Explore the vast range of titles available.

Despite advancements in care, many people with type 2 diabetes do not meet treatment goals; thus, development of new therapies is needed. We aimed to assess efficacy, safety, and tolerability of novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and GLP-1 receptor agonist tirzepatide monotherapy versus placebo in people with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by diet and exercise alone. We did a 40-week, double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial (SURPASS-1), at 52 medical research centres and hospitals in India, Japan, Mexico, and the USA. Adult participants (≥18 years) were included if they had type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by diet and exercise alone and if they were naive to injectable diabetes therapy. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) via computer-generated random sequence to once a week tirzepatide (5, 10, or 15 mg), or placebo. All participants, investigators, and the sponsor were masked to treatment assignment. The primary endpoint was the mean change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline at 40 weeks. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03954834. From June 3, 2019, to Oct 28, 2020, of 705 individuals assessed for eligibility, 478 (mean baseline HbA1c 7·9% [63 mmol/mol], age 54·1 years [SD 11·9], 231 [48%] women, diabetes duration 4·7 years, and body-mass index 31·9 kg/m2) were randomly assigned to tirzepatide 5 mg (n=121 [25%]), tirzepatide 10 mg (n=121 [25%]), tirzepatide 15 mg (n=121 [25%]), or placebo (n=115 [24%]). 66 (14%) participants discontinued the study drug and 50 (10%) discontinued the study prematurely. At 40 weeks, all tirzepatide doses were superior to placebo for changes from baseline in HbA1c, fasting serum glucose, bodyweight, and HbA1c targets of less than 7·0% (<53 mmol/mol) and less than 5·7% (<39 mmol/mol). Mean HbA1c decreased from baseline by 1·87% (20 mmol/mol) with tirzepatide 5 mg, 1·89% (21 mmol/mol) with tirzepatide 10 mg, and 2·07% (23 mmol/mol) with tirzepatide 15 mg versus +0·04% with placebo (+0·4 mmol/mol), resulting in estimated treatment differences versus placebo of −1·91% (−21 mmol/mol) with tirzepatide 5 mg, −1·93% (−21 mmol/mol) with tirzepatide 10 mg, and −2·11% (−23 mmol/mol) with tirzepatide 15 mg (all p<0·0001). More participants on tirzepatide than on placebo met HbA1c targets of less than 7·0% (<53 mmol/mol; 87–92% vs 20%) and 6·5% or less (≤48 mmol/mol; 81–86% vs 10%) and 31–52% of patients on tirzepatide versus 1% on placebo reached an HbA1c of less than 5·7% (<39 mmol/mol). Tirzepatide induced a dose-dependent bodyweight loss ranging from 7·0 to 9·5 kg. The most frequent adverse events with tirzepatide were mild to moderate and transient gastrointestinal events, including nausea (12–18% vs 6%), diarrhoea (12–14% vs 8%), and vomiting (2–6% vs 2%). No clinically significant (<54 mg/dL [<3 mmol/L]) or severe hypoglycaemia were reported with tirzepatide. One death occurred in the placebo group. Tirzepatide showed robust improvements in glycaemic control and bodyweight, without increased risk of hypoglycaemia. The safety profile was consistent with GLP-1 receptor agonists, indicating a potential monotherapy use of tirzepatide for type 2 diabetes treatment. Eli Lilly and Company.

Abstract Context Tirzepatide is a glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist approved for treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). SURPASS-1, a phase 3 trial of tirzepatide monotherapy in people with early T2D, enables evaluating effects of tirzepatide on pancreatic beta-cell function and insulin sensitivity (IS) without other background antihyperglycemic medications. Objective Explore changes in biomarkers of beta-cell function and IS with tirzepatide monotherapy. Design Post hoc analyses of fasting biomarkers with analysis of variance and mixed model repeated measures. Setting Forty-seven sites in 4 countries. Patients Four hundred seventy-eight T2D participants. Intervention Tirzepatide (5, 10, 15 mg), placebo. Main Outcome Measure(s) Analyze biomarkers of beta-cell function and IS at 40 weeks. Results At 40 weeks, markers of beta-cell function improved with tirzepatide monotherapy vs placebo with reductions from baseline in fasting proinsulin levels (49-55% vs −0.6%) and in intact proinsulin/C-peptide ratios (47-49% vs −0.1%) (P < .001, all doses vs placebo). Increases from baseline in homeostatic model assessment for beta-cell function (computed with C-peptide) (77-92% vs −1.4%) and decreases in glucose-adjusted glucagon levels (37-44% vs +4.8%) were observed with tirzepatide vs placebo (P < .001, all doses vs placebo). IS improved as indicated by reductions from baseline in homeostatic model assessment for insulin resistance (9-23% vs +14.7%) and fasting insulin levels (2-12% vs +15%), and increases in total adiponectin (16-23% vs −0.2%) and insulin-like growth factor binding protein 2 (38-70% vs +4.1%) with tirzepatide vs placebo at 40 weeks (P ≤ .031, all doses vs placebo, except for fasting insulin levels with tirzepatide 10 mg). Conclusions As monotherapy for early T2D, tirzepatide achieved significant improvements in biomarkers of both pancreatic beta-cell function and IS.

