Long-Term Safety and Efficacy of Recombinant Human Parathyroid Hormone (1-84) in Adults With Chronic Hypoparathyroidism.

Context: Chronic hypoparathyroidism is conventionally treated with oral calcium and active vitamin D to reach and maintain targeted serum calcium and phosphorus levels, but some patients remain inadequately controlled. Objective: To assess long-term safety and efficacy of recombinant human parathyroid hormone (1-84) (rhPTH(1-84)) treatment. Methods: This was an open-label extension study at 12 US centers. Adults (n = 49) with chronic hypoparathyroidism were included. The intervention was rhPTH(1-84) for 6 years. The main outcome measures were safety, biochemical measures, oral supplement doses, bone indices. Results: Thirty-eight patients (77.6%) completed the study. Throughout 72 months, mean albumin-adjusted serum calcium was within 2.00 to 2.25 mmol/L (8.0-9.0 mg/dL). At baseline, 65% of patients with measurements (n = 24/37) were hypercalciuric; of these, 54% (n = 13/24) were normocalciuric at month 72. Mean serum phosphorus declined from 1.6 ± 0.19 mmol/L at baseline (n = 49) to 1.3 ± 0.20 mmol/L at month 72 (n = 36). Mean estimated glomerular filtration rate was stable. rhPTH(1-84)-related adverse events were reported in 51.0% of patients (n = 25/49); all but 1 event were mild/moderate in severity. Mean oral calcium supplementation reduced by 45% ± 113.6% and calcitriol by 74% ± 39.3%. Bone turnover markers declined by month 32 to a plateau above pretreatment values; only aminoterminal propeptide of type 1 collagen remained outside the reference range. Mean bone mineral density z score fell at one-third radius and was stable at other sites. Conclusion: 6 years of rhPTH(1-84) treatment was associated with sustained improvements in biochemical parameters, a reduction in the percentage of patients with hypercalciuria, stable renal function, and decreased supplement requirements. rhPTH(1-84) was well tolerated; no new safety signals were identified.

Oral semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, renal impairment, or other comorbidities, and in older patients.

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) often have comorbidities, such as cardiovascular disease or chronic kidney disease, and a large and growing proportion of the T2D patient population is over 65 years. There are many therapies for the treatment of T2D but not all are suitable for patients with comorbidities. Oral semaglutide is a tablet formulation of a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) and was recently approved for the treatment of T2D, representing an oral alternative to injectable GLP-1RAs. This article reviews data from: PIONEER 6, a phase 3a cardiovascular outcomes trial in patients at high cardiovascular risk; PIONEER 5, a phase 3a trial in patients with moderate renal impairment; a post-hoc analysis of PIONEER data by age; and pharmacokinetic trials investigating the effects of renal impairment, gastrointestinal disease, and hepatic impairment on the exposure of oral semaglutide. PIONEER 6 demonstrated the cardiovascular safety of oral semaglutide compared with placebo (hazard ratio: 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57, 1.11; p < 0.001 for noninferiority), ruling out excess cardiovascular risk. In PIONEER 5, oral semaglutide was superior to placebo in decreasing glycated hemoglobin over 26 weeks (estimated treatment difference [ETD]: -0.8%; 95% CI: -1.0, -0.6; p < 0.0001) and body weight (ETD: -2.5 kg; 95% CI: -3.2, -1.8; p < 0.0001), and renal function was unchanged in both treatment groups. There was no effect of age on glycemic efficacy of oral semaglutide and the presence of upper gastrointestinal disease or hepatic impairment did not affect the pharmacokinetics of semaglutide. Across the trials, the safety profile of oral semaglutide was as expected for a GLP-1RA, with gastrointestinal adverse events most commonly reported. As such, oral semaglutide provides an effective oral GLP-1RA treatment option in older patients and/or those with comorbidities, with no requirements for dose adjustment.

Safety and Efficacy of 5 Years of Treatment With Recombinant Human Parathyroid Hormone in Adults With Hypoparathyroidism.

