Secukinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa based on prior biologic exposure: an efficacy and safety analysis from the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE phase III trials.

BACKGROUND: Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic inflammatory skin disease associated with a substantial disease burden. Secukinumab has previously been reported to have sustained efficacy with a favourable safety profile in patients with moderate-to-severe HS. It is unknown whether prior biologic exposure affects the efficacy and safety of secukinumab. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy and safety of secukinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe HS based on prior exposure to -biologics. METHODS: This was an analysis of the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE phase III trials of secukinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe HS. Patients were randomized at baseline to receive secukinumab every 2 (SECQ2W) or 4 weeks (SECQ4W), or placebo for 16 weeks. After week 16, patients on the SECQ2W and SECQ4W schedules remained on the same treatment regimen, while patients randomized to placebo were switched to either SECQ2W or SECQ4W up to week 52. Assessments based on prior exposure to biologics included Hidradenitis Suppurativa Clinical Response (HiSCR), abscess and inflammatory nodule (AN) count, flare rates, HS-related pain [numerical rating scale 30 (NRS30)], 55% reduction in the International Hidradenitis Suppurativa Severity Score System (IHS4-55), Dermatology Life Quality Index, EuroQol-5D and safety. RESULTS: Overall, 1084 patients were randomized in the SUNSHINE and SUNRISE trials and included in this analysis; 255 (23.5%) were biologic-experienced [SECQ2W (n = 80); SECQ4W (n = 81); placebo (n = 94)] and 829 (76.5%) were biologic-naïve [SECQ2W (n = 281); SECQ4W (n = 279); placebo (n = 269)]. At week 16, responses were more efficacious for secukinumab than for placebo with regard to HiSCR in patients who were biologic-experienced {SECQ2W 37.0% [odds ratio (OR) 1.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83-3.08]; SECQ4W 38.8% [OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.86-3.22]; placebo 27.3%} and biologic-naïve [SECQ2W 45.6% (OR 1.64, 95% CI 1.15-2.33); SECQ4W 45.4% (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.13-2.29); placebo 34.2%]. Similar results were observed for AN count, NRS30 and IHS4-55. The higher response seen at week 16 with secukinumab was sustained, with a trend toward improvement over time, through to week 52 in both subgroups. Additional efficacy was observed for quality-of-life assessments, and no differences in safety between subgroups were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Regardless of prior biologic exposure, secukinumab was efficacious in improving the signs and symptoms of HS. This finding positions secukinumab as the first option in patients who are biologic-naïve, as well as in patients who have previously been treated with other biologic therapy, based on individual patient needs.

Hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) is a chronic skin disease that causes painful boils. HS is common and affects about 0.4% of the world's population. Treating the condition is difficult, but drugs called 'biologics' can help to improve the symptoms. For example, secukinumab is a biologic drug that has been shown to be effective and well-tolerated for the treatment of HS. In this analysis, we investigated whether previous treatment with biologics could affect the effectiveness and tolerability of secukinumab. This analysis included data from two identical clinical trials (called SUNSHINE and SUNRISE) that recruited adult patients with HS who had moderate-to-severe disease. In these trials, patients took secukinumab 300 mg every 2 weeks or every 4 weeks for 1 year, or a placebo for 4 months and then switched to secukinumab until 1 year. At regular intervals, the effectiveness and tolerability of secukinumab were examined and the results were compared between patients who had previously used another biologic and patients who had never used a biologic before. After 16 weeks, patients who took secukinumab had better results than the patients who took a placebo, independent of previous biologic use. Secukinumab was still effective and had improved results over 1 year of treatment in both subgroups. Regardless of whether patients had previously been taking another biologic, secukinumab was just as tolerable as placebo and there were no new safety risks. Our analysis shows that secukinumab is effective and tolerable, regardless of whether patients have previously used another biologic drug.

Secukinumab in moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa (SUNSHINE and SUNRISE): week 16 and week 52 results of two identical, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trials.

