Safety and Efficacy of Efruxifermin in Combination With a GLP-1 Receptor Agonist in Patients With NASH/MASH and Type 2 Diabetes in a Randomized Phase 2 Study.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: In phase 2 studies, efruxifermin, an Fc-FGF21 analog, significantly reduced steatohepatitis and fibrosis in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, now called metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (MASH), for which there is no approved treatment. Type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity are prevalent among patients with MASH and increasingly treated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs). This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of efruxifermin in patients with MASH, fibrosis, and T2D taking a GLP-1RA. METHODS: Cohort D was a double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b study in adults with T2D and MASH with fibrosis (F1-F3) on stable GLP-1RA therapy randomized (2:1) to receive efruxifermin 50 mg or placebo, once weekly for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint was safety and tolerability of efruxifermin added to a stable dose of GLP-1RA. Secondary endpoints included changes in hepatic fat fraction (HFF), markers of liver injury and fibrosis, and metabolic parameters. RESULTS: Adults (N = 31) with T2D and MASH fibrosis (F1-F3) on a stable GLP-1RA (semaglutide, 48.4%; dulaglutide, 45.2%; liraglutide, 6.5%) received efruxifermin 50 mg (n = 21) or placebo (n = 10) for 12 weeks. The addition of efruxifermin to a GLP-1RA appeared safe and well-tolerated. The most frequent efruxifermin-related adverse events were mild to moderate gastrointestinal events. One patient receiving efruxifermin discontinued due to nausea, and another withdrew consent. There were no treatment-related serious adverse events. After 12 weeks, efruxifermin reduced HFF by 65% (P < .0001 vs placebo) compared with a 10% reduction for placebo (GLP-1RA alone). Efruxifermin also improved noninvasive markers of liver injury, fibrosis, glucose, and lipid metabolism while maintaining GLP-1RA-mediated weight loss. CONCLUSIONS: The tolerability profile of efruxifermin added to GLP-1RA appeared comparable to that of either drug alone, while also significantly reducing HFF and noninvasive markers of fibrosis in patients with MASH and T2D. Liver health in patients already on a GLP-1RA may be further improved by addition of efruxifermin. CLINICALTRIALS: gov, Number: NCT05039450.

Tirzepatide Improved Markers of Islet Cell Function and Insulin Sensitivity in People With T2D (SURPASS-2).

CONTEXT: In previous SURPASS studies tirzepatide reduced HbA1c and body weight and improved markers of insulin sensitivity (IS) and beta-cell function to a greater extent than comparators. OBJECTIVE: Explore changes in biomarkers of beta-cell function and IS and in efficacy profiles in baseline biomarker quartile analyses with tirzepatide compared to semaglutide. DESIGN: Post-hoc analysis of SURPASS-2 Phase 3 trial (participants randomly assigned to receive weekly subcutaneous tirzepatide or semaglutide for 40 weeks). SETTING: Post-hoc analysis of 128 sites in 8 countries. PARTICIPANTS: 1879 participants with T2D. INTERVENTIONS: Once-weekly tirzepatide (5, 10, 15 mg) or semaglutide 1 mg. MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES: Change in HOMA2-B, HOMA2-IR, fasting glucagon, fasting C-peptide, and fasting insulin. RESULTS: At week 40, greater increase in HOMA2-B was seen with tirzepatide (5, 10, 15 mg) doses (96.9 to 120.4%) than with semaglutide 1 mg (84.0%) [p<0.05]. There was a greater reduction in HOMA2-IR with all doses of tirzepatide (15.5 to 24.0%) than with semaglutide 1 mg (5.1%) [p<0.05]. Tirzepatide 10 and 15 mg resulted a significant reduction in both fasting C-peptide (5.2 to 6.0%) and fasting glucagon (53.0 to 55.3%) compared to an increase of C-peptide (3.3%) and a reduction of glucagon (47.7%) with semaglutide 1 mg [p<0.05]. HbA1c and body weight reductions were greater with all tirzepatide doses than semaglutide within each HOMA2-B and HOMA2-IR baseline quartile. CONCLUSION: In this post-hoc analysis improvements in HbA1c and weight loss were consistent and significantly higher with tirzepatide, irrespective of baseline beta cell function and insulin resistance, compared to semaglutide.

