Ronnie Aronson

Adding Once-Daily Lixisenatide for Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled by Established Basal Insulin A 24-week, randomized, placebo-controlled comparison (GetGoal-L)

OBJECTIVE To examine the efficacy and safety of adding the once-daily glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA) lixisenatide to established basal insulin therapy alone or together with metformin, in people with type 2 diabetes and elevated glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS We conducted a double-blind, parallel-group, placebo-controlled trial. Patients (n = 495) with established basal insulin therapy but inadequate glycemic control were randomized to add lixisenatide 20 μg or placebo for 24 weeks. Basal insulin dosage was unchanged except to limit hypoglycemia. HbA1c reduction from baseline was the primary end point. RESULTS Mean duration of diabetes was 12.5 years, duration of insulin use was 3.1 years, insulin dosage was 55 units/day, and baseline HbA1c was 8.4%. With lixisenatide, the placebo-corrected change of HbA1c from baseline was –0.4% (95% CI –0.6 to –0.2; P = 0.0002), and mean HbA1c at end point was 7.8%. HbA1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol) was attained by more lixisenatide (28%) than placebo (12%; P < 0.0001) participants. Lixisenatide reduced plasma glucose levels after a standardized breakfast (placebo-corrected reduction, –3.8 mmol/L; P < 0.0001); seven-point glucose profiles showed a reduction persisting through the day. Reductions in body weight (placebo corrected, –1.3 kg; P < 0.0001) and insulin dosage (–3.7 units/day; P = 0.012) were greater with lixisenatide. Main adverse events (AEs) with lixisenatide were gastrointestinal. Symptomatic hypoglycemia was 28% for lixisenatide and 22% for placebo; 4 of 328 subjects (1.2%) had severe hypoglycemia with lixisenatide vs. 0 of 167 with placebo. CONCLUSIONS By improving HbA1c and postprandial hyperglycemia without weight gain in type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycemic control despite stable basal insulin, lixisenatide may provide an alternative to rapid-acting insulin or other treatment options.

Adding Once-Daily Lixisenatide for Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled With Newly Initiated and Continuously Titrated Basal Insulin Glargine A 24-Week, Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Study (GetGoal-Duo 1)

OBJECTIVE When oral therapy for type 2 diabetes is ineffective, adding basal insulin improves glycemic control. However, when glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) remains elevated because of postprandial hyperglycemia, the next therapeutic step is controversial. We examined the efficacy and safety of lixisenatide in patients with HbA1c still elevated after initiation of insulin glargine. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This double-blind, parallel-group trial enrolled patients with HbA1c 7–10% despite oral therapy. Insulin glargine was added and systematically titrated during a 12-week run-in, after which candidates with fasting glucose ≤7.8 mmol/L and HbA1c 7–9% were randomized to lixisenatide 20 µg or placebo for 24 weeks while insulin titration continued. The primary end point was HbA1c change after randomization. RESULTS The randomized population (n = 446) had mean diabetes duration of 9.2 years, BMI 31.8 kg/m2, and daily glargine dosage of 44 units. HbA1c had decreased during run-in from 8.6 to 7.6%; adding lixisenatide further reduced HbA1c by 0.71 vs. 0.40% with placebo (least squares mean difference, –0.32%; 95% CI, –0.46 to –0.17; P < 0.0001). More participants attained HbA1c <7% with lixisenatide (56 vs. 39%; P < 0.0001). Lixisenatide reduced plasma glucose 2 h after a standardized breakfast (difference vs. placebo –3.2 mmol/L; P < 0.0001) and had a favorable effect on body weight (difference vs. placebo –0.89 kg; P = 0.0012). Nausea, vomiting, and symptomatic hypoglycemia <3.3 mmol/L were more common with lixisenatide. CONCLUSIONS Adding lixisenatide to insulin glargine improved overall and postprandial hyperglycemia and deserves consideration as an alternative to prandial insulin for patients not reaching HbA1c goals with recently initiated basal insulin.

