57
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Effect of adding insulin degludec to treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin and liraglutide: a double‐blind randomized controlled trial (BEGIN: ADD TO GLP‐1 Study)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Aim

          To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding insulin degludec ( IDeg) to treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes receiving liraglutide and metformin and qualifying for treatment intensification because of inadequate glycaemic control.

          Methods

          In this 26‐week, double‐blind trial, patients who still had inadequate glycaemic control after a 15‐week run‐in period with initiation and dose escalation of liraglutide to 1.8 mg in combination with metformin (≥1500 mg) were randomized to addition of once‐daily IDeg (‘ IDeg add‐on to liraglutide’ arm; n = 174) or placebo (‘placebo add‐on to liraglutide’ arm; n = 172), with dosing of both IDeg and placebo based on titration guidelines.

          Results

          At 26 weeks, the mean change in glycated haemoglobin level was greater in the IDeg add‐on to liraglutide arm (−1.04%) than in the placebo add‐on to liraglutide arm (−0.16%; p < 0.0001). Similarly, the mean fasting plasma glucose reduction was greater, and self‐measured plasma glucose values were lower at all eight time points, with IDeg add‐on versus placebo add‐on (both p < 0.0001). At 26 weeks, the IDeg dose was 51  U (0.54  U/kg). During the run‐in period with liraglutide, body weight decreased by ∼3 kg in both groups. After 26 weeks, the mean change was +2.0 kg ( IDeg add‐on to liraglutide) and −1.3 kg (placebo add‐on to liraglutide). Confirmed hypoglycaemia rates were low in both groups, although higher with IDeg than with placebo (0.57 vs. 0.12 episodes/patient‐years of exposure; p = 0.0002). Nocturnal confirmed hypoglycaemia was infrequent in both groups, with no episodes of severe hypoglycaemia, and no marked differences in adverse events with either treatment approach.

          Conclusion

          The addition of liraglutide and IDeg to patients sub‐optimally treated with metformin and liraglutide and requiring treatment intensification was found to be effective and well‐tolerated.

          Related collections

          Most cited references12

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Efficacy and Safety Comparison of Liraglutide, Glimepiride, and Placebo, All in Combination With Metformin, in Type 2 Diabetes

          OBJECTIVE—The efficacy and safety of adding liraglutide (a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist) to metformin were compared with addition of placebo or glimepiride to metformin in subjects previously treated with oral antidiabetes (OAD) therapy. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS—In this 26-week, double-blind, double-dummy, placebo- and active-controlled, parallel-group trial, 1,091 subjects were randomly assigned (2:2:2:1:2) to once-daily liraglutide (either 0.6, 1.2, or 1.8 mg/day injected subcutaneously), to placebo, or to glimepiride (4 mg once daily). All treatments were in combination therapy with metformin (1g twice daily). Enrolled subjects (aged 25–79 years) had type 2 diabetes, A1C of 7–11% (previous OAD monotherapy for ≥3 months) or 7–10% (previous OAD combination therapy for ≥3 months), and BMI ≤40 kg/m2. RESULTS—A1C values were significantly reduced in all liraglutide groups versus the placebo group (P < 0.0001) with mean decreases of 1.0% for 1.8 mg liraglutide, 1.2 mg liraglutide, and glimepiride and 0.7% for 0.6 mg liraglutide and an increase of 0.1% for placebo. Body weight decreased in all liraglutide groups (1.8–2.8 kg) compared with an increase in the glimepiride group (1.0 kg; P < 0.0001). The incidence of minor hypoglycemia with liraglutide (∼3%) was comparable to that with placebo but less than that with glimepiride (17%; P < 0.001). Nausea was reported by 11–19% of the liraglutide-treated subjects versus 3–4% in the placebo and glimepiride groups. The incidence of nausea declined over time. CONCLUSIONS—In subjects with type 2 diabetes, once-daily liraglutide induced similar glycemic control, reduced body weight, and lowered the occurrence of hypoglycemia compared with glimepiride, when both had background therapy of metformin.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Liraglutide versus glimepiride monotherapy for type 2 diabetes (LEAD-3 Mono): a randomised, 52-week, phase III, double-blind, parallel-treatment trial.

            New treatments for type 2 diabetes mellitus are needed to retain insulin-glucose coupling and lower the risk of weight gain and hypoglycaemia. We aimed to investigate the safety and efficacy of liraglutide as monotherapy for this disorder. In a double-blind, double-dummy, active-control, parallel-group study, 746 patients with early type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to once daily liraglutide (1.2 mg [n=251] or 1.8 mg [n=247]) or glimepiride 8 mg (n=248) for 52 weeks. The primary outcome was change in proportion of glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA(1c)). Analysis was done by intention-to-treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NTC00294723. At 52 weeks, HbA(1c) decreased by 0.51% (SD 1.20%) with glimepiride, compared with 0.84% (1.23%) with liraglutide 1.2 mg (difference -0.33%; 95% CI -0.53 to -0.13, p=0.0014) and 1.14% (1.24%) with liraglutide 1.8 mg (-0.62; -0.83 to -0.42, p<0.0001). Five patients in the liraglutide 1.2 mg, and one in 1.8 mg groups discontinued treatment because of vomiting, whereas none in the glimepiride group did so. Liraglutide is safe and effective as initial pharmacological therapy for type 2 diabetes mellitus and leads to greater reductions in HbA(1c), weight, hypoglycaemia, and blood pressure than does glimepiride.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Liraglutide vs insulin glargine and placebo in combination with metformin and sulfonylurea therapy in type 2 diabetes mellitus (LEAD-5 met+SU): a randomised controlled trial

