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.).

Retatrutide, a GIP, GLP-1 and glucagon receptor agonist, for people with type 2 diabetes: a randomised, double-blind, placebo and active-controlled, parallel-group, phase 2 trial conducted in the USA.

BACKGROUND: According to current consensus guidelines for type 2 diabetes management, bodyweight management is as important as attaining glycaemic targets. Retatrutide, a single peptide with agonist activity at the glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), GLP-1, and glucagon receptors, showed clinically meaningful glucose-lowering and bodyweight-lowering efficacy in a phase 1 study. We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of retatrutide in people with type 2 diabetes across a range of doses. METHODS: In this randomised, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo-controlled and active comparator-controlled, parallel-group, phase 2 trial, participants were recruited from 42 research and health-care centres in the USA. Adults aged 18-75 years with type 2 diabetes, glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 7·0-10·5% (53·0-91·3 mmol/mol), and BMI of 25-50 kg/m2 were eligible for enrolment. Eligible participants were treated with diet and exercise alone or with a stable dose of metformin (≥1000 mg once daily) for at least 3 months before the screening visit. Participants were randomly assigned (2:2:2:1:1:1:1:2) using an interactive web-response system, with stratification for baseline HbA1c and BMI, to receive once-weekly injections of placebo, 1·5 mg dulaglutide, or retatrutide maintenance doses of 0·5 mg, 4 mg (starting dose 2 mg), 4 mg (no escalation), 8 mg (starting dose 2 mg), 8 mg (starting dose 4 mg), or 12 mg (starting dose 2 mg). Participants, study site personnel, and investigators were masked to treatment allocation until after study end. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to 24 weeks, and secondary endpoints included change in HbA1c and bodyweight at 36 weeks. Efficacy was analysed in all randomly assigned, except inadvertently enrolled, participants, and safety was assessed in all participants who received at least one dose of study treatment. The study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04867785. FINDINGS: Between May 13, 2021, and June 13, 2022, 281 participants (mean age 56·2 years [SD 9·7], mean duration of diabetes 8·1 years [7·0], 156 [56%] female, and 235 [84%] White) were randomly assigned and included in the safety analysis (45 in the placebo group, 46 in the 1·5 mg dulaglutide group, and 47 in the retatrutide 0·5 mg group, 23 in the 4 mg escalation group, 24 in the 4 mg group, 26 in the 8 mg slow escalation group, 24 in the 8 mg fast escalation group, and 46 in the 12 mg escalation group). 275 participants were included in the efficacy analyses (one each in the retatrutide 0·5 mg group, 4 mg escalation group, and 8 mg slow escalation group, and three in the 12 mg escalation group were inadvertently enrolled). 237 (84%) participants completed the study and 222 (79%) completed study treatment. At 24 weeks, least-squares mean changes from baseline in HbA1c with retatrutide were -0·43% (SE 0·20; -4·68 mmol/mol [2·15]) for the 0·5 mg group, -1·39% (0·14; -15·24 mmol/mol [1·56]) for the 4 mg escalation group, -1·30% (0·22; -14·20 mmol/mol [2·44]) for the 4 mg group, -1·99% (0·15; -21·78 mmol/mol [1·60]) for the 8 mg slow escalation group, -1·88% (0·21; -20·52 mmol/mol [2·34]) for the 8 mg fast escalation group, and -2·02% (0·11; -22·07 mmol/mol [1·21]) for the 12 mg escalation group, versus -0·01% (0·21; -0·12 mmol/mol [2·27]) for the placebo group and -1·41% (0·12; -15·40 mmol/mol [1·29]) for the 1·5 mg dulaglutide group. HbA1c reductions with retatrutide were significantly greater (p<0·0001) than placebo in all but the 0·5 mg group and greater than 1·5 mg dulaglutide in the 8 mg slow escalation group (p=0·0019) and 12 mg escalation group (p=0·0002). Findings were consistent at 36 weeks. Bodyweight decreased dose dependently with retatrutide at 36 weeks by 3·19% (SE 0·61) for the 0·5 mg group, 7·92% (1·28) for the 4 mg escalation group, 10·37% (1·56) for the 4 mg group, 16·81% (1·59) for the 8 mg slow escalation group, 16·34% (1·65) for the 8 mg fast escalation group, and 16·94% (1·30) for the 12 mg escalation group, versus 3·00% (0·86) with placebo and 2·02% (0·72) with 1·5 mg dulaglutide. For retatrutide doses of 4 mg and greater, decreases in weight were significantly greater than with placebo (p=0·0017 for the 4 mg escalation group and p<0·0001 for others) and 1·5 mg dulaglutide (all p<0·0001). Mild-to-moderate gastrointestinal adverse events, including nausea, diarrhoea, vomiting, and constipation, were reported in 67 (35%) of 190 participants in the retatrutide groups (from six [13%] of 47 in the 0·5 mg group to 12 [50%] of 24 in the 8 mg fast escalation group), six (13%) of 45 participants in the placebo group, and 16 (35%) of 46 participants in the 1·5 mg dulaglutide group. There were no reports of severe hypoglycaemia and no deaths during the study. INTERPRETATION: In people with type 2 diabetes, retatrutide showed clinically meaningful improvements in glycaemic control and robust reductions in bodyweight, with a safety profile consistent with GLP-1 receptor agonists and GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonists. These phase 2 data also informed dose selection for the phase 3 programme. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

LY3437943, a novel triple GIP, GLP-1, and glucagon receptor agonist in people with type 2 diabetes: a phase 1b, multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, multiple-ascending dose trial.