Introduction The American Diabetes Association (ADA) has identified a target hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) < 7% as appropriate for most adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This research examines US diabetes-related healthcare costs for adults with T2D for individuals with glycemic control (HbA1c < 7%) compared to poor glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 7%). Methods The Optum Clinformatics ® Data Mart database from 2016 to 2020 was used to identify a cohort of adults with T2D who had a recorded HbA1c test (with first such date identified as the index date) and continuous insurance from 1 year prior through 1 year post index date. Patients with glycemic control were propensity matched to patients with poor glycemic control. Generalized linear models and two-part models examined diabetes-related outpatient, drug, acute care, and total costs over the 1-year post-period. Results There were 34,538 propensity matched individuals included in the study. Results indicate that glycemic control (HbA1c < 7%), compared to poor glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 7%) ,was associated with statistically significantly lower annual diabetes-related acute ($5671 ± $4216 vs $6138 ± $4211), outpatient ($6051 ± $4216 vs $7259 ± $7771), drug ($3739 ± $4581 vs $4288 ± $4788), and total costs care ($13,704 ± $10,635 vs $16,460 ± $10,885) (all P  < 0.0001). Sensitivity analyses also examined results based upon alternative HbA1c thresholds which were chosen on the basis of expert guidelines and prior clinical trial thresholds (< 6%, ≤ 6.5%, < 8%, and ≤ 9%). In all cases, being below threshold was associated with statistically significantly lower diabetes-related total costs and component costs. Results also illustrate that, in general, higher HbA1c thresholds are associated with higher diabetes-related costs. Conclusion Glycemic control was found to be associated with significantly lower annual diabetes-related component and total costs. Results suggest economic benefits associated with having HbA1c at or below target.

Introduction Glycemic control is associated with better outcomes among individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). This research examines total US all-cause medical costs for adults with T2D with recommended glycemic control (HbA1c < 7%) compared to poor glycemic control (HbA1c ≥ 7%). Methods The study used administrative claims data linked to HbA1c laboratory test results from January 1, 2015 through June 30, 2021 to identify adults with T2D with a recorded HbA1c test. Patients with recommended glycemic control at index date were propensity score matched to patients with poor glycemic control. General linear models and two-part models were used to compare all-cause outpatient, drug, acute care and total costs for 1 year post index date. Results The study included 59,830 propensity-matched individuals. Results indicate that recommended glycemic control, compared to poor glycemic control, was associated with statistically significantly lower all-cause acute care ($23,868 ± $21,776 vs. $24,352 ± $22,223), drug ($10,277 ± $14,671 vs. $10,540 ± $14,928), and total medical costs ($41,381 ± $42,757 vs. $42,054 ± $43,422) but significantly higher outpatient costs ($7290 ± $12,028 vs. $7026 ± $11,587) (all p  < 0.0001). Sensitivity analyses examined results based upon alternative HbA1c thresholds of ≤ 6.5% and < 8%. Results were generally robust to alternative HbA1c thresholds, with higher HbA1c thresholds associated with higher all-cause total costs as well as increased savings for having HbA1c below threshold. Conclusions Glycemic control was associated with significantly lower all-cause total, drug, and acute care medical costs. Given the high prevalence of T2D in the USA, our results suggest potential economic benefits associated with glycemic control for healthcare providers.

