Johan Jendle

Weight loss with liraglutide, a once‐daily human glucagon‐like peptide‐1 analogue for type 2 diabetes treatment as monotherapy or added to metformin, is primarily as a result of a reduction in fat tissue

Aim: The effect on body composition of liraglutide, a once‐daily human glucagon‐like peptide‐1 analogue, as monotherapy or added to metformin was examined in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Insulin Degludec in Type 1 Diabetes: A randomized controlled trial of a new-generation ultra-long-acting insulin compared with insulin glargine

OBJECTIVE Insulin degludec (IDeg) is a basal insulin that forms soluble multihexamers after subcutaneous injection, resulting in an ultra-long action profile. We assessed the efficacy and safety of IDeg formulations administered once daily in combination with mealtime insulin aspart in people with type 1 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In this 16-week, randomized, open-label trial, participants (mean: 45.8 years old, A1C 8.4%, fasting plasma glucose [FPG] 9.9 mmol/L, BMI 26.9 kg/m2) received subcutaneous injections of IDeg(A) (600 μmol/L; n = 59), IDeg(B) (900 μmol/L; n = 60), or insulin glargine (IGlar; n = 59), all given once daily in the evening. Insulin aspart was administered at mealtimes. RESULTS At 16 weeks, mean A1C was comparable for IDeg(A) (7.8 ± 0.8%), IDeg(B) (8.0 ± 1.0%), and IGlar (7.6 ± 0.8%), as was FPG (8.3 ± 4.0, 8.3 ± 2.8, and 8.9 ± 3.5 mmol/L, respectively). Estimated mean rates of confirmed hypoglycemia were 28% lower for IDeg(A) compared with IGlar (rate ratio [RR]: 0.72 [95% CI 0.52–1.00]) and 10% lower for IDeg(B) compared with IGlar (RR: 0.90 [0.65–1.24]); rates of nocturnal hypoglycemia were 58% lower for IDeg(A) (RR: 0.42 [0.25–0.69]) and 29% lower for IDeg(B) (RR: 0.71 [0.44–1.16]). Mean total daily insulin dose was similar to baseline. The frequency and pattern of adverse events was similar between insulin treatments. CONCLUSIONS In this clinical exploratory phase 2 trial in people with type 1 diabetes, IDeg is safe and well tolerated and provides comparable glycemic control to IGlar at similar doses, with reduced rates of hypoglycemia.

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.

Insulin pump therapy, multiple daily injections, and cardiovascular mortality in 18 168 people with type 1 diabetes: observational study

Objective To investigate the long term effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (insulin pump therapy) on cardiovascular diseases and mortality in people with type 1 diabetes. Design Observational study. Setting Swedish National Diabetes Register, Sweden 2005-12. Participants 18 168 people with type 1 diabetes, 2441 using insulin pump therapy and 15 727 using multiple daily insulin injections. Main outcome measures Cox regression analysis was used to estimate hazard ratios for the outcomes, with stratification of propensity scores including clinical characteristics, risk factors for cardiovascular disease, treatments, and previous diseases. Results Follow-up was for a mean of 6.8 years until December 2012, with 114 135 person years. With multiple daily injections as reference, the adjusted hazard ratios for insulin pump treatment were significantly lower: 0.55 (95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.83) for fatal coronary heart disease, 0.58 (0.40 to 0.85) for fatal cardiovascular disease (coronary heart disease or stroke), and 0.73 (0.58 to 0.92) for all cause mortality. Hazard ratios were lower, but not significantly so, for fatal or non-fatal coronary heart disease and fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular disease. Unadjusted absolute differences were 3.0 events of fatal coronary heart disease per 1000 person years; corresponding figures were 3.3 for fatal cardiovascular disease and 5.7 for all cause mortality. When lower body mass index and previous cardiovascular diseases were excluded, results of subgroup analyses were similar to the results from complete data. A sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounders in all individuals showed that an unmeasured confounders with hazard ratio of 1.3 would have to be present in >80% of the individuals treated with multiple daily injections versus not presence in those treated with pump therapy to invalidate the significantly lower hazard ratios for fatal cardiovascular disease. Data on patient education and frequency of blood glucose monitoring were missing, which might have influenced the observed association. Conclusion Among people with type 1 diabetes use of insulin pump therapy is associated with lower cardiovascular mortality than treatment with multiple daily insulin injections.

Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analogue combined with insulin reduces HbA1c and weight with low risk of hypoglycemia and high treatment satisfaction.

