RESUMEN
AIM: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of once-weekly (QW) efpeglenatide in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) suboptimally controlled with oral glucose-lowering drugs and/or basal insulin (BI). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Three phase 3, multicentre, randomized controlled trials compared the efficacy and safety of QW efpeglenatide versus dulaglutide when added to metformin (AMPLITUDE-D), efpeglenatide versus placebo when added to BI ± oral glucose-lowering drugs (AMPLITUDE-L) or metformin ± sulphonylurea (AMPLITUDE-S). All trials were terminated early by the sponsor because of funding rather than safety or efficacy concerns. RESULTS: In AMPLITUDE-D, non-inferiority of efpeglenatide to dulaglutide 1.5 mg was shown in HbA1c reduction from baseline to week 56, least squares mean treatment difference (95% CI): 4 mg, -0.03% (-0.20%, 0.14%)/-0.35 mmol/mol (-2.20, 1.49); 6 mg, -0.08% (-0.25%, 0.09%)/-0.90 mmol/mol (-2.76, 0.96). The reductions in body weight (approximately 3 kg) from baseline to week 56 were similar across all treatment groups. In AMPLITUDE-L and AMPLITUDE-S, numerically greater reduction in HbA1c and body weight were observed at all doses of efpeglenatide than placebo. American Diabetes Association level 2 hypoglycaemia (< 54 mg/dL [< 3.0 mmol/L]) was reported in few participants across all treatment groups (AMPLITUDE-D, ≤ 1%; AMPLITUDE-L, ≤ 10%; and AMPLITUDE-S, ≤ 4%). The adverse events profile was consistent with other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs); gastrointestinal adverse events were most frequent in all three studies. CONCLUSIONS: In people with T2D suboptimally controlled with oral glucose-lowering drugs and/or BI, QW efpeglenatide was non-inferior to dulaglutide in terms of HbA1c reduction and showed numerically greater improvements than placebo in glycaemic control and body weight, with safety consistent with the GLP-1 RA class.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2 , Metformina , Humanos , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/inducido químicamente , Hipoglucemiantes/efectos adversos , Hemoglobina Glucada , Glucemia , Ensayos Clínicos Controlados Aleatorios como Asunto , Metformina/efectos adversos , Péptido 1 Similar al Glucagón/uso terapéutico , Péptidos Similares al Glucagón/efectos adversos , Peso Corporal , Glucosa/uso terapéutico , Fragmentos Fc de Inmunoglobulinas/efectos adversos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Proteínas Recombinantes de Fusión/efectos adversosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: SENIOR compared the efficacy and safety of insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300) with glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100) in older people (≥65 years old) with type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: SENIOR was an open-label, two-arm, parallel-group, multicenter phase 3b trial designed to enroll â¼20% of participants aged ≥75 years. Participants were randomized 1:1 to Gla-300 or Gla-100, titrated to a fasting self-monitored plasma glucose of 5.0-7.2 mmol/L (90-130 mg/dL). RESULTS: In total, 1,014 participants were randomized (mean age: 71 years). Comparable reductions in HbA1c were observed from baseline to week 26 for Gla-300 (-0.89%) and Gla-100 (-0.91%) in the overall population (least squares mean difference: 0.02% [95% CI -0.092 to 0.129]) and for participants aged ≥75 years (-0.11% [-0.330 to 0.106]). Incidence and rates of confirmed (≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]) or severe hypoglycemia events were low and similar between both treatment groups, with lower rates of documented symptomatic hypoglycemia with Gla-300. The lower risk of hypoglycemia with Gla-300 versus Gla-100 was more apparent in the subgroup aged ≥75 years versus the overall population. Significantly lower annualized rates of documented symptomatic (≤3.9 mmol/L [≤70 mg/dL]) hypoglycemia were observed (Gla-300: 1.12; Gla-100: 2.71; rate ratio: 0.45 [95% CI 0.25-0.83]). CONCLUSIONS: Efficacy and safety of Gla-300 was demonstrated in older people (≥65 years of age) with type 2 diabetes, with comparable reductions in HbA1c and similarly low or lower risk of documented symptomatic hypoglycemia versus Gla-100. A significant benefit in hypoglycemia reduction was seen in participants aged ≥75 years.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/tratamiento farmacológico , Hipoglucemiantes/administración & dosificación , Hipoglucemiantes/efectos adversos , Insulina Glargina/administración & dosificación , Insulina Glargina/efectos adversos , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Envejecimiento/sangre , Envejecimiento/efectos de los fármacos , Glucemia/efectos de los fármacos , Glucemia/metabolismo , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/sangre , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/epidemiología , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Ayuno/sangre , Femenino , Hemoglobina Glucada/análisis , Hemoglobina Glucada/efectos de los fármacos , Humanos , Hipoglucemia/sangre , Hipoglucemia/epidemiología , Incidencia , Masculino , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
