Comparison of the Usability, Accuracy, Preference, and Satisfaction of Three Once-Weekly Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist Pen Devices in People With Type 2 Diabetes.

Aim: This study's aim was to compare the time and accuracy of use and participants' satisfaction and preferences with pen devices for the once-weekly glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists dulaglutide, exenatide XR BCise, and semaglutide. Materials and methods: In this triple crossover, open-label, simulated injection study, GLP-1 receptor agonist pen devices were compared, with time and accuracy of use and participants' satisfaction and preferences as primary outcomes. Participants had type 2 diabetes and were naive to GLP-1 receptor agonist therapy. Participants watched instructional videos for each device, demonstrated administration, and then provided feedback after each demonstration. Investigators tracked errors and omissions of demonstration steps for accuracy and time. Differences across devices were compared using univariate mixed models, adjusting for multiple comparisons. Results: Of the 60 participants, 50% were male, a majority (65%) were Caucasian, and most (65%) had adequate health literacy. Participants rated the dulaglutide device easier to use than those of exenatide XR BCise or semaglutide (P <0.001 for each). Participants expressed greater satisfaction with the dulaglutide device compared with those of exenatide XR BCise or semaglutide (P <0.01 for each). Most participants (75%) preferred the dulaglutide device overall; however, many participants (61%) preferred the size and portability of the semaglutide device. The dulaglutide device took less time to use than the exenatide XR BCise or semaglutide devices (69 vs. 126 and 146 seconds, respectively; P <0.001 for each). Participants were less accurate when using the dulaglutide device. Conclusion: Most participants preferred the dulaglutide device. The dulaglutide device took the least amount of time to demonstrate; however, demonstration accuracy was lower.

Intranasal Glucagon: A New Way to Treat Hypoglycemic Emergencies.

Objective: To review the safety, efficacy, and administration of intranasal (IN) glucagon for the management of hypoglycemia. Data Source: A literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE (1995 to November 2019) using the terms intranasal glucagon, nasal glucagon, glucagon, hypoglycemia treatment, and hypoglycemia management was completed. Study Selection and Data Extraction: English-language studies evaluating IN glucagon were evaluated. Data Synthesis: IN glucagon is a newly approved product for the treatment of hypoglycemia in patients with diabetes, 4 years and older. Administered as a 3-mg dose, it was shown to be noninferior to intramuscular (IM) glucagon. In comparison trials, more than 98% of hypoglycemic events were treated successfully with IN glucagon in both pediatric and adult patients. In simulated and real-world studies, IN glucagon was administered in less than a minute for the majority of scenarios. IM glucagon took longer to administer, ranging from 1 to 4 minutes, and often, patients did not receive the intended full dose. Nausea and vomiting, known adverse events for glucagon, as well as local adverse events were most commonly reported with IN glucagon. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: IN glucagon is safe, effective, easy to use, and does not require reconstitution prior to use, which can lead to faster delivery in a severe hypoglycemic event. It does not require age- or weight-based dosing. This delivery method offers an option for someone who fears needles or is uncomfortable with injections. Conclusion: IN glucagon is a safe, effective, easy to use, needle-free treatment option for severe hypoglycemia.

Low incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events over time with a fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine and lixisenatide versus lixisenatide alone.

This post hoc analysis of gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) from the phase 3 LixiLan-L (NCT02058160) and LixiLan-O (NCT02058147) trials aimed to determine the frequency and timing of nausea, vomiting, and diarrhoea for iGlarLixi, a titratable, fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 units/mL (iGlar) and lixisenatide, versus iGlar alone or iGlar and lixisenatide alone, in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) or basal insulin ± OADs. In iGlarLixi-treated patients, the rate of GI AEs during the initial weeks of treatment was lower versus patients treated with lixisenatide alone (9.6% and 11.7% of iGlarLixi-treated patients in LixiLan-L and LixiLan-O, respectively, vs. 27.5% of lixisenatide-treated patients in LixiLan-O). Beyond day 60, these rates were generally low and similar to those of lixisenatide. These lower rates are likely due to the gradual titration of lixisenatide in iGlarLixi. Median durations of intermittent GI AEs in the iGlarLixi arms were 6.0, 2.0 and 2.5 days (LixiLan-L), and 5.0, 1.0 and 3.5 days (LixiLan-O), respectively. iGlarLixi-associated GI AEs were transient, mostly mild or moderate in severity, and occurred mainly during initial titration.