A 24-Week, Randomized, Treat-to-Target Trial Comparing Initiation of Insulin Glargine Once-Daily With Insulin Detemir Twice-Daily in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Oral Glucose-Lowering Drugs

OBJECTIVE To determine whether glargine is noninferior to detemir regarding the percentage of patients reaching A1C <7% without symptomatic hypoglycemia ≤3.1 mmol/l. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS In this 24-week trial, 973 insulin-naive type 2 diabetic patients on stable oral glucose-lowering drugs with A1C 7.0–10.5% were randomized to glargine once daily or detemir twice daily. Insulin doses were systematically titrated. RESULTS 27.5 and 25.6% of patients reached the primary outcome with glargine and detemir, respectively, demonstrating the noninferiority of glargine. Improvements in A1C were −1.46 ± 1.09% for glargine and −1.54 ± 1.11% for detemir (P = 0.149), with similar proportions of patients achieving A1C <7% (P = 0.254) but more detemir-treated patients reaching A1C <6.5% (P = 0.017). Hypoglycemia risk was similar. Weight gain was higher for glargine (difference: 0.77 kg, P < 0.001). Glargine doses were lower than detemir doses: 43.5 ± 29.0 vs. 76.5 ± 50.5 units/day (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS In insulin-naive type 2 diabetic patients, glargine reached similar control as detemir, with more weight gain, but required significantly lower doses.

Efficacy and Safety of Lixisenatide Once-Daily Morning or Evening Injections in Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Metformin (GetGoal-M)

OBJECTIVE To examine the efficacy and safety of lixisenatide (20 μg once daily, administered before the morning or evening meal) as add-on therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled with metformin alone. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS This was a 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in 680 patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (HbA1c 7–10% [53−86 mmol/mol]). Patients were randomized to lixisenatide morning (n = 255), lixisenatide evening (n = 255), placebo morning (n = 85), or placebo evening (n = 85) injections. RESULTS Lixisenatide morning injection significantly reduced mean HbA1c versus combined placebo (mean change −0.9% [9.8 mmol/mol] vs. −0.4% [4.4 mmol/mol]; least squares [LS] mean difference vs. placebo −0.5% [5.5 mmol/mol], P < 0.0001). HbA1c was significantly reduced by lixisenatide evening injection (mean change –0.8% [8.7 mmol/mol] vs. –0.4% [4.4 mmol/mol]; LS mean difference –0.4% [4.4 mmol/mol], P < 0.0001). Lixisenatide morning injection significantly reduced 2-h postprandial glucose versus morning placebo (mean change −5.9 vs. −1.4 mmol/L; LS mean difference −4.5 mmol/L, P < 0.0001). LS mean difference in fasting plasma glucose was significant in both morning (–0.9 mmol/L, P < 0.0001) and evening (–0.6 mmol/L, P = 0.0046) groups versus placebo. Mean body weight decreased to a similar extent in all groups. Rates of adverse events were 69.4% in both lixisenatide groups and 60.0% in the placebo group. Rates for nausea and vomiting were 22.7 and 9.4% for lixisenatide morning and 21.2 and 13.3% for lixisenatide evening versus 7.6 and 2.9% for placebo, respectively. Symptomatic hypoglycemia occurred in 6, 13, and 1 patient for lixisenatide morning, evening, and placebo, respectively, with no severe episodes. CONCLUSIONS In patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin, lixisenatide 20 μg once daily administered in the morning or evening significantly improved glycemic control, with a pronounced postprandial effect, and was well tolerated.

Insulin pump treatment compared with multiple daily injections for treatment of type 2 diabetes (OpT2mise): a randomised open-label controlled trial