BACKGROUND: Treating hyperglycaemia and obesity in individuals with type 2 diabetes using multi-receptor agonists can improve short-term and long-term outcomes. LY3437943 is a single peptide with agonist activity for glucagon, glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP), and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptors that is currently in development for the treatment of type 2 diabetes and for the treatment of obesity and associated comorbidities. We investigated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of multiple weekly doses of LY3437943 in people with type 2 diabetes in a 12-week study. METHODS: In this phase 1b, proof-of-concept, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomised, multiple-ascending dose trial, adults (aged 20-70 years) with type 2 diabetes for at least 3 months, a glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) value of 7·0-10·5%, body-mass index of 23-50 kg/m2, and stable bodyweight (<5% change in previous 3 months) were recruited at four centres in the USA. Using an interactive web-response system, participants were randomly assigned to receive once-weekly subcutaneous injections of LY3437943, placebo, or dulaglutide 1·5 mg over a 12-week period. Five ascending dose cohorts were studied, with randomisation in each cohort such that a minimum of nine participants received LY3437943, three received placebo, and one received dulaglutide 1·5 mg within each cohort. The top doses in the two highest dose cohorts were attained via stepwise dose escalations. The primary outcome was to investigate the safety and tolerability of LY3437943, and characterising the pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics were secondary outcomes. Safety was analysed in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug, and pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics in all participants who received at least one dose of study drug and had evaluable data. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04143802. FINDINGS: Between Dec 18, 2019, and Dec 28, 2020, 210 people were screened, of whom 72 were enrolled, received at least one dose of study drug, and were included in safety analyses. 15 participants had placebo, five had dulaglutide 1·5 mg and, for LY3437943, nine had 0·5 mg, nine had 1·5 mg, 11 had 3 mg, 11 had 3/6 mg, and 12 had 3/6/9/12 mg. 29 participants discontinued the study prematurely. Treatment-emergent adverse events were reported by 33 (63%), three (60%), and eight (54%) participants who received LY3437943, dulaglutide 1·5 mg, and placebo, respectively, with gastrointestinal disorders being the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse events. The pharmacokinetics of LY3437943 were dose proportional and its half-life was approximately 6 days. At week 12, placebo-adjusted mean daily plasma glucose significantly decreased from baseline at the three highest dose LY3437943 groups (least-squares mean difference -2·8 mmol/L [90% CI -4·63 to -0·94] for 3 mg; -3·1 mmol/L [-4·91 to -1·22] for 3/6 mg; and -2·9 mmol/L [-4·70 to -1·01] for 3/6/9/12 mg). Placebo-adjusted sHbA1c also decreased significantly in the three highest dose groups (-1·4% [90% CI -2·17 to -0·56] for 3 mg; -1·6% [-2·37 to -0·75] for 3/6 mg; and -1·2% [-2·05 to -0·45] for 3/6/9/12 mg). Placebo-adjusted bodyweight reduction with LY3437943 appeared to be dose dependent (up to -8·96 kg [90% CI -11·16 to -6·75] in the 3/6/9/12 mg group). INTERPRETATION: In this early phase study, LY3437943 showed an acceptable safety profile, and its pharmacokinetics suggest suitability for once-weekly dosing. This finding, together with the pharmacodynamic findings of robust reductions in glucose and bodyweight, provides support for phase 2 development. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Efficacy and tolerability of tirzepatide, a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic peptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist in patients with type 2 diabetes: A 12-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate different dose-escalation regimens.

AIM: To assess the efficacy and tolerability of tirzepatide treatment using three different dose-escalation regimens in patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, patients were randomized (1:1:1:1) to receive either once-weekly subcutaneous tirzepatide or placebo. The tirzepatide dose groups and dose-escalation regimens were: 12 mg (4 mg weeks 0-3; 8 mg weeks 4-7; 12 mg weeks 8-11), 15 mg-1 (2.5 mg weeks 0-1; 5 mg weeks 2-3; 10 mg weeks 4-7; 15 mg weeks 8-11) and 15 mg-2 (2.5 mg weeks 0-3; 7.5 mg weeks 4-7; 15 mg weeks 8-11). The primary objective was to compare tirzepatide with placebo in HbA1c change from baseline at 12 weeks. RESULTS: Overall, 111 patients were randomized: placebo, 26; tirzepatide 12 mg, 29; tirzepatide 15 mg-1, 28; tirzepatide 15 mg-2, 28. The mean age was 57.4 years, HbA1c 8.4% and body mass index 31.9 kg/m2 . At week 12, absolute HbA1c change from baseline (SE) was greater in the tirzepatide treatment groups compared with placebo (placebo, +0.2% [0.21]; 12 mg, -1.7% [0.19]; 15 mg-1, -2.0% [0.20]; 15 mg-2, -1.8% [0.19]). The incidence of nausea was: placebo, 7.7%; 12 mg group, 24.1%; 15 mg-1 group, 39.3%; 15 mg-2 group, 35.7%. Three patients discontinued the treatment because of adverse events, one from each of the placebo, 12 mg and 15 mg-1 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Tirzepatide treatment for 12 weeks resulted in clinically significant reductions in HbA1c. This suggests that lower starting doses and smaller dose increments are associated with a more favourable side effect profile.