Introduction This retrospective claims database study examined the prevalence of mortality and morbidity among adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity. Methods The study used deidentified data from 2007 to 2021 from the Optum® Market Clarity Dataset. A cohort of adults with T2D and obesity were identified, and age- and sex-adjusted prevalence rates were calculated for mortality, a composite cardiovascular outcome (CCO), a composite microvascular outcome (CMO), and other complications. Results were examined overall and by obesity class (class 1, class 2, and class 3). Results For the 15,970 adults included in the study, the prevalence of CCO and CMO after 5 years was 15.3% and 60.7%, respectively. The 5-year prevalence of mortality was 10.9%. There were statistically significant differences in prevalence rates by obesity class, with obesity class 3 associated with higher rates of morbidity and mortality compared to obesity classes 1 or 2. Specifically, after 5 years, the prevalence of mortality was 9.4%, 10.3% and 13.6% for obese classes 1, 2 and 3, respectively ( P  < 0.05 between class 3 and class 2 or 1). Similarly, For obesity classes 1, 2 and 3, the 5-year prevalence of CCO was 13.0%, 14.5% and 18.4% and the rates for CMO were 58.0%, 57.9% and 64.8%, respectively (both P  < 0.05 between class 3 and class 2 or 1). Regarding other complications, differences in the prevalence of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) were statistically significantly higher with increasing obesity class. Conclusions The results indicate that for a cohort of adults with T2D and obesity, obesity class 3 is associated with significantly higher mortality and morbidity, including CCO, CMO, ASCVD and OSA. These findings suggest that treatment which reduces obesity among individuals with T2D may have significant health benefits, although additional studies are needed to confirm the results.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) medication adherence is poor and is impacted by individual drug characteristics. Treatment-associated weight change can affect medication-taking behavior. This review aimed to explore weight change on T2D therapy and consider its impact on adherence and discontinuation. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE and EMBASE (2005 to September 2020), and among recent congress abstract books for studies providing data on medication adherence or discontinuation and weight change in people with T2D (PwD). Nine studies meeting the inclusion criteria were identified from 9188 bibliographic records. All three studies exploring weight change and discontinuation reported weight loss to be associated with higher persistence. Seven studies of varying design explored weight change and adherence. Four reported absolute weight change (kg) and adherence: one pooled data from different diabetes medications and demonstrated that self-reported adherence was significantly associated with weight loss; however, three studies found that weight change in adherent PwD was in the direction of the known weight profile (loss/gain) of the evaluated drug. Categorical weight loss (≥3%) and adherence were reported in two studies: one reported that numerically more adherent versus non-adherent PwD lost ≥3% weight regardless of the drug's weight profile, the other showed that early weight loss with a glucagon-like peptide-1 agonist was significantly associated with better adherence. One study reported adherence by categorical weight change; as weight loss increased, adherence scores improved, regardless of drug type. Findings suggest that discontinuation rates may be lower in PwD who lose as compared to those who gain weight on T2D treatment. The evidence base on adherence and weight change is more challenging to interpret due to the range of study designs. Given the importance of weight control in T2D, further research exploring the individual's treatment, weight journey, and behaviors over time should be undertaken.

The importance of patient-centered care in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is widely advocated. Understanding the attributes of T2DM medications important to patients is thus essential for effective management, in order to limit disease progression. This literature review aimed to identify studies comparing patient preferences, based on process and outcome attributes, between GLP1-receptor agonist (RA) profiles and between GLP1 RA and insulin profiles. MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library (2005-present) were searched for studies in patients with T2DM or the general population that compared preferences for GLP1 RAs or GLP1 RAs versus insulin using contingent valuation, conjoint analysis (discrete-choice experiments [DCEs], willingness to pay), rating-based approaches of specific attributes, standard gamble, or time trade-off. Studies comparing drug A versus drug B without explicit attribute valuation were excluded. Ten records met eligibility criteria. Eight studies compared preferences for GLP1 RA- profile attributes, one compared GLP1 RA versus insulin glargine profiles, and one addressed both comparisons. Important attributes driving patient preferences in DCEs were dose frequency, type of device, needle size, change in glycated hemoglobin, and adverse-event profile. Time trade-off evaluations demonstrated that weekly GLP1 RA injection-device attributes (reconstitution, waiting during preparation, needle handling) had a measurable impact on preference. Willingness-to-pay analysis showed that patients were more willing to pay extra for attributes of once-daily liraglutide over twice-weekly exenatide or insulin. Direct preference elicitation in DCEs revealed that patients preferred medication profiles representing GLP1 RAs with less frequent dosing and preferred GLP1 RA profiles over insulin. Process and outcome attributes are important drivers of patient preference for GLP1 RAs. Findings from patient-preference studies can inform clinical decision-making and help align care with patient values, which has the potential to improve medication adherence and outcomes.

