Glargine Group Research Articles

Weight loss in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving once-weekly dulaglutide plus insulin lispro or insulin glargine plus insulin lispro: A post-hoc analysis of the AWARD-4 study across baseline body mass index subgroups.

Insulin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity are challenged in achieving body weight stability or reduction, in addition to glycaemic control. Post-hoc analyses of body weight and insulin dose data from the AWARD-4 trial involved comparison of treatment with once-weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg (N = 295) or 0.75 mg (N = 293) and treatment with daily insulin glargine (N = 296), each with prandial insulin lispro (± metformin). Changes in weight and in the proportion of patients without weight gain or with weight loss of at least 3%, 5% or 10% or composites of HbA1c less than 7% without weight gain and weight loss of at least 3% after 52 weeks were compared between the dulaglutide (either dose) groups and the insulin glargine group, overall and by baseline BMI (<30, 30-<35, ≥35 kg/m2 ), using analysis of covariance and logistic regression, including interaction terms. The following parameters were statistically significant (P < 0.01) in favour of the dulaglutide-treated groups, at lower mean total daily insulin doses, vs the insulin glargine group. The achieved targets were more pronounced with dulaglutide 1.5 mg than with insulin glargine: LSM weight change difference, -3.23 kg; proportion of patients without weight gain, 49.0% vs 19.0%; proportion of patients with weight loss ≥3%, 21.7% vs 5.7% or with weight loss ≥5%, 10.5% vs 2.4%; proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% without weight gain, 26.2% vs 7.9%; proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% and weight loss ≥3%, 11.9% vs 1.4%, respectively. Treatment effect for these parameters was not significantly different across BMI categories. Larger proportions of patients in late-stage T2D needing treatment intensification achieved glycemic control without weight gain or with weight loss at lower insulin doses with once-weekly dulaglutide plus daily prandial insulin than with a basal-bolus insulin regimen, overall and across all three BMI subgroups.

Efficacy and safety of once‐weekly dulaglutide versus insulin glargine in mainly Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on metformin and/or a sulphonylurea: A 52‐week open‐label, randomized phase III trial

AimTo compare the efficacy and safety of once‐weekly dulaglutide with that of insulin glargine in combination with metformin and/or a sulphonylurea in mainly Asian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).Materials and MethodsIn this 52‐week, randomized, parallel‐arm open‐label study, we enrolled patients aged ≥18 years with T2DM for at least 6 months and a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration ≥53.0 mmol/mol (7.0%) and ≤96.7 mmol/mol (11.0%). The primary outcome was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 to determine non‐inferiority of dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus glargine.ResultsA total of 774 patients from China, South Korea, Mexico and Russia were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to dulaglutide 1.5 mg, dulaglutide 0.75 mg or glargine treatment groups. The patients' mean age was 55 years and the average T2DM duration was ~8 years. The least squares mean (SE) changes from baseline in HbA1c at 26 weeks were − 18.9 (0.73) mmol/mol (−1.73 [0.067]%) for dulaglutide 1.5 mg and −14.5 (0.73) mmol/mol (−1.33 [0.067]%) for dulaglutide 0.75 mg, compared with −12.7 (0.73) mmol/mol (−1.16 [0.067]%) for glargine. Statistical criteria for superiority were met with both dulaglutide 1.5 mg and dulaglutide 0.75 mg. More patients in the dulaglutide 1.5 and 0.75 mg groups achieved HbA1c target <53.0 mmol/mol (<7.0%) than in the glargine group at week 26 (P < 0.001 and P = 0.004, respectively). Body weight decreased with dulaglutide and increased with glargine. The incidence and rate of total hypoglycaemia were lower with dulaglutide versus glargine. Gastrointestinal adverse events, including diarrhoea and nausea, were the most frequently reported for patients taking dulaglutide.ConclusionsOnce‐weekly dulaglutide provides greater improvement in HbA1c, with weight loss and less hypoglycaemia, than once‐daily insulin glargine in a population of mainly Asian patients with T2DM who had failed to achieve optimal glycaemic control on metformin and/or a sulphonylurea.

Improved Cardiovascular and Cardiometabolic Risk in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes and Autoimmune Polyglandular Syndrome Switched From Glargine to Degludec Due to Hypoglycaemic Variability.