Efficacy and safety of LY3298176, a novel dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist, in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomised, placebo-controlled and active comparator-controlled phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: LY3298176 is a novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist that is being developed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. We aimed to examine the efficacy and safety of co-stimulation of the GLP-1 and GIP receptors with LY3298176 compared with placebo or selective stimulation of GLP-1 receptors with dulaglutide in patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomised, phase 2 study, patients with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1:1:1) to receive either once-weekly subcutaneous LY3298176 (1 mg, 5 mg, 10 mg, or 15 mg), dulaglutide (1·5 mg), or placebo for 26 weeks. Assignment was stratified by baseline glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), metformin use, and body-mass index (BMI). Eligible participants (aged 18-75) had type 2 diabetes for at least 6 months (HbA1c 7·0-10·5%, inclusive), that was inadequately controlled with diet and exercise alone or with stable metformin therapy, and a BMI of 23-50 kg/m2. The primary efficacy outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks in the modified intention-to-treat (mITT) population (all patients who received at least one dose of study drug and had at least one postbaseline measurement of any outcome). Secondary endpoints, measured in the mITT on treatment dataset, were change in HbA1c from baseline to 12 weeks; change in mean bodyweight, fasting plasma glucose, waist circumference, total cholesterol, LDL cholesterol, HDL cholesterol, and triglycerides, and proportion of patients reaching the HbA1c target (≤6·5% and <7·0%) from baseline to weeks 12 and 26; and proportion of patients with at least 5% and 10% bodyweight loss from baseline to 26 weeks. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03131687. FINDINGS: Between May 24, 2017, and March 28, 2018, 555 participants were assessed for eligibility, of whom 318 were randomly assigned to one of the six treatment groups. Because two participants did not receive treatment, the modified intention-to-treat and safety populations included 316 participants. 258 (81·7%) participants completed 26 weeks of treatment, and 283 (89·6%) completed the study. At baseline, mean age was 57 years (SD 9), BMI was 32·6 kg/m2 (5·9), duration from diagnosis of diabetes was 9 years (6), HbA1c was 8·1% (1·0), 53% of patients were men, and 47% were women. At 26 weeks, the effect of LY3298176 on change in HbA1c was dose-dependent and did not plateau. Mean changes from baseline in HbA1c with LY3298176 were -1·06% for 1 mg, -1·73% for 5 mg, -1·89% for 10 mg, and -1·94% for 15 mg, compared with -0·06% for placebo (posterior mean differences [80% credible set] vs placebo: -1·00% [-1·22 to -0·79] for 1 mg, -1·67% [-1·88 to -1·46] for 5 mg, -1·83% [-2·04 to -1·61] for 10 mg, and -1·89% [-2·11 to -1·67] for 15 mg). Compared with dulaglutide (-1·21%) the posterior mean differences (80% credible set) for change in HbA1c from baseline to 26 weeks with the LY3298176 doses were 0·15% (-0·08 to 0·38) for 1 mg, -0·52% (-0·72 to -0·31) for 5 mg, -0·67% (-0·89 to -0·46) for 10 mg, and -0·73% (-0·95 to -0·52) for 15 mg. At 26 weeks, 33-90% of patients treated with LY3298176 achieved the HbA1c target of less than 7·0% (vs 52% with dulaglutide, 12% with placebo) and 15-82% achieved the HbA1c target of at least 6·5% (vs 39% with dulaglutide, 2% with placebo). Changes in fasting plasma glucose ranged from -0·4 mmol/L to -3·4 mmol/L for LY3298176 (vs 0·9 mmol/L for placebo, -1·2 mmol/L for dulaglutide). Changes in mean bodyweight ranged from -0·9 kg to -11·3 kg for LY3298176 (vs -0·4 kg for placebo, -2·7 kg for dulaglutide). At 26 weeks, 14-71% of those treated with LY3298176 achieved the weight loss target of at least 5% (vs 22% with dulaglutide, 0% with placebo) and 6-39% achieved the weight loss target of at least 10% (vs 9% with dulaglutide, 0% with placebo). Changes in waist circumference ranged from -2·1 cm to -10·2 cm for LY3298176 (vs -1·3 cm for placebo, -2·5 cm for dulaglutide). Changes in total cholesterol ranged from 0·2 mmol/L to -0·3 mmol/L for LY3298176 (vs 0·3 mmol/L for placebo, -0·2 mmol/L for dulaglutide). Changes in HDL or LDL cholesterol did not differ between the LY3298176 and placebo groups. Changes in triglyceride concentration ranged from 0 mmol/L to -0·8 mmol/L for LY3298176 (vs 0·3 mmol/L for placebo, -0·3 mmol/L for dulaglutide). The 12-week outcomes were similar to those at 26 weeks for all secondary outcomes. 13 (4%) of 316 participants across the six treatment groups had 23 serious adverse events in total. Gastrointestinal events (nausea, diarrhoea, and vomiting) were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events. The incidence of gastrointestinal events was dose-related (23·1% for 1 mg LY3298176, 32·7% for 5 mg LY3298176, 51·0% for 10 mg LY3298176, and 66·0% for 15 mg LY3298176, 42·6% for dulaglutide, 9·8% for placebo); most events were mild to moderate in intensity and transient. Decreased appetite was the second most common adverse event (3·8% for 1 mg LY3298176, 20·0% for 5 mg LY3298176, 25·5% for 10 mg LY3298176, 18·9% for 15 mg LY3298176, 5·6% for dulaglutide, 2·0% for placebo). There were no reports of severe hypoglycaemia. One patient in the placebo group died from lung adenocarcinoma stage IV, which was unrelated to study treatment. INTERPRETATION: The dual GIP and GLP-1 receptor agonist, LY3298176, showed significantly better efficacy with regard to glucose control and weight loss than did dulaglutide, with an acceptable safety and tolerability profile. Combined GIP and GLP-1 receptor stimulation might offer a new therapeutic option in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Effect of once-weekly dulaglutide versus insulin glargine in people with type 2 diabetes and different baseline glycaemic patterns: A post hoc analysis of the AWARD-2 clinical trial.

