Search

Aims: To assess the cost-utility of the FreeStyle Libre flash continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) system from an Italian healthcare system perspective, when compared with self-monitoring of blood glucose (SMBG) in people living with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) receiving basal insulin., Materials and Methods: A patient-level microsimulation model was run using Microsoft Excel for 10 000 patients over a lifetime horizon, with 3.0% discounting for costs and utilities. Inputs were based on clinical trials and real-world evidence, with patient characteristics reflecting Italian population data. The effect of flash CGM was modelled as a persistent 0.8% reduction in glycated haemoglobin versus SMBG. Costs (€ 2023) and disutilities were applied to glucose monitoring, diabetes complications, severe hypoglycaemia, and diabetic ketoacidosis. The health outcome was measured as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs)., Results: Direct costs were €5338 higher with flash CGM than with SMBG. Flash CGM was associated with 0.51 more QALYs than SMBG, giving an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €10 556/QALY. Scenario analysis ICERs ranged from €3825/QALY to €26 737/QALY. In probabilistic analysis, flash CGM was 100% likely to be cost effective at willingness-to-pay thresholds > €20 000/QALY., Conclusions: From an Italian healthcare system perspective, flash CGM is cost effective compared with SMBG for people living with T2DM on basal insulin., (© 2024 John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: Large outcome trials have demonstrated cardiovascular benefits of selected glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists. We examined coronary disease outcomes in the Harmony Outcomes trial of the GLP-1 receptor agonist albiglutide., Methods and Results: Harmony Outcomes was an event-driven, multicenter, double-blind, and placebo-controlled trial involving 9463 patients >40 years of age with type-2 diabetes and established atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. It tested the effects of albiglutide on the occurrence of a composite primary endpoint, consisting of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction (MI), or stroke. Within this post-hoc analysis, the effects of albiglutide on MI subtypes and other ischaemic endpoints were analysed.During the median-follow up of 1.6 years, a total of 421 patients (4.5%) experienced at least one MI, with 72 patients having more than one event. Treatment with albiglutide reduced both first events [hazard ratio (HR) 0.75 (0.62-0.91)] and overall events [HR 0.75 (0.61-0.91)] as well as first type 1 [HR 0.73 (0.57-0.92)] and type 2 myocardial infarctions [HR 0.65 (0.46-0.92)]. The effect of albiglutide treatment was consistent for ST-segment elevation [HR 0.69 (0.38-1.26)] and non-ST elevation (HR 0.86 (0.66-1.2) MI., Conclusion: Treatment with the GLP-1 receptor agonist albiglutide resulted in a 25% relative risk reduction in MI that was consistent for type of infarction and presence or absence of ST elevation. Our findings add novel information about the effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists on ischaemic events in patients with type 2 diabetes., (© The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Cardiology.)

Despite the risk of atherosclerosis has progressively declined over the past few decades, subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) continue to experience substantial excess of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD)-related events. Therefore, there is urgent need to treat ASCVD disease in T2DM earlier, more intensively, and with greater precision. Many factors concur to increase the risk of atherosclerosis, and multifactorial intervention remains the basis for effective prevention or reduction of atherosclerotic events. The role of anti-hyperglycemic medications in reducing the risk of ASCVD in subjects with T2DM has evolved over the past few years. Multiple cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) with new and emerging glucose-lowering agents, namely SGLT2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RA), have demonstrated significant reductions of major cardiovascular events and additional benefits. This robust evidence has changed the landscape for managing people with T2DM. In addition to glycemic and ancillary extra-glycemic properties, SGLT2i and GLP1-RA might exert favorable effects on subclinical and clinical atherosclerosis. Therefore, the objective of this review is to discuss the available evidence supporting anti-atherosclerotic properties of SGLT2i and GLP1-RA, with a quick nod to sotagliflozin and tirzepatide., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest Angela Dardano (AD) reported no duality of interest. Cristina Bianchi (CB) reported consulting fees and grants from Lilly, Novo Nordisk, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. Monia Garofolo (MG) reported consulting fees from Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. and Bayer Inc. Stefano Del Prato (SDP) has served as president of EASD/European Foundation for the Study of Diabetes (EFSD) (2020–2022); has received research grants to the institution from AstraZeneca and Boehringer Ingelheim; has served as advisor for Abbott, Amarin Corporation, Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly & Co., EvaPharma, Jiangsu Hengrui Pharmaceuticals Co., Menarini International, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Novartis Pharmaceutical Co., Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and Sun Pharmaceuticals; and has received fees for speaking from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly & Co., Laboratori Guidotti, Menarini International, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, and Novo Nordisk. The authors declare that there are no other relationships or activities that might bias, or be perceived to bias, their work., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Background: Both sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists reduce cardiovascular events among patients with type 2 diabetes. However, no cardiovascular outcome trial has evaluated the long-term effects of their combined use. The AMPLITUDE-O trial (Effect of Efpeglenatide on Cardiovascular Outcomes) reported that once-weekly injections of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists efpeglenatide (versus placebo) reduced major adverse cardiovascular events (MACEs); MACEs, coronary revascularization, or unstable angina hospitalization (expanded MACEs); a renal composite outcome; and MACEs or death in people with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular or renal disease. The trial uniquely stratified randomization by baseline or anticipated use of SGLT2 inhibitors and included the highest prevalence at baseline (N=618, 15.2%) of SGLT2 inhibitor use among glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist cardiovascular outcome trials to date. Its results were analyzed to estimate the combined effect of SGLT2 inhibitors and efpeglenatide on clinical outcomes., Methods: Cardiovascular and renal outcomes were analyzed with Cox proportional hazards models adjusted for region, SGLT2 inhibitor randomization strata, and the SGLT2 inhibitor-by-treatment interaction. Continuous variables were analyzed with a mixed-effects models for repeated measures that also included an interaction term., Results: The effect (hazard ratio [95% CI]) of efpeglenatide versus placebo in the absence and presence of baseline SGLT2 inhibitors on MACEs (0.74 [0.58-0.94] and 0.70 [0.37-1.30], respectively), expanded MACEs (0.77 [0.62-0.96] and 0.87 [0.51-1.48]), renal composite (0.70 [0.59-0.83] and 0.52 [0.33-0.83]), and MACEs or death (0.74 [0.59-0.93] and 0.65 [0.36-1.19]) did not differ by baseline SGLT2 inhibitor use ( P for all interactions >0.2). The reduction of blood pressure, body weight, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio by efpeglenatide also appeared to be independent of concurrent SGLT2 inhibitor use (all interaction P ≥0.08). Last, adverse events did not differ by baseline SGLT2 inhibitor use., Conclusions: The efficacy and safety of efpeglenatide appear to be independent of concurrent SGLT2 inhibitor use. These data support combined SGLT2 inhibitor and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist therapy in type 2 diabetes. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT03496298.