Background: Cardiovascular disease is a frequent complication of type 1 diabetes (T1D). We evaluated the effectiveness of switching from glargine to degludec in reducing the cardiovascular risk factors, the Framingham risk score (FRS) and visceral adiposity index (VAI) in patients with T1D and autoimmune polyglandular syndrome (APS).Methods: We selected 66 T1D outpatients who had been on stable treatment with glargine for at least 5 years. Among them, 30 patients maintained glargine (group A), while 36 were switched to degludec (group B) for 12 months. At baseline and after 12 months of observation, clinical and metabolic parameters, insulin dose, 30-days blood glucose (BG) self monitoring, VAI and FRS were obtained.Results: At baseline, patients in group B had more hypoglycaemic episodes and prevalence of hypertension than those in group A. After 12 months on degludec, patients in group B had a significant decrease in BMI (p = 0.003), waist circumference (p < 0.001), total daily insulin as U/day and U/kg (p = 0.001 for both), basal insulin as U/day and U/kg (p = 0.001 for both), HbA1c (p < 0.001), mean (p = 0.035) and standard deviation of daily BG (p = 0.017), mean pre-meal BG (p = 0.016), number of hypoglycaemic episodes (p = 0.001), VAI (p = 0.012) and FRS (p = 0.019) and a significant increase in HDL-C (p < 0.001), compared to baseline. At 12 months of treatment a significant decrease in BMI (p = 0.017), WC (p = 0.003), SBP (p = 0.001), DBP (p = 0.005), basal insulin as U/day (p = 0.018) and U/kg (p = 0.045), HbA1c (p = 0.040) and FRS (p = 0.010) was observed in group B compared to group A.Conclusions: Our preliminary data suggest that 12 months' treatment with degludec is associated with an improvement of glycaemic control, cardiometabolic and cardiovascular risk, compared to glargine, in patients with T1D and APS.

Evaluation of Insulin Regimen and Glycemic Control in Noncritically Ill Hospitalized Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Receiving Continuous Enteral Nutrition Therapy

Hyperglycemia is a common complication in hospitalized patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) on continuous enteral nutrition therapy (ENT). The purpose of this study was to identify an insulin regimen for this patient population that provided adequate coverage for hyperglycemia without significant hypoglycemia. A retrospective chart review was conducted at the University of Vermont Medical Center for noncritically ill patients admitted between 07/01/2012 and 09/01/2015 who had T2DM and received continuous ENT for ≥72 hours—209 patients met the inclusion criteria; 117 had received aspart sliding scale only and 92 had received aspart with long-acting glargine. Our results revealed no evidence of severe hypoglycemia (blood glucose &amp;lt;40mg/dL) in either group, and the occurrence of hypoglycemia (blood glucose &amp;lt;70mg/dL) was similar in both groups (p=0.54). However, there was a difference in the percentage of blood glucose values within the optimal range (100 to 180mg/dL): the aspart-only group had 60.3%±27.2% of values within this range compared to 36.6%±24.4% in the aspart+glargine group (p&amp;lt;0.001). The aspart+glargine group had blood glucose levels &amp;gt;180 mg/dL 58.8%±26.9% of the time compared to 33.1%±28.6% in the aspart-only group (p&amp;lt;0.0001). In conclusion, both insulin regimens resulted in similar efficacy in noncritically ill, hospitalized patients with T2DM receiving continuous ENT without significant hypoglycemia. However, neither regimen resulted in blood glucose values in the optimal range for a sufficient percentage of the 72-hour period. A basal and bolus insulin regimen, rather than sliding scale only, is likely needed to improve overall glycemic control in these patients while preventing hypoglycemia. Further prospective studies are needed in this area to identify the most appropriate insulin program to treat hyperglycemia in hospitalized patients on ENT. Disclosure D.J. Selen: Employee; Spouse/Partner; CVS/Caremark. A.B. Howard: None. M.P. Gilbert: Consultant; Self; Sanofi US, Novo Nordisk A/S.

Dapagliflozin improves blood glucose in diabetes on triple oral hypoglycemic agents having inadequate glucose control

AimsThe aim of this study was to evaluate whether a combination drug therapy that consists of dapagliflozin with three other oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) would have a beneficial safety and efficacy profile in T2DM patients who have uncontrolled glucose levels compared to a treatment regimen that contains of basal insulin with two different OHAs. MethodsA total of 162 type 2 diabetic patients who are unable to control glucose on their current therapy consisting of 3 OHAs were enrolled in dapagliflozin group and 148 patients in insulin glargine group for the 24-week study period. ResultsThe mean changes in HbA1c level were comparable as −0.97 ± 1.29% in dapagliflozin group and −0.95 ± 1.41% in insulin glargine group (p = 0.911). Also, the fasting plasma glucose or post-prandial 2 h glucose were comparably decreased in dapagliflozin or insulin glargine. In terms of the body-weight, there was a significant decrease of −2.36 ± 0.51 kg following treatment of dapagliflozin, whereas the increment of 1.93 ± 0.49 kg was in insulin glargine (p < 0.001). In terms of adverse events, hypoglycemic events were higher in insulin glargine rather than dapagliflozin (15.1% vs. 1.6%, p < 0.05). ConclusionsOur findings demonstrated that the addition of dapagliflozin to an existing drug regimen consisting of three different OHAs in patients exhibiting inadequate blood glucose control could be alternate treatment modality in T2D who hesitate to initiate insulin therapy.