BACKGROUND: Few therapeutic options are available for patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa. We aimed to assess the efficacy of secukinumab in patients with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa in two randomised trials. METHODS: SUNSHINE and SUNRISE were identical, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trials done in 219 primary sites in 40 countries. Patients aged 18 years old or older with the capacity to provide written informed consent and with moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa (defined as a total of ≥5 inflammatory lesions affecting ≥2 distinct anatomical areas) for at least 1 year were eligible for inclusion. Included patients also agreed to daily use of topical over-the-counter antiseptics on the areas affected by hidradenitis suppurativa lesions while on study treatment. Patients were excluded if they had 20 or more fistulae at baseline, had ongoing active conditions requiring treatment with prohibited medication (eg, systemic biological immunomodulating treatment, live vaccines, or other investigational treatments), or met other exclusion criteria. In both trials, patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1) by means of interactive response technology to receive subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg every 2 weeks, subcutaneous secukinumab 300 mg every 4 weeks, or subcutaneous placebo all via a 2 mL prefilled syringe in a double-dummy method as per treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with a hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response, defined as a decrease in abscess and inflammatory nodule count by 50% or more with no increase in the number of abscesses or in the number of draining fistulae compared with baseline, at week 16, assessed in the overall population. Hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response was calculated based on the number of abscesses, inflammatory nodules, draining fistulae, total fistulae, and other lesions in the hidradenitis suppurativa affected areas. Safety was assessed by evaluating the presence of adverse events and serious adverse events according to common terminology criteria for adverse events, which were coded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities terminology. Both the SUNSHINE, NCT03713619, and SUNRISE, NCT03713632, trials are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov. FINDINGS: Between Jan 31, 2019, and June 7, 2021, 676 patients were screened for inclusion in the SUNSHINE trial, of whom 541 (80%; 304 [56%] women and 237 [44%] men; mean age 36·1 years [SD 11·7]) were included in the analysis (181 [33%] in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group, 180 [33%] in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group, and 180 [33%] in the placebo group). Between the same recruitment dates, 687 patients were screened for inclusion in the SUNRISE trial, of whom 543 (79%; 306 [56%] women and 237 [44%] men; mean age 36·3 [11·4] years) were included in the analysis (180 [33%] in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group, 180 [33%] in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group, and 183 [34%] in the placebo group). In the SUNSHINE trial, significantly more patients in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group had a hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response (rounded average number of patients with response in 100 imputations, 81·5 [45%] of 181 patients) compared with the placebo group (60·7 [34%] of 180 patients; odds ratio 1·8 [95% CI 1·1-2·7]; p=0·0070). However, there was no significant difference between the number of patients in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group (75·2 [42%] of 180 patients) and the placebo group (1·5 [1·0-2·3]; p=0·042). Compared with the placebo group (57·1 [31%] of 183 patients), significantly more patients in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group (76·2 [42%] of 180 patients; 1·6 [1·1-2·6]; p=0·015) and the secukinumab every 4 weeks group (83·1 [46%] of 180 patients; 1·9 [1·2-3·0]; p=0·0022) had a hidradenitis suppurativa clinical response in the SUNRISE trial. Patient responses were sustained up to the end of the trials at week 52. The most common adverse event by preferred term up to week 16 was headache in both the SUNSHINE (17 [9%] patients in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group, 20 [11%] in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group, and 14 [8%] in the placebo group) and SUNRISE (21 [12%] patients in the secukinumab every 2 weeks group, 17 [9%] in the secukinumab every 4 weeks group, and 15 [8%] in the placebo group) trials. No study-related deaths were reported up to week 16. The safety profile of secukinumab in both trials was consistent with that previously reported, with no new or unexpected safety findings detected. INTERPRETATION: When given every 2 weeks, secukinumab was clinically effective at rapidly improving signs and symptoms of hidradenitis suppurativa with a favourable safety profile and with sustained response up to 52 weeks of treatment. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma.

The effect of sonidegib (LDE225) on the pharmacokinetics of bupropion and warfarin in patients with advanced solid tumours.