Basal insulin treatment is indispensable for patients with type 1 diabetes and often required by many with type 2 diabetes. Incremental advances lengthening the duration of action of insulin analogs and reducing pharmacodynamic variability have resulted in truly once-daily, long-acting basal insulin analogs. In the quest for better basal insulins to facilitate improvements in glycemic control and long-term outcomes, the driving need is to remove barriers delaying timely initiation of basal insulin, to maximize treatment adherence and persistence and reduce treatment burden without increasing risk of hypoglycemia. We review the range of investigational once-weekly insulins and their molecular strategies and profiles. Currently, the two most advanced clinical development programs are: (1) basal insulin icodec, an insulin analog acylated with a C20 fatty diacid (icosanedioic acid) side chain (Novo Nordisk) and (2) basal insulin Fc, a fusion protein that combines a single-chain insulin variant with a human immunoglobulin G fragment crystallizable domain (Eli Lilly). Available phase 2 data for these two once-weekly agents show comparable glycemic control to existing once-daily insulin analogs, with no greater risk of hypoglycemia. While phase 3 data are awaited to confirm efficacy and safety, we provide future clinical perspectives on practical considerations for the potential use of once-weekly insulins., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Four glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists that are structurally similar to human GLP-1 have been shown to reduce the risk of adverse cardiovascular events among persons with type 2 diabetes. The effect of an exendin-based GLP-1 receptor agonist, efpeglenatide, on cardiovascular and renal outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes who are also at high risk for adverse cardiovascular events is uncertain., Methods: In this randomized, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 344 sites across 28 countries, we evaluated efpeglenatide in participants with type 2 diabetes and either a history of cardiovascular disease or current kidney disease (defined as an estimated glomerular filtration rate of 25.0 to 59.9 ml per minute per 1.73 m 2 of body-surface area) plus at least one other cardiovascular risk factor. Participants were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 ratio to receive weekly subcutaneous injections of efpeglenatide at a dose of 4 or 6 mg or placebo. Randomization was stratified according to use of sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. The primary outcome was the first major adverse cardiovascular event (MACE; a composite of nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, or death from cardiovascular or undetermined causes)., Results: A total of 4076 participants were enrolled; 2717 were assigned to receive efpeglenatide and 1359 to receive placebo. During a median follow-up of 1.81 years, an incident MACE occurred in 189 participants (7.0%) assigned to receive efpeglenatide (3.9 events per 100 person-years) and 125 participants (9.2%) assigned to receive placebo (5.3 events per 100 person-years) (hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.92; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P = 0.007 for superiority). A composite renal outcome event (a decrease in kidney function or macroalbuminuria) occurred in 353 participants (13.0%) assigned to receive efpeglenatide and in 250 participants (18.4%) assigned to receive placebo (hazard ratio, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.57 to 0.79; P<0.001). Diarrhea, constipation, nausea, vomiting, or bloating occurred more frequently with efpeglenatide than with placebo., Conclusions: In this trial involving participants with type 2 diabetes who had either a history of cardiovascular disease or current kidney disease plus at least one other cardiovascular risk factor, the risk of cardiovascular events was lower among those who received weekly subcutaneous injections of efpeglenatide at a dose of 4 or 6 mg than among those who received placebo. (Funded by Sanofi; AMPLITUDE-O ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03496298.)., (Copyright © 2021 Massachusetts Medical Society.)

During the last decade we experienced a surge in the number of glucose lowering agents that can be used to treat patients with type 2 diabetes. Especially important are the discoveries that sodium glucose co-transporter type 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) improve patients' cardiovascular and renal outcomes. Accordingly, various medical associations have updated their guidelines for the treatment of diabetes in this new era. Though not agreeing on every issue, these position-statements generally share a detailed and often complex workflow that may be too complicated for the busy and overworked primary care setting, where the majority of patients with type 2 diabetes are managed in many countries. Other guidelines, generally those from the cardiology associations focus primarily on the population of patients with high risk for or pre-existing cardiovascular disease, which represent only the minority of patients with type 2 diabetes. We believe that we should re-define SGLT2i and GLP-1 RA as diabetes/disease modifying drugs (DMDs) given the recent evidence of their cardiovascular and renal benefits. Based on this definition we have designed a SIMPLE approach in order to assist primary care teams in selecting the most appropriate therapy for their patients. We believe that most subjects newly diagnosed with type 2 diabetes should initiate early combination therapy with metformin and a prognosis changing DMD. The decision whether to use GLP-1 RA or SGLT2i should be made based on specific patient's risk factors and preferences. Importantly, DMDs are known to have a generally safe side-effect profile, with lower risk for hypoglycemia and weight gain, further promoting their wider usage. Early combination therapy with DMDs may improve the multiple pathophysiological abnormalities responsible for type 2 diabetes and its complications, thus resulting in the greatest long term benefits.

In recent years guidelines for the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) have evolved substantially. Initially limited to a few glucose lowering agents, early guidelines predicated strict glycemic control as a main goal in the attempt to reduce the risk of long-term diabetic complications. Nowadays, guidelines are not limited to such a goal but include cardiovascular (and renal) protection. This rapid evolution was made possible by the introduction of new glucose lowering agents, which have been extensively tested in randomized clinical studies including large cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs). In this review we will specifically consider the use of incretin-based medications in T2DM as recommended in the recent ADA/EASD consensus, and other international guidelines, with special consideration of their glucose-lowering efficacy, their cardiovascular (and renal) benefit, their effect on body weight and risk of hypoglycemia, as well as the economic implications for their use., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest M.J. Davies reports personal fees and grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Janssen, Novo Nordisk and Sanofi, and personal fees from AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, Gilead Sciences Ltd., Intarcia/Servier, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma Corporation and Takeda Pharmaceuticals International Inc. C. Bianchi reports no duality of interest. S. Del Prato reports personal fees and grants from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, Laboratoires Servier, Merck Sharpe & Dohme, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Co., Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and Takeda., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: N-acetylaspartate (NAA) is synthesized only by neurons and is involved in neuronal metabolism and axonal myelination. NAA is the strongest signal on brain magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and its concentration have been associated with cognitive dysfunction in neurodegenerative diseases, obesity, and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Materials and Methods: We explored the impact of obesity and T2D on circulating NAA as well as the impact of bariatric surgery and antidiabetic treatments. We developed an LC-MS method for the accurate measurements of fasting plasma NAA levels in 505 subjects (156 subjects with normal glucose tolerance, 24 subjects with impaired glucose tolerance, and 325 patients with T2D) to examine the associations of NAA with obesity and dysglycemia. To validate cross-sectional findings, plasma NAA was measured 6 months after Roux-en-Y Gastric Bypass (RYGB) in 55 morbidly obese subjects, and after 1 year of antidiabetic treatment (with dapagliflozin, exenatide, or dapagliflozin plus exenatide) in 192 T2D patients. Results: In the whole population, NAA was associated with age ( r = 0.31, p <0.0001) and BMI ( r = -0.20, p <0.0001). Independently of age and BMI, NAA was reciprocally related to HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (partial r = -0.13, both p = 0.01). Surgically-induced weight loss raised NAA (by 18 nmol/L on average, p <0.02). Glucose lowering treatment increased NAA in proportion to the drop in HbA1c ( r = 0.31, p <0.0001) regardless of the agent used. Conclusions: Circulating NAA concentrations are modulated by age, obesity, and glycemic control. Whether they may mark for the corresponding metabolic effects on brain function remains to be established by joint measurements of spectroscopic signal and cognitive function., (Copyright © 2020 Daniele, Campi, Saba, Codini, Ciccarone, Giusti, Del Prato, Esterline and Ferrannini.)

Large cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) have lent support to a cardiovascular protection with the use of SGLT2-inhibitors (SGLT2is) and GLP1-Receptor Agonists (GLP1-RAs) in subjects with type 2 diabetes. These two classes of novel glucose lowering agents have been shown to have a similar effect on the risk reduction of Major Adverse Cardiovascular Events (MACE: nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, cardiovascular mortality). Nonetheless, they may not be simply interchangeable. Rather, careful evaluation of all the results of CVOTs leads identification of different effects that may allow profiling of the ideal individuals with T2DM who may benefit most from the use of one or the other class of agents. These differences include effect on heart failure, stroke and diabetic kidney disease that have prompt recent guidelines and recommendation for the treatment of type 2 diabetes to suggest the preferential use of SGLT2is in those with evidence of heart failure and impaired kidney function, while both SGLT2i and GLP1-RAs with proven effect could be use in those with prevalent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease. This review discusses all these elements of differentiation along with others that in the future may help establishing the best cardiorenal benefit for individuals with T2DM., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest SDP has received research funding from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Co. and Merck Sharpe & Dohme; and is a consultant for or has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, GlaxoSmithKline, Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Laboratoires Servier, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Co., Novo Nordisk, Sanofi and Takeda. AD, RM, CB and GD have no competing interests to declare., (Copyright © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To assess patient-reported outcomes after two years of use of dual oral anti-diabetes drug (OAD) therapy in elderly people (≥65 years) with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) from Italy under real-life settings. Methods: 3-AGE was a prospective, non-interventional study in elderly people with T2DM inadequately controlled on metformin monotherapy (defined as glycated hemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.0-9.0%), in whom a second OAD was prescribed. Primary endpoint was to assess the physical and psychological symptoms associated with T2DM from baseline to 24 months using the Diabetes Symptom Check List revised (DSC-R) questionnaire. Patient's quality of life and health status, treatment satisfaction, consumption of healthcare resources, and physician satisfaction with treatment were also assessed (secondary endpoints) using validated questionnaires. Additionally, safety and clinical characteristics were also evaluated. Results: The mean age of the study population (N = 860) was 71.5 ± 5.2 years. Addition of a second OAD significantly ( p  < .0001) reduced the DSC-R score from baseline (0.73 ± 0.68) to both Months 12 and 24 (0.63 ± 0.59 and 0.61 ± 0.56), and HbA1c from baseline (7.72% ± 0.54%) to Month 12 (6.95% ± 0.82%). Adding a second OAD improved quality of life and health status (baseline, 71.31 ± 15.16 to Month 12, 74.49 ± 13.64; p  < .0001), patient's treatment satisfaction ( p  < .0001), and consumption of healthcare resources per patient. Physicians expressed good satisfaction with patients' treatment (across efficacy, tolerability and compliance domains) at Month 12. Overall, 32 adverse reactions (in 24 patients) and four hypoglycemic episodes were reported during the 24 months. Conclusion: Addition of a second OAD improved physical and psychological symptoms associated with T2DM and was well tolerated in elderly people under real-life settings.

