Safety and efficacy of linagliptin as add‐on therapy to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled study

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the potent and selective dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 (DPP‐4) inhibitor linagliptin administered as add‐on therapy to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes with inadequate glycaemic control. Methods: This 24‐week, randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind, parallel‐group study was carried out in 82 centres in 10 countries. Patients with HbA1c levels of 7.0–10.0% on metformin and a maximum of one additional antidiabetes medication, which was discontinued at screening, continued on metformin ≥1500 mg/day for 6 weeks, including a placebo run‐in period of 2 weeks, before being randomized to linagliptin 5 mg once daily (n = 524) or placebo (n = 177) add‐on. The primary outcome was the change from baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks of treatment, evaluated with an analysis of covariance (ANCOVA). Results: Mean baseline HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) were 8.1% and 9.4 mmol/l, respectively. Linagliptin showed significant reductions vs. placebo in adjusted mean changes from baseline of HbA1c (?0.49 vs. 0.15%), FPG (?0.59 vs. 0.58 mmol/l) and 2hPPG (?2.7 vs. 1.0 mmol/l); all p < 0.0001. Hypoglycaemia was rare, occurring in three patients (0.6%) treated with linagliptin and five patients (2.8%) in the placebo group. Body weight did not change significantly from baseline in both groups (?0.5 kg placebo, ?0.4 kg linagliptin). Conclusions: The addition of linagliptin 5 mg once daily in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on metformin resulted in a significant and clinically meaningful improvement in glycaemic control without weight gain or increased risk of hypoglycaemia.     

Adding saxagliptin to extended-release metformin vs. uptitrating metformin dosage

Aim: To investigate whether patients taking metformin for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have improved glycaemic control without compromising tolerability by adding an agent with a complementary mechanism of action vs. uptitrating metformin. Methods: Adults with T2DM and glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) between 7.0 and 10.5% receiving metformin extended release (XR) 1500 mg/day for ≥8 weeks were randomized to receive saxagliptin 5 mg added to metformin XR 1500 mg (n = 138) or metformin XR uptitrated to 2000 mg/day (n = 144). Endpoints were change from baseline to week 18 in HbA1c (primary), 120‐min postprandial glucose (PPG), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7%. Results: At week 18, the adjusted mean reduction from baseline HbA1c was ?0.88% for saxagliptin + metformin XR and ?0.35% for uptitrated metformin XR (difference, ?0.52%; p < 0.0001). For 120‐min PPG and FPG, differences in adjusted mean change from baseline between saxagliptin + metformin XR and uptitrated metformin XR were ?1.3 mmol/l (?23.32 mg/dl) (p = 0.0013) and ?0.73 mmol/l (?13.18 mg/dl) (p = 0.0030), respectively. More patients achieved HbA1c <7.0% with saxagliptin + metformin XR than with uptitrated metformin XR (37.2 vs. 26.1%; p = 0.0459). The proportions of patients experiencing any adverse events (AEs) were generally similar between groups; neither group showed any notable difference in hypoglycaemia or gastrointestinal AEs. Conclusion: Adding saxagliptin to metformin XR provided superior glycaemic control compared with uptitrating metformin XR without the emergence of additional safety concerns (Clinical Trials.gov registration: NCT00960076).     

Saxagliptin add‐on therapy in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by insulin with or without metformin: Results from the SUPER study,a randomized,double‐blind,placebo‐controlled trial

This prospective, multicentre, phase III study (NCT02104804) evaluated the efficacy and safety of saxagliptin add‐on therapy in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by insulin ± metformin. Patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) 7.5% to 10.5% and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) <15 mmol/L (270 mg/dL) on stable insulin therapy (20‐150 U/d) were randomized (1:1) to saxagliptin 5 mg once daily (N = 232) or placebo (N = 230) for 24 weeks, stratified by metformin use. The primary efficacy measure was change in HbA1c. Saxagliptin treatment resulted in a greater adjusted mean change in HbA1c from baseline to week 24 than placebo (?0.58%; P < .001), irrespective of metformin use, and a greater mean change in FPG (0.9 mmol/L [?15.9 mg/dL]; P < .001). More patients achieved HbA1c <7% with saxagliptin (11.4%) than with placebo (3.5%, P = .002). Adverse events and incidence of hypoglycaemia were similar in both groups. Overall, add‐on saxagliptin 5 mg once daily significantly improved glycaemic control without increasing hypoglycaemia risk and was well tolerated in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by insulin (± metformin).     