CONTEXT: Conventional hypoparathyroidism treatment with oral calcium and active vitamin D is aimed at correcting hypocalcemia but does not address other physiologic defects caused by PTH deficiency. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate long-term safety and tolerability of recombinant human PTH (1-84) [rhPTH(1-84)]. DESIGN: Open-label extension study; 5-year interim analysis. SETTING: 12 US centers. PATIENTS: Adults (N = 49) with chronic hypoparathyroidism. INTERVENTION(S): rhPTH(1-84) 25 or 50 µg/d initially, with 25-µg adjustments permitted to a 100 µg/d maximum. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Safety parameters; composite efficacy outcome was the proportion of patients with ≥50% reduction in oral calcium (or ≤500 mg/d) and calcitriol (or ≤0.25 µg/d) doses, and albumin-corrected serum calcium normalized or maintained compared with baseline, not exceeding upper limit of normal. RESULTS: Forty patients completed 60 months of treatment. Mean albumin-corrected serum calcium levels remained between 8.2 and 8.7 mg/dL. Between baseline and month 60, levels ± SD of urinary calcium, serum phosphorus, and calcium-phosphorus product decreased by 101.2 ± 236.24 mg/24 hours, 1.0 ± 0.78 mg/dL, and 8.5 ± 8.29 mg2/dL2, respectively. Serum creatinine level and estimated glomerular filtration rate were unchanged. Treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were reported in 48 patients (98.0%; hypocalcemia, 36.7%; muscle spasms, 32.7%; paresthesia, 30.6%; sinusitis, 30.6%; nausea, 30.6%) and serious AEs in 13 (26.5%). At month 60, 28 patients (70.0%) achieved the composite efficacy outcome. Bone turnover markers increased, peaked at ∼12 months, and then declined to values that remained above baseline. CONCLUSION: Treatment with rhPTH(1-84) for 5 years demonstrated a safety profile consistent with previous studies and improved key biochemical parameters.

Oral Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Establishing cardiovascular safety of new therapies for type 2 diabetes is important. Safety data are available for the subcutaneous form of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist semaglutide but are needed for oral semaglutide. METHODS: We assessed cardiovascular outcomes of once-daily oral semaglutide in an event-driven, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients at high cardiovascular risk (age of ≥50 years with established cardiovascular or chronic kidney disease, or age of ≥60 years with cardiovascular risk factors only). The primary outcome in a time-to-event analysis was the first occurrence of a major adverse cardiovascular event (death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke). The trial was designed to rule out 80% excess cardiovascular risk as compared with placebo (noninferiority margin of 1.8 for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval for the hazard ratio for the primary outcome). RESULTS: A total of 3183 patients were randomly assigned to receive oral semaglutide or placebo. The mean age of the patients was 66 years; 2695 patients (84.7%) were 50 years of age or older and had cardiovascular or chronic kidney disease. The median time in the trial was 15.9 months. Major adverse cardiovascular events occurred in 61 of 1591 patients (3.8%) in the oral semaglutide group and 76 of 1592 (4.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.79; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.57 to 1.11; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Results for components of the primary outcome were as follows: death from cardiovascular causes, 15 of 1591 patients (0.9%) in the oral semaglutide group and 30 of 1592 (1.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.27 to 0.92); nonfatal myocardial infarction, 37 of 1591 patients (2.3%) and 31 of 1592 (1.9%), respectively (hazard ratio, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.90); and nonfatal stroke, 12 of 1591 patients (0.8%) and 16 of 1592 (1.0%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.57). Death from any cause occurred in 23 of 1591 patients (1.4%) in the oral semaglutide group and 45 of 1592 (2.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.31 to 0.84). Gastrointestinal adverse events leading to discontinuation of oral semaglutide or placebo were more common with oral semaglutide. CONCLUSIONS: In this trial involving patients with type 2 diabetes, the cardiovascular risk profile of oral semaglutide was not inferior to that of placebo. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; PIONEER 6 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02692716.).