AIMS: We evaluated the potential effect of sonidegib at an oral dose of 800 mg once daily (QD) on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of the probe drugs warfarin (CYP2C9) and bupropion (CYP2B6). METHODS: This was a multicentre, open-label study to evaluate the effect of sonidegib on the PK of the probe drugs warfarin and bupropion in patients with advanced solid tumours. Cohort 1 patients received a single warfarin 15-mg dose on Day 1 of the run-in period and on Cycle 2 Day 22 (C2D22) of sonidegib administration. Cohort 2 patients received a single bupropion 75-mg dose on Day 1 of run-in period and on C2D22 of sonidegib administration. Sonidegib 800 mg QD oral dosing began on Cycle 1 Day 1 of a 28-day cycle after the run-in period in both cohorts. RESULTS: The geometric means ratios [90% confidence interval] for (S)-warfarin with and without sonidegib were: area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUCinf ) 1.15 [1.07, 1.24] and maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ) 0.88 [0.81, 0.97]; and for (R)-warfarin were: AUCinf 1.10 [0.98, 1.24] and Cmax 0.93 [0.87, 1.0]. The geometric means ratios [90% confidence interval] of bupropion with and without sonidegib were: AUCinf 1.10 [0.99, 1.23] and Cmax 1.16 [0.95, 1.42]. Sonidegib 800 mg had a safety profile that was similar to that of lower dose sonidegib 200 mg and was unaffected by single doses of the probe drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Sonidegib dosed orally at 800 mg QD (higher than the Food and Drug Administration-approved dose) did not impact the PK or pharmacodynamics of warfarin (CYP2C9 probe substrate) or the PK of bupropion (CYP2B6 probe substrate).

Risk factors and management of pasireotide-associated hyperglycemia in acromegaly.

Pasireotide, a multireceptor-targeted somatostatin analog with highest affinity for somatostatin receptor subtype (SST) 5, has demonstrated superior efficacy over the SST2-preferential somatostatin analogs octreotide and lanreotide. The safety profile is similar to those of octreotide and lanreotide, except for a higher frequency and degree of hyperglycemia. This analysis investigated baseline characteristics and occurrence and management of hyperglycemia during pasireotide treatment in patients with acromegaly treated in two prospective clinical studies, SOM230C2305 (C2305) and SOM230C2402 (C2402; PAOLA). One hundred and seventy-eight patients naïve to medical therapy at baseline (C2305) and 125 uncontrolled on first-generation somatostatin analogs at baseline (C2402) received long-acting pasireotide in these studies. Of patients treated with pasireotide in studies C2305 and C2402, respectively, 75.3 (134/178) and 65.6% (82/125) developed hyperglycemia or experienced worsening of existing hyperglycemia. Occurrence of hyperglycemia during pasireotide treatment was less frequent in patients with lower age (<40 years, C2402; <30 years, C2305), normal glucose tolerance, and no history of hypertension or dyslipidemia at baseline. Thirteen (4%) patients discontinued pasireotide because of hyperglycemia-related adverse events. Metformin alone or in combination with other oral antidiabetic medications controlled elevations in glucose levels in most pasireotide-treated patients; 78% of C2305 patients and 73 (pasireotide 40 mg) and 60% (pasireotide 60 mg) of C2402 patients achieved the ADA/EASD goal of HbA1c <7% (<53 mmol/mol) at the end of the core phase. Not all patients develop hyperglycemia, and it is reversible upon pasireotide withdrawal. Close monitoring, patient education and prompt action remain key elements in addressing hyperglycemia during pasireotide treatment.

Use of late-night salivary cortisol to monitor response to medical treatment in Cushing's disease.

