Lower rates of hypoglycemia during maintenance treatment with insulin degludec/insulin aspart versus biphasic insulin aspart 30 : a combined analysis of two Phase 3a studies in type 2 diabetes

BackgroundInsulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a soluble coformulation of the basal analog insulin degludec and the rapid-acting prandial insulin aspart in a single injection. The present combined analysis of two Phase 3a trials compared the incidence of hypoglycemia in participants treated twice daily with IDegAsp or biphasic insulin aspart 30 (BIAsp 30). MethodsHypoglycemia data were analyzed from two similarly designed randomized controlled open-label treat-to-target Phase 3a clinical trials of adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Participants were treated twice daily with IDegAsp or BIAsp 30, with breakfast and their main evening meal. ResultsOver 26 weeks, the rates of overall confirmed, nocturnal confirmed and severe hypoglycemic events were 19%, 57%, and 39% lower, respectively, with IDegAsp (n = 504) than BIAsp 30 (n = 364); estimated rate ratios were 0.81 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67, 0.98; P = 0.0341), 0.43 (95% CI 0.31, 0.59; P = 0.0001), and 0.61 (95% CI 0.26, 1.45; P = NS). The between-treatment differences were more pronounced during the maintenance period (16 weeks); compared with BIAsp 30, rates of overall confirmed, nocturnal confirmed and severe hypoglycemic events with IDegAsp were 0.69 (95% CI 0.55, 0.87; -31%; P = 0.0015); 0.38 (95% CI 0.25, 0.58; -62%; P <0.0001), and 0.16 (95% CI 0.04, 0.59; -84%; P = 0.0061), respectively. ConclusionsCompared with BIAsp 30 twice daily, IDegAsp twice daily provided similar improvements in glycemic control with a lower risk of hypoglycemia, particularly nocturnal hypoglycemia, in subjects with T2D previously treated with insulin.Peer reviewe

Insulin Intensification for People with Type 2 Diabetes

BackgroundType 2 diabetes is a progressive disorder and with time, it is appropriate for insulin therapy to be initiated in the majority of people. Insulin is commonly initiated with once-daily basal insulin. However, when glycaemic control becomes unsatisfactory despite the introduction of basal insulin, no clear guidelines exist for intensifying the insulin regimen. In this article we aim to provide a clinician’s approach to both the optimisation of the basal insulin dose, and strategies to intensify insulin therapy.MethodsAn expert consensus panel, consisting of the authors, was convened to review the current practice of insulin intensification in people with type 2 diabetes and to develop a pragmatic algorithm for clinicians. The panel reviewed the published literature on the use of insulin in clinical practice, the evidence for different intensification strategies, and the potential impact of patient-related factors on insulin choices. ResultsInsulin intensification should only be considered after the basal insulin dose has been optimised. This is achieved by taking into account basal and prandial (pre and post) blood glucose levels, individualised target HbA1c, and dietary factors. If optimal basal insulin together with oral medications is not sufficient to reach glycaemic targets, the next step is to introduce a basal plus 1 regimen or switch to twice-daily premixed insulin. Each has advantages and disadvantages and existing guidelines do not emphasise or support any particular regimen. Therefore, it is important to individualise the choice according to the individual’s needs. A practical algorithm has been developed to help clinicians choose an appropriate second-line regimen.ConclusionAs beta-cell failure progresses in people with type 2 diabetes, basal insulin regimens need to be optimised and then intensified when necessary to maintain agreed glycaemic targets

Reasons for hospitalizations in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus in the CANVAS Program:a secondary analysis

AIMS: To determine the reasons for hospitalizations in the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program and the effects of the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitor canagliflozin on hospitalization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A secondary analysis was performed on the CANVAS Program that included 10,142 participants with type 2 diabetes mellitus randomized to canagliflozin or placebo. The primary outcome was total (first plus all recurrent) all-cause hospitalization (ACH). Secondary outcomes were total hospitalizations categorized by the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities hierarchy at the system organ class level, reported by investigators at each center. Outcomes were assessed using negative binomial models. RESULTS: Of the 7115 hospitalizations reported, the most common reasons were cardiac disorders (23.7%), infections and infestations (15.0%), and nervous system disorders (9.0%). The rate of total ACH was lower in the canagliflozin group (n=5795) compared to the placebo group (n=4347): 197.9 versus 215.8 participants per 1000 patient-years, respectively (rate ratio [RR] 0.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86, 0.98). Canagliflozin reduced the rate of total hospitalizations due to cardiac disorders (RR 0.81; 95% CI 0.75, 0.88). There was no significant difference between the canagliflozin and placebo groups in the rates of total hospitalizations due to infections and infestations (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.86, 1.02) or nervous system disorders (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.88, 1.05). CONCLUSIONS: In the CANVAS Program, the most common reasons for hospitalization were cardiac disorders, infections and infestations, and nervous system disorders. Canagliflozin, compared with placebo, reduced the rate of total ACH. This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved

Effect of Canagliflozin on Renal and Cardiovascular Outcomes across Different Levels of Albuminuria:Data from the CANVAS Program

Background If SGLT2 inhibitors protect the kidneys by reducing albuminuria as hypothesized, peoplewith type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with higher albuminuria should benefit more. Methods We conducted a post-hoc analysis of data from the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program, which randomized 10,142 participants with T2DM and high cardiovascular risk to canagliflozin or placebo. We assessed effects of canagliflozin on renal, cardiovascular, and safety outcomes by baseline albuminuria. The trial included 2266 participants (22.3%) with moderately increased albuminuria (urinary albumin/creatinine ratio [UACR] 30-300mg/g) and 760 (7.5%) with severely increased albuminuria (UACR .300 mg/g) at baseline. Results Canagliflozin lowered albuminuria with greater proportional reductions in those with moderately and severely increased albuminuria (P heterogeneity,0.001). After week 13, canagliflozin slowed the annual loss of kidney function across albuminuria subgroups, with greater absolute reductions in participants with severely increased albuminuria (placebo-subtracted difference 3.01 ml/min per 1.73 m2 per year; P heterogeneity,0.001). Heterogeneity for the renal composite outcome of 40%reduction in EGFR, ESKD, or renal-related death was driven by lesser effects in participants with moderately increased albuminuria (P heterogeneity=0.03), but no effectmodification was observed when albuminuria was fitted as a continuous variable (P heterogeneity=0.94). Cardiovascular and safety outcomes were mostly consistent across albuminuria levels including increased risks for amputation across albuminuria subgroups (P heterogeneity= 0.66). Greater absolute risk reductions in the renal composite outcome were observed in participants with severely increased albuminuria (P heterogeneity=0.004). Conclusions The proportional effects of canagliflozin on renal and cardiovascular outcomes are mostly consistent across patients with different levels of albuminuria, but absolute benefits are greatest among those with severely increased albuminuria

Relative and Absolute Risk Reductions in Cardiovascular and Kidney Outcomes With Canagliflozin Across KDIGO Risk Categories:Findings From the CANVAS Program

Rationale & Objective: Canagliflozin reduces the risk for cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in type 2 diabetes. This study aimed to assess the relative and absolute effects of canagliflozin on clinical outcomes across different KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) risk categories based on estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio. Study Design: Post hoc analysis of the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program. Settings & Participants: The CANVAS Program randomly assigned 10,142 participants with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk and with eGFR ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m2 to treatment with canagliflozin or placebo. Intervention(s): Canagliflozin or matching placebo. Outcomes: The primary outcome was a composite of cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke, with a set of other cardiovascular and kidney prespecified outcomes. Results: Of 10,142 participants, 10,031 (98.9%) had available baseline eGFR and urinary albumin-creatinine ratio data. The proportion of participants in low-, moderate-, high-, and very high–risk KDIGO categories was 58.6%, 25.8%, 10.6%, and 5.0%, respectively. The relative effect of canagliflozin on the primary outcome (HR, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.75-0.97) was consistent across KDIGO risk categories (P trend = 0.2), with similar results for other cardiovascular and kidney outcomes. Absolute reductions in the primary outcome were greater within higher KDIGO risk categories (P trend = 0.03) with a similar pattern of effect for the composite of cardiovascular death or hospitalization for heart failure (P trend = 0.06) and for chronic eGFR slope (P trend = 0.04). Limitations: Predominantly a low kidney risk population, relatively few participants in higher KDIGO risk categories, and exclusion of individuals with eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. Conclusions: Although the relative effects of canagliflozin are similar across KDIGO risk categories, absolute risk reductions are likely greater for individuals at higher KDIGO risk. The KDIGO classification system may be able to identify individuals who might derive greater benefits for end-organ protection from treatment with canagliflozin. Funding: This post hoc analysis was not specifically funded. The original CANVAS Program trials were funded by Janssen Research & Development, LLC and were conducted as a collaboration between the funder, an academic steering committee, and an academic research organization, George Clinical. Trial Registration: The original trials of the CANVAS Program were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov with study numbers NCT01032629 and NCT01989754