Tirzepatide vs Insulin Lispro Added to Basal Insulin in Type 2 Diabetes: The SURPASS-6 Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Tirzepatide is a glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Efficacy and safety of adding tirzepatide vs prandial insulin to treatment in patients with inadequate glycemic control with basal insulin have not been described. Objective: To assess the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide vs insulin lispro as an adjunctive therapy to insulin glargine. Design, Setting, and Participants: This open-label, phase 3b clinical trial was conducted at 135 sites in 15 countries (participants enrolled from October 19, 2020, to November 1, 2022) in 1428 adults with type 2 diabetes taking basal insulin. Interventions: Participants were randomized (in a 1:1:1:3 ratio) to receive once-weekly subcutaneous injections of tirzepatide (5 mg [n = 243], 10 mg [n = 238], or 15 mg [n = 236]) or prandial thrice-daily insulin lispro (n = 708). Main Outcomes and Measures: Outcomes included noninferiority of tirzepatide (pooled cohort) vs insulin lispro, both in addition to insulin glargine, in HbA1c change from baseline at week 52 (noninferiority margin, 0.3%). Key secondary end points included change in body weight and percentage of participants achieving hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) target of less than 7.0%. Results: Among 1428 randomized participants (824 [57.7%] women; mean [SD] age, 58.8 [9.7] years; mean [SD] HbA1c, 8.8% [1.0%]), 1304 (91.3%) completed the trial. At week 52, estimated mean change from baseline in HbA1c with tirzepatide (pooled cohort) was -2.1% vs -1.1% with insulin lispro, resulting in mean HbA1c levels of 6.7% vs 7.7% (estimated treatment difference, -0.98% [95% CI, -1.17% to -0.79%]; P < .001); results met noninferiority criteria and statistical superiority was achieved. Estimated mean change from baseline in body weight was -9.0 kg with tirzepatide and 3.2 kg with insulin lispro (estimated treatment difference, -12.2 kg [95% CI, -13.4 to -10.9]). The percentage of participants reaching HbA1c less than 7.0% was 68% (483 of 716) with tirzepatide and 36% (256 of 708) with insulin lispro (odds ratio, 4.2 [95% CI, 3.2-5.5]). The most common adverse events with tirzepatide were mild to moderate gastrointestinal symptoms (nausea: 14%-26%; diarrhea: 11%-15%; vomiting: 5%-13%). Hypoglycemia event rates (blood glucose level <54 mg/dL or severe hypoglycemia) were 0.4 events per patient-year with tirzepatide (pooled) and 4.4 events per patient-year with insulin lispro. Conclusions and Relevance: In people with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes treated with basal insulin, weekly tirzepatide compared with prandial insulin as an additional treatment with insulin glargine demonstrated reductions in HbA1c and body weight with less hypoglycemia. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04537923.

Safety and efficacy of once-weekly efruxifermin versus placebo in non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (HARMONY): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 2b trial.

BACKGROUND: Fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) regulates metabolism and protects cells against stress. Efruxifermin is a bivalent Fc-FGF21 analogue that replicates FGF21 agonism of fibroblast growth factor receptor 1c, 2c, or 3c. The aim of this phase 2b study was to assess its efficacy and safety in patients with non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and moderate (F2) or severe (F3) fibrosis. METHODS: HARMONY is a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 96-week, phase 2b trial that was initiated at 41 clinics in the USA. Adults with biopsy-confirmed NASH, defined by a non-alcoholic fatty liver disease activity score (NAS) of 4 or higher and scores of 1 or higher in each of steatosis, ballooning, and lobular inflammation, with histological stage F2 or F3 fibrosis, were randomly assigned (1:1:1), via an interactive response system, to receive placebo or efruxifermin (28 mg or 50 mg), subcutaneously once weekly. Patients, investigators, pathologists, site staff, and the sponsor were masked to group assignments during the study. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with improvement in fibrosis of at least 1 stage and no worsening of NASH, based on analyses of baseline and week 24 biopsies (liver biopsy analysis set [LBAS]). A sensitivity analysis evaluated the endpoint in the full analysis set (FAS), for which patients with missing biopsies were considered non-responders. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04767529, and is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between March 22, 2021, and Feb 7, 2022, 747 patients were assessed for eligibility and 128 patients (mean age 54·7 years [SD 10·4]; 79 [62%] female and 49 male [38%]; 118 [92%] white; and 56 [41%] Hispanic or Latino) were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive placebo (n=43), efruxifermin 28 mg (n=42; two randomised patients were not dosed because of an administrative error), or efruxifermin 50 mg (n=43). In the LBAS (n=113), eight (20%) of 41 patients in the placebo group had an improvement in fibrosis of at least 1 stage and no worsening of NASH by week 24 versus 15 (39%) of 38 patients in the efruxifermin 28 mg group (risk ratio [RR] 2·3 [95% CI 1·1-4·8]; p=0·025) and 14 (41%) of 34 patients in the efruxifermin 50 mg group (2·2 [1·0-5·0]; p=0·036). Based on the FAS (n=128), eight (19%) of 43 patients in the placebo group met this endpoint versus 15 (36%) of 42 in the efruxifermin 28 mg group (RR 2·2 [95% CI 1·0-4·8]; p=0·033) and 14 (33%) of 43 in the efruxifermin 50 mg group (1·9 [0·8-4·3]; p=0·123). The most frequent efruxifermin-related adverse events were diarrhoea (16 [40%] of 40 patients in the efruxifermin 28 mg group and 17 [40%] of 43 patients in efruxifermin 50 mg group vs eight [19%] of 43 patients in the placebo group; all events except one were grade 1-2) and nausea (11 [28%] patients in the efruxifermin 28 mg group and 18 [42%] patients in the efruxifermin 50 mg group vs ten [23%] patients in the placebo group; all grade 1-2). Five patients (two in the 28 mg group and three in the 50 mg group) discontinued due to adverse events. Serious adverse events occurred in four patients in the 50 mg group; one was defined as drug related (ulcerative esophagitis in a participant with a history of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease). No deaths occurred. INTERPRETATION: Efruxifermin improved liver fibrosis and resolved NASH over 24 weeks in patients with F2 or F3 fibrosis, with acceptable tolerability, supporting further assessment in phase 3 trials. FUNDING: Akero Therapeutics.

Clinical trial: Effects of pegozafermin on the liver and on metabolic comorbidities in subjects with biopsy-confirmed nonalcoholic steatohepatitis.

