Fixed-Dose Combination of Dapagliflozin + Sitagliptin + Metformin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Poorly Controlled with Metformin: Phase 3, Randomized Comparison with Dual Combinations.

INTRODUCTION: This study compared efficacy and safety of triple drug fixed-dose combination (FDC) of dapagliflozin (DAPA) + sitagliptin (SITA) + metformin (MET) extended release (ER) with SITA + MET sustained release (SR) and DAPA + MET ER in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled with metformin. METHODS: This phase 3, randomized, open-label, active-controlled study included adult patients with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥ 8% (64 mmol/mol) and ≤ 11% (97 mmol/mol), randomized in 1:1:1 ratio to receive either FDC of DAPA + SITA + MET ER (10 mg + 100 mg + 1000 mg) tablets once daily (n = 137) or co-administration of SITA + MET SR (100 mg + 1000 mg) tablets once daily (n = 139) or FDC of DAPA + MET ER (10 mg + 1000 mg) tablets once daily (n = 139). Primary endpoint was mean change in HbA1c from baseline to week 16. RESULTS: Mean baseline HbA1c was approximately 9% (75 mmol/mol) in each treatment group. At week 16, adjusted mean reduction in HbA1c from baseline was significantly greater with DAPA + SITA + MET ER (- 1.73% [- 19.0 mmol/mol]) compared to SITA + MET SR (- 1.28% [- 14.1 mmol/mol]; difference of - 0.46% [- 5.1 mmol/mol], p < 0.001) and DAPA + MET ER (- 1.33% [- 14.6 mmol/mol]; difference - 0.4% [4.4 mmol/mol], p < 0.001). Similarly, at week 12, reduction in HbA1c from baseline was significantly greater with DAPA + SITA + MET ER compared to SITA + MET SR (p = 0.0006) and DAPA + MET ER (p = 0.0276). At week 16, DAPA + SITA + MET ER showed significant reduction in postprandial blood glucose compared to DAPA + MET ER (p = 0.0394) and significant reduction in fasting blood glucose with DAPA + SITA + MET ER compared to SITA + MET SR (p = 0.0226). The proportion of patients achieving HbA1c < 7.0% (53 mmol/mol) at week 16 was significantly higher with DAPA + SITA + MET ER (38.5%) versus SITA + MET SR (12.8%) (p < 0.001) and DAPA + MET ER (21.3%) (p = 0.0023). All study medications were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: Triple FDC of DAPA + SITA + MET ER tablets once daily was significantly better in achieving glycemic control versus dual combination once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes poorly controlled with metformin without any significant safety concerns. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI/2021/11/038176, registered on 22 November 2021.

Type 2 diabetes is a progressive disease in which the risks of microvascular and macrovascular complications and mortality are strongly associated with hyperglycemia. Achieving glycemic control remains the main goal of treatment to prevent these complications. Estimates in 2019 showed that 77 million individuals had diabetes in India, which is expected to rise over 134 million by 2045. Considering the progressive nature of the disease, many guidelines recommend use of dual or triple drug therapy based on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) level. Use of fixed-dose combination (FDC) helps to improve therapy compliance and can provide optimum therapeutic benefits. Mechanisms of action of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) and sodium­glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors are complementary to that of metformin with low risk of hypoglycemia. Studies have shown beneficial effects of adding both DPP4 inhibitors and SGLT2 inhibitors after metformin monotherapy. This phase 3 study was designed to assess efficacy and safety of triple FDC of dapagliflozin + sitagliptin + metformin extended release in comparison with combipack of sitagliptin + metformin sustained release and FDC of dapagliflozin + metformin ER in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy. The study demonstrated superiority of triple FDC of dapagliflozin + sitagliptin + metformin ER over dual combinations in terms of reduction in HbA1c and percentage of patients achieving target HbA1c at the end of week 16. The current study provides evidence for considering triple FDC of dapagliflozin + sitagliptin + metformin ER as an alternative option with minimal risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain, while considering oral triple-combination therapy for patients to achieve their glycemic target.

Efficacy and Safety of Pregabalin Prolonged Release-Etoricoxib Combination Compared to Etoricoxib for Chronic Low Back Pain: Phase 3, Randomized Study.