Effects of canagliflozin on amputation risk in type 2 diabetes:the CANVAS Program

Aims/hypothesis The primary analysis of the Canagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study (CANVAS) Program showed canagliflozin to have a beneficial effect on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes at high cardiovascular risk, but also an unexpected increased risk of major or minor lower extremity amputation. These secondary analyses explore this finding in more detail.Methods The effect of canagliflozin on amputation risk in the CANVAS Program was calculated for amputations of different types and proximate aetiologies and different canagliflozin doses. Univariate and multivariate associations of baseline characteristics with amputation risk were determined and proportional and absolute effects of canagliflozin were compared across subgroups.Results There were 187 (1.8%) participants with atraumatic lower extremity amputations (minor 71%, major 29%); as previously published, rates were 6.30 vs 3.37 per 1000 participant-years with canagliflozin vs placebo (HR 1.97 [95% CI 1.41, 2.75]). Risk was similar for ischaemic and infective aetiologies and for 100mg and 300mg doses. Overall amputation risk was strongly associated with baseline history of prior amputation (major or minor) (HR 21.31 [95% CI 15.40, 29.49]) and other established risk factors. No interactions between randomised treatment and participant characteristics explained the effect of canagliflozin on amputation risk. For every clinical subgroup studied, numbers of amputation events projected were smaller than numbers of major adverse cardiovascular events averted.Conclusions/interpretation The CANVAS Program demonstrated that canagliflozin increased the risk of amputation (mainly minor) in this study population. Anticipated risk factors for amputation were identified, such as prior history of amputation, peripheral vascular disease and neuropathy, but no specific aetiological mechanism or at-risk subgroup for canagliflozin was identified.</p

Canagliflozin and cardiovascular and renal events in type 2 diabetes

Background: Canagliflozin is a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor that reduces glycemia as well as blood pressure, body weight, and albuminuria in people with diabetes. We report the effects of treatment with canagliflozin on cardiovascular, renal, and safety outcomes. Methods: the CANVAS Program integrated data from two trials involving a total of 10,142 participants with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. Participants in each trial were randomly assigned to receive canagliflozin or placebo and were followed for a mean of 188.2 weeks. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. Results: the mean age of the participants was 63.3 years, 35.8% were women, the mean duration of diabetes was 13.5 years, and 65.6% had a history of cardiovascular disease. The rate of the primary outcome was lower with canagliflozin than with placebo (occurring in 26.9 vs. 31.5 participants per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.02 for superiority). Although on the basis of the prespecified hypothesis testing sequence the renal outcomes are not viewed as statistically significant, the results showed a possible benefit of canagliflozin with respect to the progression of albuminuria (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.79) and the composite outcome of a sustained 40% reduction in the estimated glomerular filtration rate, the need for renal-replacement therapy, or death from renal causes (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.77). Adverse reactions were consistent with the previously reported risks associated with canagliflozin except for an increased risk of amputation (6.3 vs. 3.4 participants per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.75); amputations were primarily at the level of the toe or metatarsal. Conclusion: in two trials involving patients with type 2 diabetes and an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, patients treated with canagliflozin had a lower risk of cardiovascular events than those who received placebo but a greater risk of amputation, primarily at the level of the toe or metatarsal. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; CANVAS and CANVAS-R ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01032629 and NCT01989754 , respectively)

Effects of canagliflozin on myocardial infarction:a post hoc analysis of the CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial

AIMS: Given the benefits of sodium glucose co-transporter 2 inhibition (SGLT2i) in protecting against heart failure in diabetic patients, we sought to explore the potential impact of SGLT2i on the clinical features of patients presenting with myocardial infarction (MI) through a post-hoc analysis of CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial.METHODS AND RESULTS: Individuals with type 2 diabetes and history or high risk of cardiovascular disease (CANVAS Program) or type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CREDENCE) were included. The intervention was Canagliflozin 100 or 300 mg (combined in the analysis) or placebo. MI events were adjudicated as ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI), non-STEMI as well as type 1 MI or type 2 MI. 421 first MI events in the CANVAS Program and 178 first MI events in the CREDENCE trial were recorded (83 fatal, 128 STEMI, 431 non-STEMI, and 40 unknown). No benefit of canagliflozin compared with placebo on time to first MI event was observed (HR 0.89; 95% CI 0.75, 1.05). Canagliflozin was associated with lower risk for non-STEMI (HR 0.78; 95% CI 0.65, 0.95) but suggested a possible increase in STEMI (HR 1.55; 95% CI 1.06, 2.27), with no difference in risk of type 1 or type 2 MI. There was no change in fatal MI (HR 1.22, 95% CI 0.78, 1.93).CONCLUSIONS: Canagliflozin was not associated with a reduction in overall MI in the pooled CANVAS Program and CREDENCE trial population. The possible differential effect on STEMI and Non-STEMI observed in the CANVAS cohort warrants further investigation.</p

Rationale, design and baseline characteristics of the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R):A randomized, placebo-controlled trial

Aims: The primary aim of the CANagliflozin cardioVascular Assessment Study-Renal (CANVAS-R) is to determine whether the favourable effects of inhibition of the sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) on blood glucose, blood pressure and body weight are accompanied by protection against adverse renal outcomes. Materials and methods: CANVAS-R is a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes with a history or high risk of cardiovascular events. Patients were randomly assigned to once-daily placebo or canagliflozin 100 mg (with optional uptitration to 300 mg) for a planned average of 2.5 years of follow-up. The primary outcome is kidney disease progression, defined by class change in albuminuria. The two secondary outcomes are the composite of hospitalized heart failure or cardiovascular death, and cardiovascular death alone. Effects on end-stage renal disease and a range of other outcomes will also be explored. Results: A total of 5812 participants were recruited at 422 sites in 24 countries between January 2014 and May 2015. The mean baseline age was 64 years, mean duration of diabetes was 14 years, mean glycated haemoglobin level was 8.3% and mean body mass index was 32 kg/m(2). Of these participants, 37% were women, 71% had a history of cardiovascular disease, 22.3% had microalbuminuria and 8.7% had macroalbuminuria. The mean baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate was 76 mL/min/1.73 m(2). The study will have at least 90% power (P =.05) to detect a 22% or greater reduction in the risk of progression of albuminuria. Conclusions: The trial should define the potential renoprotective effect of canagliflozin and will provide additional important new data about its effects on vascular outcomes, death and kidney failure

Canagliflozin and Cardiovascular and Renal Events in Type 2 Diabetes

BACKGROUND Canagliflozin is a sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor that reduces glycemia as well as blood pressure, body weight, and albuminuria in people with diabetes. We report the effects of treatment with canagliflozin on cardiovascular, renal, and safety outcomes. METHODS The CANVAS Program integrated data from two trials involving a total of 10,142 participants with type 2 diabetes and high cardiovascular risk. Participants in each trial were randomly assigned to receive canagliflozin or placebo and were followed for a mean of 188.2 weeks. The primary outcome was a composite of death from cardiovascular causes, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal stroke. RESULTS The mean age of the participants was 63.3 years, 35.8% were women, the mean duration of diabetes was 13.5 years, and 65.6% had a history of cardiovascular disease. The rate of the primary outcome was lower with canagliflozin than with placebo (occurring in 26.9 vs. 31.5 participants per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 0.86; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.75 to 0.97; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P=0.02 for superiority). Although on the basis of the prespecified hypothesis testing sequence the renal outcomes are not viewed as statistically significant, the results showed a possible benefit of canagliflozin with respect to the progression of albuminuria (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.79) and the composite outcome of a sustained 40% reduction in the estimated glomerular filtration rate, the need for renal-replacement therapy, or death from renal causes (hazard ratio, 0.60; 95% CI, 0.47 to 0.77). Adverse reactions were consistent with the previously reported risks associated with canagliflozin except for an increased risk of amputation (6.3 vs. 3.4 participants per 1000 patient-years; hazard ratio, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.41 to 2.75); amputations were primarily at the level of the toe or metatarsal. CONCLUSIONS In two trials involving patients with type 2 diabetes and an elevated risk of cardiovascular disease, patients treated with canagliflozin had a lower risk of cardiovascular events than those who received placebo but a greater risk of amputation, primarily at the level of the toe or metatarsal. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; CANVAS and CANVAS-R ClinicalTrials.gov numbers, NCT01032629 and NCT01989754, respectively.