Patient-reported outcomes from a randomized, crossover trial comparing a pen injector with insulin degludec versus a pen injector with insulin glargine U100 in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Objective: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is associated with insulin resistance and deteriorated glycemic control that can be restored with insulin injections. Choice of insulin pen injector may affect complexity, adherence, efficacy of treatment and health-related quality of life. We describe detailed patient-reported outcomes (PROs) on treatment impact and preference comparing insulin degludec (degludec) using FlexTouch1 versus insulin glargine U100 (glargine U100) with SoloStar2 pen injector.Methods: In this randomized, multicenter (USA), open-label, crossover, treat-to-target study (NCT01570751), patients with T2D using high-dose insulin (≥81 U/day from vials) were randomized (n = 145) 1:1 to 16 weeks of degludec U200 (3 mL FlexTouch) followed by 16 weeks of glargine U100 (3 mL SoloStar) or vice versa. PRO questionnaires assessed treatment impact and patient preference of pen injectors.Results: Significantly more patients (p < .01) considered FlexTouch "extremely easy" for learning (62.5 vs. 43.0%), maintaining (63.2 vs. 42.2%) and adjusting the dose (63.2 vs. 44.4%), and significantly more were "very" or "extremely confident" in using the device (60.3 vs. 36.3%) and in its accuracy (50.7 vs. 30.4%) versus SoloStar. Significantly more were "not at all bothered" by device discomfort (74.3 vs. 54.1%), whereas device size (83.8 vs. 80.0%) or public use (69.9 vs. 60.7%) were numerically in favor of FlexTouch. Significantly more patients preferred degludec treatment with FlexTouch (59 vs. 22%), preferred to continue (67 vs. 15%) and recommend (67 vs. 14%) use of FlexTouch compared with SoloStar with glargine U100.Conclusions: In this randomized, crossover trial, lower treatment impact and higher patient preference were reported for FlexTouch versus SoloStar pen injectors.

Semaglutide induces weight loss in subjects with type 2 diabetes regardless of baseline BMI or gastrointestinal adverse events in the SUSTAIN 1 to 5 trials.

AIMS: To assess the effect of baseline body mass index (BMI) and the occurrence of nausea and/or vomiting on weight loss induced by semalgutide, a once-weekly glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Semaglutide demonstrated superior reductions in HbA1c and superior weight loss (by 2.3-6.3 kg) versus different comparators across the SUSTAIN 1 to 5 trials; the contributing factors to weight loss are not established. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Subjects with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (drug-naïve or on background treatment) were randomized to subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 mg (excluding SUSTAIN 3), 1.0 mg (all trials), or comparator (placebo, sitagliptin, exenatide extended release or insulin glargine). Subjects were subdivided by baseline BMI and reporting (yes/no) of any nausea and/or vomiting. Change from baseline in body weight was assessed within each trial and subgroup. A mediation analysis separated weight loss into direct or indirect (mediated by nausea or vomiting) effects. RESULTS: Clinically relevant weight-loss differences were observed across all BMI subgroups, with a trend towards higher absolute weight loss with higher baseline BMI. Overall, 15.2% to 24.0% and 21.5% to 27.2% of subjects experienced nausea or vomiting with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg, respectively, versus 6.0% to 14.1% with comparators. Only 0.07 to 0.5 kg of the treatment difference between semaglutide and comparators was mediated by nausea or vomiting (indirect effects). CONCLUSIONS: In SUSTAIN 1 to 5, semaglutide-induced weight loss was consistently greater versus comparators, regardless of baseline BMI. The contribution of nausea or vomiting to this weight loss was minor.

Insulin Degludec 200 Units/mL Is Associated With Lower Injection Frequency and Improved Patient-Reported Outcomes Compared With Insulin Glargine 100 Units/mL in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Requiring High-Dose Insulin.