AIMS: Insulin glargine 300 U/mL (Gla-300) offers a flatter pharmacodynamic profile than insulin glargine 100 U/mL (Gla-100). We have compared these insulins over 1 year in people with type 1 diabetes (T1DM). METHODS: EDITION 4 was a 6-month, multicentre, randomized, open-label phase 3 study. People with T1DM who completed the 6 months continued randomized Gla-300 or Gla-100 once daily, morning or evening, for a further 6 months. RESULTS: Among 549 participants randomized, 444 completed the 12-month study period (Gla-300, 80%; Gla-100, 82%). Mean HbA1c decreased similarly from baseline to month 12 in the 2 treatment groups (difference, 0.02 [95% CI, -0.13 to 0.17]) %-units [0.2 (-1.5 to 1.9) mmol/mol]), to a mean of 7.86 %-units (62.4 mmol/mol) in both groups. For morning vs evening injection, there was no difference in HbA1c change over 12 months for Gla-100, but a significantly larger decrease in HbA1c was observed in the Gla-300 morning group than in the Gla-300 evening group (difference, -0.25 [-0.47 to -0.04] %-units [-2.7 (-5.2 to -0.4) mmol/mol]). Mean glucose from the 8-point SMPG profiles decreased from baseline, and was similar between the 2 treatment groups. Basal insulin dose was 20% higher with Gla-300 than with Gla-100, while hypoglycaemia event rates, analysed at night, over 24 hours, or according to different glycaemic thresholds, did not differ between treatment groups, regardless of injection time. Adverse event profiles did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In T1DM, Gla-300 provides glucose control comparable to that of Gla-100, and can be given at any time of day.
Asunto(s)
Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/dietoterapia , Hiperglucemia/prevención & control , Hipoglucemia/prevención & control , Insulina Glargina/administración & dosificación , Actividades Cotidianas , Adulto , Automonitorización de la Glucosa Sanguínea , Índice de Masa Corporal , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/sangre , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 1/complicaciones , Relación Dosis-Respuesta a Droga , Esquema de Medicación , Composición de Medicamentos , Monitoreo de Drogas , Femenino , Hemoglobina Glucada/análisis , Humanos , Hipoglucemia/inducido químicamente , Hipoglucemia/fisiopatología , Insulina Glargina/efectos adversos , Insulina Glargina/uso terapéutico , Análisis de Intención de Tratar , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Concentración Osmolar , Sobrepeso/inducido químicamente , Sobrepeso/complicaciones , Pacientes Desistentes del Tratamiento , Calidad de Vida , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Aumento de Peso/efectos de los fármacosRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: Insulin therapy in type 1 diabetes still provides suboptimal outcomes. Insulin glargine 300 units/mL (Gla-300), with a flatter pharmacodynamic profile compared with insulin glargine 100 units/mL (Gla-100), is an approach to this problem. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: People with type 1 diabetes, using a mealtime and basal insulin regimen, were randomized open-label to Gla-300 or Gla-100 and to morning or evening injection, continuing the mealtime analog, and followed for 6 months. RESULTS: Participants (n = 549) were a mean age of 47 years and had a mean duration of diabetes of 21 years and BMI of 27.6 kg/m(2). The change in HbA1c (primary end point; baseline 8.1%) was equivalent in the two treatment groups (difference, 0.04% [95% CI -0.10 to 0.19]) (0.4 mmol/mol [-1.1 to 2.1]), and Gla-300 was thus noninferior. Similar results with wider 95% CIs were found for morning and evening injection times and for prebreakfast self-measured plasma glucose (SMPG) overall. Results were also similar for Gla-300 when morning and evening injection time was compared, including overlapping 8-point SMPG profiles. Hypoglycemia did not differ, except for the first 8 weeks of the study, when nocturnal confirmed or severe hypoglycemia was lower with Gla-300 (rate ratio 0.69 [95% CI 0.53-0.91]). Hypoglycemia with Gla-300 did not differ by time of injection. The basal insulin dose was somewhat higher at 6 months for Gla-300. The adverse event profile did not differ and was independent of the Gla-300 time of injection. Weight gain was lower with Gla-300. CONCLUSIONS: In long-duration type 1 diabetes, Gla-300 provides similar glucose control to Gla-100, with a lower risk of hypoglycemia after transfer from other insulins, independent of time of injection, and less weight gain.