Glycemic Control in Adult Type 1 Diabetes Patients with Insulin Glargine, Insulin Detemir, or Continuous Subcutaneous Insulin Infusion in Daily Practice.

This study aims to compare glycemic control of persons with type 1 diabetes using multiple daily injections (MDI) with insulin glargine versus insulin detemir or with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) in daily practice. All adult individuals with type 1 diabetes (n = 1053) were identified from the electronic patient database in North Karelia, Finland. The persons' individual data for insulin treatment, diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA), and hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) measurements during the year 2014 were obtained from medical records. Persons using long-acting insulin analogs or CSII were included in the analyses (n = 1004). Altogether, 47.7% used glargine, 43.9% used detemir, and 8.4% used CSII. The mean HbA1c was lower in the CSII group (63 mmol/mol [7.9%]) compared with the glargine group (66 mmol/mol [8.2%]) or the detemir group (67 mmol/mol [8.3%]). The overall rate of DKA was 5.1% per year. The rate of DKA was higher in the detemir group compared with the glargine group (6.3% per year vs. 3.8% per year, respectively, P < 0.049). In logistic regression analyses, the higher rate of DKA with detemir use was explained by HbA1c. In daily practice, the glycemic control of type 1 diabetes patients with MDI was similar regardless of basal insulin, glargine, or detemir, whereas CSII allowed better glycemic control than MDI. The rate of DKA was higher with detemir than with glargine, but this is likely related to higher HbA1c rather than insulin regimen.

New Medications for the Treatment of Diabetes.

New Medications for the Treatment of Diabetes.

Effects of glargine insulin on glycemic control in patients with diabetes mellitus type II undergoing off-pump coronary artery bypass graft.

Background:The prevalence of diabetes mellitus in patients requiring coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) is noticeably high (20%–30%). These patients have inferior perioperative outcome, reduced long-term survival, and high risk of recurrent episodes of angina. To improve perioperative outcome surgical unit defined satisfactory glycemic control is desired during this period. Hence, the aim of our study is to compare the efficacy of glargine insulin combination with continuous human insulin infusion for perioperative glycemic control in patients with diabetes undergoing CABG.Materials and Methods:Fifty Patients, who were posted for off-pump CABG with diabetes mellitus type II, were randomized in two group, Group I normal saline + human insulin infusion during the perioperative period, Group II (glargine group): Glargine + human insulin infusion during perioperative period.Results:During surgery and in the postoperative period, random blood sugar and human insulin requirement are significantly higher in control group than glargine group. Other infection, step-up antibiotics, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and hospital stay were significantly higher in control groups in postoperative period.Conclusion:Our study results suggest that glargine effectively manages blood glucose level with significantly greater control over postoperative morbidity.

Efficacy and Safety of Degludec versus Glargine in Type 2 Diabetes

BackgroundDegludec is an ultralong-acting, once-daily basal insulin that is approved for use in adults, adolescents, and children with diabetes. Previous open-label studies have shown lower day-to-day variability in the glucose-lowering effect and lower rates of hypoglycemia among patients who received degludec than among those who received basal insulin glargine. However, data are lacking on the cardiovascular safety of degludec.MethodsWe randomly assigned 7637 patients with type 2 diabetes to receive either insulin degludec (3818 patients) or insulin glargine U100 (3819 patients) once daily between dinner and bedtime in a double-blind, treat-to-target, event-driven cardiovascular outcomes trial. The primary composite outcome in the time-to-event analysis was the first occurrence of an adjudicated major cardiovascular event (death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke) with a prespecified noninferiority margin of 1.3. Adjudicated severe hypoglycemia, as defined by the American Diabetes Association, was the prespecified, multiplicity-adjusted secondary outcome.ResultsOf the patients who underwent randomization, 6509 (85.2%) had established cardiovascular disease, chronic kidney disease, or both. At baseline, the mean age was 65.0 years, the mean duration of diabetes was 16.4 years, and the mean (±SD) glycated hemoglobin level was 8.4±1.7%; 83.9% of the patients were receiving insulin. The primary outcome occurred in 325 patients (8.5%) in the degludec group and in 356 (9.3%) in the glargine group (hazard ratio, 0.91; 95% confidence interval, 0.78 to 1.06; P<0.001 for noninferiority). At 24 months, the mean glycated hemoglobin level was 7.5±1.2% in each group, whereas the mean fasting plasma glucose level was significantly lower in the degludec group than in the glargine group (128±56 vs. 136±57 mg per deciliter, P<0.001). Prespecified adjudicated severe hypoglycemia occurred in 187 patients (4.9%) in the degludec group and in 252 (6.6%) in the glargine group, for an absolute difference of 1.7 percentage points (rate ratio, 0.60; P<0.001 for superiority; odds ratio, 0.73; P<0.001 for superiority). Rates of adverse events did not differ between the two groups.ConclusionsAmong patients with type 2 diabetes at high risk for cardiovascular events, degludec was noninferior to glargine with respect to the incidence of major cardiovascular events. (Funded by Novo Nordisk and others; DEVOTE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01959529.)

