Explore the vast range of titles available.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) were first introduced for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D) in 2005. Despite the high efficacy and other benefits of GLP-1RAs, their uptake was initially limited by the fact that they could only be administered by injection. Semaglutide is a human GLP-1 analog that has been shown to significantly improve glycemic control and reduce body weight, in addition to improving cardiovascular outcomes, in patients with T2D. First approved as a once-weekly subcutaneous injection, semaglutide was considered an ideal peptide candidate for oral delivery with a permeation enhancer on account of its low molecular weight, long half-life, and high potency. An oral formulation of semaglutide was therefore developed by co-formulating semaglutide with sodium N-(8-[2-hydroxybenzoyl]amino)caprylate, a well-characterized transcellular permeation enhancer, to produce the first orally administered GLP-1RA. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed that stable steady-state concentrations could be achieved with once-daily dosing owing to the long half-life of oral semaglutide. Upper gastrointestinal disease and renal and hepatic impairment did not affect the pharmacokinetic profile. In the phase III PIONEER clinical trial program, oral semaglutide was shown to reduce glycated hemoglobin and body weight compared with placebo and active comparators in patients with T2D, with no new safety signals reported. Cardiovascular efficacy and safety are currently being assessed in a dedicated outcomes trial. The development of an oral GLP-1RA represents a significant milestone in the management of T2D, providing an additional efficacious treatment option for patients.

Abbreviations: A1C = hemoglobin A1C; AACE = American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists; ABCD = adiposity-based chronic disease; ACCORD = Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes; ACCORD BP = Action to Control Cardiovascular Risk in Diabetes Blood Pressure; ACE = American College of Endocrinology; ACEI = angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor; AGI = alpha-glucosidase inhibitor; apo B = apolipoprotein B; ARB = angiotensin II receptor blocker; ASCVD = atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease; BAS = bile acid sequestrant; BMI = body mass index; BP = blood pressure; CCB = calcium channel blocker; CGM = continuous glucose monitoring; CHD = coronary heart disease; CKD = chronic kidney disease; DKA = diabetic ketoacidosis; DPP4 = dipeptidyl peptidase 4; eGFR = estimated glomerular filtration rate; EPA = eicosapentaenoic acid; ER = extended release; FDA = Food and Drug Administration; GLP1 = glucagon-like peptide 1; HDL-C = high-density-lipoprotein cholesterol; HeFH = heterozygous familial hypercholesterolemia; LDL-C = low-density-lipoprotein cholesterol; LDL-P = low-density-lipoprotein particle; Look AHEAD = Look Action for Health in Diabetes; NPH = neutral protamine Hagedorn; OSA = obstructive sleep apnea; PCSK9 = proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 serine protease; RCT = randomized controlled trial; SU = sulfonylurea; SGLT2 = sodium-glucose cotransporter 2; SMBG = self-monitoring of blood glucose; T2D = type 2 diabetes; TZD = thiazolidinedione