IN BRIEF Many patients with type 2 diabetes require high basal insulin doses, necessitating multiple injections, increasing patient burden, and resulting in reduced treatment adherence. This randomized, controlled, crossover trial compared the efficacy, safety, and patient-reported outcomes for a concentrated formulation of insulin degludec (200 units/mL) to those of insulin glargine in patients requiring high doses of basal insulin. By offering equivalent glycemic control while reducing the rate of confirmed hypoglycemia and the number of injections required for administration, insulin degludec 200 units/mL may be preferred by patients with type 2 diabetes who require high basal insulin doses.

Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes.

BACKGROUND: Regulatory guidance specifies the need to establish cardiovascular safety of new diabetes therapies in patients with type 2 diabetes in order to rule out excess cardiovascular risk. The cardiovascular effects of semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide 1 analogue with an extended half-life of approximately 1 week, in type 2 diabetes are unknown. METHODS: We randomly assigned 3297 patients with type 2 diabetes who were on a standard-care regimen to receive once-weekly semaglutide (0.5 mg or 1.0 mg) or placebo for 104 weeks. The primary composite outcome was the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. We hypothesized that semaglutide would be noninferior to placebo for the primary outcome. The noninferiority margin was 1.8 for the upper boundary of the 95% confidence interval of the hazard ratio. RESULTS: At baseline, 2735 of the patients (83.0%) had established cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, or both. The primary outcome occurred in 108 of 1648 patients (6.6%) in the semaglutide group and in 146 of 1649 patients (8.9%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.95; P<0.001 for noninferiority). Nonfatal myocardial infarction occurred in 2.9% of the patients receiving semaglutide and in 3.9% of those receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.51 to 1.08; P=0.12); nonfatal stroke occurred in 1.6% and 2.7%, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.99; P=0.04). Rates of death from cardiovascular causes were similar in the two groups. Rates of new or worsening nephropathy were lower in the semaglutide group, but rates of retinopathy complications (vitreous hemorrhage, blindness, or conditions requiring treatment with an intravitreal agent or photocoagulation) were significantly higher (hazard ratio, 1.76; 95% CI, 1.11 to 2.78; P=0.02). Fewer serious adverse events occurred in the semaglutide group, although more patients discontinued treatment because of adverse events, mainly gastrointestinal. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with type 2 diabetes who were at high cardiovascular risk, the rate of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke was significantly lower among patients receiving semaglutide than among those receiving placebo, an outcome that confirmed the noninferiority of semaglutide. (Funded by Novo Nordisk; SUSTAIN-6 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01720446 .).

EFFECT OF TOTAL DAILY DOSE ON EFFICACY, DOSING, AND SAFETY OF 2 DOSE TITRATION REGIMENS OF HUMAN REGULAR U500 INSULIN IN SEVERELY INSULIN-RESISTANT PATIENTS WITH TYPE 2 DIABETES.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the influence of baseline U-100 insulin total daily dose (TDD) on clinical outcomes in severely insulin-resistant patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes treated with human regular U-500 insulin (U-500R) from the perspective of current dosing recommendations. METHODS: Data from a recent prospective, randomized trial comparing thricedaily (TID) and twice-daily (BID) U-500R in 325 patients transitioned from high-dose/high-volume U-100 insulin were analyzed across baseline U-100 TDD units and units/kg subgroups (≤300 units [n = 224, 68.9%] and >300 units [n = 101, 31.1%]; ≤2 units/kg [n = 96, 29.5%] and >2 units/kg [n = 229, 70.5%]). Subgroup effects on treatment differences were evaluated, and outcomes between treatment-pooled subgroups were compared. RESULTS: At 24 weeks, significant reductions in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were observed for all subgroups (range: -1.01% to -1.38%, P<.05). Within-subgroup treatment effects were similar with no treatment-by-subgroup interactions; however, a greater reduction was noted in the >300 units subgroup (P = .04). No TID/BID differences within subgroups or treatment-by-subgroup interactions were observed for TDD or weight increase from baseline. Overall hypoglycemia rates were similar between treatments (within subgroups) and showed no interactions. However, rates were higher in the >300 units subgroup for severe hypoglycemia (P = .04) and in both higher-dose subgroups for documented symptomatic hypoglycemia ≤70 mg/dL (P<.001, units; P = .001, units/kg). CONCLUSION: Both TID and BID U-500R were efficacious and safe across TDD subgroups, though higher hypoglycemia rates were observed in higher-dose, treatment-pooled subgroups. U-500R dosing recommendations have been updated accordingly. ABBREVIATIONS: AE = adverse event BID = twice daily HbA1c = glycated hemoglobin QID = 4 times daily RCT = randomized clinical trial T2D = type 2 diabetes TDD = total daily dose TID = thrice daily U-500R = human regular U-500 insulin.