Semaglutide: The Newest Once-Weekly GLP-1 RA for Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To review efficacy and safety of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) semaglutide for type 2 diabetes (T2D). DATA SOURCES: A literature search of PubMed/MEDLINE and EMBASE using the term semaglutide was completed through April 2018. A search of clinicaltrials.gov was also conducted. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: English-language studies assessing the efficacy and/or safety of semaglutide were evaluated. DATA SYNTHESIS: Semaglutide is a newly approved GLP-1 RA for the treatment of T2D. Administered once weekly at a dose of 0.5 or 1 mg, it has been compared with placebo, sitagliptin, insulin glargine, a combination of oral antidiabetic therapies, and 2 GLP-1 RAs, exenatide ER and dulaglutide, and demonstrated greater efficacy compared with these therapies. Published data from studies ranging from 30 to 104 weeks duration demonstrate efficacy with decreases in hemoglobin A1C (A1C) ranging from 1.1% to 2.2%. Studies show reductions in weight from 1.4 to 6.5 kg. Semaglutide demonstrated a reduction in the composite outcome of cardiovascular (CV) death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke compared with placebo in patients at high risk of CV events (hazard ratio = 0.74; P = 0.02). Common adverse effects include nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea as seen with other GLP-1 RAs. Relevance to Patient Care and Clinical Practice: Semaglutide represents an attractive GLP-1 RA considering its A1C and weight reduction. It provides patient convenience and high patient satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: Semaglutide is an appealing option for the treatment of T2D as a once-weekly GLP-1 RA with established glycemic, CV, and weight benefits.

iGlarLixi: A Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine 100 U/mL and Lixisenatide for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To review the safety and efficacy of iGlarLixi, a titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine 100 U/mL (iGlar) and lixisenatide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist. DATA SOURCES: A literature search of MEDLINE for all English-language primary articles through June 2016, using the terms LixiLan, iGlarLixi and insulin glargine and lixisenatide, and a search of abstracts presented at the 2016 Scientific Sessions of the American Diabetes Association were performed. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: All studies assessing the efficacy and/or safety of iGlarLixi were evaluated. DATA SYNTHESIS: iGlarLixi has been approved in the United States for glycemic control in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled with basal insulin (<60 U/d) or lixisenatide. In clinical trials, iGlarLixi was associated with significantly greater reductions from baseline in glycated hemoglobin A1C (A1C) than iGlar or lixisenatide alone. Reductions in postprandial glucose were also greater with iGlarLixi than with iGlar or lixisenatide. iGlarLixi was weight neutral compared with the weight gain with iGlar and loss with lixisenatide alone, and there was no increase in hypoglycemia with iGlarLixi compared with iGlar despite the greater A1C reduction. Gastrointestinal events, frequently associated with lixisenatide, were less common with iGlarLixi. Potential drawbacks of iGlarLixi include reduced flexibility in dosing and the absence of long-term efficacy and safety data. CONCLUSIONS: iGlarLixi is a titratable fixed-ratio combination that shows improved efficacy and comparable or improved safety outcomes relative to its separate constituents, offering an alternative approach to intensification of therapy in T2D.

A Comparison of New Pharmacological Agents for the Treatment of Obesity.