BACKGROUND: An approved therapy for nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and fibrosis remains a major unmet medical need. AIM: To investigate the histological and metabolic benefits of pegozafermin, a glycoPEGylated FGF21 analogue, in subjects with biopsy-confirmed NASH. METHODS: This proof-of-concept, open-label, single-cohort study, part 2 of a phase 1b/2a clinical trial, was conducted at 16 centres in the United States. Adults (age 21-75 years) with NASH (stage 2 or 3 fibrosis, NAS≥4) and magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction (MRI-PDFF) ≥8% received subcutaneous pegozafermin 27 mg once weekly for 20 weeks. Primary outcomes were improvements in liver histology, and safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Of 20 enrolled subjects, 19 completed the study. Twelve subjects (63%) met the primary endpoint of ≥2-point improvement in NAFLD activity score with ≥1-point improvement in ballooning or lobular inflammation and no worsening of fibrosis. Improvement of fibrosis without worsening of NASH was observed in 26% of subjects, and NASH resolution without worsening of fibrosis in 32%. Least-squares mean relative change from baseline in MRI-PDFF was -64.7% (95% CI: -71.7, -57.7; p < 0.0001). Significant improvements from baseline were also seen in serum aminotransferases, noninvasive fibrosis tests, serum lipids, glycaemic control and body weight. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in 18 subjects (90%). The most frequently reported AEs were mild/moderate nausea and diarrhoea. There were no serious AEs, discontinuations due to AEs, or deaths. CONCLUSIONS: Pegozafermin treatment for 20 weeks had beneficial effects on hepatic and metabolic parameters and was well tolerated in subjects with NASH. CLINICALTRIALS: gov: NCT04048135.

Cardiovascular efficacy and safety of antidiabetic agents: A network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

AIM: An important characteristic of glucose-lowering therapies (GLTs) is their ability to prevent cardiovascular complications. We aimed to investigate the cardiorenal efficacy and general safety of GLTs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Multicentre, randomized, clinical trials that included over 100 participants comparing antidiabetic agents with a placebo or a different antidiabetic agent and reporting major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs), or primarily reporting heart failure, were searched in the PubMed, Embase and Cochrane databases. Data were extracted independently for random-effects network meta-analyses to calculate the hazard ratio estimates. RESULTS: Forty-three trials that compared nine types of GLTs were included in the present analysis. The risk of three-point MACE was reduced in the presence of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs), sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) and thiazolidinedione therapy compared with the placebo, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, or insulin therapy. GLP-1 RAs were favourable for cardiovascular and renal outcomes. SGLT-2is reduced renal outcomes by ~40%, which was superior to other GLTs. Thiazolidinedione therapy increased the risks of hospitalization for heart failure and had no benefits on mortality. Adverse events leading to drug discontinuation were higher with GLP-1 RAs and thiazolidinediones than placebo. CONCLUSIONS: GLP-1 RAs, SGLT-2is and thiazolidinediones reduced three-point MACE compared with other GLTs. Each drug class had unique advantages and disadvantages.

