Explore the vast range of titles available.

Abstract Context Combination therapy with insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) is important for treating type 2 diabetes (T2D). This trial assesses the efficacy and safety of semaglutide, a GLP-1RA, as an add-on to basal insulin. Objective To demonstrate the superiority of semaglutide vs placebo on glycemic control as an add-on to basal insulin in patients with T2D. Design Phase 3a, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 30-week trial. Setting This study included 90 sites in five countries. Patients We studied 397 patients with uncontrolled T2D receiving stable therapy with basal insulin with or without metformin. Interventions Subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 or 1.0 mg once weekly or volume-matched placebo. Main Outcome Measures Primary endpoint was change in glycated Hb (HbA1c) from baseline to week 30. Confirmatory secondary endpoint was change in body weight from baseline to week 30. Results At week 30, mean HbA1c reductions [mean baseline value, 8.4% (67.9 mmol/mol)] with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg were 1.4% (15.8 mmol/mol) and 1.8% (20.2 mmol/mol) vs 0.1% (1.0 mmol/mol) with placebo [estimated treatment difference (ETD) vs placebo, –1.35 (14.8 mmol/mol); 95% CI, –1.61 to –1.10 and ETD, –1.75% (19.2 mmol/mol); 95% CI, –2.01 to –1.50; both P < 0.0001]. Severe or blood glucose–confirmed hypoglycemic episodes were reported in 11 patients (17 events) and 14 patients (25 events) with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg, respectively, vs seven patients (13 events) with placebo (estimated rate ratio vs placebo, 2.08; 95% CI, 0.67 to 6.51 and estimated rate ratio vs placebo, 2.41; 95% CI, 0.84 to 6.96 for 0.5 and 1.0 mg; both P = nonsignificant). Mean body weight decreased with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg vs placebo from baseline to end of treatment: 3.7, 6.4, and 1.4 kg (ETD, –2.31; 95% CI, –3.33 to –1.29 and ETD, –5.06; 95% CI, –6.08 to –4.04 kg; both P < 0.0001). Premature treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was higher for semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg vs placebo (4.5%, 6.1%, and 0.8%), mainly due to gastrointestinal disorders. Conclusions Semaglutide, added to basal insulin, significantly reduced HbA1c and body weight in patients with uncontrolled T2D vs placebo. The randomized, double-blind SUSTAIN 5 trial demonstrated the superiority of once-weekly semaglutide vs placebo in patients with uncontrolled T2D on basal insulin therapy.

To compare ultra-long-acting insulin degludec with glargine for efficacy and safety in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). In this 1-year, parallel-group, randomized, open-label, treat-to-target trial, adults with type 2 diabetes with A1C of 7-10% taking OADs were randomized 3:1 to receive once daily degludec or glargine, both with metformin. Insulin was titrated to achieve prebreakfast plasma glucose (PG) of 3.9-4.9 mmol/L. The primary end point was confirmation of noninferiority of degludec to glargine in A1C reduction after 52 weeks in an intent-to-treat analysis. In all, 1,030 participants (mean age 59 years; baseline A1C 8.2%) were randomized (degludec 773, glargine 257). Reduction in A1C with degludec was similar (noninferior) to that with glargine (1.06 vs. 1.19%), with an estimated treatment difference of degludec to glargine of 0.09% (95% CI -0.04 to 0.22). Overall rates of confirmed hypoglycemia (PG <3.1 mmol/L or severe episodes requiring assistance) were similar, with degludec and glargine at 1.52 versus 1.85 episodes/patient-year of exposure (PYE). There were few episodes of nocturnal confirmed hypoglycemia in the overall population, and these occurred at a lower rate with degludec versus glargine (0.25 vs. 0.39 episodes/PYE; P = 0.038). Similar percentages of patients in both groups achieved A1C levels <7% without hypoglycemia. End-of-trial mean daily insulin doses were 0.59 and 0.60 units/kg for degludec and glargine, respectively. Adverse event rates were similar. Insulins degludec and glargine administered once daily in combination with OADs provided similar long-term glycemic control in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes, with lower rates of nocturnal hypoglycemia with degludec.