OBJECTIVE: Monitoring of patients with Cushing's disease on cortisol-lowering drugs is usually performed with urinary free cortisol (UFC). Late-night salivary cortisol (LNSC) has an established role in screening for hypercortisolism and can help to detect the loss of cortisol circadian rhythm. Less evidence exists regarding the usefulness of LNSC in monitoring pharmacological response in Cushing's disease. DESIGN: Exploratory analysis evaluating LNSC during a Phase III study of long-acting pasireotide in Cushing's disease (clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01374906). METHODS: Mean LNSC (mLNSC) was calculated from two samples, collected on the same days as the first two of three 24-h urine samples (used to calculate mean UFC [mUFC]). Clinical signs of hypercortisolism were evaluated over time. RESULTS: At baseline, 137 patients had evaluable mLNSC measurements; 91.2% had mLNSC exceeding the upper limit of normal (ULN; 3.2 nmol/L). Of patients with evaluable assessments at month 12 (n = 92), 17.4% had both mLNSC ≤ULN and mUFC ≤ULN; 22.8% had mLNSC ≤ULN, and 45.7% had mUFC ≤ULN. There was high variability in LNSC (intra-patient coefficient of variation (CV): 49.4%) and UFC (intra-patient CV: 39.2%). mLNSC levels decreased over 12 months of treatment and paralleled changes in mUFC. Moderate correlation was seen between mLNSC and mUFC (Spearman's correlation: ρ = 0.50 [all time points pooled]). Greater improvements in systolic/diastolic blood pressure and weight were seen in patients with both mLNSC ≤ULN and mUFC ≤ULN. CONCLUSION: mUFC and mLNSC are complementary measurements for monitoring treatment response in Cushing's disease, with better clinical outcomes seen for patients in whom both mUFC and mLNSC are controlled.

Real-world Clinical Outcomes of Pazopanib Immediately After Discontinuation of Immunotherapy for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

INTRODUCTION: In the first-line (1L) setting, pazopanib (PAZ) has been recommended by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network for the treatment of advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC). In 2018, immuno-oncology (IO) therapy became a commonly used 1L treatment option for aRCC. We report the real-world clinical outcomes of PAZ after IO therapy for patients with aRCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a longitudinal, retrospective medical record review study. The included patients were aged ≥ 18 years, had initiated second-line and/or beyond PAZ after IO therapy for clear cell aRCC on or before October 2017, and had complete medical records available from the diagnosis of aRCC to the discontinuation of PAZ, death, or the medical record extraction date (May 2018), whichever occurred first. The primary outcome variable was the PAZ duration of therapy. The secondary outcomes were progression-free survival and overall survival since PAZ initiation, the reasons for PAZ discontinuation, and the occurrence of adverse events (AEs). RESULTS: A total of 258 eligible patients had initiated IO therapies before PAZ as follows: nivolumab (68%), nivolumab plus ipilimumab (14%), pembrolizumab (12%), and ipilimumab (3%). Overall, the median PAZ duration of therapy was 13.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 10.1-16.0 months). The median progression-free survival with PAZ after IO therapy was 13.5 months (95% CI, 11.8 months to not reached). The estimated overall survival rate of PAZ after IO therapy at 6 and 12 months was 93% and 89%, respectively. A total of 109 patients (42%) had reported an AE. The most frequently reported AEs were fatigue (29%) and diarrhea (14%). No additional safety signal of hepatotoxicity was observed (increased aspartate aminotransferase, 5%; increased alanine transaminase, 6%). CONCLUSIONS: In the present real-world study, second-line and/or beyond PAZ after previous IO therapy was well-tolerated and effective for patients with aRCC.