Effect of insulin glargine on recreational physical activity and TV viewing: Analysis of the randomised ORIGIN trial.

To quantify whether insulin therapy, and concomitant weight gain, affects recreational physical activity and TV viewing time using data from the Outcomes Reduction with an Initial Glargine Intervention (ORIGIN) trial. 12,537 insulin-naïve individuals with dysglycaemia were randomised to receive either basal insulin glargine or standard care and followed for a median of 6.2years. Complete recreational physical activity and TV viewing time questionnaires across baseline, 2year follow-up and study end were available for 8954 participants. Differences between groups at follow-up were assessed by analysis of covariance. At follow-up, there was no difference in physical activity or TV viewing time between those taking insulin glargine and those receiving standard care, despite body weight increasing by 1.66 (7.56) kg in the insulin glargine group and reducing by -0.65 (7.90) kg in the standard care group (P<0.001). The dose of insulin glargine was not associated with changes in physical activity. Despite modest weight gain, insulin glargine did not adversely impact recreational physical activity levels within an international cohort with dysglyaemia. ORIGIN ClinicalTrials.gov number: NCT00069784.

Effects of maternal hypoglycemia on fetal eye and skeleton development in rats

The relationship between insulin-induced maternal hypoglycemia and teratogenicity was investigated in detail. We injected 4 different forms of insulin (insulin human, aspart, glargine, and detemir) subcutaneously at 1 or 2 dose levels to Sprague-Dawley rats from Days 6 to 11 of pregnancy, measured blood glucose levels, and conducted fetal examination. In the insulin human and aspart (low dose) groups, while severe hypoglycemia (approximately 50mg/dL) was seen, it lasted only 6h and no fetal anomalies were observed. Fetal axial skeleton anomalies were observed in the aspart (high dose) group, which exhibited intermediate-duration of severe hypoglycemia (9h). Eye and axial skeleton anomalies were observed in the glargine and detemir groups, which exhibited continuous severe hypoglycemia (≥9h). These results revealed that insulin-induced maternal hypoglycemia caused fetal eye and skeleton anomalies and the causative key factors were duration of maternal severe hypoglycemia.

Effects of exenatide on cardiac function, perfusion, and energetics in type 2 diabetic patients with cardiomyopathy: a randomized controlled trial against insulin glargine

BackgroundMultiple bloodglucose-lowering agents have been linked to cardiovascular events. Preliminary studies showed improvement in left ventricular (LV) function during glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist administration. Underlying mechanisms, however, are unclear. The purpose of this study was to investigate myocardial perfusion and oxidative metabolism in type 2 diabetic (T2DM) patients with LV systolic dysfunction as compared to healthy controls. Furthermore, effects of 26-weeks of exenatide versus insulin glargine administration on cardiac function, perfusion and oxidative metabolism in T2DM patients with LV dysfunction were explored.Methods and resultsTwenty-six T2DM patients with LV systolic dysfunction (cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) derived LV ejection fraction (LVEF) of 47 ± 13%) and 10 controls (LVEF of 59 ± 4%, P < 0.01 as compared to patients) were analyzed. Both myocardial perfusion during adenosine-induced hyperemia (P < 0.01), and coronary flow reserve (P < 0.01), measured by [15O]H2O positron emission tomography (PET), were impaired in T2DM patients as compared to healthy controls. Myocardial oxygen consumption and myocardial efficiency, measured using [11C]acetate PET and CMR derived stroke volume, were not different between the groups. Eleven patients in the exenatide group and 12 patients in the insulin glargine group completed the trial. Systemic metabolic control was improved after both treatments, although, no changes in cardiac function, perfusion and metabolism were seen after exenatide or insulin glargine.ConclusionsT2DM patients with LV systolic dysfunction did not have altered myocardial efficiency as compared to healthy controls. Exenatide or insulin glargine had no effects on cardiac function, perfusion or oxidative metabolism.Trial registration NCT00766857

The effect of basal insulin glargine on the fibrinolytic system and von Willebrand factor in people with dysglycaemia and high risk for cardiovascular events: Swedish substudy of the Outcome Reduction with an Initial Glargine Intervention trial.

