating patients about the importance, rationale, and evolving role of insulin in individualized self-treatment regimens. Enlisting the services of Certified Diabetes Educators and office personnel can help in addressing patient-related challenges. Self-management of diabetes requires improved patient awareness regarding the importance of lifestyle modifications, self-monitoring, and/or continuous glucose monitoring, improved methods of insulin delivery (eg, insulin pens), and the enhanced convenience and safety provided by insulin analogs. Health care system-related challenges may be improved through control of the rising cost of insulin therapy while making it available to patients. To increase the success rate of treatment of T2DM, the 2012 position statement from the American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes focused on individualized patient care and provided clinicians with general treatment goals, implementation strategies, and tools to evaluate the quality of care.

Elderly patients with diabetes experience a lower rate of nocturnal hypoglycaemia with insulin degludec than with insulin glargine: a meta-analysis of phase IIIa trials.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Elderly patients with diabetes are more vulnerable to the occurrence and effects of hypoglycaemia; therefore, treatments with low risk of hypoglycaemia are preferred in this population. This study aimed to compare hypoglycaemia rates between insulin degludec (IDeg) and insulin glargine (IGlar) in elderly patients. METHODS: Hypoglycaemia data from patients ≥65 years of age with type 1 (T1DM) or type 2 (T2DM) diabetes from seven randomised, treat-to-target phase IIIa trials were used to compare IDeg and IGlar in a pre-planned meta-analysis. Overall, 917/4345 (21 %) randomised patients in the seven trials were elderly (634 IDeg, 283 IGlar). Overall confirmed hypoglycaemia was defined as <3.1 mmol/L or severe hypoglycaemia (symptoms requiring external assistance). Nocturnal hypoglycaemia included confirmed episodes from 0001 to 0559 hours (inclusive). Treatment comparisons of hypoglycaemia in T1DM patients were not performed due to low numbers of elderly patients with T1DM randomised (43 IDeg, 18 IGlar); statistical comparisons were also not made for severe hypoglycaemia due to the low number of events. RESULTS: In elderly patients with T2DM, the rate of overall confirmed hypoglycaemia was significantly lower with IDeg than IGlar [estimated rate ratio (ERR) 0.76 (0.61; 0.95)95 % CI]; nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was also significantly lower with IDeg [ERR 0.64 (0.43; 0.95)95 % CI]. Confirmed hypoglycaemia occurred in the majority of T1DM patients, whereas severe episodes occurred infrequently and at similar rates in both treatment groups in T1DM and T2DM. CONCLUSION: Results of this pre-planned meta-analysis in elderly patients with diabetes demonstrate a significant reduction in hypoglycaemic events with IDeg relative to IGlar.

A pilot study of the duodenal-jejunal bypass liner in low body mass index type 2 diabetes.

CONTEXT: The duodenal-jejunal bypass liner (DJBL) is a device that mimics the intestinal portion of gastric bypass surgery and has been shown to improve glucose metabolism rapidly in obese subjects with type 2 diabetes (T2DM). OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety of the DJBL and to evaluate its potential to affect glycemic control beneficially in subjects with T2DM who were not morbidly obese. PATIENTS AND DESIGN: Adult men and women with T2DM of ≤ 10 years' duration with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥ 7.5% and ≤ 10% and having a body mass index ≥ 26 to ≤ 50 kg/m(2) were enrolled in this prospective, 52-week, single-center, open-label clinical study. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Adverse events and changes in body weight, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels, and HbA1c levels. RESULTS: Sixteen of 20 subjects implanted with the DJBL completed the 1-year study (mean body mass index = 30.0 ± 3.6, mean ± SD). Gastrointestinal disorders were reported by 13 subjects, and metabolic or nutritional disorders occurred in 14 subjects. FPG levels dropped from 207 ± 61 mg/dL at baseline to 139 ± 37 mg/dL at 1 week and remained low throughout the study. Mean body weight also declined, but the change in body weight was not significantly associated with change in FPG at 52 weeks. HbA1c declined from 8.7 ± 0.9% at baseline to 7.5 ± 1.6% at week 52. CONCLUSIONS: The improvements in glycemic status were observed at 1 year in moderately obese subjects with T2DM, suggesting that the DJBL may represent an effective adjuvant to standard medical therapy of T2DM in this population.

An analysis of data management tools for diabetes self-management: can smart phone technology keep up?

In this issue of Journal of Diabetes Science and Technology, Rao and colleagues present a comparison of three iPhone diabetes data management applications: the Diamedic Diabetes Logbook, Blood Sugar Diabetes Control, and WaveSense Diabetes Manager. These applications provide patients the ability to enter blood glucose readings manually, view graphs and simple statistics, and email data to health care providers. While these applications show promise, they are limited in their current forms. All require manual data entry and none convert insulin-to-carbohydrate ratios to insulin dose. Future development of these types of technology should consider integration with blood glucose meters and expanded calculation capabilities, as well as monitoring of other risk factors, e.g., blood pressure and lipids, and tracking of preventive examinations, e.g., eye, foot, and renal.

Pilot clinical study of an endoscopic, removable duodenal-jejunal bypass liner for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Bariatric surgery is associated with the rapid improvement of type 2 diabetes (T2DM). Here we report an exploratory trial of a completely endoscopic, removable, duodenal-jejunal bypass liner (DJBL) intended to treat T2DM. METHODS: Obese T2DM subjects were randomized to receive a DJBL (n = 12) or sham endoscopy (n = 6) in a 24-week study, extended up to 52 weeks. Measurements included weights, hemoglobin A1c (HbA(1c)), meal tolerance testing, fasting glucose, and seven-point glucose profiles. Subjects' diets were adjusted in the first 2 weeks to obtain similar weight loss during this period. RESULTS: Subjects had baseline HbA(1c) of 9.1 +/- 1.7% and body mass index of 38.9 +/- 6.1 kg/m(2) (+/- SD). In the completer population by week 1, change in fasting glucose in the DJBL arm was -55 +/- 21 mg/dL versus +42 +/- 30 mg/dL in the sham arm (P < or = 0.05; +/- SE); the seven-point glucose profiles were reduced in the DJBL arm but not in the sham arm. Mean postprandial glucose area under the curve was reduced in the DJBL arm by 20% and increased 17% in the sham arm (P = 0.016). At week 12, HbA(1c) change was -1.3 +/- 0.9% in the DJBL arm and -0.7 +/- 0.4% in the sham arm (P > 0.05), and at 24 weeks, values were -2.4 +/- 0.7% in the DJBL arm and -0.8 +/- 0.4% in the sham arm (P > 0.05). Device migrations required endoscopic removal prior to reaching 52 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: The DJBL rapidly normalized glycemic control in obese T2DM subjects, a promising development in the search for novel therapies less invasive than bariatric surgery.