BACKGROUND Many patients with advanced type 2 diabetes do not meet their glycated haemoglobin targets and randomised controlled studies comparing the efficacy of pump treatment and multiple daily injections for lowering glucose in insulin-treated patients have yielded inconclusive results. We aimed to resolve this uncertainty with a randomised controlled trial (OpT2mise). METHODS We did this multicentre, controlled trial at 36 hospitals, tertiary care centres, and referal centres in Canada, Europe, Israel, South Africa, and the USA. Patients with type 2 diabetes who had poor glycaemic control despite multiple daily injections with insulin analogues were enrolled into a 2-month dose-optimisation run-in period. After the run-in period, patients with glycated haemoglobin of 8·0-12·0% (64-108 mmol/mol) were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated randomisation sequence (block size 2 with probability 0·75 and size 4 with probability 0·25) to pump treatment or to continue with multiple daily injections. Neither patients nor investigators were masked to treatment allocation. The primary endpoint was change in mean glycated haemoglobin between baseline and end of the randomised phase for the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01182493. FINDINGS 495 of 590 screened patients entered the run-in phase and 331 were randomised (168 to pump treatment, 163 to multiple daily injections). Mean glycated haemoglobin at baseline was 9% (75 mmol/mol) in both groups. At 6 months, mean glycated haemoglobin had decreased by 1·1% (SD 1·2; 12 mmol/mol, SD 13) in the pump treatment group and 0·4% (SD 1·1; 4 mmol/mol, SD 12) in the multiple daily injection group, resulting in a between-group treatment difference of -0·7% (95% CI -0·9 to -0·4; -8 mmol/mol, 95% CI -10 to -4, p<0·0001). At the end of the study, the mean total daily insulin dose was 97 units (SD 56) with pump treatment versus 122 units (SD 68) for multiple daily injections (p<0·0001), with no significant difference in bodyweight change between the two groups (1·5 kg [SD 3·5] vs 1·1 kg [3·6], p=0·322). Two diabetes-related serious adverse events (hyperglycaemia or ketosis without acidosis) resulting in hospital admission occurred in the pump treatment group compared with one in the multiple daily injection group. No ketoacidosis occurred in either group and one episode of severe hypoglycaemia occurred in the multiple daily injection group. INTERPRETATION In patients with poorly controlled type 2 diabetes despite using multiple daily injections of insulin, pump treatment can be considered as a safe and valuable treatment option. FUNDING Medtronic.

Prandial Options to Advance Basal Insulin Glargine Therapy: Testing Lixisenatide Plus Basal Insulin Versus Insulin Glulisine Either as Basal-Plus or Basal-Bolus in Type 2 Diabetes: The GetGoal Duo-2 Trial.

OBJECTIVE To provide evidence-based options on how to intensify basal insulin, we explored head-to-head prandial interventions in overweight patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on basal insulin glargine with or without 1–3 oral antidiabetic agents (OADs). RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients were randomized to lixisenatide once daily or insulin glulisine given once or thrice daily, added to glargine, with or without metformin, if HbA1c remained ≥7 to ≤9% (≥53 to ≤75 mmol/mol) after 12 weeks of glargine optimization with OADs other than metformin stopped at the start of optimization. Coprimary end points at 26 weeks were 1) noninferiority (95% CI upper bound <0.4% [<4.4 mmol/mol]) in HbA1c reduction with lixisenatide versus glulisine once daily, and either 2a) noninferiority in HbA1c reduction for lixisenatide versus glulisine thrice daily or 2b) superiority in body weight change for lixisenatide versus glulisine thrice daily. Fasting and postprandial plasma glucose, composite efficacy/safety end points, and adverse events were also assessed. RESULTS Baseline characteristics were similar between arms (n = 298, diabetes and basal insulin duration of 12.2 and 3.2 years, respectively; BMI 32.2 kg/m2). HbA1c improved from 8.5% to 7.9% (69 to 63 mmol/mol) with glargine optimization and further to 7.2%, 7.2%, and 7.0% (55, 55, and 53 mmol/mol) with lixisenatide and glulisine once daily and thrice daily, respectively; all coprimary end points were met. Symptomatic hypoglycemia and body weight were lower in lixisenatide versus glulisine patients. More gastrointestinal events occurred with lixisenatide. CONCLUSIONS Short-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists as add-on to basal insulin may become a preferred treatment intensification option, attaining meaningful glycemic targets with fewer hypoglycemic events without weight gain versus basal-plus or basal-bolus in uncontrolled basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.