Fibrinolytic factors, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, tissue plasminogen activator, tissue plasminogen activator/plasminogen activator-complex and the haemostatic factor von Willebrand factor are known markers of cardiovascular disease. Their plasma levels are adversely affected in patients with dysglycaemia, and glucose normalization with insulin glargine might improve the levels of these factors. Prespecified Swedish substudy of the Outcome Reduction with an Initial Glargine Intervention trial (ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00069784). Tissue plasminogen activator activity, tissue plasminogen activator antigen, plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 antigen, tissue plasminogen activator/plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 complex and von Willebrand factor were analysed at study start, after 2 years and at the end of the study (median follow-up of 6.2 years). Of 129 patients (mean age of 64 ± 7 years, females: 19%), 68 (53%) and 61 (47%) were randomized to the insulin glargine and standard care group, respectively. Allocation to insulin glargine did not significantly affect the studied fibrinolytic markers or von Willebrand factor compared to standard care. Likewise, there were no significant differences in plasminogen activator inhibitor-1, tissue plasminogen activator antigen and von Willebrand factor. During the whole study period, the within-group analysis revealed a curvilinear pattern and significant changes for tissue plasminogen activator/plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 complex, tissue plasminogen activator antigen and von Willebrand factor in the insulin glargine but not in the standard care group. In people with dysglycaemia and other cardiovascular risk factors, basal insulin does not improve the levels of markers of fibrinolysis or von Willebrand factor compared to standard glucose-lowering treatments.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide versus once-daily insulin glargine as add-on to metformin (with or without sulfonylureas) in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN 4): a randomised, open-label, parallel-group, multicentre, multinational, phase 3a trial

Several pharmacological treatment options are available for type 2 diabetes; however, many patients do not achieve optimum glycaemic control and therefore new therapies are necessary. We assessed the efficacy and safety of semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue in clinical development, compared with insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes who were inadequately controlled with metformin (with or without sulfonylureas). We did a randomised, open-label, non-inferiority, parallel-group, multicentre, multinational, phase 3a trial (SUSTAIN 4) at 196 sites in 14 countries. Eligible participants were insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes, aged 18 years and older, who had insufficient glycaemic control with metformin either alone or in combination with a sulfonylurea. We randomly assigned participants (1:1:1) to either subcutaneous once-weekly 0·5 mg or 1·0 mg semaglutide (doses reached after following a fixed dose-escalation regimen) or once-daily insulin glargine (starting dose 10 IU per day, then titrated weekly to a pre-breakfast self-measured plasma glucose target of 4·0-5·5 mmol/L [72-99 mg/dL]) for 30 weeks. In all treatment groups, previous background metformin and sulfonylurea treatment was continued throughout the trial. We did the randomisation using an interactive voice or web response system. The primary endpoint was change in mean HbA1c from baseline to week 30 and the confirmatory secondary endpoint was the change in mean bodyweight from baseline to week 30. We assessed efficacy and safety in the modified intention-to-treat population (mITT; all randomly assigned participants who were exposed to at least one dose of study drug) and used a margin of 0·3% to establish non-inferiority in HbA1c reduction. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02128932. Between Aug 4, 2014, and Sept 3, 2015, we randomly assigned 1089 participants to treatment; the mITT population consisted of 362 participants assigned to 0·5 mg semaglutide, 360 to 1·0 mg semaglutide, and 360 to insulin glargine. 49 (14%) participants assigned to 0·5 mg semaglutide discontinued treatment prematurely, compared with 55 (15%) assigned to 1·0 mg semaglutide, and 26 (7%) assigned to insulin glargine. Most discontinuations were due to adverse events-mostly gastrointestinal with semaglutide, and others such as skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders (eg, rash, pruritus, and urticaria) with insulin glargine. From a mean baseline HbA1c of 8·17% (SD 0·89), at week 30, 0·5 and 1·0 mg semaglutide achieved reductions of 1·21% (95% CI 1·10-1·31) and 1·64% (1·54-1·74), respectively, versus 0·83% (0·73-0·93) with insulin glargine; estimated treatment difference versus insulin glargine -0·38% (95% CI -0·52 to -0·24) with 0·5 mg semaglutide and -0·81% (-0·96 to -0·67) with 1·0 mg semaglutide (both p<0·0001). Mean bodyweight at baseline was 93·45 kg (SD 21·79); at week 30, 0·5 and 1·0 mg semaglutide achieved weight losses of 3·47 kg (95% CI 3·00-3·93) and 5·17 kg (4·71-5·66), respectively, versus a weight gain of 1·15 kg (0·70-1·61) with insulin glargine; estimated treatment difference versus insulin glargine -4·62 kg (95% CI -5·27 to -3·96) with 0·5 mg semaglutide and -6·33 kg (-6·99 to -5·67) with 1·0 mg semaglutide (both p<0·0001). Severe or blood glucose-confirmed hypoglycaemia was reported by 16 (4%) participants with 0·5 mg semaglutide and 20 (6%) with 1·0 mg semaglutide versus 38 (11%) with insulin glargine (p=0·0021 and p=0·0202 for 0·5 mg and 1·0 mg semaglutide vs insulin glargine, respectively). Severe hypoglycaemia was reported by two (<1%) participants with 0·5 mg semaglutide, five (1%) with 1·0 mg semaglutide, and five (1%) with insulin glargine. Six deaths were reported: four (1%) in the 0·5 mg semaglutide group (three cardiovascular deaths, one pancreatic carcinoma, which was assessed as being possibly related to study medication) and two (<1%) in the insulin glargine group (both cardiovascular death). The most frequently reported adverse events were nausea with semaglutide, reported in 77 (21%) patients with 0·5 mg and in 80 (22%) with 1·0 mg, and nasopharyngitis reported in 44 (12%) patients with insulin glargine. Compared with insulin glargine, semaglutide resulted in greater reductions in HbA1c and weight, with fewer hypoglycaemic episodes, and was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that of other GLP-1 receptor agonists. Novo Nordisk A/S.