Initial therapy with the fixed-dose combination of sitagliptin and metformin results in greater improvement in glycaemic control compared with pioglitazone monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of initial therapy with a fixed‐dose combination (FDC) of sitagliptin and metformin compared with pioglitazone in drug‐naÏve patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: After a 2‐week single‐blind placebo run‐in period, patients with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c of 7.5–12% and not on antihyperglycaemic agent therapy were randomized in a double‐blind manner to initial treatment with a FDC of sitagliptin/metformin 50/500 mg twice daily (N = 261) or pioglitazone 30 mg per day (N = 256). Sitagliptin/metformin and pioglitazone were up‐titrated over 4 weeks to doses of 50/1000 mg twice daily and 45 mg per day, respectively. Both treatments were then continued for an additional 28 weeks. Results: From a mean baseline HbA1c of 8.9% in both groups, least squares (LS) mean changes in HbA1c at week 32 were ?1.9 and ?1.4% for sitagliptin/metformin and pioglitazone, respectively (between‐group difference = ?0.5%; p < 0.001). A greater proportion of patients had an HbA1c of <7% at week 32 with sitagliptin/metformin vs. pioglitazone (57% vs. 43%, p < 0.001). Compared with pioglitazone, sitagliptin/metformin treatment resulted in greater LS mean reductions in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) [?56.0 mg/dl (?3.11 mmol/l) vs. ?44.0 mg/dl (?2.45 mmol/l), p < 0.001] and in 2‐h post‐meal glucose [?102.2 mg/dl (?5.68 mmol/l) vs. ?82.0 mg/dl (?4.56 mmol/l), p < 0.001] at week 32. A substantially greater reduction in FPG [?40.5 mg/dl (?2.25 mmol/l) vs. ?13.0 mg/dl (?0.72 mmol/l), p < 0.001] was observed at week 1 with sitagliptin/metformin vs. pioglitazone. A greater reduction in the fasting proinsulin/insulin ratio and a greater increase in homeostasis model assessment of β‐cell function (HOMA‐β) were observed with sitagliptin/metformin than with pioglitazone, while greater decreases in fasting insulin and HOMA of insulin resistance (HOMA‐IR), and a greater increase in quantitative insulin sensitivity check index (QUICKI) were observed with pioglitazone than with sitagliptin/metformin. Both sitagliptin/metformin and pioglitazone were generally well tolerated. Sitagliptin/metformin led to weight loss (?1.4 kg), while pioglitazone led to weight gain (3.0 kg) (p < 0.001 for the between‐group difference). Higher incidences of diarrhoea (15.3% vs. 4.3%, p < 0.001), nausea (4.6% vs. 1.2%, p = 0.02) and vomiting (1.9% vs. 0.0%, p = 0.026), and a lower incidence of oedema (1.1% vs. 7.0%, p < 0.001), were observed with sitagliptin/metformin vs. pioglitazone. The between‐group difference in the incidence of hypoglycaemia did not reach statistical significance (8.4 and 4.3% with sitagliptin/metformin and pioglitazone, respectively; p = 0.055). Conclusion: Compared with pioglitazone, initial therapy with a FDC of sitagliptin and metformin led to significantly greater improvement in glycaemic control as well as a higher incidence of prespecified gastrointestinal adverse events, a lower incidence of oedema and weight loss vs. weight gain.     

Efficacy, dose-response relationship and safety of once-daily extended-release metformin (Glucophage XR) in type 2 diabetic patients with inadequate glycaemic control despite prior treatment with diet and exercise: results from two double-blind, placebo-controlled studies

AIM: The efficacy, dose-response relationships and safety of an extended-release formulation of metformin (Glucophage) XR) were evaluated in two double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled studies of 24 and 16 weeks' duration, in patients with inadequate glycaemic control despite diet and exercise. Protocol 1 provided an evaluation of metformin XR at a commonly used dosage. Protocol 2 evaluated different dosages of metformin XR. METHODS: In Protocol 1, 240 patients were randomized to receive metformin XR 1000 mg once daily. or placebo in a 2:1 ratio for 12 weeks (patients could receive metformin XR 1500 mg during weeks 12-24 if required). In Protocol 2, 742 patients were randomized to receive metformin XR 500 mg once daily, 1000 mg once daily, 1500 mg once daily, 2000 mg once daily, 1000 mg twice daily or placebo for 16 weeks. The primary endpoint in each study was the change from baseline in HbA(1C) at 12 weeks (Protocol 1) or 16 weeks (Protocol 2). RESULTS: Metformin XR reduced HbA(1C) in Protocol 1, with mean treatment differences for 1000 mg once daily vs. placebo of -0.7% at 12 weeks and -0.8% at 24 weeks (p < 0.001 for each). In Protocol 2, a clear dose-response relationship was evident at doses up to 1500 mg, with treatment differences vs. placebo of -0.6% (500 mg once daily), -0.7% (1000 mg once daily), -1.0% (1500 mg once daily) and -1.0% (2000 mg once daily). The efficacy of metformin XR 2000 mg once daily and 1000 mg twice daily were similar (mean treatment differences vs. placebo in HbA(1C) were -1.0% and -1.2%, respectively). More patients achieved HbA(1C) < 7.0% with metformin XR vs. placebo in Protocol 1 (29% vs. 14% at 12 weeks) and with once-daily metformin XR in Protocol 2 (up to 36% vs. 10% at 16 weeks). No significant changes in fasting insulin or body weight occurred. Total and low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol improved (p < 0.05-p < 0.001) in metformin XR groups in Protocol 2. Metformin XR was well tolerated; gastrointestinal side effects were more common with metformin XR vs. placebo, but few patients withdrew for this reason (1.3% vs. 1.3% in Protocol 1 and 1.6% vs. 0.9% in Protocol 2). CONCLUSIONS: Once-daily metformin XR presents an effective and well-tolerated therapeutic option for delivering metformin in a convenient manner, which supports good compliance with therapy.     