Efficacy and Safety of Insulin Degludec 200 U/mL and Insulin Degludec 100 U/mL in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes (Begin: Compare).

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of the present study was to provide clinical data on the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec (IDeg) 200 U/mL compared with IDeg 100 U/mL in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) currently treated with basal insulin in combination with oral antidiabetic drugs. METHODS: In this 22-week, treat-to-target trial, eligible adult patients with T2DM were randomized 1:1 to IDeg 200 or IDeg 100 U/mL once daily (OD) (n = 186 and 187, respectively). The starting insulin dose was based on a 1:1 transfer of the total prerandomization basal insulin dose. The primary endpoint was change (%) from baseline in glycosylated hemoglobin A1C (A1C) after 22 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: A total of 373 subjects (mean age 59.8 years, A1C 8.2%, fasting plasma glucose 149.6 mg/dL [8.3 mmol/L], body mass index 33.3 kg/m2) were randomized. A1C reduction with IDeg 200 U/mL was noninferior to that of IDeg 100 U/mL (IDeg 200 U/mL - IDeg 100 U/mL estimated treatment difference: -0.11%, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.28 to 0.05). Rates of overall confirmed hypoglycemia were low and similar between both formulations (5.17 and 5.66 events/patient-year of exposure [PYE] for IDeg 200 and 100 U/mL, respectively). Similarly, the rates of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemia were low (1.27 and 1.70 events/PYE for 200 and 100 U/mL). In general, both IDeg formulations were well tolerated (respective rates of adverse events: 4.16 and 3.00 events/PYE for 200 and 100 U/mL). CONCLUSION: The 200 and 100 U/mL formulations of IDeg provide comparable and effective levels of glycemic control with similar, low rates of overall confirmed and nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemia.

Postprandial versus preprandial dosing of biphasic insulin aspart in elderly type 2 diabetes patients.

Preprandial dosing (within 5 min before meal) and postprandial dosing (15-20 min after meal onset) of NovoLog Mix 70/30 (BIAsp 30, a biphasic formulation of insulin aspart, 30% soluble and 70% protamine-crystallized) were compared in elderly (> or =65 years) type 2 diabetes patients in this open-label, 12-week, crossover study. Ninety-three patients were treated with b.i.d. preprandial injections of BIAsp 30 during a 2-week run-in period and subsequently randomized to a 4-week treatment with either pre- or postprandial b.i.d. BIAsp 30, followed by crossover to the other regimen for 4 weeks. Mean plasma glucose values during a 4-h mealtest at the end of each treatment were similar for pre- and postprandial BIAsp 30 (153 +/- 58 mg/dl and 161 +/- 59 mg/dl, respectively, difference not significant). However, the mean blood glucose increment from self-measured blood glucose values was slightly but significantly greater after postprandial injection than after preprandial injection (treatment difference: 16.3mg/dl; 95% CI: [0.5, 29.3]). Fifty-six percent of patients reported a hypoglycemic episode; postprandial injection did not increase the incidence of hypoglycemia as compared to preprandial injection (113 episodes versus 125 episodes, respectively). For some elderly type 2 diabetes patients, postprandial injection of BIAsp 30 may be an acceptable alternative to standard preprandial injection.