Premium
Superior HbA1c control with the fixed‐ratio combination of insulin degludec and liraglutide (IDegLira) compared with a maximum dose of 50 units of insulin degludec in Japanese individuals with type 2 diabetes in a phase 3, double‐blind, randomized trial
Author(s) -
Watada Hirotaka,
Kaneko Shizuka,
Komatsu Mitsuhisa,
Agner Bue Ross,
Nishida Tomoyuki,
Ranthe Mattis,
Nakamura Jiro
Publication year - 2019
Publication title -
diabetes, obesity and metabolism
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 2.445
H-Index - 128
eISSN - 1463-1326
pISSN - 1462-8902
DOI - 10.1111/dom.13859
Subject(s) - insulin degludec , medicine , liraglutide , type 2 diabetes , metformin , clinical endpoint , diabetes mellitus , insulin , urology , randomized controlled trial , endocrinology , insulin glargine
Aims To investigate the efficacy and safety of insulin degludec/liraglutide (IDegLira) compared with 50 U insulin degludec (degludec) or less in Japanese individuals with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Materials and methods In this 26‐week, double‐blind, multicentre, treat‐to‐target trial, Japanese individuals with T2D that was uncontrolled with basal or pre‐mix insulin (20–50 units) were randomized (1:1) to receive IDegLira or degludec, both with metformin. The maximum dose was 50 dose steps (IDegLira) or 50 units (degludec). The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c with IDegLira vs degludec after 26 weeks of treatment. Results In total, 210 Japanese individuals were randomized to IDegLira or degludec and completion rates were 100% and 93%, respectively. IDegLira was superior to degludec with respect to change from baseline in HbA1c: estimated treatment difference (ETD) (95% confidence interval), −13.98 mmol/Mol (−16.41; −11.55); P < 0.0001. The change in mean HbA1c was from 70.6 by −21.3 mmol/Mol with IDegLira and from 70.1 by −7.1 mmol/Mol with degludec. Mean change in body weight was −0.7 kg with IDegLira and 0.7 kg with degludec: ETD (95% CI) −1.41 kg (−2.26; −0.56); P = 0.0012. Mean daily total insulin dose was significantly lower with IDegLira (37.6 U) as compared to that with degludec (41.2 U) at Week 26. Overall rates of severe or blood glucose‐confirmed hypoglycaemia and adverse events were comparable between treatment groups. Conclusions IDegLira provided superior reductions in HbA1c compared with ≤50 U degludec, with weight loss and similar hypoglycaemia rates and no unexpected safety or tolerability issues. These results suggest that this treatment could be an attractive intensification option for Japanese subjects with T2D that was uncontrolled with basal or pre‐mixed insulin.