Objective: Fixed-ratio combinations of basal insulin plus glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA) allow concomitant administration of two proven complementary injectable therapies for type 2 diabetes. This study investigated switching to a titratable fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine plus lixisenatide (iGlarLixi) in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving daily or weekly GLP-1 RA therapy., Research Design and Methods: LixiLan-G, a randomized, open-label, 26-week trial, compared switching to iGlarLixi versus continuing prior GLP-1 RA in patients with type 2 diabetes and HbA 1c 7-9% (53-75 mmol/mol) taking maximum tolerated doses of a GLP-1 RA daily (60% on liraglutide once daily or exenatide twice daily) or weekly (40% on dulaglutide, exenatide extended release, or albiglutide) with metformin with or without pioglitazone and with or without sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. Adherence to randomized treatment was closely monitored throughout the study., Results: iGlarLixi ( n = 257) reduced HbA 1c more than continued GLP-1 RA therapy ( n = 257) from a baseline 7.8% (62 mmol/mol) in both to 6.7% (50 mmol/mol) and 7.4% (57 mmol/mol), respectively, at 26 weeks (least squares mean difference -0.6%; P < 0.0001). More iGlarLixi patients achieved HbA 1c <7% (53 mmol/mol) (62% vs. 26%; P < 0.0001) and the composite of HbA 1c <7% without documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dL). Nausea and vomiting rates as well as numbers of documented symptomatic hypoglycemia events per patient-year were generally low but greater with iGlarLixi versus continued GLP-1 RA therapy., Conclusions: Switching to iGlarLixi improves glucose control for patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled on a maximum tolerated dose of a GLP-1 RA plus oral antihyperglycemic agents., (© 2019 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Background: Early treatment intensification leading to sustained good glycaemic control is essential to delay diabetic complications. Although initial combination therapy has been suggested to offer more opportunities than a traditional stepwise approach, its validity remains to be determined., Methods: Vildagliptin Efficacy in combination with metfoRmIn For earlY treatment of type 2 diabetes (VERIFY) was a randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study of newly diagnosed patients with type 2 diabetes conducted in 254 centres across 34 countries. The study consisted of a 2-week screening visit, a 3-week metformin-alone run-in period, and a 5-year treatment period, which was further split into study periods 1, 2, and 3. Patients aged 18-70 years were included if they had type 2 diabetes diagnosed within 2 years prior to enrolment, and centrally confirmed glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA 1c ) of 48-58 mmol/mol (6·5-7·5%) and a body-mass index of 22-40 kg/m 2 . Patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio either to the early combination treatment group or to the initial metformin monotherapy group, with the help of an interactive response technology system and simple randomisation without stratification. Patients, investigators, clinical staff performing the assessments, and data analysts were masked to treatment allocation. In study period 1, patients received either the early combination treatment with metformin (stable daily dose of 1000 mg, 1500 mg, or 2000 mg) and vildagliptin 50 mg twice daily, or standard-of-care initial metformin monotherapy (stable daily dose of 1000 mg, 1500 mg, or 2000 mg) and placebo twice daily. If the initial treatment did not maintain HbA 1c below 53 mmol/mol (7·0%), confirmed at two consecutive scheduled visits which were 13 weeks apart, patients in the metformin monotherapy group received vildagliptin 50 mg twice daily in place of the placebo and entered study period 2, during which all patients received the combination therapy. The primary efficacy endpoint was the time from randomisation to initial treatment failure, defined as HbA 1c measurement of at least 53 mmol/mol (7·0%) at two consecutive scheduled visits, 13 weeks apart from randomisation through period 1. The full analysis set included patients who received at least one randomised study medication and had at least one post-randomisation efficacy parameter assessed. The safety analysis set included all patients who received at least one dose of randomised study medication. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01528254., Findings: Trial enrolment began on March 30, 2012, and was completed on April 10, 2014. Of the 4524 participants screened, 2001 eligible participants were randomly assigned to either the early combination treatment group (n=998) or the initial metformin monotherapy group (n=1003). A total of 1598 (79·9%) patients completed the 5-year study: 811 (81·3%) in the early combination therapy group and 787 (78·5%) in the monotherapy group. The incidence of initial treatment failure during period 1 was 429 (43·6%) patients in the combination treatment group and 614 (62·1%) patients in the monotherapy group. The median observed time to treatment failure in the monotherapy group was 36·1 (IQR 15·3-not reached [NR]) months, while the median time to treatment failure time for those receiving early combination therapy could only be estimated to be beyond the study duration at 61·9 (29·9-NR) months. A significant reduction in the relative risk for time to initial treatment failure was observed in the early combination treatment group compared with the monotherapy group over the 5-year study duration (hazard ratio 0·51 [95% CI 0·45-0·58]; p<0·0001). Both treatment approaches were safe and well tolerated, with no unexpected or new safety findings, and no deaths related to study treatment., Interpretation: Early intervention with a combination therapy of vildagliptin plus metformin provides greater and durable long-term benefits compared with the current standard-of-care initial metformin monotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes., Funding: Novartis., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To ensure the integrity of the planned analyses and maximize the clinical utility of the VERIFY study results by describing the detailed concepts behind its statistical analysis plan (SAP) before completion of data collection and study database lock. The SAP will be adhered to for the final primary data analysis of the VERIFY trial., Materials and Methods: Vildagliptin efficacy in combination with metformin for early treatment of T2DM (VERIFY) is an ongoing, multicentre, randomized controlled trial aiming to demonstrate the clinical benefits of glycaemic durability and glucose control achieved with an early combination therapy in newly-diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients., Results: The SAP was initially designed at the study protocol conception phase and later modified, as reported here, in collaboration between the steering committee members, statisticians, and the VERIFY study leadership team. All authors were blinded to treatment allocation. An independent statistician has additionally retrieved and presented unblinded data to the independent data safety monitoring committee. An overview of the trial design with a focus on describing the fine-tuning of the analysis plan for the primary efficacy endpoint, risk of initial treatment failure, and secondary, exploratory and pre-specified subgroup analyses is provided here., Conclusion: According to optimal trial practice, the details of the statistical analysis and data-handling plan prior to locking the database are reported here. The SAP accords with high-quality standards of internal validity to minimize analysis bias and will enhance the utility of the reported results for improved outcomes in the management of T2DM., (© 2019 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Diabetes is a common comorbidity in patients hospitalized for an acute coronary syndrome event, and prevalence is increasing. Among patients hospitalized with acute myocardial infarction, diabetes can be an independent predictor of mortality and new cardiovascular events; both short- and long-term outcomes are worse for patients with diabetes relative to those without, and undiagnosed diabetes is associated with greater mortality. The impact of glycemic control on cardiovascular outcomes and the best approach to treat hyperglycemia upon hospital admission for acute coronary syndrome in patients with or without known diabetes remain open questions. This review assesses available evidence for hyperglycemia management at the time of admission for acute coronary syndrome and, thereafter, finds that (1) admission plasma glucose plays a role in predicting adverse events, especially in patients with unknown diabetes; (2) glycated haemoglobin is a likely predictor of events in patients with unknown diabetes; and (3) hypoglycemia at the time of acute myocardial infarction hospital admission is an important predictor for mortality in patients with and without diabetes. Whether glucose-targeted insulin and glucose infusion have advantages over glucose-insulin-potassium infusion remains controversial. Evidence for the effect of novel glucose-lowering agents used at the time of an acute cardiovascular event is limited and requires more dedicated studies.