SGLT2 inhibitor plus DPP‐4 inhibitor as combination therapy for type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

To assess the efficacy and safety of sodium‐glucose co‐transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors plus a dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 (DPP‐4) inhibitor in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), we performed a systematic review and meta‐analysis of 14 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 4828 patients. Compared with a DPP‐4 inhibitor, SGLT2 inhibitor/DPP‐4 inhibitor combination therapy was significantly associated with a decrease in glycaemic control (HbA1c, ?0.71%; fasting plasma glucose [FPG], ?25.62 mg/dL; postprandial plasma glucose, ?44.00 mg/dL), body weight (?2.05 kg) and systolic blood pressure (?5.90 mm Hg), but an increase in total cholesterol (TC) of 3.24%, high‐density lipoprotein of 6.15% and low‐density lipoprotein of 2.55%. Adding a DPP‐4 inhibitor to an SGLT2 inhibitor could reduce HbA1c by ?0.31%, FPG by ?8.94 mg/dL, TC by ?1.48% and triglycerides by ?3.25%. Interestingly, low doses of an SGLT2 inhibitor in the combination has similar or even better efficacy in some aspects than high doses. Similar adverse events were observed for the combination therapy, with the exception of genital infection vs DPP‐4 inhibitor (risk ratio [RR], 5.31) and consistent genital infection vs an SGLT2 inhibitor (RR, 0.61). Further studies are warranted to confirm these results.     

Efficacy and safety of triple therapy with dapagliflozin add‐on to saxagliptin plus metformin over 52 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes

We previously reported that dapagliflozin versus placebo as add‐on to saxagliptin plus metformin resulted in greater reductions in glycated haemoglobin (A1C), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and body weight (BW) after 24 weeks of treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Here we report results after 52 weeks of treatment. Patients stabilized on open‐label metformin and saxagliptin 5 mg/day for 8‐16 weeks were randomized to placebo or dapagliflozin 10 mg/day plus open‐label saxagliptin plus metformin for 52 weeks. Changes from baseline to week 52 were greater with dapagliflozin versus placebo in A1C (?0.74% vs. 0.07%), FPG (?27 vs. 10 mg/dL) and BW (?2.1 vs. ?0.4 kg). More patients achieved A1C <7% with dapagliflozin (29.4%) versus placebo (12.6%). Adverse events were similar with dapagliflozin (66%) and placebo (71%), and hypoglycaemia was rare (≤2%). Genital infections occurred more often with dapagliflozin (6%) than with placebo (1%); frequency of urinary tract infections was similar between the two groups (9% vs. 10%). Triple therapy with dapagliflozin add‐on to saxagliptin plus metformin is a durable, effective and well‐tolerated intervention for the treatment of T2D.     

Saxagliptin given in combination with metformin as initial therapy improves glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes compared with either monotherapy: a randomized controlled trial