Pharmacological efficacy of FGF21 analogue, liraglutide and insulin glargine in treatment of type 2 diabetes

Fibroblast growth factor 21 (FGF21) is a promising regulator of glucose and lipid metabolism with multiple beneficial effects including hypoglycemic and lipid-lowering. Previous studies have reported that FGF21 is expected to become a new drug for treatment of diabetes. Liraglutide and insulin glargine are the two representative anti-diabetic biological drugs. In the current study, we aim to compare the long-term pharmacological efficacy of mFGF21 (an FGF21 analogue), liraglutide and insulin glargine in type 2 diabetic db/db mice. Db/db mice were initially treated with three kinds of proteins (25nmol/kg/day) by subcutaneous injection once a day for 4weeks, then subsequently be treated with once every two days for next 4weeks. After 8weeks of treatments, the blood glucose levels, body weights, glycosylated hemoglobin levels, fasting insulin levels, serum lipid profiles, hepatic biochemical parameters, oral glucose tolerance tests and hepatic mRNA expression levels of several proteins (GK, G6P, GLUT-1 and GLUT-4) associated with glucose metabolism of the experimental mice were detected. Results demonstrated that three proteins could significantly decrease the fed blood glucose levels of db/db mice. After treatment for 1week, the fed blood glucose levels of db/db mice in liraglutide group were significantly lower than those in mFGF21 and insulin glargine groups. However, after 2weeks of administration, the long-lasting hypoglycemic effect of mFGF21 was superior to liraglutide and insulin glargine up to the end of the experiments. Compared with liraglutide and insulin glargine, mFGF21 significantly reduced the glycosylated hemoglobin levels and improved the ability on glycemic control, insulin resistance, serum lipid and liver function states in db/db mice after 8weeks treatments. In addition, mFGF21 regulated glucose metabolism through increasing the mRNA expression levels of GK and GLUT-1, and decreasing the mRNA expression level of G6P. But liraglutide and insulin glargine could only up-regulate the mRNA expression of GLUT-4. In summary, as a hypoglycemic drug for long-term treatment, mFGF21 has the potential to be an ideal drug candidate for the therapy of type 2 diabetes.

THE USE OF ULTRA-LONG-ACTING INSULIN ANALOGUE DEGLUDEC IN TYPE 1 DIABETES MELLITUS IN CLINICAL PRACTICE: THE INFLUENCE ON QUALITY OF LIFE AND SATISFACTION WITH TREATMENT