Efficacy and safety of oral orforglipron in patients with type 2 diabetes: a multicentre, randomised, dose-response, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Orforglipron, an oral, non-peptide glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, is in development for type 2 diabetes and obesity. We assessed the efficacy and safety of orforglipron versus placebo or dulaglutide in participants with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this 26-week, phase 2, double-blind, randomised, multicentre study, participants were recruited from 45 centres (private clinics, hospitals, and research centers) in the USA, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. Adult participants aged 18 years or older with type 2 diabetes treated with diet and exercise, with or without metformin, and with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7·0-10·5%, and stable BMI of 23 kg/m2 or more, were randomly assigned (5:5:5:5:5:3:3:3:3) via an interactive web-response system to placebo, dulaglutide 1·5 mg once per week, or orforglipron 3 mg, 12 mg, 24 mg, 36 mg (group 1), 36 mg (group 2), 45 mg (group 1), or 45 mg (group 2) once per day with no food or water restrictions. Two different dose escalation regimens were evaluated for each of the 36 mg and 45 mg cohorts. Participants were masked to the study drug, dulaglutide, and placebo. The primary efficacy outcome The primary efficacy outcome was mean change in HbA1c from baseline with orforglipron versus placebo at week 26. Efficacy was analysed in all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of study drug and excluded data after the permanent discontinuation of study drug or initiation of rescue medication. Safety was analysed in all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05048719) and is completed. FINDINGS: Between Sept 15, 2021, and Sept 30, 2022, 569 participants were screened and 383 were enrolled and randomly assigned to a group. 352 (92%) completed the study and 303 (79%) completed 26 weeks of treatment. At baseline, the mean age was 58·9 years, HbA1c was 8·1%, BMI was 35·2 kg/m2, 226 (59%) were men, and 157 (41%) were women. At week 26, mean change in HbA1c with orforglipron was up to -2·10% (-1·67% placebo adjusted), versus -0·43% with placebo and -1·10% with dulaglutide. HbA1c reduction was statistically superior with orforglipron versus placebo (estimated treatment difference -0·8% to -1·7%). Change in mean bodyweight at week 26 was up to -10·1 kg (95% CI -11·5 to -8·7; 7·9 kg placebo adjusted [-9·9 to -5·9]) with orforglipron versus -2·2 kg (-3·6 to -0·7) for placebo and -3·9 kg (-5·3 to -2·4) for dulaglutide. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events ranged from 61·8% to 88·9% in orforglipron-treated participants, compared with 61·8% with placebo and 56·0% with dulaglutide. The majority were gastrointestinal events (44·1% to 70·4% with orforglipron, 18·2% with placebo, and 34·0% with dulaglutide) of mild to moderate severity. Three participants receiving orforglipron and one participant receiving dulaglutide had clinically significant (<54 mg/dL [<3 mmol/L]) hypoglycaemia and no participants had severe hypoglycaemia. One death occurred in the placebo group and was not related to study treatment. INTERPRETATION: In this phase 2 trial the novel, oral, non-peptide GLP-1 receptor agonist orforglipron at doses of 12 mg or greater showed significant reductions in HbA1c and bodyweight compared with placebo or dulaglutide. The adverse event profile was similar to other GLP-1 receptor agonists in similar stage of development. Orforglipron might provide an alternative to injectable GLP-1 receptor agonists and oral semaglutide, with the prospect of less burdensome administration to achieve treatment goals in people with type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Tirzepatide once weekly for the treatment of obesity in people with type 2 diabetes (SURMOUNT-2): a double-blind, randomised, multicentre, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Weight reduction is essential for improving health outcomes in people with obesity and type 2 diabetes. We assessed the efficacy and safety of tirzepatide, a glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, versus placebo, for weight management in people living with obesity and type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This phase 3, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in seven countries. Adults (aged ≥18 years) with a body-mass index (BMI) of 27 kg/m2 or higher and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7-10% (53-86 mmol/mol) were randomly assigned (1:1:1), using a computer-generated random sequence via a validated interactive web-response system, to receive either once-weekly, subcutaneous tirzepatide (10 mg or 15 mg) or placebo for 72 weeks. All participants, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. Coprimary endpoints were the percent change in bodyweight from baseline and bodyweight reduction of 5% or higher. The treatment-regimen estimand assessed effects regardless of treatment discontinuation or initiation of antihyperglycaemic rescue therapy. Efficacy and safety endpoints were analysed with data from all randomly assigned participants (intention-to-treat population). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04657003. FINDINGS: Between March 29, 2021, and April 10, 2023, of 1514 adults assessed for eligibility, 938 (mean age 54·2 years [SD 10·6], 476 [51%] were female, 710 [76%] were White, and 561 [60%] were Hispanic or Latino) were randomly assigned and received at least one dose of tirzepatide 10 mg (n=312), tirzepatide 15 mg (n=311), or placebo (n=315). Baseline mean bodyweight was 100·7 kg (SD 21·1), BMI 36·1 kg/m2 (SD 6·6), and HbA1c 8·02% (SD 0·89; 64·1 mmol/mol [SD 9·7]). Least-squares mean change in bodyweight at week 72 with tirzepatide 10 mg and 15 mg was -12·8% (SE 0·6) and -14·7% (0·5), respectively, and -3·2% (0·5) with placebo, resulting in estimated treatment differences versus placebo of -9·6% percentage points (95% CI -11·1 to -8·1) with tirzepatide 10 mg and -11·6% percentage points (-13·0 to -10·1) with tirzepatide 15 mg (all p<0·0001). More participants treated with tirzepatide versus placebo met bodyweight reduction thresholds of 5% or higher (79-83% vs 32%). The most frequent adverse events with tirzepatide were gastrointestinal-related, including nausea, diarrhoea, and vomiting and were mostly mild to moderate in severity, with few events leading to treatment discontinuation (<5%). Serious adverse events were reported by 68 (7%) participants overall and two deaths occurred in the tirzepatide 10 mg group, but deaths were not considered to be related to the study treatment by the investigator. INTERPRETATION: In this 72-week trial in adults living with obesity and type 2 diabetes, once-weekly tirzepatide 10 mg and 15 mg provided substantial and clinically meaningful reduction in bodyweight, with a safety profile that was similar to other incretin-based therapies for weight management. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Efficacy and safety of co-administered once-weekly cagrilintide 2·4 mg with once-weekly semaglutide 2·4 mg in type 2 diabetes: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, active-controlled, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Combining the GLP-1 receptor agonist semaglutide with the long-acting amylin analogue cagrilintide has weight-loss benefits; the impact on glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) is unknown. This trial assessed the efficacy and safety of co-administered semaglutide with cagrilintide (CagriSema) in participants with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This 32-week, multicentre, double-blind, phase 2 trial was conducted across 17 sites in the USA. Adults with type 2 diabetes and a BMI of 27 kg/m2 or higher on metformin with or without an SGLT2 inhibitor were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to once-weekly subcutaneous CagriSema, semaglutide, or cagrilintide (all escalated to 2·4 mg). Randomisation was done centrally using an interactive web response system and was stratified according to use of SGLT2 inhibitor treatment (yes vs no). The trial participants, investigators, and trial sponsor staff were masked to treatment assignment throughout the trial. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c; secondary endpoints were bodyweight, fasting plasma glucose, continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) parameters, and safety. Efficacy analyses were performed in all participants who had undergone randomisation, and safety analyses in all participants who had undergone randomisation and received at least one dose of the trial medication. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04982575) and is complete. FINDINGS: Between Aug 2 and Oct 18, 2021, 92 participants were randomly assigned to CagriSema (n=31), semaglutide (n=31), or cagrilintide (n=30). 59 (64%) participants were male; the mean age of participants was 58 years (SD 9). The mean change in HbA1c from baseline to week 32 (CagriSema: -2·2 percentage points [SE 0·15]; semaglutide: -1·8 percentage points [0·16]; cagrilintide: -0·9 percentage points [0·15]) was greater with CagriSema versus cagrilintide (estimated treatment difference -1·3 percentage points [95% CI -1·7 to -0·8]; p<0·0001), but not versus semaglutide (-0·4 percentage points [-0·8 to 0·0]; p=0·075). The mean change in bodyweight from baseline to week 32 (CagriSema: -15·6% [SE 1·26]; semaglutide: -5·1% [1·26]; cagrilintide: -8·1% [1·23]) was greater with CagriSema versus both semaglutide (p<0·0001) and cagrilintide (p<0·0001). The mean change in fasting plasma glucose from baseline to week 32 (CagriSema: -3·3 mmol/L [SE 0·3]; semaglutide: -2·5 mmol/L [0·4]; cagrilintide: -1·7 mmol/L [0·3]) was greater with CagriSema versus cagrilintide (p=0·0010) but not versus semaglutide (p=0·10). Time in range (3·9-10·0 mmol/L) was 45·9%, 32·6%, and 56·9% at baseline and 88·9%, 76·2%, and 71·7% at week 32 with CagriSema, semaglutide, and cagrilintide, respectively. Adverse events were reported by 21 (68%) participants in the CagriSema group, 22 (71%) in the semaglutide group, and 24 (80%) in the cagrilintide group. Mild or moderate gastrointestinal adverse events were most common; no level 2 or 3 hypoglycaemia was reported. No fatal adverse events were reported. INTERPRETATION: In people with type 2 diabetes, treatment with CagriSema resulted in clinically relevant improvements in glycaemic control (including CGM parameters). The mean change in HbA1c with CagriSema was greater versus cagrilintide, but not versus semaglutide. Treatment with CagriSema resulted in significantly greater weight loss versus semaglutide and cagrilintide and was well tolerated. These data support further investigation of CagriSema in this population in longer and larger phase 3 studies. FUNDING: Novo Nordisk.