Aim: The study aim was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with saxagliptin + metformin vs. saxagliptin or metformin monotherapy in treatment‐naïve patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and inadequate glycaemic control. Methods: In this multicentre, randomized, double‐blind, active‐controlled phase 3 trial, 1306 treatment‐naïve patients with T2D ≥18 to ≤77 years, glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥8 to ≤12%, fasting C‐peptide concentration ≥1.0 ng/ml, body mass index ≤40 kg/m² were randomized to receive saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin 500 mg, saxagliptin 10 mg + metformin 500 mg, saxagliptin 10 mg + placebo or metformin 500 mg + placebo for 24 weeks. From weeks 1–5, metformin was uptitrated in 500‐mg/day increments to 2000 mg/day maximum in the saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin, saxagliptin 10 mg + metformin and metformin + placebo treatment groups. The main outcome measure was HbA1c change from baseline to week 24. Selected secondary outcomes included change from baseline to week 24 in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7% and postprandial glucose area under the curve (PPG‐AUC). Results: At 24 weeks, saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin and saxagliptin 10 mg + metformin demonstrated statistically significant adjusted mean decreases vs. saxagliptin 10 mg and metformin monotherapies in HbA1c (?2.5 and ?2.5% vs. ?1.7 and ?2.0%, all p < 0.0001 vs. monotherapy) and FPG (?60 and ?62 mg/dl vs. ?31 and ?47 mg/dl, both p < 0.0001 vs. saxagliptin 10 mg; p = 0.0002 saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin vs. metformin; p < 0.0001 saxagliptin 10 mg + metformin vs. metformin). Proportion of patients achieving an HbA1c <7% was 60.3 and 59.7%, respectively, for saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin and saxagliptin 10 mg + metformin (all p < 0.0001 vs. monotherapy). PPG‐AUC was significantly reduced [?21 080 mg·min/dl (saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin) and ?21 336 mg·min/dl (saxagliptin 10 mg + metformin) vs. ?16 054 mg·min/dl (saxagliptin 10 mg) and ?15 005 mg·min/dl (metformin), all p < 0.0001 vs. monotherapy]. Adverse event occurrence was similar across all groups. Hypoglycaemic events were infrequent. Conclusion: Saxagliptin + metformin as initial therapy led to statistically significant improvements compared with either treatment alone across key glycaemic parameters with a tolerability profile similar to the monotherapy components.     

Effect of exenatide QW or placebo,both added to titrated insulin glargine,in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes: The DURATION‐7 randomized study

Aims

To compare the efficacy and safety of adding the glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist exenatide once weekly (QW) 2 mg or placebo among patients with type 2 diabetes who were inadequately controlled despite titrated insulin glargine (IG) ± metformin.

Methods

This multicentre, double‐blind study ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02229383) randomized (1:1) patients with persistent hyperglycaemia after an 8‐week titration phase (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.0%‐10.5% [53‐91 mmol/mol]) to exenatide QW or placebo. The primary endpoint was HbA1c change from baseline to week 28. Secondary endpoints included body weight, 2‐hour postprandial glucose, and mean daily IG dose.

Results

Of 464 randomized patients (mean: age, 58 years; HbA1c, 8.5% [69 mmol/mol]; diabetes duration, 11.3 years), 91% completed 28 weeks. Exenatide QW + IG vs placebo + IG significantly reduced HbA1c (least‐squares mean difference, ?0.73% [?8.0 mmol/mol]; 95% confidence interval, ?0.93%, ?0.53% [?10.2, ?5.8 mmol/mol]; P < .001; final HbA1c, 7.55% [59 mmol/mol] and 8.24% [67 mmol/mol], respectively); body weight (?1.50 kg; ?2.17, ?0.84; P < .001); and 2‐hour postprandial glucose (?1.52 mmol/L [?27.5 mg/dL]; ?2.15, ?0.90 [?38.7, ?16.2]; P < .001). Significantly more exenatide QW + IG‐treated patients vs placebo + IG‐treated patients reached HbA1c <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) (32.5% vs 7.4%; P < .001); daily IG dose increased by 2 and 4 units, respectively. Gastrointestinal and injection‐site adverse events were more frequent with exenatide QW + IG (15.1% and 7.8%, respectively) than with placebo + IG (10.8% and 3.0%, respectively); hypoglycaemia incidence was similar between the exenatide QW + IG (29.7%) and placebo + IG (29.0%) groups, with no major hypoglycaemic events.

Conclusions

Among patients with inadequate glycaemic control, exenatide QW significantly improved glucose control and decreased body weight, without increased hypoglycaemia or unexpected safety findings.     

Efficacy and safety of the addition of ertugliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with metformin and sitagliptin: The VERTIS SITA2 placebo‐controlled randomized study

Aims

To assess ertugliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled by metformin and sitagliptin.

Materials and Methods

In this double‐blind randomized study ( Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02036515), patients (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.0% to 10.5% [53‐91 mmol/mol] receiving metformin ≥1500 mg/d and sitagliptin 100 mg/d; estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m²) were randomized to ertugliflozin 5 mg once‐daily, 15 mg once‐daily or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 26; treatment was continued until Week 52.