Context: Hypoglycemic drugs with proven cardiovascular (CV) benefits are recommended for patients with type 2 diabetes and CV disease. Whether the beneficial effects extend to those at lower risk remains unclear., Aim: We investigated the long-term CV effects of pioglitazone or sulfonylureas (SUs) across the spectrum of pretreatment CV risk., Methods: Among 2820 participants of the TOSCA.IT trial, four subgroups with different risk of outcome-a composite of all-cause death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke, urgent coronary revascularization-were identified by the RECursive Partitioning and AMalgamation (RECPAM) method. Within each group, the effect of SUs or pioglitazone on the outcome was evaluated., Results: Sex was the first splitting variable, followed by urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) (>9 mg/g or ≤9 mg/g) and body mass index (BMI) (>28.7 or ≤28.7 kg/m2). Female patients had the lowest risk (reference); male patients with UACR >9 mg/g and BMI >28.7 kg/m2 had the highest risk [hazard ratio (HR), 5.58; 95% CI, 3.32 to 9.69]. Patients in this group present a cluster of conditions suggestive of marked insulin resistance (higher BMI, waist circumference, triglycerides, blood pressure, and UACR and lower high-density lipoprotein cholesterol) than the other groups. Treatment with pioglitazone in this group was associated with a significantly lower occurrence of the outcome than SUs (HR, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.25 to 0.76). No significant difference between study treatments was observed in the other RECPAM classes., Conclusions: It is possible to identify patients with type 2 diabetes early in the stage of their disease and who are largely free from evident CV disease in whom add-on pioglitazone to metformin confers CV protection as compared with SUs., (Copyright © 2019 Endocrine Society.)

Aims: To compare the efficacy and safety of an intensification strategy of early triple combination therapy with dapagliflozin (DAPA) plus saxagliptin (SAXA) to a dual therapy strategy with sitagliptin (SITA) in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin (MET) monotherapy., Materials and Methods: This multinational, active-controlled, parallel-group phase 3b trial randomized 461 patients, at least 18 years of age, with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 8%-10.5% (64-91 mmol/mol), to either DAPA plus SAXA or SITA, added to MET, for a 26-week double-blind treatment period and an extension of a 26-week blinded treatment period., Results: Mean (± SD) baseline HbA1c was 8.8% ± 0.9% (73.0 ± 9.3 mmol/mol). DAPA plus SAXA (n = 232) provided a greater reduction from baseline in HbA1c at Weeks 26 and 52 compared with SITA (n = 229) (adjusted mean ± SE change, Week 26: -1.41 ± 0.07% vs -1.07 ± 0.07% [-15.4 ± 0.8 mmol/mol vs 11.7 ± 0.8 mmol/mol]; P = 0.0008; Week 52: -1.29 ± 0.08% vs -0.81 ± 0.09% [14.1 ± 0.9 mmol/mol vs 8.9 ± 1.0 mmol/mol]). The between-group difference in adjusted mean (95% CI) change from baseline in HbA1c increased from -0.34 (-0.54, -0.14) at Week 26 to -0.48 (-0.71, -0.25) at Week 52. DAPA plus SAXA was generally well tolerated and the incidence of adverse events was similar in both treatment arms., Conclusions: Early intensification to triple therapy with DAPA plus SAXA results in better, more durable glycaemic control than addition of SITA only (dual therapy) in patients with high HbA1c levels who are uncontrolled with MET monotherapy., (© 2018 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To evaluate the changes in renal endpoints in type 2 diabetes patients treated with dapagliflozin versus other glucose-lowering medications in routine clinical practice., Materials and Methods: DARWIN-T2D was a retrospective study conducted at 46 outpatient diabetes clinics in Italy. An automated software collected data on 17 285 patients who received dapagliflozin, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, or gliclazide, 6751 of whom had a follow-up visit. We analysed changes in albumin excretion rate (AER) and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)., Results: Patients who received dapagliflozin (n = 473) were younger, more obese, and had a poorer glucose control than those who received a comparator (n = 2973). After ~6 months, median (interquartile range) AER declined by 37%, from 19.5 (7.5-78.2) to 13.2 (6.5-45.0) mg/g (P < 0.0001) in the dapagliflozin group and did not change in the comparator group. After adjusting for confounders, therapy with dapagliflozin versus comparators was associated with an AER reduction of 26.4 ± 13.1 mg/g (P = 0.045), and eGFR (mL/min/1.73 m 2 ) diminished by 1.1 ± 0.5 (P = 0.049) in the dapagliflozin group and by 0.6 ± 9.1 (P = 0.002) in the comparator group (P = 0.35 between groups). No patient treated with dapagliflozin versus four patients treated with comparators experienced a doubling of serum creatinine., Conclusions: The antiproteinuric effect of dapagliflozin is confirmed here for the first time by real-world data. Despite a mild decline in eGFR, there was no evidence of clinically relevant worsening in renal function., (© 2018 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists differ in chemical structure, duration of action, and in their effects on clinical outcomes. The cardiovascular effects of once-weekly albiglutide in type 2 diabetes are unknown. We aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of albiglutide in preventing cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke., Methods: We did a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled trial in 610 sites across 28 countries. We randomly assigned patients aged 40 years and older with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease (at a 1:1 ratio) to groups that either received a subcutaneous injection of albiglutide (30-50 mg, based on glycaemic response and tolerability) or of a matched volume of placebo once a week, in addition to their standard care. Investigators used an interactive voice or web response system to obtain treatment assignment, and patients and all study investigators were masked to their treatment allocation. We hypothesised that albiglutide would be non-inferior to placebo for the primary outcome of the first occurrence of cardiovascular death, myocardial infarction, or stroke, which was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. If non-inferiority was confirmed by an upper limit of the 95% CI for a hazard ratio of less than 1·30, closed testing for superiority was prespecified. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02465515., Findings: Patients were screened between July 1, 2015, and Nov 24, 2016. 10 793 patients were screened and 9463 participants were enrolled and randomly assigned to groups: 4731 patients were assigned to receive albiglutide and 4732 patients to receive placebo. On Nov 8, 2017, it was determined that 611 primary endpoints and a median follow-up of at least 1·5 years had accrued, and participants returned for a final visit and discontinuation from study treatment; the last patient visit was on March 12, 2018. These 9463 patients, the intention-to-treat population, were evaluated for a median duration of 1·6 years and were assessed for the primary outcome. The primary composite outcome occurred in 338 (7%) of 4731 patients at an incidence rate of 4·6 events per 100 person-years in the albiglutide group and in 428 (9%) of 4732 patients at an incidence rate of 5·9 events per 100 person-years in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·78, 95% CI 0·68-0·90), which indicated that albiglutide was superior to placebo (p<0·0001 for non-inferiority; p=0·0006 for superiority). The incidence of acute pancreatitis (ten patients in the albiglutide group and seven patients in the placebo group), pancreatic cancer (six patients in the albiglutide group and five patients in the placebo group), medullary thyroid carcinoma (zero patients in both groups), and other serious adverse events did not differ between the two groups. There were three (<1%) deaths in the placebo group that were assessed by investigators, who were masked to study drug assignment, to be treatment-related and two (<1%) deaths in the albiglutide group., Interpretation: In patients with type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular disease, albiglutide was superior to placebo with respect to major adverse cardiovascular events. Evidence-based glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists should therefore be considered as part of a comprehensive strategy to reduce the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes., Funding: GlaxoSmithKline., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists lower blood glucose in type 2 diabetes (T2D) partially through glucose-dependent stimulation of insulin secretion. The aim of this study was to investigate whether beta-cell function (as measured by HOMA2-%B) at baseline affects the glycaemic response to dulaglutide. Dulaglutide-treated patients from AWARD-1, AWARD-3 and AWARD-6 clinical studies were categorised based on their homeostatic model assessment of beta-cell function (HOMA2-%B) tertiles. Changes in glycaemic measures in response to treatment with once-weekly dulaglutide were evaluated in each HOMA2-%B tertile. Patients with low HOMA2-%B had higher baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting and postprandial blood glucose, and longer duration of diabetes (P < .001, all) (mean low, middle and high tertiles with dulaglutide 1.5 mg: HOMAB-2%B, 31%, 58%, 109%; HbA1c, 8.7%, 7.7%, 7.3%, respectively). At 26 weeks, the low tertile experienced larger reductions in HbA1c compared to the high tertile with dulaglutide 1.5 mg (mean; -1.55% vs. -0.98% [-16.94 vs. -10.71 mmol/mol]). Differences between low and high tertiles disappeared when adjusted for baseline HbA1c (LSM; -1.00 vs. -1.18% [-10.93 vs. -12.90 mmol/mol]). Greater decreases in fasting blood glucose and greater increases in fasting C-peptide were observed in the low tertile. Similar increases in HOMA2-%B were observed in all tertiles. Dulaglutide demonstrated clinically relevant HbA1c reduction irrespective of estimated baseline beta-cell function., (© 2018 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