There is a direct relationship between bodyweight and risk of diabetes. Lorcaserin, a selective serotonin 2C receptor agonist that suppresses appetite, has been shown to facilitate sustained weight loss in obese or overweight patients. We aimed to evaluate the long-term effects of lorcaserin on diabetes prevention and remission. In this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial done in eight countries, we recruited overweight or obese patients (body-mass index ≥27 kg/m2) with or at high risk for atherosclerotic vascular disease. Eligible patients were aged 40 years or older; patients at high risk for atherosclerotic vascular disease had to be aged 50 years or older with diabetes and at least one other risk factor. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either lorcaserin (10 mg twice daily) or matching placebo. Additionally, all patients had access to a standardised weight management programme based on lifestyle modification. The prespecified primary metabolic efficacy endpoint of time to incident diabetes was assessed in patients with prediabetes at baseline. The prespecified secondary outcomes for efficacy were incident diabetes in all patients without diabetes, achievement of normoglycaemia in patients with prediabetes, and change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) in patients with diabetes. Hypoglycaemia was a prespecified safety outcome. Analysis was by intention to treat, using Cox proportional hazard models for time-to-event analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02019264. Between Feb 7, 2014, and Nov 20, 2015, 12 000 patients were randomly assigned to lorcaserin or placebo (6000 patients in each group) and followed up for a median of 3·3 years (IQR 3·0–3·5). At baseline, 6816 patients (56·8%) had diabetes, 3991 (33·3%) prediabetes, and 1193 (9·9%) normoglycaemia. At 1 year, patients treated with lorcaserin had a net weight loss beyond placebo of 2·6 kg (95% CI 2·3–2·9) for those with diabetes, 2·8 kg (2·5–3·2) for those with prediabetes, and 3·3 kg (2·6–4·0) for those with normoglycaemia (p<0·0001 for all analyses). Lorcaserin reduced the risk of incident diabetes by 19% in patients with prediabetes (172 [8·5%] of 2015 vs 204 [10·3%] of 1976; hazard ratio 0·81, 95% CI 0·66–0·99; p=0·038) and by 23% in patients without diabetes (174 [6·7%] of 2615 vs 215 [8·4%] of 2569; 0·77, 0·63–0·94; p=0·012). Lorcaserin resulted in a non-significant increase in the rate of achievement of normoglycaemia in patients with prediabetes (185 [9·2%] vs 151 [7·6%]; 1·20, 0·97–1·49; p=0·093). In patients with diabetes, lorcaserin resulted in a reduction of 0·33% (95% CI 0·29–0·38; p<0·0001) in HbA1c compared with placebo at 1 year from a mean baseline of 53 mmol/mol (7·0%). In patients with diabetes at baseline, severe hypoglycaemia with serious complications was rare, but more common with lorcaserin (12 [0·4%] vs four [0·1%] events; p=0·054). Lorcaserin decreases risk for incident diabetes, induces remission of hyperglycaemia, and reduces the risk of microvascular complications in obese and overweight patients, supporting the role of lorcaserin as an adjunct to lifestyle modification for chronic management of weight and metabolic health. Eisai.

Obesity is a risk factor for type 2 diabetes (T2D) and cardiovascular disease (CVD). Whether obesity affects outcomes among those with T2D and atherosclerotic CVD (ASCVD) remains uncertain. Our objective was to investigate the relationship between body mass index (BMI) and ASCVD outcomes among TECOS participants with T2D and ASCVD. BMI categories were defined as underweight/normal weight (BMI <25 kg/m2), overweight (25-29.9 kg/m2), obese class I (30-34.9 kg/m2), obese class II (35-39.9 kg/m2), and obese class III (≥ 40 kg/m2). Asian-specific BMI categories were applied to Asian participants. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis and Cox proportional hazards models were used to examine associations between baseline BMI and a composite CV outcome (CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or hospitalization for unstable angina). For 14,534 TECOS patients with available BMI, mean age was 65.5 years; 29.3% were female, 32.0% non-White, and 23.1% insulin-treated, with median 3 years' follow-up. At baseline, 11.6% (n = 1686) were underweight/normal weight, 38.1% (n = 5532) overweight, 32.2% (n = 4683) obese class I, 12.4% (n = 1806) obese class II, and 5.7% (n = 827) obese class III. The composite CV outcome occurred in 11.4% (n = 1663) of participants; the outcome risk was lower, compared with under/normal weight, in overweight (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.71-0.98) and obese class I (HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.67-0.93) individuals. Obesity was not associated with worse glycemic control. The majority of TECOS participants with ASCVD and T2D were overweight or obese, yet overweight or obese class I individuals had lower CV risk than those who were under/normal weight. These results suggest the presence of an obesity paradox, but this paradox may reflect an epidemiological artifact rather than a true negative association between normal weight and clinical outcomes.

We evaluated the addition of liraglutide to metformin in type 2 diabetes followed by intensification with basal insulin (detemir) if glycated hemoglobin (A1C) ≥7%. In 988 participants from North America and Europe uncontrolled on metformin ± sulfonylurea, sulfonylurea was discontinued and liraglutide 1.8 mg/day added for 12 weeks (run-in). Subsequently, those with A1C ≥7% were randomized 1:1 to 26 weeks' open-label addition of insulin detemir to metformin + liraglutide (n = 162) or continuation without insulin detemir (n = 161). Patients achieving A1C <7% continued unchanged treatment (observational arm). The primary end point was A1C change between randomized groups. Of 821 participants completing the run-in, 61% (n = 498) achieved A1C <7% (mean change -1.3% from 7.7% at start), whereas 39% (n = 323) did not (-0.6% from 8.3% at start). During run-in, 167 of 988 (17%) withdrew; 46% of these due to gastrointestinal adverse events. At week 26, A1C decreased further, by 0.5% (from 7.6% at randomization) with insulin detemir (n = 162) versus 0.02% increase without insulin detemir (n = 157) to 7.1 and 7.5%, respectively (estimated treatment difference -0.52 [95% CI -0.68 to -0.36]; P < 0.0001). Forty-three percent of participants with insulin detemir versus 17% without reached A1C <7%. Mean weight decreased by 3.5 kg during run-in, then by 0.16 kg with insulin detemir or 0.95 kg without insulin detemir. In the randomized phase, no major hypoglycemia occurred and minor hypoglycemia rates were 0.286 and 0.029 events per participant-year with and without insulin detemir (9.2 vs. 1.3%). Supplementation of metformin with liraglutide and then insulin detemir was well tolerated in the majority of patients, with good glycemic control, sustained weight loss, and very low hypoglycemia rates.