INTRODUCTION: Currently available treatments for chronic lower back pain (CLBP) do not adequately address both nociceptive and neuropathic components of pain. We evaluated efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination (FDC) of low-dose pregabalin prolonged release 75 mg-etoricoxib 60 mg to address both pain components. METHODS: This randomized phase 3 trial conducted at 12 centres across India evaluated efficacy (based on mean change in numeric rating scale [NRS], Roland-Morris disability questionnaire [RDQ], visual analogue scale [VAS], patient global impression of improvement [PGI-I], clinical global impression of improvement [CGI-I] and rescue medication consumption) and safety of FDC in comparison to etoricoxib alone in adult patients with CLBP. Treatment duration was 8 weeks. RESULTS: Of the 371 patients screened, 319 were randomized and considered for efficacy and safety analysis. Both treatment groups had no significant difference in terms of demography and baseline disease characteristics. Significantly better outcomes with FDC compared to etoricoxib were observed at week 4 onwards. At week 8, both groups showed significant reduction in mean NRS score from baseline (- 4.00 ± 1.65 in FDC; - 2.92 ± 1.59 in etoricoxib) with mean NRS score being significantly less in the FDC group compared to etoricoxib group (3.26 ± 1.56 vs 4.31 ± 1.56; p < 0.0001). The FDC was more effective than etoricoxib in terms of significantly greater reduction in RDQ score (- 9.28 ± 4.48 vs - 6.78 ± 4.34; p < 0.0001) and VAS score (- 37.66 ± 18.7 vs - 28.50 ± 16.31; p < 0.0001) at week 8. The FDC was also better in terms of significantly more patients reporting their condition as 'very much better' (36.9% vs 5.0%; p < 0.0001) and clinicians reporting patient's condition as 'very much improved' (36.3% vs 5.7%; p < 0.0001). Overall, study medications were well tolerated. CONCLUSION: FDC of pregabalin and etoricoxib provided significant benefits in reducing pain and improving functional status compared with etoricoxib alone in patients with CLBP. Pregabalin prolonged release-etoricoxib FDC could be one of the treatment options for early and sustained pain relief and improvement in quality-of-life in treating CLBP as it addresses both neuropathic and nociceptive components of pain. TRIAL REGISTRATION: CTRI/2018/10/015886.

Low back pain is one of the most common causes of loss of productivity worldwide. About 60% of Indians suffer from low back pain at some point. Low back pain that persists for more than 3 months is classified as chronic low back pain which mostly includes both nociceptive and neuropathic components. Monotherapies, if prescribed, are not completely effective, as they generally only target either nociceptive or neuropathic components of pain. Multiple drugs are usually needed at multiple times a day, at higher doses for optimal effectiveness, and in most cases they have significant side effects if taken over prolonged periods and also add to the pill burden. To minimize treatment-associated adverse effects, and to increase treatment compliance, while addressing both the components of pain, we developed a fixed-dose combination of low-dose pregabalin prolonged release and etoricoxib. A phase 3 trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of the fixed-dose combination in comparison with etoricoxib alone in treating chronic low back pain. The combination demonstrated statistically and clinically significant improvement in patient-reported outcomes­pain, functionality and quality of life­as early as 4 weeks after starting the medication. No severe or serious adverse effects were reported. Thus, the combination of low-dose pregabalin prolonged release and etoricoxib could provide an option for optimal management of chronic low back pain. This would provide multiple benefits, such as addressing both nociceptive and neuropathic components of chronic low back pain, reducing drug-related adverse effects because of low dose, reducing pill burden and thereby increasing drug compliance.

Arrive: A retrospective registry of Indian patients with venous thromboembolism.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: There is lack of substantial Indian data on venous thromboembolism (VTE). The aim of this study was to provide real-world information on patient characteristics, management strategies, clinical outcomes, and temporal trends in VTE. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Multicentre retrospective registry involving 549 medical records of patients with confirmed diagnosis of VTE (deep vein thrombosis [DVT] confirmed by Doppler ultrasonography; pulmonary embolism [PE] by computed tomography, pulmonary angiography and/or V/Q scan) from 2006 to 2010 at three Indian tertiary care hospitals. RESULTS: Acute DVT without PE, acute DVT with PE, and PE alone were reported in 64% (352/549), 23% (124/549), and 13% (73/549) patients, respectively. Mean age was 47 (±16) years, and 70% were males. H/o DVT (34%), surgery including orthopedic surgery (28%), trauma (16%), and immobilization >3 days (14%) were the most common risk factors for VTE. Hypertension (25%), diabetes (19%), and neurological disease (other than stroke) (8%) were the most common co-morbidities. Most (94%) were treated with heparin alone (82%) or fondaparinux (2%) for initial anticoagulation; low molecular weight heparin alone (5%) or warfarin/acenocoumarol (76%) for long-term anticoagulation. Anticoagulant treatment was stopped because of bleeding in 2% (9/515) patients. Mortality was 7% among patients diagnosed with VTE during hospital stay versus 1% in those hospitalized with diagnosed VTE. The annual incidence of DVT (±PE) increased from 2006 to 2010. CONCLUSION: Acute DVT alone was responsible for the substantial burden of VTE in Indian patients. Bleeding was not the limiting factor for anticoagulant treatment in most patients.