The safety of triple oral therapy with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin plus metformin versus dual therapy with dapagliflozin or saxagliptin plus metformin was compared in a post-hoc analysis of 3 randomized trials of sequential or concomitant add-on of dapagliflozin and saxagliptin to metformin. In the concomitant add-on trial, patients with type 2 diabetes on stable metformin received dapagliflozin 10 mg/d plus saxagliptin 5 mg/d. In sequential add-on trials, patients on metformin plus either saxagliptin 5 mg/d or dapagliflozin 10 mg/d received dapagliflozin 10 mg/d or saxagliptin 5 mg/d, respectively, as add-on therapy. After 24 weeks, incidences of adverse events and serious adverse events were similar between triple and dual therapy and between concomitant and sequential add-on regimens. Urinary tract infections were more common with sequential than with concomitant add-on therapy; genital infections were reported only with sequential add-on of dapagliflozin to saxagliptin plus metformin. Hypoglycaemia incidence was <2.0% across all analysis groups. In conclusion, the safety and tolerability of triple therapy with dapagliflozin, saxagliptin and metformin, as either concomitant or sequential add-on, were similar to dual therapy with either agent added to metformin., (© 2018 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aim: To compare alirocumab, a proprotein convertase subtilisin-kexin type 9 inhibitor, with usual care (UC) in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and mixed dyslipidaemia not optimally managed by maximally tolerated statins in the ODYSSEY DM-DYSLIPIDEMIA trial (NCT02642159)., Materials and Methods: The UC options (no additional lipid-lowering therapy; fenofibrate; ezetimibe; omega-3 fatty acid; nicotinic acid) were selected prior to stratified randomization to open-label alirocumab 75 mg every 2 weeks (with increase to 150 mg every 2 weeks at week 12 if week 8 non-HDL cholesterol concentration was ≥2.59 mmol/L [100 mg/dL]) or UC for 24 weeks. The primary efficacy endpoint was percentage change in non-HDL cholesterol from baseline to week 24., Results: The randomized population comprised 413 individuals (intention-to-treat population, n = 409; safety population, n = 412). At week 24, the mean non-HDL cholesterol reductions were superior with alirocumab (-32.5% difference vs UC, 97.5% confidence interval -38.1 to -27.0; P < .0001). Overall, 63.6% of alirocumab-treated individuals were maintained on 75 mg every 2 weeks. Alirocumab also reduced LDL cholesterol (-43.0%), apolipoprotein B (-32.3%), total cholesterol (-24.6%) and LDL particle number (-37.8%) at week 24 vs UC (all P < .0001). Consistent with the overall trial comparison, alirocumab reduced non-HDL cholesterol to a greater degree within each UC stratum at week 24. The incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was 68.4% (alirocumab) and 66.4% (UC). No clinically meaningful effect on glycated haemoglobin, or change in number of glucose-lowering agents, was seen., Conclusions: In individuals with T2DM and mixed dyslipidaemia on maximally tolerated statin, alirocumab showed superiority to UC in non-HDL cholesterol reduction and was generally well tolerated., (© 2018 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

T2DM is a complex disease underlined by multiple pathogenic defects responsible for the development and progression of hyperglycaemia. Each of these factors can now be tackled in a more targeted manner thanks to glucose-lowering drugs that have been made available in the past 2 to 3 decades. Recognition of the multiplicity of the mechanisms underlying hyperglycaemia calls for treatments that address more than 1 of these mechanisms, with more emphasis placed on the earlier use of combination therapies. Although chronic hyperglycaemia contributes to and amplifies cardiovascular risk, several trials have failed to show a marked effect from intensive glycaemic control. During the past 10 years, the effect of specific glucose-lowering agents on cardiovascular risk has been explored with dedicated trials. Overall, the cardiovascular safety of the new glucose-lowering agents has been proven with some of the trials summarized in this review, showing significant reduction of cardiovascular risk. Against this background, pioglitazone, in addition to exerting a sustained glucose-lowering effect, also has ancillary metabolic actions of potential interest in addressing the cardiovascular risk of T2DM, such as preservation of beta-cell mass and function. As such, it seems a logical agent to combine with other oral anti-hyperglycaemic agents, including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i). DPP4i, which may also have a potential to preserve beta-cell function, is available as a fixed-dose combination with pioglitazone, and could, potentially, attenuate some of the side effects of pioglitazone, particularly if a lower dose of the thiazolidinedione is used. This review critically discusses the potential for early combination of pioglitazone and DPP4i., (© 2017 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Aims: To investigate the efficacy and safety of alirocumab in participants with type 2 (T2D) or type 1 diabetes (T1D) treated with insulin who have elevated LDL cholesterol levels despite maximally tolerated statin therapy., Methods: Participants at high cardiovascular risk with T2D (n = 441) or T1D (n = 76) and LDL cholesterol levels ≥1.8 mmol/L (≥70 mg/dL) were randomized 2:1 to alirocumab:placebo administered subcutaneously every 2 weeks, for 24 weeks' double-blind treatment. Alirocumab-treated participants received 75 mg every 2 weeks, with blinded dose increase to 150 mg every 2 weeks at week 12 if week 8 LDL cholesterol levels were ≥1.8 mmol/L. Primary endpoints were percentage change in calculated LDL cholesterol from baseline to week 24, and safety assessments., Results: Alirocumab reduced LDL cholesterol from baseline to week 24 by a mean ± standard error of 49.0% ± 2.7% and 47.8% ± 6.5% vs placebo (both P < .0001) in participants with T2D and T1D, respectively. Significant reductions were observed in non-HDL cholesterol (P < .0001), apolipoprotein B (P < .0001) and lipoprotein (a) (P ≤ .0039). At week 24, 76.4% and 70.2% of the alirocumab group achieved LDL cholesterol <1.8 mmol/L in the T2D and T1D populations (P < .0001), respectively. Glycated haemoglobin and fasting plasma glucose levels remained stable for the study duration. Treatment-emergent adverse events were observed in 64.5% of alirocumab- vs 64.1% of placebo-treated individuals (overall population)., Conclusions: Alirocumab produced significant LDL cholesterol reductions in participants with insulin-treated diabetes regardless of diabetes type, and was generally well tolerated. Concomitant administration of alirocumab and insulin did not raise any safety concerns (NCT02585778)., (© 2017 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: The best treatment option for patients with type 2 diabetes in whom treatment with metformin alone fails to achieve adequate glycaemic control is debated. We aimed to compare the long-term effects of pioglitazone versus sulfonylureas, given in addition to metformin, on cardiovascular events in patients with type 2 diabetes., Methods: TOSCA.IT was a multicentre, randomised, pragmatic clinical trial, in which patients aged 50-75 years with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin monotherapy (2-3 g per day) were recruited from 57 diabetes clinics in Italy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by permuted blocks randomisation (block size 10), stratified by site and previous cardiovascular events, to add-on pioglitazone (15-45 mg) or a sulfonylurea (5-15 mg glibenclamide, 2-6 mg glimepiride, or 30-120 mg gliclazide, in accordance with local practice). The trial was unblinded, but event adjudicators were unaware of treatment assignment. The primary outcome, assessed with a Cox proportional-hazards model, was a composite of first occurrence of all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or urgent coronary revascularisation, assessed in the modified intention-to-treat population (all randomly assigned participants with baseline data available and without any protocol violations in relation to inclusion or exclusion criteria). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00700856., Findings: Between Sept 18, 2008, and Jan 15, 2014, 3028 patients were randomly assigned and included in the analyses. 1535 were assigned to pioglitazone and 1493 to sulfonylureas (glibenclamide 24 [2%], glimepiride 723 [48%], gliclazide 745 [50%]). At baseline, 335 (11%) participants had a previous cardiovascular event. The study was stopped early on the basis of a futility analysis after a median follow-up of 57·3 months. The primary outcome occurred in 105 patients (1·5 per 100 person-years) who were given pioglitazone and 108 (1·5 per 100 person-years) who were given sulfonylureas (hazard ratio 0·96, 95% CI 0·74-1·26, p=0·79). Fewer patients had hypoglycaemias in the pioglitazone group than in the sulfonylureas group (148 [10%] vs 508 [34%], p<0·0001). Moderate weight gain (less than 2 kg, on average) occurred in both groups. Rates of heart failure, bladder cancer, and fractures were not significantly different between treatment groups., Interpretation: In this long-term, pragmatic trial, incidence of cardiovascular events was similar with sulfonylureas (mostly glimepiride and gliclazide) and pioglitazone as add-on treatments to metformin. Both of these widely available and affordable treatments are suitable options with respect to efficacy and adverse events, although pioglitazone was associated with fewer hypoglycaemia events., Funding: Italian Medicines Agency, Diabete Ricerca, and Italian Diabetes Society., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Hyperglycemia is the major risk factor for microvascular complications in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the principal cause of death, and lowering HbA 1c has only a modest effect on reducing CVD risk and mortality. The recently published LEADER and SUSTAIN-6 trials demonstrate that, in T2D patients with high CVD risk, the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists liraglutide and semaglutide reduce the primary major adverse cardiac events (MACE) end point (cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke) by 13% and 24%, respectively. The EMPA-REG OUTCOME, IRIS (subjects without diabetes), and PROactive (second principal end point) studies also demonstrated a significant reduction in cardiovascular events in T2D patients treated with empagliflozin and pioglitazone. However, the benefit of these four antidiabetes agents (liraglutide, semaglutide, empagliflozin, and pioglitazone) on the three individual MACE end points differed, suggesting that different underlying mechanisms were responsible for the reduction in cardiovascular events. Since liraglutide, semaglutide, pioglitazone, and empagliflozin similarly lower the plasma glucose concentration but appear to reduce CVD risk by different mechanisms, there emerges the intriguing possibility that, if used in combination, the effects of these antidiabetes agents may be additive or even multiplicative with regard to cardiovascular benefit., (© 2017 by the American Diabetes Association.)

