Laura Fernández Landó

Safety and Efficacy of Dulaglutide, a Once Weekly GLP-1 Receptor Agonist, for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes

Abstract Background: Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is an increasingly common endocrine disorder that is characterized by chronic hyperglycemia and tissue compartment abnormalities, including macrovascular and microvascular complications. More than 90% of patients with T2D will be diagnosed and treated in the primary care setting. One of the relatively recent additions to the increasing array of approved antidiabetic medications is the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist class. Mechanisms of action for glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists include: 1) stimulation of insulin secretion through β-cells, though only when glucose levels are elevated (hence, minimizing risk for hypoglycemia); 2) blunting of glucagon secretion; 3) increased satiety; and 4) decreased rate of release of gastric contents into the small intestine, thereby reducing glycemic load. Recent T2D treatment guidelines encourage individualization of therapy. Many patients still do not achieve optimal glycemic control. Therefore, other treatment options are important. Methods: A literature search was performed using PubMed and MEDSCAPE to retrieve abstracts and articles pertinent to topics discussed in this review. Original research articles, reviews, and clinical trial manuscripts were identified based on relevance. Only English language articles were considered. Results: In 3 phase 3 registration trials in patients with T2D, once-weekly dulaglutide demonstrated superior efficacy at the primary endpoint to metformin as monotherapy, to sitagliptin as add-on to metformin, and to exenatide twice daily as add-on to metformin and pioglitazone. The safety profile of dulaglutide in these trials is similar to currently available glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, characterized predominantly by gastrointestinal symptoms (ie, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea). Based on these results, once-weekly dulaglutide should be a relevant additional treatment option for the management of T2D.

Treatment patterns in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists: Higher adherence and persistence with dulaglutide compared with once‐weekly exenatide and liraglutide

To compare adherence (proportion of days covered [PDC]), persistence, and treatment patterns among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) newly initiating glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists (GLP‐1RAs). More specifically, the main objectives were to compare dulaglutide vs exenatide once weekly and dulaglutide vs liraglutide.

Patient perceptions of injection devices used with dulaglutide and liraglutide for treatment of type 2 diabetes

Abstract Objective: Liraglutide and dulaglutide have demonstrated similar glycemic efficacy and safety. However, they differ in treatment administration and injection devices. The purpose of this study was to examine and compare patient perceptions of the injection devices used with liraglutide and dulaglutide. Methods: Patients with type 2 diabetes treated with liraglutide or dulaglutide were recruited from across the US. Patients completed the Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) to rate their current injection device. Patients who had experience with both treatments also completed the Diabetes Injection Device Preference Questionnaire (DID-PQ) to report preferences between the two devices. ANCOVAs were conducted to compare DID-EQ scores between dulaglutide and liraglutide patients, while controlling for covariates. Descriptive statistics are presented for preferences reported on the DID-PQ. Results: A total of 404 patients were recruited from 49 states (mean age = 60.7 years; 54.0% female; 204 liraglutide; 200 dulaglutide). Mean DID-EQ item scores for both treatments were high, ranging from 3.48 to 3.90 on a 4 point scale. ANCOVAs found significantly higher scores for dulaglutide than liraglutide on DID-EQ global items assessing ease of use (3.82 vs. 3.73, p = .040) and convenience (3.79 vs. 3.66, p = .004). Among the 58 patients who had used both devices, more patients reported a preference for the dulaglutide device than the liraglutide device on every item of the DID-PQ. Conclusions: High DID-EQ scores indicate positive perceptions of both the liraglutide and dulaglutide injection devices. The dulaglutide device was associated with slightly higher scores for ease of use and convenience than the liraglutide device.

Dulaglutide 1.5 mg as an add-on option for patients uncontrolled on insulin: Subgroup analysis by age, duration of diabetes and baseline glycated haemoglobin concentration

To assess efficacy and safety of dulaglutide 1.5 mg combined with insulin, categorized by subgroups of baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c; ≤9% and >9% [≤74.9 and >74.9 mmol/mol]), age (<65 and ≥65 years), and duration of diabetes (<10 and ≥10 years) at 6 months in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Real-world effectiveness, adherence and persistence among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus initiating dulaglutide treatment

Abstract Objectives: To assess glycemic effectiveness, adherence and persistence within 6 months of treatment initiation with dulaglutide, a once weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist, in a US real-world setting. Methods: This retrospective claims analysis included adults (≥18 years) with T2DM from the HealthCore Integrated Research Database, who had HbA1c laboratory results around initiation and within 6 months after initiation. Glycemic control was assessed by change in HbA1c from pre-initiation to post-initiation. Patients were considered adherent if their proportion of days covered (PDC) was ≥0.80; persistence was measured as days of continuous therapy from initiation to 6 months after initiation with no gaps >45 days between fills. Results: Of the 308 analyzed patients, the majority (n = 188; 61%) were adherent to dulaglutide (mean PDC 0.76; SD 0.26), with 115 patients (37%) discontinuing treatment. Mean persistence was 152 days/5 months. Mean HbA1c decreased from 8.49% (SD 1.70, median 8.20%) at baseline to 7.59% (SD 1.51, median 7.30%) at follow-up, corresponding to a mean HbA1c change of −0.90% (95% confidence interval [CI] −1.08 to −0.73; p < .01; median −0.70%). Patients who were adherent to or persistent with dulaglutide experienced larger reductions (−1.14% and −1.12% respectively), as did those without prior GLP-1 RA use (−1.03%). The proportion of patients with HbA1c <7% increased from 18% to 40%. Conclusions: Dulaglutide was associated with a significant decrease in HbA1c levels 6 months after treatment initiation. Patients who adhered to or persisted with dulaglutide therapy, or were naïve to GLP-1 RA use, experienced greater decreases in HbA1c levels.