The long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide acts by stimulating insulin secretion and reducing glucagon levels in a glucose-dependent manner both in the fasting and postprandial states, resulting in reductions of both fasting glucose (FG) and postprandial glucose (PPG). In contrast, the main mechanism of action of basal insulin is to reduce elevated FG by inhibiting hepatic glucose production. The aim of the present post hoc analysis of the phase 3 AWARD-2 trial was to investigate whether specific baseline glycaemic patterns respond differentially to dulaglutide compared to insulin glargine (glargine). We categorized participants into four subgroups based on prespecified glucose thresholds and their baseline FG and daily 2-hour mean PPG: low FG/low PPG; low FG/high PPG; high FG/low PPG; and high FG/high PPG. Changes in glycaemic measures in response to treatment with dulaglutide or glargine were evaluated in each subgroup. At 52 weeks, significant reductions from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) were observed in all subgroups with dulaglutide 1.5 mg and with glargine (all P < .05), except in patients with low FG/low PPG who received glargine. Greater HbA1c reductions were observed with dulaglutide 1.5 mg compared to glargine in all subgroups (all P ≤ .05), except in the low FG/high PPG subgroup.

Efficacy and safety of an expanded dulaglutide dose range: A phase 2, placebo-controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes using metformin.

AIMS: Dulaglutide, a once weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist, is approved at two doses (1.5 and 0.75 mg) for treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Two higher doses of dulaglutide (3.0 and 4.5 mg) were evaluated for safety and efficacy to determine whether these doses warrant further study for improved control of glucose and body weight. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This 18-week, double-blind, phase 2 trial randomized 318 patients with T2D using ≥1500 mg metformin, to receive subcutaneous injection of placebo (n = 82), dulaglutide 1.5 mg (n = 81), dulaglutide 3.0 mg (n = 79) or dulaglutide 4.5 mg (n = 76). The primary objective was superiority of dulaglutide doses over placebo in reduction of HbA1c at 18 weeks. Secondary objectives included superiority of dulaglutide over placebo in change from baseline in body weight and fasting serum glucose (FSG) at 18 weeks. Investigational doses of dulaglutide were compared to the 1.5 mg dose as an exploratory objective. RESULTS: HbA1c reduction at 18 weeks was significantly greater with dulaglutide vs placebo (placebo, -0.44% ± 0.10% [-4.8 ± 1.1 mmol/mol]; dulaglutide 1.5 mg, -1.23% ± 0.10% [-13.5 ± 1.1 mmol/mol]; dulaglutide 3.0 mg, -1.31% ± 0.10% [-14.3 ± 1.1 mmol/mol]; dulaglutide 4.5 mg, -1.40% ± 0.10% [-15.3 ± 1.1 mmol/mol]; P < 0.001, each dose), as were changes in body weight (placebo, -1.6 ± 0.39 kg; dulaglutide 1.5 mg, -2.8 ± 0.39 kg; dulaglutide 3.0 mg, -3.9 ± 0.39 kg; dulaglutide 4.5 mg, -4.1 ± 0.41 kg; P < 0.001, each dose). All three dulaglutide doses significantly reduced FSG from baseline (1.5 mg, -36.2 ± 4.7 mg/dL [-2.0 ± 0.3 mmol/L]; 3.0 mg, -34.5 ± 4.5 mg/dL [-1.9 ± 0.3 mmol/L]; 4.5 mg, -38.0 ± 4.7 mg/dL [-2.1 ± 0.3 mmol/L]) vs placebo (-12.4 ± 4.5 mg/dL [-0.7 ± 0.3 mmol/L]) (P < 0.001, all). Safety profiles of the higher doses were consistent with the established safety profile for dulaglutide. Gastrointestinal events were mostly mild to moderate, and was dose-related for nausea. CONCLUSION: All three dulaglutide doses were superior to placebo in improving glycaemic control and reducing body weight in participants with T2D using metformin. The potential for doses of dulaglutide of 3.0 and 4.5 mg to provide additional glycaemic benefit and weight reduction with an acceptable safety profile, compared with the 1.5 mg dose, warrants further study in a phase 3 trial.

Dulaglutide treatment results in effective glycaemic control in latent autoimmune diabetes in adults (LADA): A post-hoc analysis of the AWARD-2, -4 and -5 Trials.