Despite the considerable burden of disease associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), most patients are not at, or are unable to achieve, recommended glycemic targets. This is partly because of the relentless progressive nature of the disease, but it may also be attributable to the current diabetes treatment paradigm. The recommended stepwise approach may lead to frequent early treatment failure with prolonged periods of elevated glucose as a consequence of clinical inertia and delays in achieving optimal glycemic control. Thus, it is most appropriate to consider the current treatment paradigm for T2DM in the context of a more aggressive initial therapy with early combination therapy. Current guidelines advise that initial combination therapy should be used for patients presenting with elevated glycated hemoglobin (HbA 1c ). However, several studies and recent meta-analyses suggest a potential benefit from initial combination therapy on glycemic outcomes in diabetes compared with metformin monotherapy across a wide range of baseline HbA 1c levels. Indeed, combination therapy can increase the number of patients achieving glycemic goals, and the newer glucose-lowering agents may reduce the risk of hypoglycemia and body weight gain. Moreover, our improving understanding of the complex pathophysiology of T2DM and the availability of treatments tackling specific mechanisms contributing to hyperglycemia should lead to more pathophysiologically sound combination therapy. We discuss the rationale behind and evidence for early combination therapy as well as what is needed in the future to better understand its potential.

Objectives: Few studies of oral glucose-lowering drugs exist in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with marked hyperglycemia, and insulin is often proposed as initial treatment. We evaluated the oral initial combination of metformin and linagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, in this population., Methods: We performed a pre-specified subgroup analysis of a randomized study in which newly diagnosed T2D patients with glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 8.5%-12.0% received linagliptin/metformin or linagliptin monotherapy. Subgroups of baseline HbA1c, age, body-mass index (BMI), renal function, race, and ethnicity were evaluated, with efficacy measured by HbA1c change from baseline after 24 weeks., Results: HbA1c reductions from baseline (mean 9.7%) at week 24 in the overall population were an adjusted mean -2.81% ± 0.12% with linagliptin/metformin (n = 132) and -2.02% ± 0.13% with linagliptin (n = 113); treatment difference -0.79% (95% CI -1.13 to -0.46, P < 0.0001). In patients with baseline HbA1c ≥9.5%, HbA1c reduction was -3.37% with linagliptin/metformin (n = 76) and -2.53% with linagliptin (n = 61); difference -0.84% (95% CI -1.32 to -0.35). In those with baseline HbA1c <9.5%, HbA1c reduction was -2.08% with linagliptin/metformin (n = 56) and -1.39% with linagliptin (n = 52); difference -0.69% (95% CI -1.23 to -0.15). Changes in HbA1c and treatment differences between the linagliptin/metformin and linagliptin groups were of similar magnitudes to the overall population across patient subgroups based on age, BMI, renal function, and race. Drug-related adverse events occurred in 8.8% and 5.7% of linagliptin/metformin and linagliptin patients, respectively; no severe hypoglycemia occurred., Conclusion: Linagliptin/metformin combination in newly diagnosed T2D patients with marked hyperglycemia was well tolerated and elicited substantial improvements in glycemic control regardless of baseline HbA1c, age, BMI, renal function, or race. Thus, newly diagnosed, markedly hyperglycemic patients may be effectively treated by combinations of oral agents., Clinical Trial Registration: www.clinicaltrials.gov identifier is NCT01512979.

Modern treatment of type 2 diabetes must rely on therapy individualization. Morbid obesity confers an independent excess of risk to diabetes. In these individuals metabolic surgery is an opportunity the physician should consider, especially at the time of the diabetes diagnosis, because of its efficacy and long-term effects. In addition to the possible remission of diabetes, bariatric surgery is also associated with reduced risk of micro- and macrovascular complications. A multidisciplinary team approach is necessary to maximize the beneficial effects and minimize the adverse events of metabolic surgery and to ensure proper follow-up based on the residual possibility of developing complications. In this regard, a consensus on definition of remission must be reached to define the residual risk after antidiabetic drug withdrawal. Finally, randomized clinical trials are deemed necessary to establish the risk-to-benefit profile of glucose-lowering agents for those patients who have remained diabetic or experience a disease relapse., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Bariatric Surgery. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Although cardiovascular (CV) mortality is the principal cause of death in individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), reduction of plasma glucose concentration has little effect on CV disease (CVD) risk. Thus, novel strategies to reduce CVD risk in T2DM patients are needed. The recently published BI 10773 (Empagliflozin) Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients (EMPA-REG OUTCOME) study demonstrated that in T2DM patients with high CVD risk empagliflozin reduced the primary major adverse cardiac event end point (CV death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, nonfatal stroke) by 14%. This beneficial effect was driven by a 38% reduction in CV mortality with no significant decrease in nonfatal myocardial infarction or stroke. Empagliflozin also caused a 35% reduction in hospitalization for heart failure without affecting hospitalization for unstable angina. Although sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors exert multiple metabolic benefits (decreases in HbA1c, body weight, and blood pressure and an increase in HDL cholesterol), all of which could reduce CVD risk, it is unlikely that the reduction in CV mortality can be explained by empagliflozin's metabolic effects. More likely, hemodynamic effects, specifically reduced blood pressure and decreased extracellular volume, are responsible for the reduction in CV mortality and heart failure hospitalization. In this Perspective, we will discuss possible mechanisms for these beneficial effects of empagliflozin and their implications for the care of T2DM patients., (© 2016 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered.)