Randomized, Controlled Trial of the FGF21 Analogue Pegozafermin in NASH.

BACKGROUND: Pegozafermin is a long-acting glycopegylated (pegylated with the use of site-specific glycosyltransferases) fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) analogue in development for the treatment of nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) and severe hypertriglyceridemia. The efficacy and safety of pegozafermin in patients with biopsy-proven noncirrhotic NASH are not well established. METHODS: In this phase 2b, multicenter, double-blind, 24-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trial, we randomly assigned patients with biopsy-confirmed NASH and stage F2 or F3 (moderate or severe) fibrosis to receive subcutaneous pegozafermin at a dose of 15 mg or 30 mg weekly or 44 mg once every 2 weeks or placebo weekly or every 2 weeks. The two primary end points were an improvement in fibrosis (defined as reduction by ≥1 stage, on a scale from 0 to 4, with higher stages indicating greater severity), with no worsening of NASH, at 24 weeks and NASH resolution without worsening of fibrosis at 24 weeks. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: Among the 222 patients who underwent randomization, 219 received pegozafermin or placebo. The percentage of patients who met the criteria for fibrosis improvement was 7% in the pooled placebo group, 22% in the 15-mg pegozafermin group (difference vs. placebo, 14 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -9 to 38), 26% in the 30-mg pegozafermin group (difference, 19 percentage points; 95% CI, 5 to 32; P = 0.009), and 27% in the 44-mg pegozafermin group (difference, 20 percentage points; 95% CI, 5 to 35; P = 0.008). The percentage of patients who met the criteria for NASH resolution was 2% in the placebo group, 37% in the 15-mg pegozafermin group (difference vs. placebo, 35 percentage points; 95% CI, 10 to 59), 23% in the 30-mg pegozafermin group (difference, 21 percentage points; 95% CI, 9 to 33), and 26% in the 44-mg pegozafermin group (difference, 24 percentage points; 95% CI, 10 to 37). The most common adverse events associated with pegozafermin therapy were nausea and diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase 2b trial, treatment with pegozafermin led to improvements in fibrosis. These results support the advancement of pegozafermin into phase 3 development. (Funded by 89bio; ENLIVEN ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04929483.).

Triple-Hormone-Receptor Agonist Retatrutide for Obesity - A Phase 2 Trial.

BACKGROUND: Retatrutide (LY3437943) is an agonist of the glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, glucagon-like peptide 1, and glucagon receptors. Its dose-response relationships with respect to side effects, safety, and efficacy for the treatment of obesity are not known. METHODS: We conducted a phase 2, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial involving adults who had a body-mass index (BMI, the weight in kilograms divided by the square of the height in meters) of 30 or higher or who had a BMI of 27 to less than 30 plus at least one weight-related condition. Participants were randomly assigned in a 2:1:1:1:1:2:2 ratio to receive subcutaneous retatrutide (1 mg, 4 mg [initial dose, 2 mg], 4 mg [initial dose, 4 mg], 8 mg [initial dose, 2 mg], 8 mg [initial dose, 4 mg], or 12 mg [initial dose, 2 mg]) or placebo once weekly for 48 weeks. The primary end point was the percentage change in body weight from baseline to 24 weeks. Secondary end points included the percentage change in body weight from baseline to 48 weeks and a weight reduction of 5% or more, 10% or more, or 15% or more. Safety was also assessed. RESULTS: We enrolled 338 adults, 51.8% of whom were men. The least-squares mean percentage change in body weight at 24 weeks in the retatrutide groups was -7.2% in the 1-mg group, -12.9% in the combined 4-mg group, -17.3% in the combined 8-mg group, and -17.5% in the 12-mg group, as compared with -1.6% in the placebo group. At 48 weeks, the least-squares mean percentage change in the retatrutide groups was -8.7% in the 1-mg group, -17.1% in the combined 4-mg group, -22.8% in the combined 8-mg group, and -24.2% in the 12-mg group, as compared with -2.1% in the placebo group. At 48 weeks, a weight reduction of 5% or more, 10% or more, and 15% or more had occurred in 92%, 75%, and 60%, respectively, of the participants who received 4 mg of retatrutide; 100%, 91%, and 75% of those who received 8 mg; 100%, 93%, and 83% of those who received 12 mg; and 27%, 9%, and 2% of those who received placebo. The most common adverse events in the retatrutide groups were gastrointestinal; these events were dose-related, were mostly mild to moderate in severity, and were partially mitigated with a lower starting dose (2 mg vs. 4 mg). Dose-dependent increases in heart rate peaked at 24 weeks and declined thereafter. CONCLUSIONS: In adults with obesity, retatrutide treatment for 48 weeks resulted in substantial reductions in body weight. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04881760.).