Stat4 is required for Th1 development, although how a transiently activated factor generates heritable patterns of gene expression is still unclear. We examined the regulation of IL‐18Rα expression to define a mechanism for Stat4‐dependent genetic programming of a Th1‐associated gene. Although Stat4 binds the Il18r1 promoter following IL‐12 stimulation and transiently increases acetylated histones H3 and H4, patterns of histone acetylation alone in Th1 cells may not be sufficient to explain cell‐type‐specific patterns of gene expression. The level of DNA methylation and recruitment of Dnmt3a to Il18r1 inversely correlate with IL‐18Rα expression, and blocking DNA methylation increases IL‐18Rα expression. Moreover, there was decreased Il18r1 –Dnmt3a association and DNA methylation following transient trichostatin A‐induced histone hyperacetylation in Stat4 −/−Th1 cultures. Increased association of Dnmt3a and the Dnmt3a cofactor Dnmt3L with the promoters of several Stat4‐dependent genes was found in Stat4−/− Th1 cultures, providing a general mechanism for Stat4‐dependent gene programming. These data support a mechanism wherein the transient hyperacetylation induced by Stat4 prevents the recruitment of DNA methyltransferases and the subsequent repression of the Il18r1 locus.

Purpose Prasugrel is a novel thienopyridine prodrug metabolised to an active metabolite that binds irreversibly to the platelet P2Y₁₂ receptor and inhibits adenosine diphosphate (ADP)-induced platelet aggregation. We compared prasugrel pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and tolerability in healthy Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Caucasian subjects. Methods In an open-label, single-centre, parallel-design study, 89 healthy subjects (25 Chinese, 20 Japanese, 22 Korean and 22 Caucasian) aged 20-65 years were given a prasugrel 60-mg loading dose (LD) followed by daily 10-mg maintenance doses (MD) for 7 days and then 5-mg MD for 10 days. Plasma concentrations of prasugrel's active metabolite and inhibition of ADP-induced platelet aggregation (IPA) were determined. Results Mean exposure to prasugrel's active metabolite in all treatment regimens was higher in each of the Asian groups than in the Caucasian group, although there was considerable overlap between individual exposure estimates in Asians and Caucasians. The mean IPA was also higher in Asians than in Caucasians following a prasugrel 60-mg LD, although the difference did not consistently achieve statistical significance. Prasugrel 10-mg or 5-mg MD produced statistically significantly higher IPA in each Asian group compared with that in the Caucasians. Prasugrel was well tolerated during the LD and MD regimens by all groups. Conclusions Mean exposure to the prasugrel active metabolite following prasugrel 60-mg LD and during daily 10-mg or 5-mg MD was higher in each of the Asian groups than in the Caucasian group, which resulted in greater platelet inhibition.

Purpose: The importance of patient-centered care in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is widely advocated. Understanding the attributes of T2DM medications important to patients is thus essential for effective management, in order to limit disease progression. This literature review aimed to identify studies comparing patient preferences, based on process and outcome attributes, between GLP1 -receptor agonist (RA) profiles and between GLP1 RA and insulin profiles. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library (2005-present) were searched for studies in patients with T2DM or the general population that compared preferences for GLP1 RAs or GLP1 RAs versus insulin using contingent valuation, conjoint analysis (discrete-choice experiments [DCEs], willingness to pay), rating-based approaches of specific attributes, standard gamble, or time trade-off. Studies comparing drug A versus drug B without explicit attribute valuation were excluded. Results: Ten records met eligibility criteria. Eight studies compared preferences for GLP1 RA-profile attributes, one compared GLP1 RA versus insulin glargine profiles, and one addressed both comparisons. Important attributes driving patient preferences in DCEs were dose frequency, type of device, needle size, change in glycated hemoglobin, and adverse-event profile. Time trade-off evaluations demonstrated that weekly GLP1 RA injection-device attributes (reconstitution, waiting during preparation, needle handling) had a measurable impact on preference. Willingness-to-pay analysis showed that patients were more willing to pay extra for attributes of once-daily liraglutide over twice-weekly exenatide or insulin. Direct preference elicitation in DCEs revealed that patients preferred medication profiles representing GLP1 RAs with less frequent dosing and preferred GLP1 RA profiles over insulin. Conclusion: Process and outcome attributes are important drivers of patient preference for GLP1 RAs. Findings from patient-preference studies can inform clinical decision-making and help align care with patient values, which has the potential to improve medication adherence and outcomes. Keywords: T2D mellitus, discrete-choice experiment, GLP1 RA, insulin