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding a single bolus dose of insulin glulisine to basal insulin ('basal-plus') in persons with type 2 diabetes., Methods: Data from patients with poor glycemic control on oral antihyperglycemic drugs who were initiated on a 'basal-plus' regimen for up to 6 months were pooled from four randomized, multicenter studies. Glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting blood glucose, postprandial glucose (PPG), insulin dose and demographics were measured at baseline and end of study., Results: 711 patients with a mean age of 59.9 years and a mean duration of diabetes of 11.0 years were included in the analysis population. A 'basal-plus' regimen was associated with significant decreases in HbA1c and PPG at 6 months, an increase in glargine and glulisine doses and small, but statistically significant, changes in body weight and BMI in all patient subsets. The proportion of patients with HbA1c<7% also increased in all populations studied, while the prevalence of severe hypoglycemia was low and did not significantly differ across patient groups., Conclusions: These results suggest that the use of 'basal-plus' can achieve a good therapeutic response with a low risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain, regardless of a patient's age or BMI., (Copyright © 2015 Primary Care Diabetes Europe. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Aims: To test potential efficacy of liraglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist, in subjects with type 1 diabetes (T1DM)., Methods: We have recruited nine T1DM patients (age 40.1 ± 6.4 years, duration of diabetes 19.2 ± 8.8 years, BMI 24.3 ± 3.5 kg/m(2), HbA1c 8.2 ± 1.0 %-66 ± 11 mmol/mol, daily insulin dose: 0.6 ± 0.1 IU/kg) on continuous subcutaneous insulin therapy with undetectable C-peptide. In addition to existing treatment was administered in single-blind (a) therapy subcutaneously with 0.1 ml of saline solution for 3 days and (b) 0.1 ml of liraglutide (0.6 mg/day) for a further 3 days with daily glucose excursions recorded by continuous glucose monitoring., Results: Adding liraglutide resulted in a significant reduction in mean blood glucose (138 ± 29 vs. 163 ± 29 mg/dl, p < 0.0001) and standard deviation (42 ± 9 vs. 60 ± 15 mg/dl, p < 0.0001). The area under the curve (AUC) for blood glucose >140 mg/dl was also significantly reduced (22.2 ± 16.4 vs. 41.1 ± 19.7 mg/dl h, p < 0.05) with no difference in AUC for blood glucose <70 mg/dl (liraglutide 0.7 ± 0.9 mg/dl h; placebo: 0.8 ± 1.4 mg/dl h, p = NS). Finally, adding liraglutide reduced daily insulin requirement (37.5 ± 17.2 vs. 42.9 ± 22.4 UI/day, p < 0.01)., Conclusions: Short-term treatment with liraglutide, in T1DM, reduces average blood glucose, blood glucose variability and daily insulin requirement without increasing risk of hypoglycemia.

Background: Hypoglycaemia is a major burden of the pharmacological therapy of diabetes and is associated with increased morbidity, mortality and treatment costs., Methods: We screened all admissions to the emergency room of the Pisa University Hospital from 1 January 2009 to 31 December 2013, selecting individuals with a discharge diagnosis of hypoglycaemia. We retrieved 500 admissions involving adult diabetic patients: age 71 ± 16 years; M/F 50.2/49.8%; 70.2% type 2 diabetes (T2DM)., Results: Among T2DM, 42.2% were on insulin, 10.8% on insulin plus oral anti-diabetes drugs and 38.2% on oral anti-diabetes drugs alone (92% sulphonylureas/glinides ± insulin-sensitizers). Glibenclamide was the most frequently used sulphonylurea (69%). Individuals treated with oral anti-diabetes drugs were older than those on insulin (79 ± 11 versus 74 ± 12 years; p < 0.0001). Among patients taking sulphonylurea, 47% had estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m(2) and 13.5% had <30 mL/min/1.73 m(2) . In-hospital admission occurred in 20% of cases. Hospitalized patients with T2DM were older than those discharged (80 ± 10 versus 76 ± 12 years, p < 0.01) and were on oral antidiabetic drugs in 54.8% of the cases, whereas 35.7% were on insulin (χ(2) , p < 0.0001) and 8.3% on combined therapy. Notably, 93.5% of those on oral anti-diabetic drugs were taking a secretagogue. Insulin-treated subjects were younger than those treated with oral anti-diabetic drugs alone (77 ± 12 versus 82 ± 7 years; p < 0.02). The mean in-hospital annual mortality rate was 85 deaths per 1000 patients-year., Conclusions: Our results support the recommendation that the risk associated with insulin and insulin-secretagogues should be carefully assessed, particularly when prescribed in vulnerable patients with T2DM., (Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Insulin is a common treatment option for many patients with type 2 diabetes, and is generally used late in the natural history of the disease. Its injectable delivery mode, propensity for weight gain and hypoglycaemia, and the paucity of trials assessing the risk-to-safety ratio of early insulin use are major shortcomings associated with its use in patients with type 2 diabetes. Development of new insulins-such as insulin analogues, including long-acting and short-acting insulins-now provide alternative treatment options to human insulin. These novel insulin formulations and innovative insulin delivery methods, such as oral or inhaled insulin, have been developed with the aim to reduce insulin-associated hypoglycaemia, lower intraindividual pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability, and improve imitation of physiological insulin release. Availability of newer glucose-lowering drugs (such as glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors) also offers the opportunity for combination treatment; the results of the first trials in this area of research suggest that such treatment might lead to use of reduced insulin doses, less weight gain, and fewer hypoglycaemic episodes than insulin treatment alone. These and future developments will hopefully offer better opportunities for individualisation of insulin treatment for patients with type 2 diabetes., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The trend toward personalized management of diabetes has focused attention on the differences among available pharmacological agents in terms of mechanisms of action, efficacy, and, most important, safety. Clinicians must select from these features to develop individualized therapy regimens. In June 2013, a nine-member Diabetes Care Editors' Expert Forum convened to review safety evidence for six major diabetes drug classes: insulin, sulfonylureas (SUs), thiazolidinediones (TZDs), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors. This article, an outgrowth of the forum, summarizes well-delineated and theoretical safety concerns related to these drug classes, as well as the panelists' opinions regarding their best use in patients with type 2 diabetes. All of the options appear to have reasonably wide safety margins when used appropriately. Those about which we know the most-metformin, SUs, insulin, and perhaps now also TZDs-are efficacious in most patients and can be placed into a basic initial algorithm. However, these agents leave some clinical needs unmet. Selecting next steps is a more formidable process involving newer agents that are understood less well and for which there are unresolved questions regarding risk versus benefit in certain populations. Choosing a specific agent is not as important as implementing some form of early intervention and advancing rapidly to some form of combination therapy as needed. When all options are relatively safe given the benefits they confer, therapeutic decision making must rely on a personalized approach, taking into account patients' clinical circumstances, phenotype, pathophysiological defects, preferences, abilities, and costs., (© 2014 by the American Diabetes Association. Readers may use this article as long as the work is properly cited, the use is educational and not for profit, and the work is not altered.)