OBJECTIVE: To review and compare the phase 3 clinical trial evidence on the 4 new pharmacological agents approved for the management of overweight and obesity. DATA SOURCES: Searches were performed (from 1966 through January 2016) in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scientific Citation Index, and product package inserts to identify key phase 3 clinical trials that were used in the approval of each agent. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Phase 3 clinical trials that listed end points of ≥5% and ≥10% weight loss benchmarks from baseline as well as total percentage of weight loss by participants were selected for the review. DATA SYNTHESIS: No head-to-head trials have been identified between these agents at this point, which limits comparisons across agents. Phentermine/topiramate ER appeared to have the best overall average weight loss from baseline as well as highest percentages of patients achieving both ≥5% and ≥10% weight loss benchmarks, followed second by naltrexone/bupropion, and then liraglutide, with lorcaserin showing the lowest rates. Phentermine/topiramate ER completion rates were highest for both treatment and placebo groups, followed by liraglutide, with lorcaserin and naltrexone/bupropion showing similar completion rates, below that of the other 2 agents. Common side effects reported differed between agents, although the most common adverse events reported were gastrointestinal in nature, with liraglutide demonstrating the highest reported rates and lorcaserin demonstrating the lowest. CONCLUSION: These 4 new pharmacological agents represent new options for the clinician to utilize when trying to manage the problem of obesity. No clear first-line agent has emerged, so treatment decisions should be based on patient-specific factors.

Basal Insulin Use With GLP-1 Receptor Agonists.

IN BRIEF The combination of basal insulin and a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist is becoming increasingly common and offers several potential benefits to patients with type 2 diabetes. Clinical studies have demonstrated improved glycemic control and low risks of hypoglycemia and weight gain with the combination, which provides a safe and effective alternative to basal-bolus insulin with less treatment burden. Fixed-ratio combination products that administer both agents in a single injection are in the pipeline and will offer additional options for clinicians and patients. This review focuses on the rationale for, clinical evidence on, and implications of using this combination of therapies in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Dulaglutide: the newest GLP-1 receptor agonist for the management of type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), dulaglutide, in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2D). DATA SOURCES: A PubMed search was completed to identify publications from 1947 to October 2014 using the search terms dulaglutide and LY2189265. References were reviewed to identify additional resources. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Articles were included if they evaluated the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, safety, or efficacy of dulaglutide. DATA SYNTHESIS: Dulaglutide reduces both glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) and weight by stimulating insulin secretion and suppressing glucagon in a glucose-dependent manner, delaying gastric emptying, and promoting satiety. Dulaglutide consists of 2 GLP-1 analogues that have been modified to make it a long-acting, once-weekly agent. Dulaglutide has been studied as monotherapy and in combination with metformin, glimepiride, pioglitazone, and insulin lispro. It has demonstrated superior A1C reduction compared with placebo, metformin, insulin glargine, sitagliptin, and twice-daily exenatide. It demonstrated noninferiority in A1C reduction to liraglutide. Dulaglutide changed A1C by -0.78% to -1.51%, and it changed weight by -0.35 kg to -3.03 kg. The most common adverse effects in clinical studies were nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: Dulaglutide is the fifth GLP-1 RA approved for T2D in the United States. It is an attractive option because it is dosed once-weekly, provides A1C lowering similar to liraglutide, weight reduction similar to exenatide, and has an adverse effect profile similar to exenatide and liraglutide.

Technosphere insulin (Afrezza): a new, inhaled prandial insulin.

OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of Technosphere insulin (TI), a new inhaled insulin product. DATA SOURCES: Searches were conducted in PubMed/MEDLINE, Scientific Citation Index, and abstracts from both the American Diabetes Association (ADA) and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes (EASD) meetings from 2005 to August 2014, utilizing the search terms Afrezza, Technosphere, Afresa, and inhaled insulin. References were reviewed to identify additional sources. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Studies with adequate sample sizes, evaluating clinically relevant end points were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: TI is approved by the Food and Drug Administration as a bolus insulin to treat patients with type 1 and type 2 diabetes. Its glucose-lowering properties are less than that of rapid-acting insulins, but it does demonstrate less hypoglycemia. TI's kinetics make it the fastest absorbed of any insulin available, although its overall onset of action appears similar to insulin lispro. It represents an alternative to bolus injections but would likely be used concomitantly with injected basal insulin. Major adverse effects are respiratory in nature, with cough being the most prominent. There is a small decrease in the forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1) with TI; this appears to be consistent, nonprogressive, and reversible. Patients using TI must receive pulmonary function tests periodically throughout therapy. TI is contraindicated in patients with chronic lung disease and should be used with caution in patients who smoke. CONCLUSION: TI is a novel inhaled insulin that provides prandial coverage to patients with diabetes, representing an alternative to bolus insulin injections.

Albiglutide: a new GLP-1 receptor agonist for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To review the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of albiglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) in type 2 diabetes (T2D). DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE search (1950-June 2014) was conducted using the keyword albiglutide. References were reviewed to identify additional sources. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Articles evaluating pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, safety, or efficacy of albiglutide were included. DATA SYNTHESIS: Albiglutide is a long-acting GLP-1 RA that lowers glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) and reduces weight by stimulating glucose-dependent insulin secretion, suppressing glucagon secretion, delaying gastric emptying, and promoting satiety. Albiglutide has a long half-life as a result of resistance to degradation by dipeptidyl peptidase-4 and fusion to albumin, thus allowing once-weekly dosing. Albiglutide has been studied as monotherapy and add-on therapy to metformin, sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones, insulin glargine, and varying combinations of these agents. Clinical studies have shown albiglutide to be superior to placebo, sitagliptin, and glimepiride and noninferior to insulin glargine and insulin lispro at reducing A1C in T2D patients, with A1C changes from baseline ranging from -0.55% to -0.9%. Noninferiority was not achieved when compared to liraglutide and pioglitazone. Weight changes ranged from +0.28 to -1.21 kg. The most common side effects are upper-respiratory-tract infections, diarrhea, nausea, and injection-site reactions. CONCLUSION: Albiglutide is the fourth GLP-1 RA approved in the United States. Advantages include once-weekly dosing and fewer gastrointestinal side effects compared with liraglutide, but it is less effective at reducing A1C and weight compared to liraglutide. It has not been compared head to head with other GLP-1 RAs.

A doctor of pharmacy curriculum revision process focused on curricular overload.

OBJECTIVE: The objective is to describe the impact of a curricular revision process using the 8-step Kotter change model to decrease curricular overload in a Doctor of Pharmacy program at a public, research-intensive school of pharmacy. METHODS: In alignment with the 8-step Kotter change model, the first step was to create urgency for change, which was supported by calls to action to address curricular overload. Next, a coalition of change leaders was formed, who developed 7 curriculum renewal targets to collectively address curricular overload. This vision was communicated at faculty meetings throughout the change process, with requests for feedback. Five curricular working groups were formed to empower action based on their charges. Quick wins were created by early adopters, which built momentum and led to a more streamlined course change process. Lastly, making changes stick requires ongoing evaluation. RESULTS: In total, required didactic credits were reduced from 92.6 to 79 and didactic courses were reduced from 31 to 23 while ensuring that all required content remained. For many courses, contact hours were also reduced to align with allotted credit hours. Obstacles and challenges were encountered along the way, and a collaborative approach to finding solutions proved beneficial. CONCLUSION: The key recommendations for implementing curricular changes to address overload include having a change model in place and identifying change leaders to support change and address faculty concerns efficiently. Effective communication through repetition of messaging is critical. Although change is complex, leaning into it with patience and perseverance can lead to success.