Tolerability, safety and pharmacodynamics of oral, small-molecule glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist danuglipron for type 2 diabetes: A 12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, Phase 2 study comparing different dose-escalation schemes.

AIM: To evaluate the tolerability, safety and pharmacodynamics of different dose-escalation schemes of the oral small-molecule glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonist danuglipron. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This Phase 2a, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group study randomly assigned adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with metformin to placebo or danuglipron (low [5-mg] or high [10-mg] starting dose, with 1- or 2-week dose-escalation steps, to target doses of 80, 120 or 200 mg twice daily [BID]) and adults with obesity without diabetes to placebo or danuglipron 200 mg BID. RESULTS: Participants with T2D (n = 123, mean glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 8.19%) or obesity without diabetes (n = 28, mean body mass index 37.3 kg/m2 ) were randomly assigned and treated. Discontinuation from study medication occurred in 27.3% to 72.7% of participants across danuglipron groups versus 16.7% to 18.8% for placebo, most often due to adverse events. Nausea (20.0%-47.6% of participants across danuglipron groups vs. 12.5% for placebo) and vomiting (18.2%-40.9% danuglipron vs. 12.5% placebo, respectively) were most commonly reported in participants with T2D. Gastrointestinal adverse events were generally related to danuglipron target dose and were not substantially affected by starting dose. In participants with T2D, least squares mean changes from baseline in HbA1c (-1.04% to -1.57% across danuglipron groups vs. -0.32% for placebo), fasting plasma glucose (-23.34 mg/dL to -53.94 mg/dL danuglipron vs. -13.09 mg/dL placebo) and body weight (-1.93 to -5.38 kg danuglipron vs. -0.42 kg placebo) at Week 12 were generally statistically significant for danuglipron compared with placebo (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Danuglipron resulted in statistically significant reductions in HbA1c, FPG and body weight over 12 weeks, in the setting of higher discontinuation rates and incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events with higher target doses. CLINICALTRIALS: gov identifier: NCT04617275.

Efficacy and Safety of Oral Small Molecule Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonist Danuglipron for Glycemic Control Among Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Currently available glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists for treating type 2 diabetes (T2D) are peptide agonists that require subcutaneous administration or strict fasting requirements before and after oral administration. Objective: To investigate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of multiple dose levels of the novel, oral, small molecule GLP-1R agonist danuglipron over 16 weeks. Design, Setting, and Participants: A phase 2b, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, 6-group randomized clinical trial with 16-week double-blind treatment period and 4-week follow-up was conducted from July 7, 2020, to July 7, 2021. Adults with T2D inadequately controlled by diet and exercise, with or without metformin treatment, were enrolled from 97 clinical research sites in 8 countries or regions. Interventions: Participants received placebo or danuglipron, 2.5, 10, 40, 80, or 120 mg, all orally administered twice daily with food for 16 weeks. Weekly dose escalation steps were incorporated to achieve danuglipron doses of 40 mg or more twice daily. Main Outcomes and Measures: Change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c, primary end point), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and body weight were assessed at week 16. Safety was monitored throughout the study period, including a 4-week follow-up period. Results: Of 411 participants randomized and treated (mean [SD] age, 58.6 [9.3] years; 209 [51%] male), 316 (77%) completed treatment. For all danuglipron doses, HbA1c and FPG were statistically significantly reduced at week 16 vs placebo, with HbA1c reductions up to a least squares mean difference vs placebo of -1.16% (90% CI, -1.47% to -0.86%) for the 120-mg twice daily group and FPG reductions up to a least squares mean difference vs placebo of -33.24 mg/dL (90% CI, -45.63 to -20.84 mg/dL). Body weight was statistically significantly reduced at week 16 compared with placebo in the 80-mg twice daily and 120-mg twice daily groups only, with a least squares mean difference vs placebo of -2.04 kg (90% CI, -3.01 to -1.07 kg) for the 80-mg twice daily group and -4.17 kg (90% CI, -5.15 to -3.18 kg) for the 120-mg twice daily group. The most commonly reported adverse events were nausea, diarrhea, and vomiting. Conclusions and Relevance: In adults with T2D, danuglipron reduced HbA1c, FPG, and body weight at week 16 compared with placebo, with a tolerability profile consistent with the mechanism of action. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03985293.

Once-Weekly Basal Insulin Fc Demonstrated Similar Glycemic Control to Once-Daily Insulin Degludec in Insulin-Naive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Phase 2 Randomized Control Trial.