              Aims/hypothesis The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of liraglutide in type 2 diabetes mellitus vs placebo and insulin glargine (A21Gly,B31Arg,B32Arg human insulin), all in combination with metformin and glimepiride. Methods This randomised (using a telephone or web-based randomisation system), parallel-group, controlled 26 week trial of 581 patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on prior monotherapy (HbA1c 7.5–10%) and combination therapy (7.0–10%) was conducted in 107 centres in 17 countries. The primary endpoint was HbA1c. Patients were randomised (2:1:2) to liraglutide 1.8 mg once daily (n = 232), liraglutide placebo (n = 115) and open-label insulin glargine (n = 234), all in combination with metformin (1 g twice daily) and glimepiride (4 mg once daily). Investigators, participants and study monitors were blinded to the treatment status of the liraglutide and placebo groups at all times. Results The number of patients analysed as intention to treat were: liraglutide n = 230, placebo n = 114, insulin glargine n = 232. Liraglutide reduced HbA1c significantly vs glargine (1.33% vs 1.09%; −0.24% difference, 95% CI 0.08, 0.39; p = 0.0015) and placebo (−1.09% difference, 95% CI 0.90, 1.28; p < 0.0001). There was greater weight loss with liraglutide vs placebo (treatment difference –1.39 kg, 95% CI 2.10, 0.69; p = 0.0001), and vs glargine (treatment difference −3.43 kg, 95% CI 4.00, 2.86; p < 0.0001). Liraglutide reduced systolic BP (−4.0 mmHg) vs glargine (+0.5 mmHg; −4.5 mmHg difference, 95% CI 6.8, −2.2; p = 0.0001) but not vs placebo (p = 0.0791). Rates of hypoglycaemic episodes (major, minor and symptoms only, respectively) were 0.06, 1.2 and 1.0 events/patient/year, respectively, in the liraglutide group (vs 0, 1.3, 1.8 and 0, 1.0, 0.5 with glargine and placebo, respectively). A slightly higher number of adverse events (including nausea at 14%) were reported with liraglutide, but only 9.8% of participants in the group receiving liraglutide developed anti-liraglutide antibodies. Conclusions/interpretation Liraglutide added to metformin and sulfonylurea produced significant improvement in glycaemic control and bodyweight compared with placebo and insulin glargine. The difference vs insulin glargine in HbA1c was within the predefined non-inferiority margin. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00331851 Funding: The study was funded by Novo Nordisk A/S. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00125-009-1472-y) contains a list of members of the LEAD-5 Study Group, which is available to authorised users.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Diabetes Obes Metab
                Diabetes Obes Metab
                10.1111/(ISSN)1463-1326
                DOM
                Diabetes, Obesity & Metabolism
                Blackwell Publishing Ltd (Oxford, UK )
                1462-8902
                1463-1326
                02 May 2016
                July 2016
                : 18
                : 7 ( doiID: 10.1111/dom.2016.18.issue-7 )
                : 663-670
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ]MedStar Health Research Institute Hyattsville MDUSA
                [ 2 ]AMCR Institute Inc. Escondido CAUSA
                [ 3 ] Department of EndocrinologyCHU Nantes, l'Institut du Thorax NantesFrance
                [ 4 ] WISDEM CentreUniversity Hospitals of Coventry and Warwickshire CoventryUK
                [ 5 ] Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute and Keenan Research Centre for Biomedical ScienceSt Michael's Hospital, University of Toronto Toronto ONCanada
                [ 6 ]University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas TXUSA
                [ 7 ]Novo Nordisk A/S SøborgDenmark
                [ 8 ]Scripps Whittier Diabetes Institute San Diego CAUSA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence to: Vanita R.2 Aroda, MedStar Health Research Institute, 6525 Belcrest Rd Suite 700, Hyattsville, MD 20782, USA.

                E‐mail: vanita.aroda@ 123456medstar.net

                Article
                DOM12661
                10.1111/dom.12661
                5074260
                26990378
                fb884b6f-97ec-4811-a600-56950da9f854
                © 2016 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

                This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.

                History
                : 18 December 2015
                : 07 March 2016
                : 11 March 2016
                Page count
                Pages: 8
                Funding
                Funded by: Novo Nordisk A/S
                Categories
                Original Article
                Original Articles
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                dom12661
                July 2016
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:4.9.5 mode:remove_FC converted:21.10.2016

                Endocrinology & Diabetes
                glp‐1,glycaemic control,type 2 diabetes
                Endocrinology & Diabetes
                glp‐1, glycaemic control, type 2 diabetes

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_

                Similar content142

                Cited by15

                Most referenced authors433