Humanistic and Economic Burden of Patients with Cardiorenal Metabolic Conditions: A Systematic Review.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetes is associated with significant economic burden. Moreover, cardiovascular disease (CVD), including heart failure, and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are common comorbidities, leading to premature mortality. We conducted a systematic review to assess the humanistic and economic burden of cardio-renal-metabolic (CRM) conditions in individuals ≥ 18 years with CVD, CKD, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. METHODS: We searched Embase® and Medline® databases from 2011 to January 10, 2022 for English publications reporting humanistic and economic burden outcomes from observational studies, real-world evidence, and economic model studies. Intervention and validation studies were excluded. Study quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Abstracts/posters were identified from four conferences (2020-2022). RESULTS: Of 1804 studies identified, 22 (including four conference publications) were selected involving 351,296,930 participants (one modeled the US population); eight reported healthcare resource utilization (HCRU), seven only cost data, six HCRU and cost data, one reported quality-of-life data (11/18 and 7/18 had estimated low and medium risk of bias, respectively). Participants were predominantly ≥ 65 years and identified as having White ethnicity. Higher costs and HCRU were observed in patients with all three conditions compared to those with two or none. Urban/metropolitan and insured patients had higher healthcare expenditure and service utilization compared to uninsured and racial/ethnic minority populations. Comorbidities were associated with increased hospitalizations, higher costs, and more emergency department visits. In general, patients identified as having Black ethnicity had low odds of using healthcare services, possibly due to disparities in healthcare access and distrust in the system. Limitations included no adjustment for inflation and a predominance of retrospective studies. CONCLUSIONS: This review showed a greater economic burden for patients with CRM conditions, with a clear trend between increasing numbers of comorbidities and increasing healthcare costs/resource use. Comparisons between countries are complicated and the scarcity of evidence from minority racial and ethnic groups and lack of data from non-US geographies warrant further investigation.

Advances in the management of type 2 diabetes in adults.

Type 2 diabetes is a chronic and progressive cardiometabolic disorder that affects more than 10% of adults worldwide and is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, disability, and high costs. Over the past decade, the pattern of management of diabetes has shifted from a predominantly glucose centric approach, focused on lowering levels of haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), to a directed complications centric approach, aimed at preventing short term and long term complications of diabetes, and a pathogenesis centric approach, which looks at the underlying metabolic dysfunction of excess adiposity that both causes and complicates the management of diabetes. In this review, we discuss the latest advances in patient centred care for type 2 diabetes, focusing on drug and non-drug approaches to reducing the risks of complications of diabetes in adults. We also discuss the effects of social determinants of health on the management of diabetes, particularly as they affect the treatment of hyperglycaemia in type 2 diabetes.

Determining predictors of response to exenatide in type 2 diabetes.

OBJECTIVES: To determine predictors of glycemic response to exenatide and to assess change in glycosylated hemoglobin (A1C) and whether a correlation exists between weight loss and glycemic response. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: United States in 2009. PATIENTS: 100 adult patients with type 2 diabetes prescribed exenatide. INTERVENTION: Retrospective chart review of patients to collect demographic data, weight, serum creatinine, diabetes education, and concurrent diabetes medications. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patients were categorized as responders or nonresponders based on change in A1C. Responders had an A1C decrease of 0.5% or more and nonresponders had an A1C decrease of less than 0.5% from baseline to post-exenatide initiation. Demographic data for each cohort were analyzed. RESULTS: 100 patients met inclusion criteria (61 responders and 39 nonresponders). Responders had a mean A1C decrease of 1.57%, whereas nonresponders had a mean A1C increase of 0.23% (P < 0.001). Post hoc linear regression analysis revealed that baseline A1C was a predictor of response to exenatide (P < 0.001). Binary logistic regression analysis demonstrated that no other variables were predictors of response to exenatide (P > 0.05 for all). No correlation was found between weight loss and exenatide and glycemic response (P = 0.99). CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that patients with a higher baseline A1C are more likely to have a glycemic response to exenatide than patients with a lower baseline A1C.

Tirzepatide: A novel, first-in-class, dual GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist.