OBJECTIVE: Basal insulin Fc (BIF) (insulin efsitora alfa; LY3209590), a fusion protein combining a novel single-chain insulin variant with a human IgG Fc domain, is designed for once-weekly basal insulin administration. This phase 2 study assessed the safety and efficacy of BIF versus degludec in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) previously treated with oral antihyperglycemic medications. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: During this randomized, parallel, open-label study, 278 insulin-naive patients with T2D were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive BIF once weekly or degludec once daily over the 26-week treatment period. Both groups were titrated to fasting glucose of 80-100 mg/dL (4.4 to <5.6 mmol/L). The primary end point was HbA1c change from baseline to week 26 (noninferiority margin 0.4%). Secondary end points included fasting blood glucose (FBG), six-point glucose profiles, and rate of hypoglycemia. RESULTS: After 26 weeks of treatment, BIF demonstrated a noninferior HbA1c change from baseline versus degludec, with a treatment difference of 0.06% (90% CI -0.11, 0.24; P = 0.56). Both BIF and degludec treatment led to significant reductions in FBG from baseline. At week 26, the between-treatment difference for BIF versus degludec was 4.7 mg/dL (90% CI 0.1, 9.3; P = 0.09). The rate of level 2 hypoglycemia was low and not significantly different between treatment groups (BIF 0.22 events/patient/year, degludec 0.15 events/patient/year; P = 0.64); there was no severe hypoglycemia. The occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events was also similar between BIF and degludec. CONCLUSIONS: Once-weekly BIF achieved excellent glycemic control similar to degludec, with no concerning hypoglycemia or other safety findings.

A microbiome-targeting fibre-enriched nutritional formula is well tolerated and improves quality of life and haemoglobin A1c in type 2 diabetes: A double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial.

AIMS: To investigate a prebiotic fibre-enriched nutritional formula on health-related quality of life and metabolic control in type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a 12-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled study with an unblinded dietary advice only comparator arm. Participants were randomized 2:1:1 to a prebiotic fibre-enriched nutritional formula (Active), a placebo fibre-absent nutritional formula (Placebo), or non-blinded dietary advice alone (Diet). Primary endpoint was change in core Type 2 Diabetes Distress Assessment System (cT2-DDAS) at week 12. Glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) change was a key secondary endpoint. RESULTS: In total, 192 participants were randomized. Mean age was 54.3 years, HbA1c 7.8%, and body mass index 35.9 kg/m2 . At week 12, cT2-DDAS reduced significantly in Active versus Placebo (-0.4, p = .03), and HbA1c was reduced significantly in Active vs Placebo (-0.64%, p = .01). Gut microbiome sequencing revealed that the relative abundance of two species of butyrate-producing bacteria (Roseburia faecis and Anaerostipes hadrus) increased significantly in Active vs. Placebo. CONCLUSIONS: A microbiome-targeting nutritional formula significantly improved cT2-DDAS and HbA1c, suggesting the potential for prebiotic fibre as a complement to lifestyle and/or pharmaceutical interventions for managing type 2 diabetes.

Two-year effect of semaglutide 2.4 mg on control of eating in adults with overweight/obesity: STEP 5.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the effect of once-weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg on 2-year control of eating. METHODS: In STEP 5, adults with overweight/obesity were randomized 1:1 to semaglutide 2.4 mg or placebo, plus lifestyle modification, for 104 weeks. A 19-item Control of Eating Questionnaire was administered at weeks 0, 20, 52, and 104 in a subgroup of participants. P values were not controlled for multiplicity. RESULTS: In participants completing the Control of Eating Questionnaire (semaglutide, n = 88; placebo, n = 86), mean body weight changes were -14.8% (semaglutide) and -2.4% (placebo). Scores significantly improved with semaglutide versus placebo for Craving Control and Craving for Savory domains at weeks 20, 52, and 104 (p < 0.01); for Positive Mood and Craving for Sweet domains at weeks 20 and 52 (p < 0.05); and for hunger and fullness at week 20 (p < 0.001). Improvements in craving domain scores were positively correlated with reductions in body weight from baseline to week 104 with semaglutide. At 104 weeks, scores for desire to eat salty and spicy food, cravings for dairy and starchy foods, difficulty in resisting cravings, and control of eating were significantly reduced with semaglutide versus placebo (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In adults with overweight/obesity, semaglutide 2.4 mg improved short- and longer-term control of eating associated with substantial weight loss.

iGlarLixi versus basal plus Rapid-Acting insulin in adults with type 2 diabetes advancing from basal insulin therapy: The SoliSimplify Real-World study.

AIM: For people with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes (T2D) on basal insulin (BI), guidelines recommend several treatment advancement options. This study compared the clinical effectiveness of once-daily iGlarLixi versus a multiple-injection BI + rapid acting insulin (RAI) regimen in adults with T2D advancing from BI therapy in real-world clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Electronic medical records from the Observational Medical Outcomes Partnership (OMOP) database were analysed retrospectively using propensity score matching to compare therapy advancement with iGlarLixi or BI + RAI in US adults ≥18 years with T2D on BI who had ≥1 valid glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) value at baseline and at the 6-month follow-up. The primary objective was non-inferiority of iGlarLixi to BI + RAI in HbA1c change from baseline to 6 months (margin 0.3%). RESULTS: Propensity score matching generated cohorts with balanced baseline characteristics (N = 814 in each group). HbA1c reduction from baseline to 6 months with iGlarLixi was non-inferior to BI + RAI [mean difference (95% confidence interval): 0.1 (-0.1, 0.2)%; one-sided p = .0032]. At 6 months, weight gain was significantly lower with iGlarLixi than with BI + RAI [-0.8 (-1.3, -0.2) kg; two-sided p = .0069]. Achievement of HbA1c <7% without hypoglycaemia and weight gain were similar between groups [odds ratio (95% confidence interval): 1.15 (0.81, 1.63); p = .4280]. Hypoglycaemia was low in both groups, probably because of underreporting. CONCLUSIONS: In real-world clinical practice, glycaemic outcomes 6 months after treatment advancement from BI are similar for people with T2D using iGlarLixi versus BI + RAI, with iGlarLixi leading to less weight gain.