Results

A total of 464 patients were randomized (mean baseline HbA1c, 8.0% [64.3 mmol/mol]; eGFR, 87.9 mL/min/1.73 m²). After 26 weeks, placebo‐adjusted least squares (LS) mean changes in HbA1c from baseline were ?0.7% (?7.5 mmol/mol) and ?0.8% (?8.3 mmol/mol) for ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg, respectively (both P < .001); 17.0%, 32.1% and 39.9% of patients receiving placebo, ertugliflozin 5 mg or ertugliflozin 15 mg, respectively, had HbA1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol). Significant reductions in fasting plasma glucose, body weight (BW) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were observed with ertugliflozin relative to placebo. The positive effects of ertugliflozin on glycaemic control, BW and SBP were maintained through Week 52. A higher incidence of genital mycotic infections was observed in male and female patients receiving ertugliflozin (3.7%‐14.1%) vs placebo (0%‐1.9%) through Week 52. The incidence of urinary tract infections, symptomatic hypoglycaemia and hypovolaemia adverse events were not meaningfully different across groups.

Conclusions

Ertugliflozin added to metformin and sitagliptin was well‐tolerated, and provided clinically meaningful, durable glycaemic control, BW and SBP reductions vs placebo over 52 weeks.     

Initial combination of linagliptin and metformin improves glycaemic control in type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with linagliptin plus metformin versus linagliptin or metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: In this 24‐week, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, Phase III trial, 791 patients were randomized to one of six treatment arms. Two free combination therapy arms received linagliptin 2.5 mg twice daily (bid) + either low (500 mg) or high (1000 mg) dose metformin bid. Four monotherapy arms received linagliptin 5 mg once daily, metformin 500 mg or 1000 mg bid or placebo. Patients with haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) ≥11.0% were not eligible for randomization and received open‐label linagliptin + high‐dose metformin. Results: The placebo‐corrected mean (95% confidence interval) change in HbA1c from baseline (8.7%) to week 24 was ?1.7% (?2.0, ?1.4) for linagliptin + high‐dose metformin, ?1.3% (?1.6, ?1.1) for linagliptin + low‐dose metformin, ?1.2% (?1.5, ?0.9) for high‐dose metformin, ?0.8% (?1.0, ?0.5) for low‐dose metformin and ?0.6 (?0.9, ?0.3) for linagliptin (all p < 0.0001). In the open‐label arm, the mean change in HbA1c from baseline (11.8%) was ?3.7%. Hypoglycaemia occurred at a similar low rate with linagliptin + metformin (1.7%) as with metformin alone (2.4%). Adverse event rates were comparable across treatment arms. No clinically significant changes in body weight were noted. Conclusions: Initial combination therapy with linagliptin plus metformin was superior to metformin monotherapy in improving glycaemic control, with a similar safety and tolerability profile, no weight gain and a low risk of hypoglycaemia.     

Efficacy and tolerability of vildagliptin as add-on therapy to metformin in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Aim: To investigate the efficacy and tolerability of vildagliptin as add‐on therapy to metformin in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled with metformin. Methods: This was a 24‐week, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study. Patients with T2DM (N = 438) with haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of 7.0–10.0% and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) <15 mmol/l (<270 mg/dl) were randomized (1 : 1 : 1) to vildagliptin 50 mg bid, vildagliptin 50 mg qd or placebo in addition to metformin. Results: The treatment groups were well balanced at baseline [mean HbA1c, 8.0%, FPG, 8.8 mmol/l (158 mg/dl); body mass index, 25.5 kg/m²]. The adjusted mean change (AMΔ) in HbA1c at endpoint was ?1.05 ± 0.08%, ?0.92 ± 0.08% and ?0.54 ± 0.08% in patients receiving vildagliptin 50 mg bid, 50 mg qd and placebo, respectively. The between‐treatment difference (vildagliptin 50 mg bid–placebo) was ?0.51 ± 0.11%, p < 0.001. A greater proportion of vildagliptin‐treated patients met at least one responder criterion (82.1 and 70.7%) compared to placebo‐treated patients (60.4%). The AMΔ at endpoint for FPG with vildagliptin 50 mg bid, ?0.95 mmol/l (?17.1 mg/dl); 50 mg qd, ?0.84 mmol/l (?15.1 mg/dl) was significantly different compared with the placebo ?0.26 mmol/l (?4.68 mg/dl) (p ≤ 0.001). Adverse events (AEs) were reported as 34.2, 36.5 and 37.5% for patients receiving vildagliptin 50 mg bid, 50 mg qd or placebo, respectively. Two patients in the vildagliptin 50 mg qd and one in the placebo group reported serious AEs, which were not considered to be related to the study drug; one incidence of hypoglycaemic event was reported in the vildagliptin 50 mg bid group. Conclusion: Vildagliptin as add‐on therapy to metformin improved glycaemic control and was well tolerated in Chinese patients who were inadequately controlled by metformin only.     

Efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with linagliptin and pioglitazone in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

Aims: To compare the efficacy, safety and tolerability of linagliptin or placebo administered for 24 weeks in combination with pioglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) exhibiting insufficient glycaemic control (HbA1c 7.5–11.0%). Methods: Patients were randomized to receive the initial combination of 30 mg pioglitazone plus 5 mg linagliptin (n = 259) or pioglitazone plus placebo (n = 130), all once daily. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c after 24 weeks of treatment, adjusted for baseline HbA1c and prior antidiabetes medication. Results: After 24 weeks of treatment, the adjusted mean change (±s.e.) in HbA1c with the initial combination of linagliptin plus pioglitazone was ?1.06% (±0.06), compared with ?0.56% (±0.09) for placebo plus pioglitazone. The difference in adjusted mean HbA1c in the linagliptin group compared with placebo was ?0.51% (95% confidence interval [CI] ?0.71, ?0.30; p < 0.0001). Reductions in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) were significantly greater for linagliptin plus pioglitazone than with placebo plus pioglitazone; ?1.8 and ?1.0 mmol/l, respectively, equating to a treatment difference of ?0.8 mmol/l (95% CI ?1.2, ?0.4; p < 0.0001). Patients taking linagliptin plus pioglitazone, compared with those receiving placebo plus pioglitazone, were more likely to achieve HbA1c of <7.0% (42.9 vs. 30.5%, respectively; p = 0.0051) and reduction in HbA1c of ≥0.5% (75.0 vs. 50.8%, respectively; p < 0.0001). β‐cell function, exemplified by the ratio of relative change in adjusted mean HOMA‐IR and disposition index, improved. The proportion of patients that experienced at least one adverse event was similar for both groups. Hypoglycaemic episodes (all mild) occurred in 1.2% of the linagliptin plus pioglitazone patients and none in the placebo plus pioglitazone group. Conclusion: Initial combination therapy with linagliptin plus pioglitazone was well tolerated and produced significant and clinically meaningful improvements in glycaemic control. This combination may offer a valuable additive initial treatment option for T2DM, particularly where metformin either is not well tolerated or is contraindicated, such as in patients with renal impairment.     

Dutogliptin,a selective DPP4 inhibitor,improves glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: a 12‐week,double‐blind,randomized, placebo‐controlled,multicentre trial

Aim: To determine efficacy and tolerability of dutogliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP4) inhibitor, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: This was a 12‐week, multicentre, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial in 423 patients with type 2 diabetes with suboptimal metabolic control. Following a 2‐week single‐blind placebo run‐in, patients aged 18–75 years with a body mass index of 25–48 kg/m² and baseline HbA1c of 7.3–11.0% were randomized 2:2:1 to receive once‐daily oral therapy with either dutogliptin (400 or 200 mg) or placebo on a background medication of either metformin alone, a thiazolidinedione (TZD) alone or a combination of metformin plus a TZD. Results: Average HbA1c at baseline was 8.4%. Administration of dutogliptin 400 and 200 mg for 12 weeks decreased HbA1c by ?0.52% (p < 0.001) and ?0.35% (p = 0.006), respectively (placebo‐corrected values), with absolute changes in HbA1c for the 400 mg, 200 mg and placebo groups of ?0.82, ?0.64 and ?0.3%, respectively. The proportion of patients achieving an HbA1c < 7% was 27, 21 and 12% at dutogliptin doses of 400 and 200 mg or placebo, respectively (p = 0.008 for comparison of 400 mg vs. placebo). Fasting plasma glucose (FPG) levels were significantly reduced in both active treatment groups compared to placebo: the placebo‐corrected difference was ?1.00 mmol/l (p < 0.001) for the 400 mg group and ?0.88 mmol/l (p = 0.003) for the 200 mg group. Dutogliptin caused significantly greater reductions in postprandial glucose AUC _0–2h in both the 400 and 200 mg groups (placebo corrected values ?2.58 mmol/l/h, p < 0.001 and ?1.63 mmol/l/h, p = 0.032, respectively). In general, patients tolerated the study drug well. There were minor, not clinically meaningful differences in adverse events (AEs) between dutogliptin‐treated patients and placebo controls, and 60% of all reported AEs were mild. Vital signs and body weight were stable, and routine safety laboratory parameters did not change compared with placebo. Trough ex vivo DPP4 inhibition at the end of the 12‐week treatment period was 80 and 70%, at the 400 and 200 mg doses of dutogliptin, respectively. Conclusions: Dutogliptin treatment for 12 weeks improved glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes who were on a background medication of metformin, a TZD or metformin plus a TZD. Tolerability was favourable for both doses tested. The 400 mg dose of dutogliptin resulted in larger changes of HbA1c and FPG and more subjects reached an HbA1c target of < 7% than the 200 mg dose.     