The objective of this article is to review the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide and discuss its potential role in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Tirzepatide is a novel once-weekly dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist which has been studied in the SURPASS clinical trials in doses of 5 mg, 10 mg, and 15 mg. Tirzepatide phase III clinical trials, SURPASS-1 through SURPASS-5, demonstrate that this medication is safe and effective in treating type 2 diabetes both with and without a variety of background medications versus placebo, semaglutide, insulin degludec, and insulin glargine in different patient populations. Most adverse events were gastrointestinal in nature, with a relatively low withdrawal rate in the active treatment arms. It seems likely that tirzepatide will be recommended as a preferred option in the American Diabetes Association treatment algorithm for high glucose lowering effects in patients with a compelling need for low hypoglycemia risk and weight loss. However, the positioning of tirzepatide in the treatment algorithm will ultimately be dependent on the results of the cardiovascular outcomes trial (CVOT) or other outcome-based trials. Tirzepatide is effective for treating type 2 diabetes by lowering glycated hemoglobin and contributing to significant weight loss.

Real-world persistence, adherence, health care resource utilization, and costs in people with type 2 diabetes switching from a first-generation basal insulin to a second-generation (insulin glargine 300 U/mL) vs an alternative first-generation basal insulin.

BACKGROUND: People with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who change their basal insulin (BI) may have variable persistence with therapy. Compared with first-generation (long-acting) BI analogs (insulin glargine 100U/mL [Gla-100]; insulin detemir [IDet]), second-generation (longer-acting) BI analogs (insulin glargine 300U/mL [Gla-300]; insulin degludec) have similar glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) attainment and lowered hypoglycemia risk, which could impact treatment persistence. OBJECTIVE: To compare persistence, adherence, health care resource utilization (HRU), and costs for individuals switching from neutral protamine Hagedorn insulin or a first-generation BI analog with either the second-generation BI, Gla-300, or an alternative first-generation BI analog (Gla-100 or IDet). METHODS: We used Optum Clinformatics claims data from adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with T2D who had received BI (neutral protamine Hagedorn, Gla-100, IDet) in the 6-month baseline period, and switched to either Gla-300 or an alternative first-generation BI (Gla-100 or IDet; treatment switch = index date) between April 1, 2015, and August 31, 2019. Participants were followed for 12 months, until plan disenrollment, or until death, whichever occurred first. Cohorts were propensity score matched (PSM) on baseline characteristics. The primary outcome was the proportion who were persistent with therapy at 12 months. Secondary outcomes were adherence (proportion of days covered); change in HbA1c; and all-cause, diabetes-related, and hypoglycemia-related HRU and costs. RESULTS: PSM generated 3,077 participants/group (mean age: 68 years, 52% female). Cohorts were well balanced except for hospitalization, which was adjusted in models as a covariate. During the 12-month follow-up period, participants who received Gla-300 vs first-generation BI had greater persistence with (45.5% vs 42.1%; adjusted P = 0.0001), and adherence to (42.8% vs 38.2%; adjusted P = 0.0006), BI therapy and a statistically larger reduction in HbA1c at 12 months (-0.65% vs -0.45%; adjusted P = 0.0040). The proportion of participants achieving HbA1c less than 8% (47.2% vs 40.9%; P < 0.0001), but not less than 7% (21.2% vs 20.8%), was significantly higher for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. All-cause (45.3 vs 65.9 per 100 patient-years [P100PY]) and diabetes-related (21.5 vs 29.1 P100PY), but not hypoglycemia-related, hospitalizations (1.0 vs 1.5 P100PY) were significantly (P < 0.0001) lower for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. Similarly, all-cause (111.9 vs 148.8 P100PY), diabetes-related (54.8 vs 74.2 P100PY), and hypoglycemia-related (2.9 vs 5.7 P100PY) emergency department (ED) visits were significantly lower for Gla-300 (all P < 0.0001). Costs for all-cause hospitalizations and hypoglycemia-related ED visits were significantly lower for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI. Although pharmacy costs were significantly higher for Gla-300 vs first-generation BI, all-cause total health care costs were not significantly different: $41,255 vs $45,316 per person per year, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In this claims-based analysis of people with T2D receiving BI, switching to Gla-300 was associated with significantly better persistence, adherence, and HbA1c reduction compared with switching to an alternative first-generation BI analog. All-cause HRU was significantly lower; despite significantly higher pharmacy costs, total health care costs were similar. DISCLOSURES: This study was funded by Sanofi US. Medical writing support was provided by Helen Jones, PhD, CMPP, of Evidence Scientific Solutions and funded by Sanofi US. Dr Wright is on the speakers' bureau and sits on the advisory boards for Abbot Diabetes, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Sanofi; sits on the advisory board for Medtronic; and is a consultant for Abbot Diabetes, Bayer, Boehringer Ingelheim, and Eli Lilly. Dr Malone is on advisory boards for Novartis and Avalere and consults for Pear Therapeutics, Sarepta, and Strategic Therapeutics. Dr Trujillo sits on advisory boards for Novo Nordisk and Sanofi. Drs Gill, Zhou, and Preblick and Mr Li are employees and stockholders of Sanofi. Mr Huse is an employee of Evidera and a contractor for Sanofi. Dr Reid is a speaker and consultant for Novo Nordisk and Sanofi-Aventis and is a consultant for AstraZeneca and Intarcia.