For patients with type 2 diabetes who do not achieve target glycaemic control with conventional insulin treatment, advancing to a basal–bolus insulin regimen is often recommended. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide with that of insulin glargine, both combined with prandial insulin lispro, in patients with type 2 diabetes. We did this 52 week, randomised, open-label, phase 3, non-inferiority trial at 105 study sites in 15 countries. Patients (aged ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with conventional insulin treatment were randomly assigned (1:1:1), via a computer-generated randomisation sequence with an interactive voice-response system, to receive once-weekly dulaglutide 1·5 mg, dulaglutide 0·75 mg, or daily bedtime glargine. Randomisation was stratified by country and metformin use. Participants and study investigators were not masked to treatment allocation, but were unaware of dulaglutide dose assignment. The primary outcome was a change in glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) from baseline to week 26, with a 0·4% non-inferiority margin. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01191268. Between Dec 9, 2010, and Sept 21, 2012, we randomly assigned 884 patients to receive dulaglutide 1·5 mg (n=295), dulaglutide 0·75 mg (n=293), or glargine (n=296). At 26 weeks, the adjusted mean change in HbA1c was greater in patients receiving dulaglutide 1·5 mg (−1·64% [95% CI −1·78 to −1·50], −17·93 mmol/mol [−19·44 to −16·42]) and dulaglutide 0·75 mg (−1·59% [−1·73 to −1·45], −17·38 mmol/mol [−18·89 to −15·87]) than in those receiving glargine (−1·41% [−1·55 to −1·27], −15·41 mmol/mol [−16·92 to −13·90]). The adjusted mean difference versus glargine was −0·22% (95% CI −0·38 to −0·07, −2·40 mmol/mol [–4·15 to −0·77]; p=0·005) for dulaglutide 1·5 mg and −0·17% (–0·33 to −0·02, −1·86 mmol/mol [–3·61 to −0·22]; p=0·015) for dulaglutide 0·75 mg. Five (<1%) patients died after randomisation because of septicaemia (n=1 in the dulaglutide 1·5 mg group); pneumonia (n=1 in the dulaglutide 0·75 mg group); cardiogenic shock; ventricular fibrillation; and an unknown cause (n=3 in the glargine group). We recorded serious adverse events in 27 (9%) patients in the dulaglutide 1·5 mg group, 44 (15%) patients in the dulaglutide 0·75 mg group, and 54 (18%) patients in the glargine group. The most frequent adverse events, arising more often with dulaglutide than glargine, were nausea, diarrhoea, and vomiting. Dulaglutide in combination with lispro resulted in a significantly greater improvement in glycaemic control than did glargine and represents a new treatment option for patients unable to achieve glycaemic targets with conventional insulin treatment. Eli Lilly and Company.

Unlike most antihyperglycaemic drugs, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists have a glucose-dependent action and promote weight loss. We compared the efficacy and safety of liraglutide, a human GLP-1 analogue, with exenatide, an exendin-based GLP-1 receptor agonist. Adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes on maximally tolerated doses of metformin, sulphonylurea, or both, were stratified by previous oral antidiabetic therapy and randomly assigned to receive additional liraglutide 1·8 mg once a day (n=233) or exenatide 10 μg twice a day (n=231) in a 26-week open-label, parallel-group, multinational (15 countries) study. The primary outcome was change in glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA 1c). Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00518882. Mean baseline HbA 1c for the study population was 8·2%. Liraglutide reduced mean HbA 1c significantly more than did exenatide (−1·12% [SE 0·08] vs −0·79% [0·08]; estimated treatment difference −0·33; 95% CI −0·47 to −0·18; p<0·0001) and more patients achieved a HbA 1c value of less than 7% (54% vs 43%, respectively; odds ratio 2·02; 95% CI 1·31 to 3·11; p=0·0015). Liraglutide reduced mean fasting plasma glucose more than did exenatide (−1·61 mmol/L [SE 0·20] vs −0·60 mmol/L [0·20]; estimated treatment difference −1·01 mmol/L; 95% CI −1·37 to −0·65; p<0·0001) but postprandial glucose control was less effective after breakfast and dinner. Both drugs promoted similar weight losses (liraglutide −3·24 kg vs exenatide −2·87 kg). Both drugs were well tolerated, but nausea was less persistent (estimated treatment rate ratio 0·448, p<0·0001) and minor hypoglycaemia less frequent with liraglutide than with exenatide (1·93 vs 2·60 events per patient per year; rate ratio 0·55; 95% CI 0·34 to 0·88; p=0·0131; 25·5% vs 33·6% had minor hypoglycaemia). Two patients taking both exenatide and a sulphonylurea had a major hypoglycaemic episode. Liraglutide once a day provided significantly greater improvements in glycaemic control than did exenatide twice a day, and was generally better tolerated. The results suggest that liraglutide might be a treatment option for type 2 diabetes, especially when weight loss and risk of hypoglycaemia are major considerations. Novo Nordisk A/S.

While glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) are known to increase heart rate (HR), it is insufficiently recognized that the extent varies greatly between the various agonists and is affected by the assessment methods employed. Here we review published data from 24-h time-averaged HR monitoring in healthy individuals and subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) treated with either short-acting GLP-1 RAs, lixisenatide or exenatide, or long-acting GLP-1 RAs, exenatide LAR, liraglutide, albiglutide, or dulaglutide (N = 1112; active-treatment arms). HR effects observed in two independent head-to-head trials of lixisenatide and liraglutide (N = 202; active-treatment arms) are also reviewed. Short-acting GLP-1 RAs, exenatide and lixisenatide, are associated with a transient (1–12 h) mean placebo- and baseline-adjusted 24-h HR increase of 1–3 beats per minute (bpm). Conversely, long-acting GLP-1 RAs are associated with more pronounced increases in mean 24-h HR; the highest seen with liraglutide and albiglutide at 6–10 bpm compared with dulaglutide and exenatide LAR at 3–4 bpm. For both liraglutide and dulaglutide, HR increases were recorded during both the day and at night. In two head-to-head comparisons, a small, transient mean increase in HR from baseline was observed with lixisenatide; liraglutide induced a substantially greater increase that remained significantly elevated over 24 h. The underlying mechanism for increased HR remains to be elucidated; however, it could be related to a direct effect at the sinus node and/or stimulation of the sympathetic nervous system, with this effect related to the duration of action of the respective GLP-1 RAs. In conclusion, this review indicates that the effects on HR differ within the class of GLP-1 RAs: short-acting GLP-1 RAs are associated with a modest and transient HR increase before returning to baseline levels, while some long-acting GLP-1 RAs are associated with a more pronounced and sustained increase during the day and night. Findings from recently completed trials indicate that a GLP-1 RA-induced increase in HR, regardless of magnitude, does not present an increased cardiovascular risk for subjects with T2DM, although a pronounced increase in HR may be associated with adverse clinical outcomes in those with advanced heart failure.

This algorithm for the comprehensive management of persons with type 2 diabetes (T2D) was developed to provide clinicians with a practical guide that considers the whole patient, his or her spectrum of risks and complications, and evidence-based approaches to treatment. It is now clear that the progressive pancreatic beta-cell defect that drives the deterioration of metabolic control over time begins early and may be present before the diagnosis of T2D (1-3). In addition to advocating glycemic control to reduce microvascular complications, this document highlights obesity and prediabetes as underlying risk factors for the development of T2D and associated macrovascular complications. In addition, the algorithm provides recommendations for blood pressure (BP) and lipid control, the two most important risk factors for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Since originally drafted in 2013, the algorithm has been updated as new therapies, management approaches, and important clinical data have emerged. The current algorithm includes up-to-date sections on lifestyle therapy and all classes of obesity, antihyperglycemic, lipidlowering, and antihypertensive medications approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) through December 2018. This algorithm supplements the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists (AACE) and American College of Endocrinology (ACE) 2015 Clinical Practice Guidelines for Developing a Diabetes Mellitus Comprehensive Care Plan (4) and is organized into discrete sections that address the following topics: the founding principles of the algorithm, lifestyle therapy, obesity, prediabetes, management of hypertension and dyslipidemia, and glucose control with noninsulin antihyperglycemic agents and insulin. In the accompanying algorithm, a chart summarizing the attributes of each antihyperglycemic class appears at the end.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the efficacy and safety of liraglutide (a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist) when added to metformin and rosiglitazone in type 2 diabetes. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This 26-week, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial randomized 533 subjects (1:1:1) to once-daily liraglutide (1.2 or 1.8 mg) or liraglutide placebo in combination with metformin (1 g twice daily) and rosiglitazone (4 mg twice daily). Subjects had type 2 diabetes, A1C 7-11% (previous oral antidiabetes drug [OAD] monotherapy greater-than-or-equal3 months) or 7-10% (previous OAD combination therapy greater-than-or-equal3 months), and BMI [less-than or equal to]45 kg/m². RESULTS: Mean A1C values decreased significantly more in the liraglutide groups versus placebo (mean ± SE -1.5 ± 0.1% for both 1.2 and 1.8 mg liraglutide and -0.5 ± 0.1% for placebo). Fasting plasma glucose decreased by 40, 44, and 8 mg/dl for 1.2 and 1.8 mg and placebo, respectively, and 90-min postprandial glucose decreased by 47, 49, and 14 mg/dl, respectively (P < 0.001 for all liraglutide groups vs. placebo). Dose-dependent weight loss occurred with 1.2 and 1.8 mg liraglutide (1.0 ± 0.3 and 2.0 ± 0.3 kg, respectively) (P < 0.0001) compared with weight gain with placebo (0.6 ± 0.3 kg). Systolic blood pressure decreased by 6.7, 5.6, and 1.1 mmHg with 1.2 and 1.8 mg liraglutide and placebo, respectively. Significant increases in C-peptide and homeostasis model assessment of β-cell function and significant decreases in the proinsulin-to-insulin ratio occurred with liraglutide versus placebo. Minor hypoglycemia occurred more frequently with liraglutide, but there was no major hypoglycemia. Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common with liraglutide, but most occurred early and were transient. CONCLUSIONS: Liraglutide combined with metformin and a thiazolidinedione is a well-tolerated combination therapy for type 2 diabetes, providing significant improvements in glycemic control.