Efficacy and safety of once-monthly pasireotide in Cushing's disease: a 12 month clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Cushing's disease is a rare debilitating endocrine disorder for which few prospective interventional studies have been done. We report results of the first phase 3 trial assessing long-acting intramuscular pasireotide in patients with Cushing's disease. METHODS: In this phase 3 clinical trial we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with persistent, recurrent, or de-novo (non-surgical candidates) Cushing's disease who had a mean urinary free cortisol (mUFC) concentration (from three 24 h samples) of 1·5-5·0 times the upper limit of normal (ULN), a normal or greater than normal morning plasma adrenocorticotropic hormone concentration, and a pituitary source of Cushing's syndrome, from 57 sites across 19 countries. Exclusion criteria included previous pasireotide treatment, mitotane therapy within 6 months, and pituitary irradiation within 10 years. We randomly allocated patients 1:1 (block size of four) using an interactive-response-technology system to intramuscular pasireotide 10 mg or 30 mg every 4 weeks for 12 months (in the core phase). We stratified randomisation by screening mUFC concentration (1·5 to <2·0 × ULN and 2·0-5·0 × ULN). The dose could be uptitrated (from 10 mg to 30 mg or from 30 mg to 40 mg) at month 4 if the mUFC concentration was greater than 1·5 × ULN, and at month 7, month 9, or month 12 if the mUFC concentration was greater than 1·0 × ULN. Investigators, patients, site personnel, and those assessing outcomes were masked to dose group allocation. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients in each group with an mUFC concentration of less than or equal to the ULN at month 7. Efficacy analyses were based on intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01374906. FINDINGS: Between Dec 28, 2011, and Dec 9, 2014, we randomly allocated 150 patients to receive pasireotide 10 mg (74 [49%] patients) or 30 mg (76 [51%] patients). The primary efficacy endpoint was met by 31 (41·9% [95% CI 30·5-53·9]) of 74 patients in the 10 mg group and 31 (40·8% [29·7-52·7]) of 76 in the 30 mg group. The most common adverse events were hyperglycaemia (36 [49%] in the 10 mg group and 36 [47%] in the 30 mg group), diarrhoea (26 [35%] and 33 [43%]), cholelithiasis (15 [20%] and 34 [45%]), diabetes mellitus (14 [19%] and 18 [24%]), and nausea (15 [20%] and 16 [21%]). Serious adverse events suspected to be study drug related were reported in eight (11%) patients in the 10 mg group and four (5%) in the 30 mg group. Two (3%) patients in the 30 mg group died during the study (pulmonary artery thrombosis and cardiorespiratory failure); neither death was judged to be related to the study drug. INTERPRETATION: Long-acting pasireotide normalised mUFC concentration in about 40% of patients with Cushing's disease at month 7 and had a similar safety profile to that of twice-daily subcutaneous pasireotide. Long-acting pasireotide is an efficacious treatment option for some patients with Cushing's disease who have persistent or recurrent disease after initial surgery or are not surgical candidates, and provides a convenient monthly administration schedule. FUNDING: Novartis Pharma AG.

Phase I dose-escalation study of long-acting pasireotide in patients with neuroendocrine tumors.

This phase I study aimed at determining the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and characterizing the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PKs), and efficacy of pasireotide in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumors (NETs). Patients were enrolled in two phases: dose-escalation phase (to determine the MTD) at a starting dose of 80 mg pasireotide long-acting release (LAR) i.m. followed by a dose-expansion phase (to evaluate safety and prelimi-nary efficacy). Associations between PK/pharmacodynamic parameters and clinical outcomes were evaluated using linear regression analysis. A total of 29 patients were treated with 80 mg (n=13) and 120 mg (n=16) doses. Most common primary tumor sites included small intestine (44.8%), pancreas (24.1%), and lung (17.2%). No protocol-defined dose-limiting toxicities were observed in the study; however, in post hoc analysis, a higher incidence of bradycardia (heart rate [HR] <40 beats per minute [bpm]) was observed with 120 mg (31.3%) vs 80 mg (0%). Two partial responses (PRs) were observed, both in the 120 mg dose cohort. Pasireotide concentrations correlated with tumor shrinkage, although the association was not statistically significant (P=0.08). Among the biomarkers analyzed, insulin-like growth factor 1 (IGF-1) showed a decreasing trend with increasing pasireotide concentration, while chromogranin A (CgA) and neuron-specific enolase (NSE) levels did not show any dose-response relationship. The most common adverse events in any dose group were hyperglycemia, fatigue, and nausea. MTD was defined at 120 mg for pasireotide LAR in patients with advanced NETs. Although objective radiographic responses were rarely observed with somatostatin analogs, two PRs were observed among 16 patients in the 120 mg cohort. Bradycardia (HR <40 bpm) appears to be a dose-limiting effect; however, the mechanism and clinical significance are uncertain. This study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01364415).

Tolerability and efficacy of glycemic control with saxagliptin in older patients (aged ≥ 65 years) with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus.