Background: Maintenance of stable glycemic control is an important prerequisite of effective treatment of patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus (DM). The ultra-long-acting basal insulin degludec allows for reduction of glycemic variability and for a substantial reduction in the rates of hypoglycemia with equivalent glycemic control. Evaluation of the impact of this novel insulin on diabetes-dependent quality of life and patient satisfactions with the treatment is necessary for comprehensive assessment of treatment efficacy.Aim: To study changes of glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), rates of hypoglycemia, diabetes-dependent quality of life and treatment satisfaction in patients with type 1 DM, who have been switched to insulin degludec.Materials and methods: This open 12-week observational comparative study included 25 patients with type 1 DM (median age, 36 [20; 63] years), who were switched to insulin degludec in combination with a ultra-short insulin analogue. The control group included 21 patients with type 1 DM (median age, 40 [23; 63] years), who continued their treatment with a long-acting insulin analogue glargine. At baseline and at week 12 after switching to insulin degludec, we assessed HbA1c level, mean insulin dose, depression score, diabetes-dependent quality of life and patient satisfaction with the treatment with the use of the Russian versions of the diabetes-specific questionnaires “Audit of Diabetes-Dependent Quality of life” (RuADDQoL), and “Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire” (DTSQ), respectively.Results: At 3 months, there was a significant reduction of the HbA1c levels in the main and the control groups to 7.57% (Ме 7.5 [7.1; 8.4]; р=0.03) and 8.18% (Ме 7.8% [7.4; 8.7]; р=0.04), respectively. The mean reduction of this parameter under treatment with degludec was slightly higher than under treatment with glargine (0.73 vs 0.57%, respectively), at 3 months the difference being statistically significant (p=0.034). To achieve an equivalent glycemic control, the mean daily dose of insulin degludec was reduced by 26%. Switching to insulin degludec was associated with a significant reduction in non-severe hypoglycemia rates by 45% (р&lt;0.001). In the main group, there was an improvement of the mean total weighted score of Ru-ADDQoL from -2.2 (Ме -1.28 [-2; -0.86]) at baseline to -1.5 (Ме -1.28 [-2; -0.86]) at 12 week, with positive changes in the most domains, demonstrating the improvement of quality of life In the reference group, the mean total weighted Ru-ADDQoL score at 3 months increased 0.4 (Me 0.1 [-0.56; -1] to -1.51 (Me -1.23 [-2; -1]). In the glargine group there were no significant changes on any of the Ru-ADDQoL domains. There was a significant improvement in the patients satisfaction with treatment in the degludec group, with an increase of the average DTSQ score by 5 in 3 months of therapy.Conclusion: Based on the results of this short-term observational study, the following conclusion can be drawn: treatment with insulin degludec in type 1 DM is as effective as treatment with insulin glargine; however, it allows for reduction of the mild hypoglycemia rates by 45%. Therefore, this insulin can be recommended, first of all, to those type 1 DM patients who demonstrate substantial glycemic fluctuations, frequent hypoglycemia, hypoglycemic unawareness or who do not achieve the glycemic goals of treatment. Finally, this would lead to better health-related quality of life and more treatment satisfaction.

Comparative effectiveness and safety of three different basal insulins in patients with type 2 diabetes in a real world setting (ORBIT): a multicentre, prospective, registry study

BackgroundThe three most commonly used basal insulins in patients with type 2 diabetes are neutral protamine Hagedorn (NPH) insulin and the long-acting insulin analogues glargine and detemir. Although randomised controlled trials have shown equivalent efficacy of these three insulins, inconsistencies in safety exist. We aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of these three basal insulins in real-world clinical setting in the ORBIT (Observational Registry for Basal Insulin Treatment) study. MethodsIn this multicentre, 6 month, prospective, registry study, patients were recruited between Nov 25, 2011, and Sept 1, 2014, who were aged 18–80 years, with type 2 diabetes that was inadequately controlled (HbA1C ≥7%, 53 mmol/mol) with oral antidiabetic drugs and who were willing to start treatment with basal insulin were enrolled from 209 hospitals in eight regions of China. Patients who were prescribed any type of insulin in the past 2 years, with clinically significant acute major organ or systemic disease or other condition judged by the investigator that would create difficulty for the 6 month follow-up, or current or planned pregnancy or lactating women were excluded. Type and dose of basal insulin were at the physician's discretion and at the patients' willingness. Assessments were done at baseline (0 month—visit 1), mid-term (3 months—visit 2), and at the end of the study (6 months—visit 3) by investigators during routine practice. During analysis, patients were separated into NPH, glargine, and detemir insulin groups according to their initial prescription of basal insulin. Outcomes included the change in concentration of HbA1c, hypoglycaemia rate, and bodyweight change in the three groups from baseline to 6 months. Propensity scores with regression adjustment were used to balance the baseline differences among the three groups. Intention-to-treat analysis was used to assess the outcomes. FindingsOur findings show that treatment with long-acting insulin analogues is associated with better glycaemic control and less hypoglycaemia and weight gain than treatment with NPH insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes. Interpretation16 341 patients were analysed in the intention-to-treat group and 9002 were analysed in the per-protocol group. In the intention-to-treat population, there were 11 290 (69%) patients treated with glargine, 2135 (13%) patients treated with detemir, and 18% (2916) patients treated with NPH insulin. After controlling for the baseline and process variables in the propensity score regression, the intention-to-treat analysis showed that the reductions in HbA1c in the glargine (2%, SD 2·1, p=0·0014) and detemir (2%, 2·1, p=0·0065) groups were higher than that in the NPH group (2%, 2·2). The detemir group had lower weight gain (−0·1 kg, SD 2·9) than the glargine group (0·1 kg, 3·0; p=0·032) and the NPH group (0·3 kg, 3·1; p<0·0001). Patients in the glargine group had the lowest rate and frequency of minor hypoglycaemia when compared with those in the determir group (10% and 27%, respectively, both p<0·0001) and NPH group (13% and 27%, respectively, both p<0·0001). Whereas no difference was noted in severe hypoglycaemia among the three groups. The rates of severe hypoglycaemia were 0·5% in the glargine group, 0·7% in the determir group, and 0·5% in the NPH groupy (p=0·32 in total), and the frequency of severe hypoglycaemia in the three groups were 6·2, 4·9, and 5·5 times per person per year, respectively (p=0·20 in total). FunderSanofi (Shanghai, China).