AIMS: Patients with a type-2-diabetes (T2D) phenotype positive for glutamic acid decarboxylase antibodies (GADA) represent the majority of cases of latent autoimmune diabetes of the adult (LADA). The GLP-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide, recently introduced for treatment of T2D, has yet to be evaluated in LADA patients. Our primary objective was to evaluate the effect of dulaglutide on glycaemic control (HbA1c) in GADA-positive LADA vs GADA-negative T2D patients. METHODS: A post-hoc analysis was performed using data from 3 randomized phase 3 trials (AWARD-2,-4,-5; patients with GADA assessment) which were part of the dulaglutide clinical development programme in T2D. LADA patients were identified by GADA ≥5 IU/mL (ELISA). Changes in HbA1c during 12 months of treatment with dulaglutide or comparator were analysed using mixed-effect model repeated measures. RESULTS: Of 2466 adults tested for GADA (dulaglutide, 1710; glargine, 298; sitagliptin, 294; placebo, 164), 2278 (92.4%) were GADA-negative and 188 (7.6%) were GADA-positive, including 58 GADA-high patients (> 200 IU/mL) and 130 GADA-low patients (≤200 and ≥5 IU/mL). Overall, baseline parameters were comparable between the groups. Dulaglutide resulted in comparable HbA1c reductions in GADA-negative (LS mean change [95%CI], -1.09% [-1.15, -1.03]) and GADA-positive patients (-0.94% [-1.15, -0.72]) at 12 months. HbA1c reductions were numerically, but not statistically, significantly larger in GADA-low patients (-1.02% [-1.26, -0.78]) vs GADA-high patients (-0.72% [-1.21,-0.24]) at 12 months. Similar outcomes were observed at 3 and 6 months. CONCLUSIONS: These data are the first to indicate that dulaglutide was effective in reducing HbA1c in LADA patients.

Placebo-controlled, randomized trial of the addition of once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide to titrated daily insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes (AWARD-9).

AIM: To compare the addition of weekly dulaglutide vs the addition of placebo to titrated glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) with sub-optimum glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients (N = 300) from this phase III, double-blind, parallel-arm, placebo-controlled study were randomized to weekly subcutaneous injections of dulaglutide 1.5 mg or placebo with titrated daily glargine (mean ± standard deviation baseline dose: 39 ± 22 U), with or without metformin (≥1500 mg/d). The primary endpoint was superiority of dulaglutide/glargine to placebo/glargine with regard to change from baseline in HbA1c level at 28 weeks. RESULTS: Least squares (LS) mean ± standard error (s.e.) HbA1c changes from baseline were -1.44 ± 0.09% (-15.74 ± 0.98 mmol/mol) with dulaglutide/glargine and -0.67 ± 0.09% (-7.32 ± 0.98 mmol/mol) with placebo/glargine at 28 weeks (LS mean difference [95% confidence interval] -0.77% [-0.97, -0.56]; P < .001). Body weight decreased with dulaglutide/glargine and increased with placebo/glargine (LS mean difference: -2.41 ± 0.39 kg; P < .001). Increases from baseline in mean glargine dose were significantly smaller with dulaglutide/glargine vs placebo/glargine (13 ± 2 U [0.1 ± 0.02 U/kg] vs 26 ± 2 U [0.3 ± 0.02 U/kg], respectively; P < .001; LS mean ± s.e. final dose: dulaglutide/glargine, 51 ± 2 U; placebo/glargine, 65 ± 2 U). The hypoglycaemia rate (≤3.9 mmol/L threshold) was 7.69 ± 15.15 and 8.56 ± 16.13 events/patient/year, respectively (P = .488). One episode of severe hypoglycaemia occurred in the dulaglutide/glargine group. Common gastrointestinal adverse events with dulaglutide were nausea (12.0%), diarrhoea (11.3%) and vomiting (6.0%). CONCLUSIONS: Weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg added to basal insulin is an efficacious and well tolerated treatment option for patients with T2D.

Once-weekly dulaglutide versus bedtime insulin glargine, both in combination with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 2 diabetes (AWARD-4): a randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority study.