PURPOSE: To assess safety and efficacy of saxagliptin in older patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a post hoc analysis of pooled data from older patients (≥65 years of age) from five 24-week phase III trials: three studies of saxagliptin versus placebo as an add-on therapy to metformin, glyburide, or a thiazolidinedione; and two studies of saxagliptin versus placebo as monotherapy in drug-naïve patients. Separate analyses were conducted on one study of initial combination therapy with saxagliptin plus metformin versus metformin monotherapy in drug-naïve patients. The safety analysis population for the five-study pool included 428 patients ≥ 65 years of age with baseline glycated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) 7.0% to 10.5% who received saxagliptin 2.5 or 5 mg or placebo, and for the study of initial combination therapy included 69 patients ≥ 65 years of age with baseline HbA(1c) 8.0% to 12.0% who received saxagliptin 5 mg in combination with metformin or metformin monotherapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline HbA(1c). RESULTS: In the five-study pool, the differences in the adjusted mean change from baseline HbA(1c) among older patients receiving saxagliptin versus placebo were -0.60% (95% confidence interval [CI], -0.99% to -0.21%) for saxagliptin 2.5 mg and -0.55% (-0.97% to -0.14%) for saxagliptin 5 mg; in the initial combination study, the difference was -1.22% (-2.27% to -0.17%) among older patients receiving saxagliptin 5 mg plus metformin versus metformin monotherapy. The results were generally similar in older and younger patients. Saxagliptin was well tolerated; the incidence and types of adverse events were similar for saxagliptin and comparators. Hypoglycemia was reported in 3.0% to 9.4% of patients receiving saxagliptin (0%-8.0% for comparators) and was confirmed (finger stick glucose ≤ 50 mg/dL, with associated symptoms) in 0% to 0.7% (0%-0.7% for comparators); hypoglycemic episodes did not vary by age category and did not require medical intervention. CONCLUSION: Saxagliptin was effective and well tolerated, with a low risk of hypoglycemia, when used as monotherapy, add-on therapy, or initial combination therapy with metformin in older patients with T2DM.

Efficacy and safety of saxagliptin combination therapy in US patients with type 2 diabetes.

BACKGROUND: The mechanism of action of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, such as saxagliptin, makes them suitable for combination therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Genetic, cultural, and environmental differences in individuals from different regions of the world may result in differences in treatment response to oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). This post-hoc subanalysis assessed the efficacy and safety of saxagliptin as add-on therapy to metformin, glyburide, or a thiazolidinedione in patients with inadequately controlled T2DM in the United States. METHODS: In 3 phase 3 studies of patients with T2DM uncontrolled on monotherapy, 547 adult US patients were randomized to receive saxagliptin (2.5 or 5 mg/d) or placebo as add-on to metformin, glyburide, or a thiazolidinedione (pioglitazone or rosiglitazone). Efficacy was assessed as the change from baseline to week 24 in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and postprandial glucose area under the curve (PPG-AUC) and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c<7.0%. Pooled safety and tolerability data across trials were also analyzed. RESULTS: Reductions from baseline to week 24 in HbA1c were observed in all saxagliptin treatment groups versus placebo: saxagliptin 2.5 or 5 mg plus metformin (mean difference from placebo, -0.87% and -0.89%, respectively), glyburide (-0.51% and -0.52%), or thiazolidinedione (-0.45% and -0.60%). Improvement was also observed in FPG and PPG-AUC. Adverse events for the US cohort were consistent with previously reported data from the 3 trials. The pooled incidence of reported hypoglycemia was 5.3% and 11.4% with saxagliptin 2.5 and 5 mg/d add-on, respectively, versus 6.8% with placebo add-on. CONCLUSIONS: This post-hoc analysis in a cohort of US patients with T2DM uncontrolled on monotherapy suggests that saxagliptin 2.5 or 5 mg as add-on therapy to OADs results in improvement across key glycemic parameters compared with placebo add-on and was generally safe and well tolerated.

Safety and efficacy of saxagliptin in combination with submaximal sulphonylurea versus up-titrated sulphonylurea over 76 weeks.