In recent years, several novel agents have become available to treat individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D), such as sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2i), tirzepatide, which is a dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide receptor agonist (GIP RA)/glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), and finerenone, a non-steroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) that confers significant renal and cardiovascular benefits in individuals with (CKD). New medications have the potential to improve the lives of individuals with diabetes. However, clinicians are challenged to understand the benefits and potential risks associated with these new and emerging treatment options. In this article, we discuss how use of network meta-analyses (NMA) can fill this need.

This post hoc analysis evaluated efficacy and safety of dronedarone in atrial fibrillation (AF) and atrial flutter (AFL) patients with/without diabetes. Patients were categorized according to baseline diabetes status. Time-to-event analyses were performed using Kaplan-Meier method. Hazard-ratios were assessed using Cox models. 945/4628 (dronedarone = 482; placebo = 463) patients in ATHENA and 215/1237 (dronedarone = 148; placebo = 67) patients in EURIDIS/ADONIS studies had diabetes. In ATHENA, there were higher rates of CV hospitalization/death in patients with diabetes (39.5%) than without diabetes (34.7%). Incidence of first CV hospitalization/death was lower in patients with diabetes treated with dronedarone (35.1%) than placebo (44.1%), and time to this event was longer in those treated with dronedarone than placebo (log-rank p = 0.005). Median AF/AFL recurrence time was longer in patients treated with dronedarone than placebo in patients with diabetes (ATHENA: 722 vs 527 days, log-rank p = 0.004; EURIDIS/ADONIS: 100 vs 23 days, log-rank p = 0.15) or without diabetes (ATHENA: 741 vs 492 days, log-rank p < 0.0001; EURIDIS/ADONIS: 120 vs 59 days, log-rank p = 0.0002). Occurrence of any treatment-related adverse events with dronedarone was similar for patients with/without diabetes and was comparable to placebo. Dronedarone reduced incidence of CV hospitalization/death, AF/AFL recurrence and increased time to these events in AF/AFL patients with/without diabetes. Not applicable, as it was a post hoc analysis. This article is based on previously conducted studies (ATHENA: NCT00174785, EURIDIS: NCT00259428, and ADONIS: NCT00259376). •Patients with diabetes had a shorter time to AF/AFL recurrence than those without diabetes.•Time to symptomatic AF/AFL recurrence was longer in patients with diabetes than without diabetes.•Patients with diabetes had higher CV hospitalization rates than those without diabetes.•Dronedarone reduced CV hospitalization rates in AF/AFL patients with/without diabetes.•Dronedarone delayed time to first AF/AFL recurrence in AF/AFL patients with/without diabetes.

Objective: Semaglutide is a glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analog for the once-weekly treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). In the global SUSTAIN clinical trial program, semaglutide demonstrated superior glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and body weight reductions versus comparators. This post hoc analysis compared the proportion of patients achieving combined reductions in glycemia and body weight versus comparators. Methods: A total of 5,119 subjects with T2D in the phase 3 SUSTAIN 1 through 5 and 7 trials, from 33 countries, were included in this post hoc analysis. Subjects received subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 or 1.0 mg, placebo or active comparator (sitagliptin 100 mg, exenatide extended release 2.0 mg, insulin glargine, dulaglutide 0.75 or 1.5 mg). The main endpoint was a composite of ≥1.0% HbA1c reduction and ≥5.0% weight loss at end of treatment. Results: Significantly greater proportions of subjects achieved the composite endpoint with semaglutide 0.5 (25 to 38%) and 1.0 mg (38 to 59%) versus comparators (2 to 23%). More subjects treated with semaglutide versus comparators achieved ≥1.0% HbA1c reductions (58 to 77% and 75 to 83% for semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg versus 12 to 68%) and ≥5.0% weight loss (37 to 46%, 45 to 66% versus 4 to 30%). Proportions of subjects achieving targets were significantly higher with semaglutide 1.0 versus 0.5 mg in four of five trials. Semaglutide was well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to other GLP-1 receptor agonists. Conclusion: Significantly more subjects achieved both ≥1.0% HbA1c reduction and ≥5.0% weight loss with once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide treatment versus comparators in the SUSTAIN trials. A dose-dependent effect was observed with semaglutide.