A 96-week, double-blind, randomized controlled trial comparing bexagliflozin to glimepiride as an adjunct to metformin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in adults.

AIM: To compare the effects of bexagliflozin tablets 20 mg, with those of optimally titrated glimepiride when used to treat adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled by metformin. METHODS: Adults with type 2 diabetes (n = 426) taking metformin, and with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level between 53 and 91 mmol/mol [7.0% and 10.5%], were randomized to receive bexagliflozin tablets 20 mg or titrated glimepiride. The primary endpoint was the intergroup difference in the change from baseline to Week 60 in percent HbA1c. Secondary endpoints included changes from baseline in body mass and systolic blood pressure (SBP), and proportion of subjects experiencing severe or documented symptomatic hypoglycaemia. RESULTS: The intergroup difference in percent HbA1c (bexagliflozin minus glimepiride) from baseline to Week 60 was -0.55 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval [CI] -2.30, 1.20)-[-0.05% (-0.21, 0.11)], establishing noninferiority of bexagliflozin to glimepiride by the prespecified margin of 3.83 mmol/mol [0.35%]. Prespecified tests gave, in order, a difference in body mass of -4.31 kg (95% CI -5.10, -3.52; P < 0.0001), a difference in SBP of -6.53 mm Hg (95% CI -10.56, -2.51; P = 0.0008), and an odds ratio of 0.12 (95% CI 0.05, 0.28; P < 0.0001) for severe or documented symptomatic hypoglycaemia. At the follow-up visit the mean difference in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) between arms was 6.05 mL min-1 per 1.73 m2 (95% CI, 3.24, 8.87; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Bexagliflozin was noninferior to glimepiride in lowering HbA1c, was superior to glimepiride for decreases in body mass and SBP, and was associated with significantly fewer hypoglycaemic events than glimepiride. A favourable effect on eGFR was observed.

Two-year effects of semaglutide in adults with overweight or obesity: the STEP 5 trial.

The STEP 5 trial assessed the efficacy and safety of once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide 2.4 mg versus placebo (both plus behavioral intervention) for long-term treatment of adults with obesity, or overweight with at least one weight-related comorbidity, without diabetes. The co-primary endpoints were the percentage change in body weight and achievement of weight loss of ≥5% at week 104. Efficacy was assessed among all randomized participants regardless of treatment discontinuation or rescue intervention. From 5 October 2018 to 1 February 2019, 304 participants were randomly assigned to semaglutide 2.4 mg (n = 152) or placebo (n = 152), 92.8% of whom completed the trial (attended the end-of-trial safety visit). Most participants were female (236 (77.6%)) and white (283 (93.1%)), with a mean (s.d.) age of 47.3 (11.0) years, body mass index of 38.5 (6.9) kg m-2 and weight of 106.0 (22.0) kg. The mean change in body weight from baseline to week 104 was -15.2% in the semaglutide group (n = 152) versus -2.6% with placebo (n = 152), for an estimated treatment difference of -12.6 %-points (95% confidence interval, -15.3 to -9.8; P < 0.0001). More participants in the semaglutide group than in the placebo group achieved weight loss ≥5% from baseline at week 104 (77.1% versus 34.4%; P < 0.0001). Gastrointestinal adverse events, mostly mild-to-moderate, were reported more often with semaglutide than with placebo (82.2% versus 53.9%). In summary, in adults with overweight (with at least one weight-related comorbidity) or obesity, semaglutide treatment led to substantial, sustained weight loss over 104 weeks versus placebo. NCT03693430.

Changes in Glucose Metabolism and Glycemic Status With Once-Weekly Subcutaneous Semaglutide 2.4 mg Among Participants With Prediabetes in the STEP Program.

OBJECTIVE: This analysis of 3,375 adults with overweight/obesity across the Semaglutide Treatment Effect in People with obesity (STEP) 1, 3, and 4 trials evaluated whether more participants with prediabetes had normoglycemia after 68 weeks' treatment with once-weekly semaglutide 2.4 mg plus lifestyle intervention versus placebo and assessed changes in glucose metabolism in participants with prediabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: STEP 1, 3, and 4 were phase 3, 68-week, randomized, placebo-controlled, multinational trials; STEP 4 had a 20-week semaglutide run-in and 48-week randomized period. Analyses included changes (week 0-68; before the washout period) in glycemic status (prespecified: STEP 1 and 3; post hoc: STEP 4), and in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), and HOMA insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) among participants with prediabetes (post hoc). RESULTS: Significantly more participants with baseline (week 0) prediabetes (n = 1,536) had normoglycemia at week 68 with semaglutide versus placebo (STEP 1, 84.1% vs. 47.8%; STEP 3, 89.5% vs. 55.0%; STEP 4, 89.8% vs. 70.4%; all P < 0.0001). Fewer participants with baseline normoglycemia had prediabetes at week 68 with semaglutide versus placebo (STEP 1, 2.9% vs. 10.9%; STEP 3, 3.2% vs. 5.8%; STEP 4, 1.1% vs. 5.0%). Semaglutide resulted in greater improvements in HbA1c, FPG, and HOMA-IR than placebo among participants with baseline prediabetes (all P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: STEP 1, 3, and 4 collectively provide a robust assessment of the effects of semaglutide on glucose metabolism and prediabetes in a large cohort of adults with overweight/obesity while on treatment. Among participants with baseline prediabetes, 68 weeks' treatment with semaglutide versus placebo led to significant improvements in glucose metabolism and a higher likelihood of normoglycemia.