This new algorithm for the comprehensive management of persons with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been developed to provide clinicians with a practical guide that considers the whole patient, the spectrum of risks and complications for the patient, and evidence-based approaches to treatment. In addition to advocating for glycemic control so as to reduce microvascular complications, this document focuses on obesity and prediabetes as the underlying risk factors for diabetes and associated macro...vascular complications. It is now clear that the progressive beta-cell defect that drives the deterioration of metabolic control over time begins early and may be present before the diagnosis of diabetes. This document is organized into discrete sections that address the following topics: obesity, prediabetes, management of hyperglycemia through lifestyle modifications, pharmacotherapy and insulin, management of hypertension, management of hyperlipidemia, and other risk-reduction strategies.

IntroductionEven with recent treatment advances, type 2 diabetes (T2D) remains poorly controlled for many patients, despite the best efforts to adhere to therapies and lifestyle modifications. Although estimates vary, studies indicate that in >10% of individuals with difficult-to-control T2D, hypercortisolism may be an underlying contributing cause. To better understand the prevalence of hypercortisolism and the impact of its treatment on T2D and associated comorbidities, we describe the two-part Hyper c ortisolism in P at ients with Difficult to Control Type 2 Di a betes Despite Receiving Standard-of-Care Therapies: Preva l ence and Treatment with Korl y m® (Mifepri st one) (CATALYST) trial.Methods and analysisIn part 1, approximately 1000 participants with difficult-to-control T2D (haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 7.5%–11.5% despite multiple therapies) are screened with a 1 mg dexamethasone suppression test (DST). Those with post-DST cortisol >1.8 µg/dL and dexamethasone level ≥140 ng/dL are identified to have hypercortisolism (part 1 primary endpoint), have morning adrenocorticotropic hormone (ACTH) and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate (DHEAS) measured and undergo a non-contrast adrenal CT scan. Those requiring evaluation for elevated ACTH are referred for care outside the study; those with ACTH and DHEAS in the range may advance to part 2, a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial to evaluate the impact of treating hypercortisolism with the competitive glucocorticoid receptor antagonist mifepristone (Korlym®). Participants are randomised 2:1 to mifepristone or placebo for 24 weeks, stratified by the presence/absence of an abnormal adrenal CT scan. Mifepristone is dosed at 300 mg once daily for 4 weeks, then 600 mg daily based on tolerability and clinical improvement, with an option to increase to 900 mg. The primary endpoint of part 2 assesses changes in HbA1c in participants with hypercortisolism with or without abnormal adrenal CT scan. Secondary endpoints include changes in antidiabetes medications, cortisol-related comorbidities and quality of life.Ethics and disseminationThe study has been approved by Cleveland Clinic IRB (Cleveland, Ohio, USA) and Advarra IRB (Columbia, Maryland, USA). Findings will be presented at scientific meetings and published in peer-reviewed journals.Trial registration number NCT05772169.