BACKGROUND: For patients with type 2 diabetes who do not achieve target glycaemic control with conventional insulin treatment, advancing to a basal-bolus insulin regimen is often recommended. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide with that of insulin glargine, both combined with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 2 diabetes. METHODS: We did this 52 week, randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority trial at 105 study sites in 15 countries. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with conventional insulin treatment were randomly assigned (1:1:1), via a computer-generated randomisation sequence with an interactive voice-response system, to receive once-weekly dulaglutide 1·5 mg, dulaglutide 0·75 mg, or daily bedtime glargine. Randomisation was stratified by country and metformin use. Participants and study investigators were not masked to treatment allocation, but were unaware of dulaglutide dose assignment. The primary outcome was a change in glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to week 26, with a 0·4% non-inferiority margin. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01191268. FINDINGS: Between Dec 9, 2010, and Sept 21, 2012, we randomly assigned 884 patients to receive dulaglutide 1·5 mg (n=295), dulaglutide 0·75 mg (n=293), or glargine (n=296). At 26 weeks, the adjusted mean change in HbA1c was greater in patients receiving dulaglutide 1·5 mg (-1·64% [95% CI -1·78 to -1·50], -17·93 mmol/mol [-19·44 to -16·42]) and dulaglutide 0·75 mg (-1·59% [-1·73 to -1·45], -17·38 mmol/mol [-18·89 to -15·87]) than in those receiving glargine (-1·41% [-1·55 to -1·27], -15·41 mmol/mol [-16·92 to -13·90]). The adjusted mean difference versus glargine was -0·22% (95% CI -0·38 to -0·07, -2·40 mmol/mol [-4·15 to -0·77]; p=0·005) for dulaglutide 1·5 mg and -0·17% (-0·33 to -0·02, -1·86 mmol/mol [-3·61 to -0·22]; p=0·015) for dulaglutide 0·75 mg. Five (<1%) patients died after randomisation because of septicaemia (n=1 in the dulaglutide 1·5 mg group); pneumonia (n=1 in the dulaglutide 0·75 mg group); cardiogenic shock; ventricular fibrillation; and an unknown cause (n=3 in the glargine group). We recorded serious adverse events in 27 (9%) patients in the dulaglutide 1·5 mg group, 44 (15%) patients in the dulaglutide 0·75 mg group, and 54 (18%) patients in the glargine group. The most frequent adverse events, arising more often with dulaglutide than glargine, were nausea, diarrhoea, and vomiting. INTERPRETATION: Dulaglutide in combination with lispro resulted in a significantly greater improvement in glycaemic control than did glargine and represents a new treatment option for patients unable to achieve glycaemic targets with conventional insulin treatment. FUNDING: Eli Lilly and Company.

Continuous glucose monitoring in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide in combination with prandial insulin lispro: an AWARD-4 substudy.

AIM: To conduct a substudy, using 24-hour continuous glucose monitoring (CGM), of the AWARD-4 trial, which was designed to compare insulin + glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist treatment with an insulin-only regimen. METHODS: The AWARD-4 trial randomized 884 conventional insulin regimen-treated patients to dulaglutide 1.5 mg, dulaglutide 0.75 mg and glargine, all in combination with prandial insulin lispro. The CGM substudy included 144 patients inserted with a Medtronic CGMS iPro CGM device to enable 3-day glucose monitoring. CGM sessions were completed at weeks 0, 13, 26 and 52. CGM measures included mean 24-hour glucose, percentage time in target glucose ranges, hyper- and hypoglycaemia and glucose variability. The primary objective was treatment comparison for percentage time spent with CGM glucose values in the 3.9-7.8 mmol/L range after 26 weeks. RESULTS: At week 26, mean CGM values decreased in all treatment groups (change from baseline -2.8 ± 0.3, -2.4 ± 0.3 and -2.5 ± 0.3 mmol/L for dulaglutide 1.5 mg, dulaglutide 0.75 mg and glargine, respectively); between-group differences were not statistically significant. Treatment groups were similar for percentage time in the 3.9-7.8 mmol/L range. Percentage time in the 3.9-10.0 mmol/L range was greater for dulaglutide 1.5 mg than for glargine (p < 0.05). Dulaglutide and glargine were associated with decreased glucose variability for all CGM variability indices. The overall within-patient standard deviation (s.d.) was significantly reduced with dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus glargine (p < 0.05). At week 52, there were no significant differences among the groups with regard to measures of normoglycaemia or near-normoglycaemia and for the overall within-patient s.d. Treatment with glargine was associated with greater increases in percentage time spent with glucose values ≤3.9 mmol/L, with statistically significant differences between the groups at 52 weeks (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In combination with prandial lispro, treatment with dulaglutide and glargine resulted in similar proportions of glucose values in the normoglycaemic range, but dulaglutide provided an improved balance between the proportion of values within the near-normoglycaemia range and values within the hypoglycaemic range.

New improved radiometabolite analysis method for [18F]FTHA from human plasma: a test-retest study with postprandial and fasting state.

BACKGROUND: Fatty acid uptake can be measured using PET and 14-(R,S)-[18F]fluoro-6-thia-heptadecanoic acid ([18F]FTHA). However, the relatively rapid rate of [18F]FTHA metabolism significantly affects kinetic modeling of tissue uptake. Thus, there is a need for accurate chromatographic methods to analyze the unmetabolized [18F]FTHA (parent fraction). Here we present a new radiometabolite analysis (RMA) method, with comparison to a previous method for parent fraction analysis, and its use in a test-retest clinical study under fasting and postprandial conditions. We developed a new thin-layer chromatography (TLC) RMA method for analysis of [18F]FTHA parent fraction and its radiometabolites from plasma, by testing stationary phases and eluent combinations. Next, we analyzed [18F]FTHA, its radiometabolites, and plasma radioactivity from subjects participating in a clinical study. A total of 17 obese or overweight participants were dosed with [18F]FTHA twice under fasting, and twice under postprandial conditions and plasma samples were obtained between 14 min (mean of first sample) and 72 min (mean of last sample) post-injection. Aliquots of 70 plasma samples were analyzed using both methods, enabling head-to-head comparisons. We performed test-retest and group comparisons of the parent fraction and plasma radioactivity. RESULTS: The new TLC method separated seven [18F]FTHA radiometabolite peaks, while the previous method separated three. The new method revealed at least one radiometabolite that was not previously separable from [18F]FTHA. From the plasma samples, the mean parent fraction value was on average 7.2 percentage points lower with the new method, compared to the previous method. Repeated [18F]FTHA investigations on the same subject revealed reproducible plasma SUV and parent fractions, with different kinetics between the fasted and postprandial conditions. CONCLUSIONS: The newly developed improved radio-TLC method for [18F]FTHA RMA enables accurate parent fraction correction, which is required to obtain quantitative data for modelling [18F]FTHA PET data. Our test-retest study of fasted and postprandial conditions showed robust reproducibility, and revealed clear differences in the [18F]FTHA metabolic rate under different study settings. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EudraCT No: 2020-005211-48, 04Feb2021; and Clinical Trials registry NCT05132335, 29Oct2021, URL: https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT05132335 .