The combination of dulaglutide and biguanide reduced bodyweight in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.

The efficacy and safety of once‐weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg (dulaglutide) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) were evaluated according to subgroups defined by concomitant oral hypoglycaemic agents. This exploratory analysis included data from a randomized, open‐label, phase III study that compared dulaglutide with insulin glargine (glargine) (n = 361). The three subgroups were dulaglutide or glargine in combination with sulphonylurea (SU) alone, biguanide (BG) alone or SU and BG combined. There were no clinically relevant differences in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) changes among the three subgroups in the dulaglutide group; in the glargine group, a numerically greater reduction was observed in combination with BG alone compared to the other two groups (SU alone and SU + BG). Weight loss was observed with dulaglutide in combination with BG alone or with SU + BG. The incidence of adverse events among subgroups was significantly different in the glargine group but not in the dulaglutide group. Incidence of hypoglycaemia was highest in combination with SU for both treatments. For patients with T2D, dulaglutide added to concomitant BG may be more likely to result in weight loss than dulaglutide added to concomitant SU.

Real-world therapeutic benefits of patients on insulin glargine versus NPH insulin.

The addition of a single injection of insulin to the oral drugs (basal supported oral therapy; BOT) has been shown to greatly reduce blood glucose levels. The intermediate-acting NPH insulin (NPH) and the long-acting insulin glargine (Lantus(®)) have been compared for use in BOT in numerous clinical trials; however, their efficacy and safety in a real-life setting have not been described. TIP (therapeutic benefits of patients on insulin glargine vs. NPH insulin being poorly controlled on prior short-time basal-insulin supported therapy with NPH insulin or insulin glargine) is a non-interventional, multicentre, observational study over 24weeks. A total of 2629 patients were enrolled and 1931 were fully evaluable (1614 insulin glargine, 303 NPH insulin). Propensity scoring (PSM) was used to match 570 patients into 2 similar cohorts of 285 patients. In the PSM cohort, a slightly greater reduction in FBG and HbA1c levels was seen in the insulin glargine group compared to the NPH group. A weight loss, which was slightly more pronounced in insulin glargine patients despite receiving a lower insulin dose relative to the NPH group, was seen in both the groups. Additionally, hypoglycaemia, including nocturnal and severe events, was more prevalent in the patients receiving BOT with NPH. The occurrence of new micro- or macro-vascular complications and adverse events was low for both groups. A large proportion of patients changed from NPH therapy to insulin glargine therapy during the study, which was mainly attributable to insufficient glucose modulation. Improvements in quality of life and treatment satisfaction were found for both types of insulin. This observational study provides evidence from a real-life setting that BOT with insulin glargine provides slightly greater reductions in weight, FBG and HbA1c levels, with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia than patients receiving NPH. This conclusion indicates that insulin glargine may be preferable to NPH insulin for BOT.

Insulin glargine versus insulin degludec in patients failing on oral therapy in type 2 diabetes: A retrospective real world comparative data from India

ObjectiveTo compare the changes in various glycemic parameters in insulin-naïve type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) patients who were initiated on insulin glargine or insulin degludec in a real world setting. MethodsRetrospective data were analyzed in consecutive type 2 DM patients in a real world setting, who failed oral therapy (at least 2 oral anti-diabetic drugs) and were initiated with either insulin glargine or insulin degludec. The parameters assessed were the changes in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, body weight, dose of Insulin and the total number of patient reported hypoglycemic episodes up to 6 months after initiation. ResultAt baseline, insulin glargine and insulin degludec groups were similar in terms of gender, age, weight, HbA1c and duration of diabetes. After 6 months follow up the change in HbA1c (−1.09 versus −1.45 P=0.124), change in FPG (−72.81mg/dl [−4mmol/L] versus −75.88mg/dl [−4.2mmol/L] P=0.755), and the change in body weight (+1.65 versus +0.85 P=0.082) were similar in glargine and degludec groups, respectively. Patients in insulin degludec group experienced significantly lesser patient reported hypoglycemic episodes (12 versus 40) and required significantly lesser dose (25.68Units versus 18.61Units per day; P=0.002) compared to insulin glargine. 41% of the patients reached HbA1C target of ≤7% with insulin glargine compared to 69% with insulin degludec within the specified time period. ConclusionResults from this real world analysis suggest that among type 2 DM patients who were initiated on insulin degludec as compared to insulin glargine may be associated with significantly lesser patient reported hypoglycemic episodes and lesser dose of insulin while achieving similar glycemic control. This study is however limited by the retrospective nature of the data collection.