Efficacy and safety of fixed‐dose combination therapy,alogliptin plus metformin,in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes: A phase 3 trial

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of 26 weeks of twice‐daily (BID) alogliptin + metformin fixed‐dose combination (FDC) therapy in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes. Patients aged 18 to 75 years with hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) of 7.5% to 10.0% after ≥2 months of diet and exercise and a 4‐week placebo run‐in were enrolled. Eligible patients were randomized (1:1:1:1) to placebo, alogliptin 12.5 mg BID, metformin 500 mg BID or alogliptin 12.5 mg plus metformin 500 mg FDC BID. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to end of treatment (Week 26). In total, 647 patients were randomized. The least‐squares mean change in HbA1c from baseline to Week 26 was ?0.19% with placebo, ?0.86% with alogliptin, ?1.04% with metformin and ?1.53% with alogliptin + metformin FDC. Alogliptin + metformin FDC was significantly more effective ( P < .0001) in lowering HbA1c than either alogliptin or metformin alone. The safety profile of alogliptin + metformin FDC was similar to that of the individual components alogliptin and metformin. The study demonstrated that treatment with alogliptin + metformin FDC BID resulted in better glycaemic control than either monotherapy and was well tolerated in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes.     

Efficacy and safety of sitagliptin monotherapy compared with voglibose in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized,double‐blind trial

Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of sitagliptin (a dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitor) and voglibose (an α‐glucosidase inhibitor) monotherapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes who have inadequate glycaemic control (HbA1c ≥6.5% and <10.0%) on diet and exercise. Methods: In a multi‐center, randomized, double‐blind, parallel‐group study, 319 patients were randomized (1:1) to 12‐week treatment with sitagliptin 50 mg once daily or voglibose 0.2 mg thrice daily before meals. The primary analysis assessed whether sitagliptin was non‐inferior to voglibose in lowering HbA1c. Results: After 12 weeks, sitagliptin was non‐inferior to voglibose for HbA1c‐lowering efficacy. Furthermore, sitagliptin was superior to voglibose, providing significantly greater reductions in HbA1c from baseline [least squares mean changes in HbA1c [95% confidence intervals (CI)] = ?0.7% (?0.8 to ?0.6) and ?0.3% (?0.4 to ?0.2), respectively; between‐group difference = ?0.4% (?0.5 to ?0.3), p < 0.001]. Sitagliptin was also superior to voglibose on other key efficacy endpoints, including change from baseline in 2‐h postmeal glucose (?2.8 mmol/l vs. ?1.8 mmol/l, p < 0.001) and fasting plasma glucose (?1.1 mmol/l vs. ?0.5 mmol/l, p < 0.001). After 12 weeks, the incidences of clinical adverse experiences (AEs), drug‐related AEs and gastrointestinal AEs in the sitagliptin group (48.5, 10.4 and 18.4%, respectively) were significantly (p < 0.05) lower than those in the voglibose group (64.7, 26.3 and 34.6%, respectively). The incidences of hypoglycaemia, serious AEs and discontinuations due to AEs were low and similar in both groups. Conclusions: In Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes, once‐daily sitagliptin monotherapy showed greater efficacy and better tolerability than thrice‐daily voglibose over 12 weeks.     

Randomized,double‐blind,phase III study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of once‐daily treatment with alogliptin and metformin hydrochloride in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes

This randomized, double‐blind, phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of once‐daily treatment with alogliptin (25 mg once daily), alone or with metformin hydrochloride (500 mg once daily or 250 mg twice daily), in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes. The primary endpoint was change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) from baseline to the end of treatment (week 24). The least squares (LS) mean (standard error) change in HbA1c from baseline to the end of treatment (week 24) was 0.16 (0.072)% in alogliptin alone, ?0.49 (0.049)% in alogliptin/metformin once daily, and ?0.60 (0.049)% in alogliptin/metformin twice daily. The LS mean difference in HbA1c change from baseline between alogliptin/metformin once daily and alogliptin alone (alogliptin/metformin once daily minus alogliptin alone) was ?0.65% (95% confidence interval [CI] ?0.821, ?0.480) and between alogliptin/metformin once daily and twice daily (once daily minus twice daily) was 0.11% (95% CI ?0.026, 0.247). The overall frequency of adverse events was similar among the groups. This study showed that the efficacy of alogliptin/metformin once daily was superior to alogliptin alone and non‐inferior to alogliptin/metformin twice daily, and that alogliptin/metformin once daily was safe and well tolerated in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.     