Effects of Tirzepatide vs Semaglutide on ß-cell Function, Insulin Sensitivity, and Glucose Control During a Meal Test.

CONTEXT: In a clinical study, tirzepatide, a glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide/glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GIP/GLP-1RA), provided superior glycemic control vs the GLP-1RA semaglutide. The physiologic mechanisms are incompletely understood. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate treatment effects by model-based analyses of mixed-meal tolerance test (MMTT) data. DESIGN: A 28-week double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. SETTING: Two clinical research centers in Germany. PATIENTS: Patients with type 2 diabetes treated with metformin. INTERVENTIONS: Tirzepatide 15 mg, semaglutide 1 mg, placebo. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Glycemic control, model-derived ß-cell function indices including insulin secretion rate (ISR) at 7.2-mmol/L glucose (ISR7.2), ß-cell glucose (ß-CG) sensitivity, insulin sensitivity, and estimated hepatic insulin-to-glucagon ratio. RESULTS: Tirzepatide significantly reduced fasting glucose and MMTT total glucose area under the curve (AUC) vs semaglutide (P < 0.01). Incremental glucose AUC did not differ significantly between treatments; therefore, greater total glucose AUC reduction with tirzepatide was mainly attributable to greater suppression of fasting glucose. A greater reduction in total ISR AUC was achieved with tirzepatide vs semaglutide (P < 0.01), in the context of greater improvement in insulin sensitivity with tirzepatide (P < 0.01). ISR7.2 was significantly increased with tirzepatide vs semaglutide (P < 0.05), showing improved ß-CG responsiveness. MMTT-derived ß-CG sensitivity was increased but not significantly different between treatments. Both treatments reduced fasting glucagon and total glucagon AUC, with glucagon AUC significantly reduced with tirzepatide vs semaglutide (P < 0.01). The estimated hepatic insulin-to-glucagon ratio did not change substantially with either treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the greater glycemic control observed for tirzepatide manifests as improved fasting glucose and glucose excursion control, due to improvements in ISR, insulin sensitivity, and glucagon suppression.

P2RY12 gene polymorphisms and effect of clopidogrel on platelet aggregation.

Objective of this study was to assess platelet response to clopidogrel and its association with certain single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) of the P2RY12 gene. Several studies have shown that patients with poor in vitro response to clopidogrel have worse outcomes after coronary interventions. Pharmacological response to clopidogrel is mediated by the P2Y12 platelet receptor, therefore, SNPs of the P2RY12 gene may account for some of the observed variability in the cardiovascular risk. Fifty patients with stable coronary heart disease, undergoing percutaneous coronary intervention were included in this study. Response to clopidogrel was analysed using light transmitted aggregometry before, and 5 days after the initation of therapy. SNPs analysed: c.-15+742C > T, c.-180+2739T > C and c.18C > T. A higher proportion of non-responders to clopidogrel were noted in carriers of 18C > T[T/T] (p = 0.05), and lower prevalence in carriers of 742C > T[T/T] (p = 0.05). Participants with 742C > T[T/T] had significantly higher change in aggregation compared to other 742C > T variants ([C/C] = 20.5 +/- 21.9%; [C/T] = 20.0 +/- 31.2%; [T/T] = 48.6 +/- 21.3%; p = 0.03). Those carrying 18C > T[T/T] had smaller change in aggregation (7.6 +/- 15.0%) compared to other variants, but the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.15). Analysis of variance showed 18C > T[T/T] was a statistically significant predictor of poor response to antiaggregation therapy, independent from other clinical and demographic variables. There was no relation between poor response to clopidogrel and any other genetic variant. Our results suggest that 18C > T SNP of the P2RY12 gene may be an independent predictor of pharmacological response to clopidogrel. Larger prospective studies are needed to confirm this link and assess its possible clinical consequences.

Tirzepatide Reduces Appetite, Energy Intake, and Fat Mass in People With Type 2 Diabetes.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of tirzepatide on body composition, appetite, and energy intake to address the potential mechanisms involved in body weight loss with tirzepatide. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a secondary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, parallel-arm study, the effects of tirzepatide 15 mg (N = 45), semaglutide 1 mg (N = 44), and placebo (N = 28) on body weight and composition, appetite, and energy intake were assessed at baseline and week 28. RESULTS: Tirzepatide treatment demonstrated significant reductions in body weight compared with placebo and semaglutide, resulting in greater fat mass reduction. Tirzepatide and semaglutide significantly reduced appetite versus placebo. Appetite scores and energy intake reductions did not differ between tirzepatide and semaglutide. CONCLUSIONS: Differences in energy intake during ad libitum lunch were not sufficient to explain the different weight outcomes. Further evaluation is needed to assess mechanistic differences related to tirzepatide actions on 24-h energy intake, substrate utilization, and energy expenditure.

