Real-world outcomes of treatment with insulin glargine 300 U/mL versus standard-of-care in people with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus

Objective: To compare real-world outcomes with newer (insulin glargine 300 U/mL; Gla-300) versus standard of care (SoC) basal insulins (BIs) in the REACH (insulin-naive; NCT02967224) and REGAIN (basal insulin-treated; NCT02967211) studies in participants with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in Europe and Brazil. Methods: In these open-label, parallel-group, pragmatic studies, patients (HbA(1c) > 7.0%) were randomized to Gla-300 or SoC BI for a 6-month treatment period (to demonstrate non-inferiority of Gla-300 vs SoC BIs for HbA(1c) change [non-inferiority margin 0.3%]) and a 6-month extension period (continuing with their assigned treatment). Insulin titration/other medication changes were at investigator/patient discretion post-randomization. Results: Overall, 703 patients were randomized to treatment in REACH (Gla-300, n = 352; SoC, n = 351) and 609 (Gla-300, n = 305, SoC, n = 304) in REGAIN. The primary outcome, non-inferiority of Gla-300 versus SoC for HbA(1c) change from baseline to month 6, was met in REACH (least squares [LS] mean difference 0.12% [95% CI -0.046 to 0.281]) but not REGAIN (LS mean difference 0.17% [0.015-0.329]); no between-treatment difference in HbA(1c) change was shown after 12 months in either study. BI dose increased minimally from baseline to 12 months in REACH (Gla-300, +0.17 U/kg; SoC, +0.15 U/kg) and REGAIN (Gla-300, +0.11 U/kg; SoC, +0.07 U/kg). Hypoglycemia incidence was low and similar between treatment arms in both studies. Conclusions: In both REACH and REGAIN, no differences in glycemic control or hypoglycemia outcomes with Gla-300 versus SoC BIs were seen over 12 months. However, the suboptimal insulin titration in REACH and REGAIN limits comparisons of outcomes between treatment arms and suggests that more titration instruction/support may be required for patients to fully derive the benefits from newer basal insulin formulations

Allele-specific regulation of MTTP expression influences the risk of ischemic heart disease

Peer reviewe

Postprandial accumulation of chylomicrons and chylomicron remnants is determined by the clearance capacity.

ObjectiveTo better understand the postprandial clearance of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins (TRLs) and its relation to the fasting kinetics of TRLs.MethodsTwo studies were performed on 30 male subjects: a fasting kinetic study to determine the fasting secretion and clearance rates of apolipoprotein B (apoB) 100 and triglycerides in the very low-density lipoprotein 1 and 2 (VLDL1 and VLDL2) fractions; and a postprandial study to determine the postprandial accumulation of apoB48, apoB100 and triglycerides in the chylomicron, VLDL1 and VLDL2 fractions. Results from these two studies were combined to characterize the postprandial clearance of TRLs in a physiologically relevant setting.ResultsOur results show that postprandial accumulation of the apoB48-carrying chylomicrons can be predicted from the clearance capacity of the lipolytic pathway, determined in the fasting state. Furthermore, we show that chylomicrons and VLDL1 particles are not cleared equally by the lipoprotein lipase pathway, and that chylomicrons seem to be the preferred substrate. Subjects with a rapid fasting lipid metabolism accumulate lower levels of postprandial triglycerides with less accumulation of apoB100 in the VLDL1 fraction and a faster transfer of apoB100 into the VLDL2 fraction. In contrast, fasting VLDL1 secretion does not predict postprandial triglyceride accumulation.ConclusionsNon-fasting triglyceride levels have recently been identified as a major predictor of future cardiovascular events. Here we show that the capacity of the lipolytic pathway is a common determinant of both the fasting and non-fasting triglyceride levels and may thus play an important role in the development of dyslipemia and atherosclerosis