AIMS To evaluate the effects of adding glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue therapy to insulin on glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), weight, insulin dosage, treatment satisfaction, and risk of hypoglycaemia. METHODS Type 2 diabetes patients with insulin therapy receiving a GLP-1 analogue at 4 Swedish centers were studied. Hypoglycemia was evaluated using glucometers and patient self-report. The Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ) was used to evaluate treatment satisfaction. RESULTS Among 65 patients studied, 4 discontinued therapy, none due to hypoglycemia, and there were no suspected severe adverse events. Among 61 patients who remained on therapy over a mean of 7.0 months, 40 were treated with liraglutide and 21 with exenatide. HbA1c decreased from a mean of 8.9% (82.4 mmol/mol) to 7.9% (71.9 mmol/mol) (p<0.001), weight decreased from 111.1 kg to 104.0 kg (p<0.001) and insulin doses were reduced from 91.1U to 52.2U (p<0.001). There was one patient with severe hypoglycemia. The mean number of asymptomatic hypoglycemia per patient and month, reported for the last month (0.085 below 4.0 mmol/l and 0 below 3.0 mmol/l) and documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (0.24 below 4.0 mmol/l and 0.068 below 3.0 mmol/l) was low. The DTSQc showed higher treatment satisfaction than with the previous regimen of 11.9 (scale -18 to +18 points, p<0.001). CONCLUSIONS The addition of GLP-1 analogues to insulin in patients with type 2 diabetes is associated with reductions in HbA1c, weight, and insulin dose, along with a low risk of hypoglycemia and high treatment satisfaction.

Willingness to pay for health improvements associated with anti-diabetes treatments for people with type 2 diabetes

Abstract Objectives: This study aimed to investigate the most important consequences of diabetes medication, as measured by the patients’ willingness to pay (WTP). Research design and methods: People in Sweden were recruited using existing nationwide e-mail panels if they were adults (≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes and were receiving pharmacological anti-diabetes treatment(s). Data were collected electronically and results were analysed using a standard statistical model designed for choice games (conditional logit). Six characteristics relating to treatment of diabetes were examined: weight (gain or loss), mean glycated haemoglobin level (HbA1c), hypoglycaemic events, nausea, need for injections (with or independently of meals), and blood glucose testing. Results: A total of 461 people with type 2 diabetes (291 males; 170 females) completed an internet questionnaire and were eligible for inclusion. Participants placed high value on weight loss and nausea avoidance; they would pay 176 Swedish Krona (SEK)/€15.61 per month to lose 1 kg, and would pay SEK 560 (€49.67) per month to avoid nausea completely. Patients wanting to reduce the number of hypoglycaemic events from three per month to none were willing to pay SEK 419 (€37.17) per month. Patients valued a 1 percentage point reduction in HbA1c at SEK 414 (€36.72) per month. Participants preferred taking tablets to injections and required a compensation of SEK 376 (€33.35) to accept one injection/day. Injections independent of meals were preferred to injections with meals (WTP: SEK 140/€12.42 per month). Potential limitations of this study are that the preferences expressed may not match preferences in real-life situations, and bias through the use of electronic questionnaire, which restricted participation to those with access to, and experience with, the internet. Conclusion: People with type 2 diabetes were willing to pay a considerable amount of money each month to lose weight, reduce or avoid hypoglycaemic events and reduce HbA1C.

Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide in the treatment of type 2 diabetes: a comprehensive review of the dulaglutide clinical data focusing on the AWARD phase 3 clinical trial program

Dulaglutide (DU) is a once weekly glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist (GLP‐1 RA) approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Glycaemic efficacy and safety characteristics of dulaglutide have been assessed in six Phase 3 studies in the AWARD program. The objective of this review article is to summarize these results from the six completed AWARD studies. At the primary endpoint, in five of the six studies, once weekly dulaglutide 1.5 mg was superior to the active comparator [exenatide, insulin glargine (two studies), metformin, and sitagliptin], with a greater proportion of patients reaching glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) targets of <7.0% (53.0 mmol/mol) and ≤6.5% (47.5 mmol/mol). Dulaglutide 1.5 mg was non‐inferior to liraglutide in AWARD‐6. Once weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg was evaluated in five of these trials and demonstrated superiority to the active comparator in four of five AWARD studies (exenatide, glargine, metformin, and sitagliptin), and non‐inferiority to glargine in the AWARD‐2 study. Similar to other GLP‐1 receptor agonists, treatment with dulaglutide was associated with weight loss or attenuation of weight gain and low rates of hypoglycaemia when used alone or with non‐insulin‐secretagogue therapy. The most frequently reported adverse events were gastrointestinal, including nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. The incidence of dulaglutide antidrug antibody formation was 1–2.8% with rare injection site reactions. In conclusion, dulaglutide is an effective treatment for T2DM and has an acceptable tolerability and safety profile. Copyright

Insulin degludec improves health-related quality of life (SF-36® ) compared with insulin glargine in people with Type 2 diabetes starting on basal insulin: a meta-analysis of phase 3a trials.

To compare the effect of insulin degludec and insulin glargine on health‐related quality of life in patients with Type 2 diabetes starting on insulin therapy.

Improved health status with insulin degludec compared with insulin glargine in people with Type 1 diabetes

Diabet. Med. 29, 716–720 (2012)

Health-economic analysis of real-time continuous glucose monitoring in people with Type 1 diabetes

To evaluate the clinical benefits and cost‐effectiveness of the sensor‐augmented pump compared with self–monitoring of plasma glucose plus continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion in people with Type 1 diabetes.