GLP-1 receptor agonists: an updated review of head-to-head clinical studies.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) are attractive options for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) because they effectively lower A1C and weight while having a low risk of hypoglycemia. Some also have documented cardiovascular benefit. The GLP-1 RA class has grown in the last decade, with several agents available for use in the United States and Europe. Since the efficacy and tolerability, dosing frequency, administration requirements, and cost may vary between agents within the class, each agent may offer unique advantages and disadvantages. Through a review of phase III clinical trials studying dulaglutide, exenatide twice daily, exenatide once weekly, liraglutide, lixisenatide, semaglutide, and oral semaglutide, 14 head-to-head trials were identified that evaluated the safety and efficacy of GLP-1 RA active comparators. The purpose of this review is to provide an analysis of these trials. The GLP-1 RA head-to-head clinical studies have demonstrated that all GLP-1 RA agents are effective therapeutic options at reducing A1C. However, differences exist in terms of magnitude of effect on A1C and weight as well as frequency of adverse effects.

Association of pancreatitis with glucagon-like peptide-1 agonist use.

OBJECTIVE: To review the possible association between glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonist use and pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. DATA SOURCES: A MEDLINE search (1950-January 2010) identified key clinical trials delineating adverse effects associated with GLP-1 agonist use. Key search terms included type 2 diabetes mellitus, pancreatitis, incretins, exenatide, liraglutide, albiglutide, and taspoglutide. Review of references listed in the articles identified was also performed. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Web site and Amylin Pharmaceuticals file data were utilized to extract case report information and unpublished clinical development data related to GLP-1 agonist use and pancreatitis. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Phase 2 and 3 clinical trials evaluating exenatide, liraglutide, albiglutide, and taspoglutide that discussed treatmentrelated adverse effects as well as FDA-reviewed case reports of pancreatitis in patients taking these same therapies were included. One study evaluating type 2 diabetes as a risk factor for development of acute pancreatitis was also included. Exenatide case reports and clinical development data were also included. DATA SYNTHESIS: Currently there have been 8 cases during clinical development and 36 postmarketing reports of acute pancreatitis in exenatide-treated patients. Four patients have developed acute (n = 3) or chronic (1) pancreatitis during liraglutide clinical trials. There have been no reports to date of development of acute pancreatitis in patients taking albiglutide or taspoglutide. CONCLUSIONS: Observational reports and clinical trial data suggest an association between GLP-1 agonist use and acute pancreatitis; however, additional clinical trial data and in-depth case report analysis are needed to further evaluate and verify this finding.