To assess the long-term efficacy and safety of saxagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on sulphonylurea monotherapy, 768 patients were randomised to saxagliptin 2.5 or 5 mg in combination with glyburide 7.5 mg versus placebo added to up-titrated glyburide over 76 weeks (24 weeks plus 52-week extension) in this phase 3, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial; 557 patients completed the study, 142 without being rescued. At 76 weeks, adjusted mean changes from baseline HbA(1C) (repeated measures model) (95% confidence interval) for saxagliptin 2.5 mg, saxagliptin 5 mg, and up-titrated glyburide were 0.11% (-0.05, 0.27), 0.03% (-0.14, 0.19), and 0.69% (0.47, 0.92), respectively (post hoc and nominal p < 0.0001 for saxagliptin 2.5 and 5 mg vs. up-titrated glyburide). Adverse event frequency was similar in all treatment groups; reported hypoglycaemia event rates were 24.2%, 22.9%, and 20.6% with saxagliptin 2.5 mg, saxagliptin 5 mg, and up-titrated glyburide, respectively. Saxagliptin plus glyburide provided sustained incremental efficacy compared with up-titrated glyburide over 76 weeks, and was generally well tolerated.

Saxagliptin and metformin XR combination therapy provides glycemic control over 24 hours in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin.

OBJECTIVE: To assess 24-hour glycemic control with saxagliptin compared with placebo as add-on treatment to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and inadequate glycemic control. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a 4-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase IIIb trial comparing the antihyperglycemic activity of saxagliptin 5 mg once daily in combination with a stable dose of metformin extended release (XR) vs. placebo in combination with metformin XR in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled (screening glycated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)] 7-10%) with stable doses of metformin immediate release or metformin XR ≥ 1500 mg/day. Ninety-three adult patients were randomized and received treatment. The primary outcome measure was change from baseline to week 4 in 24-hour mean weighted glucose (MWG). RESULTS: The reduction from baseline in 24-hour MWG was significantly greater for saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin XR (-13.8 mg/dL; -0.77 mmol/L) compared with placebo + metformin XR (3.0 mg/dL; 0.17 mmol/L) (p = 0.0001). At week 4, the mean decrease in plasma glucose was sustained through a 24-hour period in saxagliptin-treated patients. Treatment with saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin XR resulted in significant mean reductions from baseline in 4-hour mean weighted postprandial glucose (PPG), 2-hour PPG, 3-day average mean daily glucose, and fasting plasma glucose levels compared with placebo + metformin XR (p ≤ 0.001). The proportion of adverse events (AEs) was similar in the two treatment groups, with no reported hypoglycemic AEs in saxagliptin-treated patients. The 4-week evaluation period may have been insufficient to evaluate longer term effects on hyperglycemia or to identify additional AEs. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with T2DM treated with metformin XR, saxagliptin 5 mg orally administered once daily in the evening for 4 weeks effectively lowered plasma glucose concentrations through the 24-hour dosing interval and was well tolerated.

The efficacy and safety of saxagliptin when added to metformin therapy in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes with metformin alone.

OBJECTIVE: This 24-week trial assessed the efficacy and safety of saxagliptin as add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycemic control with metformin alone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of saxagliptin (2.5, 5, or 10 mg once daily) or placebo plus a stable dose of metformin (1,500-2,500 mg) in 743 patients (A1C > or =7.0 and < or =10.0%). Efficacy analyses were performed using an ANCOVA model using last observation carried forward methodology on primary (A1C) and secondary (fasting plasma glucose [FPG] and postprandial glucose [PPG] area under the curve [AUC]) end points. RESULTS: Saxagliptin (2.5, 5, and 10 mg) plus metformin demonstrated statistically significant adjusted mean decreases from baseline to week 24 versus placebo in A1C (-0.59, -0.69, and -0.58 vs. +0.13%; all P < 0.0001), FPG (-14.31, -22.03, and -20.50 vs. +1.24 mg/dl; all P < 0.0001), and PPG AUC (-8,891, -9,586, and -8,137 vs. -3,291 mg . min/dl; all P < 0.0001). More than twice as many patients achieved A1C <7.0% with 2.5, 5, and 10 mg saxagliptin versus placebo (37, 44, and 44 vs. 17%; all P < 0.0001). beta-Cell function and postprandial C-peptide, insulin, and glucagon AUCs improved in all saxagliptin treatment groups at week 24. Incidence of hypoglycemic adverse events and weight reductions were similar to those with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Saxagliptin once daily added to metformin therapy was generally well tolerated and led to statistically significant improvements in glycemic indexes versus placebo added to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin alone.