Change in HbA 1c Across the Baseline HbA 1c Range in Type 2 Diabetes Patients Receiving Once-Weekly Dulaglutide Versus Other Incretin Agents

Introduction: This exploratory post hoc analysis investigated the relative changes in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with dulaglutide versus active comparators across a continuous range of baseline HbA1c values using data from three phase III randomised controlled trials. Methods: Data from patients receiving once-weekly dulaglutide 0.75 and 1.5 mg, once-daily sitagliptin 100 mg, once-daily liraglutide 1.8 mg or twice-daily exenatide 10 ?g in the intent-to-treat populations in the AWARD-5, AWARD-6 and AWARD-1 trials were analysed using last observation carried forward analysis of covariance. Starting with the predefined statistical model from each study, the type of association between HbA1c baseline and change at 26 weeks was modelled. Consistency of treatment effect was assessed via treatment-by-baseline HbA1c interaction terms. Results: Improvements in HbA1c occurred in all treatment groups across the entire baseline HbA1c range. The relationship between HbA1c baseline and magnitude of change was linear in all treatment groups, with greater reductions in patients with higher baseline HbA1c values. Across the continuum of baseline HbA1c values, patients treated with dulaglutide 1.5 mg achieved a similar mean HbA1c reduction to patients receiving liraglutide 1.8 mg and a greater reduction than patients receiving twice-daily exenatide or sitagliptin. In AWARD-5, the treatment-by-baseline HbA1c interaction P value (0.001) demonstrated progressively greater HbA1c reduction in dulaglutide-treated compared with sitagliptin-treated patients as baseline HbA1c increased. Conclusion: Our results suggest that dulaglutide is an appropriate therapeutic option for patients with T2DM across a wide range of baseline HbA1c values, including those with poor metabolic control

Adherence to antihyperglycemic medications and glucagon-like peptide 1-receptor agonists in type 2 diabetes: Clinical consequences and strategies for improvement

Adherence to antihyperglycemic medications is often suboptimal in patients with type 2 diabetes, and this can contribute to poor glycemic control, increased hospitalization, and the development of diabetic complications. Reported adherence rates to antihyperglycemics vary widely among studies, and this may be related to differences in methodology for measuring adherence, patient populations, and other factors. Poor adherence may occur regardless of the specific regimen used and whether therapy is oral or injectable, and can be especially common in chronic, asymptomatic conditions, such as type 2 diabetes. More convenient drug-administration regimens and advances in formulations and delivery devices are among strategies shown to improve adherence to antihyperglycemic therapy, especially for injectable therapy. This is exemplified by technological developments made in the drug class of glucagon-like peptide 1-receptor agonists, which are a focus of this narrative review. Dulaglutide, albiglutide, and prolonged-release exenatide have an extended duration of action and can be administered once weekly, whereas such agents as liraglutide require once-daily administration. The convenience of once-weekly versus once-daily administration is associated with better adherence in real-world studies involving this class of agent. Moreover, provision of a user-friendly delivery device has been shown to overcome initial resistance to injectable therapy among patients with type 2 diabetes. This suggests that recent innovations in drug formulation (eg, ready-to-use formula-tions) and delivery systems (eg, single-dose prefilled pens and hidden, ready-attached needles) may be instrumental in encouraging patient acceptance. For physicians who aim to improve their patients’ adherence to antihyperglycemic medications, it is thus important to consider the patient’s therapeutic experience (treatment frequency, drug formulation, delivery device). Better adherence, powered by recent technological advances in the delivery of glucagon-like peptide 1-receptor agonists, may thus lead to improved clinical outcomes in type 2 diabetes

Once-weekly dulaglutide versus insulin glargine in the early control of fasting serum glucose and HbA1c

Aims. To determine the early benefit:risk balance of dulaglutide versus insulin glargine in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods. This post hoc analysis used data from a randomized, open-label study (AWARD-2; modified intention-to-treat group) in which suboptimally controlled metformin + glimepiride-treated patients received dulaglutide 1.5 mg (n = 273) or insulin glargine (n = 262). Two composite endpoints were used: for weeks 2–20, fasting serum glucose (FSG) <130 mg/dL (<7.2 mmol/L) without hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤70 mg/dL [≤3.9 mmol/L] or severe hypoglycemia); at week 26, patients with glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) <7.0% (<53.0 mmol/mol) or reduction from baseline ≥1.0% (≥10.9 mmol/mol), no hypoglycemia (as defined above) and no weight gain. Odds ratios (ORs) were generated using logistic regression analysis. Results. The probability of reaching the FSG target without hypoglycemia was higher with dulaglutide than with insulin glargine at weeks 4 (OR 1.78; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.22–2.60) and 8 (OR 1.69; 95% CI 1.15–2.48). The proportion of patients achieving the 26-week endpoint was higher with dulaglutide (37.4% vs. 10.3%; OR 5.28; 95% CI 3.28–8.48). Conclusions. Dulaglutide's balanced efficacy-to-safety profile compares favorably with that of insulin glargine and is apparent soon after treatment initiation and after 6 months of therapy.Sin financiación2.852 JCR (2020) Q3, 107/146 Endocrinology & Metabolism1.022 SJR (2020) Q2, 47/122No data IDR 2020UE

Insulin therapy in neonatal diabetes mellitus: a review of the literature

Aims Neonatal diabetes mellitus (NDM) is a rare disorder, and guidance is limited regarding its optimal management. We reviewed insulin usage in NDM, with a focus on continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII). Methods A PubMed search identified 40 reports of patients with NDM treated with insulin published between 1994 and 2016. Results Data concerning treatment of NDM are limited. CSII resolves some of the issues associated with insulin therapy in neonates. No clinical trials of CSII in NDM have been reported. Case reports suggest that CSII is a safe and effective means of treating NDM. CSII was initiated to improve glycaemic control, for practicality and convenience, and to overcome difficulties associated with the maintenance of long-term intravenous catheters. CSII can provide better glycaemic control than multiple daily injections, with few hypoglycaemic events. Continuous glucose monitoring integrated with the pump helps provide more precise control of blood glucose levels. CSII generally uses short-acting insulin or rapid-acting insulin analogues, and those that are approved for use in neonates appear to be appropriate for the treatment of NDM using an insulin pump. Conclusions Information from case reports indicates that CSII is safe and effective for the management of NDM