Glycemic control remains the major therapeutic objective to prevent or delay the onset and progression of complications related to diabetes mellitus. Insulin therapy represents a cornerstone in the treatment of diabetes and has been used widely for achieving glycemic goals. Nevertheless, a large portion of the population with diabetes does not meet the internationally agreed glycemic targets. Moreover, insulin treatment, especially if intensive, may be associated with emergency room visits and hospitalization due to hypoglycemic events. Therefore, fear of hypoglycemia or hypoglycemic events represents the main barriers to the attainment of glycemic targets. The burden associated with multiple daily injections also remains a significant obstacle to initiating and maintaining insulin therapy. The most attractive insulin treatment approach should meet the patients' preference, rather than demanding patients to change or adapt their lifestyle. Insulin degludec/insulin aspart (IDegAsp) is a new combination, formulated with ultra-long-acting insulin degludec and rapid-acting insulin aspart, with peculiar pharmacological features, clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability. IDegAsp provides similar, noninferior glycemic control to a standard basal-bolus regimen in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus, with additional benefits of significantly lower episodes of hypoglycemia (particularly nocturnal) and fewer daily insulin injections. Moreover, although treatment strategy and patients' viewpoint are different in type 1 and type 2 diabetes, trial results suggest that IDegAsp may be an appropriate and reasonable option for initiating insulin therapy in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on maximal doses of conventional oral agents. This paper will discuss the role of IDegAsp combination as a novel treatment option in diabetic patients.

Given the continued interest in defining the optimal management of individuals with type 2 diabetes, the Editor of Diabetes Care convened a working party of diabetes specialists to examine this topic in the context of insulin therapy. This was prompted by recent new evidence on the use of insulin in such people. The group was aware of evidence that the benefits of insulin therapy are still usually offered late, and thus the aim of the discussion was how to define the optimal timing and basis for decisions regarding insulin and to apply these concepts in practice. It was noted that recent evidence had built upon that of the previous decades, together confirming the benefits and safety of insulin therapy, albeit with concerns about the potential for hypoglycemia and gain in body weight. Insulin offers a unique ability to control hyperglycemia, being used from the time of diagnosis in some circumstances, when metabolic control is disturbed by medical illness, procedures, or therapy, as well as in the longer term in ambulatory care. For those previously starting insulin, various other forms of therapy can be added later, which offer complementary effects appropriate to individual needs. Here we review current evidence and circumstances in which insulin can be used, consider individualized choices of alternatives and combination regimens, and offer some guidance on personalized targets and tactics for glycemic control in type 2 diabetes., (© 2014 by the American Diabetes Association.)

The Global Partnership for Effective Diabetes Management, established to provide practical guidance to improve patient outcomes in diabetes, has developed and modified recommendations to improve glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes. The Global Partnership advocates an individualized therapeutic approach and, as part of the process to customize therapy, has previously identified specific type 2 diabetes patient subgroups that require special consideration. This article builds on earlier publications, expanding the scope of practical guidance to include newly diagnosed individuals with complications and women with diabetes in pregnancy. Good glycaemic control remains the cornerstone of managing type 2 diabetes, and plays a vital role in preventing or delaying the onset and progression of diabetic complications. Individualizing therapeutic goals and treatments to meet glycaemic targets safely and without delay remains paramount, in addition to a wider programme of care to reduce cardiovascular risk factors and improve patient outcomes.

In almost every epidemiological analysis so far performed a strong correlation always emerges between degree of hyperglycemia and risk of both micro- and macrovascular complications. However, whereas lowering plasma glucose levels by intensive treatment has proven to reduce the risk of development of retinopathy, nephropathy and neuropathy, the effect on macrovascular complications has remained quite doubtful. Multiple factors may have concurred to this negative findings including long duration of diabetes, poor pre-existing glycaemic control, potentially inadequate anti-diabetes drugs. Another potential explanation is that, given the high cardiovascular risk of the diabetic patients they were already aggressively treated as far as their cardiovascular risk factors are concerned. The annual mortality in these diabetic cohorts was, indeed, incredibly close to that of the non-diabetic population. These considerations along with the results of multiintervention studies, such as the Steno-2, supports the need for multifactorial intensive needs, definitely including glucose and lipid lowering.

Background: We compared telecare and conventional self-monitored blood glucose (SMBG) programs for titrating the addition of one bolus injection of insulin glulisine in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on oral hypoglycemic agents for ≥3 months who were first titrated with basal insulin glargine., Methods: This randomized, multicenter, parallel-group study included 241 patients (mean screening glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)], 8.8% [73 mmol/mol]). In the run-in phase, any antidiabetes medication, except for metformin, was discontinued. Metformin was then up-titrated to 2 g/day (1 g twice daily) until study completion. Following run-in, all patients started glargine for 8-16 weeks, targeting fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≤5.6 mmol/L using conventional SMBG. Patients with FPG ≤7 mmol/L added a glulisine dose at the meal with the highest postprandial plasma glucose excursion, titrated to target 2-h postprandial plasma glucose level <7.8 mmol/L using telecare or SMBG for 24 weeks. Patients with FPG >7 mmol/L at week 16 were withdrawn from the study., Results: After glargine titration, 224 patients achieved FPG ≤7 mmol/L, without any difference between telecare and SBMG groups (mean±SD, 6.2±0.8 vs. 6.0±0. 9 mmol/L, respectively). HbA(1c) levels were lower following titration and were similar for telecare and SMBG (7.9±0.9% vs. 7.8±0.9% [63 vs. 62 mmol/mol], respectively). Adding glulisine further reduced HbA(1c) in both groups (-0.7% vs. -0.7%); 45.2% and 54.8% (P=0.14), respectively, of patients achieved HbA(1c) ≤7.0% (≤53 mmol/mol). Weight change and hypoglycemia were similar between groups., Conclusions: Patients adding one dose of glulisine at the meal with the highest postprandial plasma glucose excursion to titrated basal glargine achieved comparable improvements in glycemic control irrespective of traditional or telecare blood glucose monitoring.

Reducing the burden of long-term complications in type 2 diabetic patients remains a major task, and represents a huge challenge. Whilst tight glycemic control has been shown to reduce the risk of microvascular complications, controversy remains regarding the benefit of intensive treatment in relation to the prevention of cardiovascular events. Recent large trials (including ACCORD, ADVANCE, and VADT) were unable to show a significant impact of glycemic control on cardiovascular events. Also, it has been argued that these trials included patients with a long duration of the disease, and with previous unsatisfactory glycemic control. Chronic exposure to hyperglycemia may cause a kind of negative metabolic memory, and thereby reduce the potential impact of good glycemic control. This concept has been corroborated by the UKPDS which recruited only subjects with newly diagnosed diabetes and without prior cardiovascular events. In these patients, early achievement of glycemic control translated into a long-term reduction of the risk of micro- and macrovascular complications. This observation prompted the UKPDS investigators to propose a positive "glycemic legacy", supporting the need for early and appropriate treatment of hyperglycemia and associated metabolic disturbances. This should be feasible now through the selection of individual targets and personalized pharmacologic treatments. In doing so, the potential risks of intensive treatment might then be avoided., (Copyright © by Lab & Life Press/SBDR)

The increasing prevalence, variable pathogenesis, progressive natural history, and complications of type 2 diabetes emphasise the urgent need for new treatment strategies. Longacting (eg, once weekly) agonists of the glucagon-like-peptide-1 receptor are advanced in development, and they improve prandial insulin secretion, reduce excess glucagon production, and promote satiety. Trials of inhibitors of dipeptidyl peptidase 4, which enhance the effect of endogenous incretin hormones, are also nearing completion. Novel approaches to glycaemic regulation include use of inhibitors of the sodium-glucose cotransporter 2, which increase renal glucose elimination, and inhibitors of 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase 1, which reduce the glucocorticoid effects in liver and fat. Insulin-releasing glucokinase activators and pancreatic-G-protein-coupled fatty-acid-receptor agonists, glucagon-receptor antagonists, and metabolic inhibitors of hepatic glucose output are being assessed. Early proof of principle has been shown for compounds that enhance and partly mimic insulin action and replicate some effects of bariatric surgery., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

The Global Partnership for Effective Diabetes Management was established in 2004 to provide practical guidance to improving glycaemic control for people with type 2 diabetes. Those recommendations have been updated to take account of recent trials assessing the effects of intensive glucose control. We continue to emphasis the importance of early and sustained glycaemic control, aiming for HbA( 1c) 6.5-7% wherever safe and appropriate. Individualisation of targets and the management process is strongly encouraged to accommodate patient circumstances and to avoid hypoglycaemia. Prompt introduction of combinations of agents is suggested when monotherapy is inadequate.Treatments will preferably address the underlying pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes and integrate within a wider programme of care which also aims to reduce modifiable cardiovascular risk factors and better equip patients in the self-management of their condition.