Benefits of LixiLan, a Titratable Fixed-Ratio Combination of Insulin Glargine Plus Lixisenatide, Versus Insulin Glargine and Lixisenatide Monocomponents in Type 2 Diabetes Inadequately Controlled on Oral Agents: The LixiLan-O Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate efficacy and safety of LixiLan (iGlarLixi), a novel titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine (iGlar) and lixisenatide (Lixi), compared with both components, iGlar and Lixi, given separately in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin with or without a second oral glucose-lowering drug. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS After a 4-week run-in to optimize metformin and stop other oral antidiabetic drugs, participants (N = 1,170, mean diabetes duration ∼8.8 years, BMI ∼31.7 kg/m2) were randomly assigned to open-label once-daily iGlarLixi or iGlar, both titrated to fasting plasma glucose <100 mg/dL (<5.6 mmol/L) up to a maximum insulin dose of 60 units/day, or to once-daily Lixi (20 μg/day) while continuing with metformin. The primary outcome was HbA1c change at 30 weeks. RESULTS Greater reductions in HbA1c from baseline (8.1% [65 mmol/mol]) were achieved with iGlarLixi compared with iGlar and Lixi (−1.6%, −1.3%, −0.9%, respectively), reaching mean final HbA1c levels of 6.5% (48 mmol/mol) for iGlarLixi versus 6.8% (51 mmol/mol) and 7.3% (56 mmol/mol) for iGlar and Lixi, respectively (both P < 0.0001). More subjects reached target HbA1c <7% with iGlarLixi (74%) versus iGlar (59%) or Lixi (33%) (P < 0.0001 for all). Mean body weight decreased with iGlarLixi (−0.3 kg) and Lixi (−2.3 kg) and increased with iGlar (+1.1 kg, difference 1.4 kg, P < 0.0001). Documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (≤70 mg/dL) was similar with iGlarLixi and iGlar (1.4 and 1.2 events/patient-year) and lower with Lixi (0.3 events/patient-year). iGlarLixi improved postprandial glycemic control versus iGlar and demonstrated considerably fewer nausea (9.6%) and vomiting (3.2%) events than Lixi (24% and 6.4%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS iGlarLixi complemented iGlar and Lixi effects to achieve meaningful HbA1c reductions, close to near normoglycemia without increases in either hypoglycemia or weight, compared with iGlar, and had low gastrointestinal adverse effects compared with Lixi.

Low-Dose Otelixizumab Anti-CD3 Monoclonal Antibody DEFEND-1 Study: Results of the Randomized Phase III Study in Recent-Onset Human Type 1 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE Previous studies demonstrated that the anti-CD3 monoclonal antibody otelixizumab, administered at a total dose of 48–64 mg, can slow the loss of C-peptide in recent-onset type 1 diabetes patients, with frequent reactivation of Epstein Barr virus (EBV). The DEFEND-1 (Durable Response Therapy Evaluation for Early or New-Onset Type 1 Diabetes) trial was designed to test whether a lower dose of otelixizumab could preserve C-peptide secretion in new-onset type 1 diabetes patients. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was performed in sites in the U.S., Canada, and Europe. Two hundred eighty-one patients were randomized to treatment with 3.1 mg otelixizumab administered over 8 days or placebo. The primary end point of the study was the change in C-peptide area under the curve (AUC) from a 2-h mixed-meal tolerance test at month 12. RESULTS The change in 2-h C-peptide AUC was not different between placebo-treated patients and otelixizumab-treated patients (−0.20 vs. −0.22 nmol/L, P = 0.81). Secondary end points, including HbA1c, glucose variability, and insulin dose, were also not statistically different between the two groups. More patients in the otelixizumab group than in the placebo group experienced adverse events, mostly grade 1 or grade 2. There was no EBV reactivation (viral load >10,000 copies/106 peripheral blood mononuclear cells) in the otelixizumab group, in contrast with previously published studies at higher doses of otelixizumab. CONCLUSIONS Otelixizumab was well tolerated in patients with recent-onset type 1 diabetes at a total dose of 3.1 mg, but did not achieve preservation of levels of C-peptide or other markers of metabolic control.

Pronounced Reduction Of Postprandial Glucagon By Lixisenatide: A Meta-Analysis Of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1) receptor agonists improve islet function and delay gastric emptying in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This meta‐analysis aimed to investigate the effects of the once‐daily prandial GLP‐1 receptor agonist lixisenatide on postprandial plasma glucose (PPG), glucagon and insulin levels.

Sustained efficacy of insulin pump therapy compared with multiple daily injections in type 2 diabetes: 12-month data from the OpT2mise randomized trial

To compare insulin pump therapy and multiple daily injections (MDI) in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving basal and prandial insulin analogues.