Effects of subcutaneous tirzepatide versus placebo or semaglutide on pancreatic islet function and insulin sensitivity in adults with type 2 diabetes: a multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-arm, phase 1 clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Tirzepatide, a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP)/GLP-1 receptor agonist, shows a remarkable ability to lower blood glucose, enabling many patients with long-standing type 2 diabetes to achieve normoglycaemia. We aimed to understand the physiological mechanisms underlying the action of tirzepatide in type 2 diabetes. METHODS: This multicentre, randomised, double-blind, parallel-arm, phase 1 study was done at two centres in Germany. Eligible patients were aged 20-74 years, had type 2 diabetes for at least 6 months, and were being treated with lifestyle advice and stable doses of metformin, with or without one additional stable dose of another oral antihyperglycaemic medicine, 3 months before study entry. Via a randomisation table, patients were randomly assigned (3:3:2) to subcutaneously receive either tirzepatide 15 mg, semaglutide 1 mg, or placebo once per week. Endpoint measurements were done at baseline and the last week of therapy (week 28). The primary endpoint was the effect of tirzepatide versus placebo on the change in clamp disposition index (combining measures of insulin secretion and sensitivity) from baseline to week 28 of treatment and was analysed in the pharmacodynamic analysis set, which comprised all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of a study drug and had evaluable pharmacodynamic data. Safety was analysed in the safety population, which comprised all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of a study drug. Secondary endpoints included the effect of tirzepatide versus semaglutide on the change in clamp disposition index from baseline to week 28 of treatment, glucose control, total insulin secretion rate, M value (insulin sensitivity), and fasting and postprandial glucagon concentrations. Exploratory endpoints included the change in fasting and postprandial insulin concentrations. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03951753, and is complete. FINDINGS: Between June 28, 2019, and April 8, 2021, we screened 184 individuals and enrolled 117 participants, all of whom were included in the safety population (45 in the tirzepatide 15 mg group, 44 in the semaglutide 1 mg group, and 28 in the placebo group). Because of discontinuations and exclusions due to missing or unevaluable data, 39 patients in each treatment group and 24 patients in the placebo group comprised the pharmacodynamic analysis set. With tirzepatide, the clamp disposition index increased from a least squares mean of 0·3 pmol m-2 L min-2 kg-1 (SE 0·03) at baseline by 1·9 pmol m-2 L min-2 kg-1 (0·16) to total 2·3 pmol m-2 L min-2 kg-1 (SE 0·16) at week 28 and, with placebo, the clamp disposition index did not change much from baseline (least squares mean at baseline 0·4 pmol m-2 L min-2 kg-1 [SE 0·04]; change from baseline 0·0 pmol m-2 L min-2 kg-1 [0·03]; least squares mean at week 28 0·3 [SE 0·03]; estimated treatment difference [ETD] tirzepatide vs placebo 1·92 [95% CI 1·59-2·24]; p<0·0001). The improvement with tirzepatide in clamp disposition index was significantly greater than with semaglutide (ETD 0·84 pmol m-2 L min-2 kg-1 [95% CI 0·46-1·21]). This result reflected significant improvements in total insulin secretion rate (ETD 102·09 pmol min-1 m-2 [51·84-152·33]) and insulin sensitivity (ETD 1·52 mg min-1 kg-1 [0·53-2·52]) for tirzepatide versus semaglutide. On meal tolerance testing, tirzepatide significantly reduced glucose excursions (lower insulin and glucagon concentrations) compared with placebo, with effects on these variables being greater than with semaglutide. The safety profiles of tirzepatide and semaglutide were similar, with gastrointestinal adverse events being the most common (11 [24%], 13 [30%], and seven [25%] with nausea; nine [20%], 13 [30%], and six [21%] with diarrhoea; and three [7%], five [11%], and one [4%] with vomiting, for tirzepatide, semaglutide, and placebo, respectively). There were no deaths. INTERPRETATION: The glycaemic efficacy of GIP/GLP-1 receptor agonist tirzepatide in type 2 diabetes results from concurrent improvements in key components of diabetes pathophysiology, namely ß-cell function, insulin sensitivity, and glucagon secretion. These effects were large and help to explain the remarkable glucose-lowering ability of tirzepatide seen in phase 3 studies. FUNDING: Eli Lilly.

LY3437943, a novel triple glucagon, GIP, and GLP-1 receptor agonist for glycemic control and weight loss: From discovery to clinical proof of concept.

With an increasing prevalence of obesity, there is a need for new therapies to improve body weight management and metabolic health. Multireceptor agonists in development may provide approaches to fulfill this unmet medical need. LY3437943 is a novel triple agonist peptide at the glucagon receptor (GCGR), glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor (GIPR), and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R). In vitro, LY3437943 shows balanced GCGR and GLP-1R activity but more GIPR activity. In obese mice, administration of LY3437943 decreased body weight and improved glycemic control. Body weight loss was augmented by the addition of GCGR-mediated increases in energy expenditure to GIPR- and GLP-1R-driven calorie intake reduction. In a phase 1 single ascending dose study, LY3437943 showed a safety and tolerability profile similar to other incretins. Its pharmacokinetic profile supported once-weekly dosing, and a reduction in body weight persisted up to day 43 after a single dose. These findings warrant further clinical assessment of LY3437943.