Efficacy and safety of canagliflozin as add‐on therapy to a glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A 52‐week,open‐label,phase IV study

Sodium‐glucose co‐transporter‐2 (SGLT2) inhibitors and glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonists (GLP‐1RAs) are antihyperglycaemic agents with weight‐lowering effects. The efficacy and safety of the SGLT2 inhibitor canagliflozin as add‐on therapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and inadequate glycaemic control with a GLP‐1RA (≥12 weeks) were evaluated in this phase IV study. Patients received canagliflozin 100 mg once daily for 52 weeks. Efficacy endpoints included change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight, systolic blood pressure (SBP) and HDL cholesterol from baseline to week 52. Safety endpoints included adverse events (AEs), hypoglycaemia and laboratory tests. Of the 71 patients treated with canagliflozin, 63 completed the study. At 52 weeks, HbA1c was significantly reduced from baseline (?0.70%; paired t test, P < .001). Significant changes were also observed in FPG (?34.7 mg/dL), body weight (?4.46%), SBP (?7.90 mm Hg), and HDL cholesterol (7.60%; all P < .001). The incidence of AEs, adverse drug reactions and hypoglycaemia was 71.8%, 32.4% and 9.9%, respectively. All hypoglycaemic events were mild. These findings suggest that the long‐term combination of canagliflozin with a GLP‐1RA is effective and well tolerated in Japanese patients with T2DM.     

Initial combination therapy with saxagliptin and metformin provides sustained glycaemic control and is well tolerated for up to 76 weeks

Aim: To assess the efficacy and safety of saxagliptin + metformin initial combination therapy compared with saxagliptin or metformin alone over 76 weeks (24‐week short‐term + 52‐week long‐term extension) in treatment‐naÏve type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with inadequate glycaemic control. Methods: In this phase 3, parallel‐group, double‐blind, active‐controlled study, 1306 patients 18–77 years of age (HbA1c 8.0–12.0%) were randomized to saxagliptin 5 mg + 500 mg metformin, saxagliptin 10 mg + 500 mg metformin, saxagliptin 10 mg + placebo or 500 mg metformin + placebo. Blinded metformin was titrated during weeks 1–5 of the short‐term treatment period in 500 mg/day increments to 2000 mg/day maximum in the metformin‐based treatment groups. No titration of metformin was permitted during the long‐term treatment period. A total of 888 patients completed the study (76 weeks), 613 without being rescued. Changes in HbA1c, fasting plasma glucose, 120‐min postprandial glucose (PPG) and PPG‐area under the curve (AUC) from baseline to week 76 were analysed using a repeated‐measures model. Results: At 76 weeks, adjusted mean changes from baseline HbA1c (95% CI) for saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin, saxagliptin 10 mg + metformin, saxagliptin 10 mg and metformin were ?2.31 (?2.44, ?2.18), ?2.33 (?2.46, ?2.20), ?1.55 (?1.70, ?1.40) and ?1.79% (?1.93, ?1.65), respectively (post hoc and nominal p < 0.0001 vs. metformin and saxagliptin monotherapies for saxagliptin 5 mg + metformin and saxagliptin 10 mg + metformin). The proportions of patients requiring rescue or discontinuation for insufficient glycaemic control were lower for saxagliptin + metformin than for either monotherapy. Little or no attenuation in PPG‐AUC or 120‐min PPG was observed between weeks 24 and 76 for saxagliptin + metformin, indicating persistent efficacy. Adverse event rates were similar across groups; hypoglycaemic events occurred at a low frequency. Conclusion: Saxagliptin + metformin initial combination therapy was well tolerated and produced sustained glycaemic control for up to 76 weeks, with greater improvements in glycaemic parameters compared with either drug alone.     

Efficacy and safety of vildagliptin and voglibose in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: a 12‐week,randomized, double‐blind,active‐controlled study

Aim: To confirm the efficacy of vildagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) by testing the hypothesis that glycosylated haemoglobin (HbA1c) reduction with vildagliptin is superior to that with voglibose after 12 weeks of treatment. Methods: In this 12‐week, randomized, double‐blind, active‐controlled, parallel‐group study, the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin (50 mg bid, n = 188) was compared with that of voglibose (0.2 mg tid, n = 192) in patients with T2D who were inadequately controlled with diet and exercise. Results: The characteristics of two groups were well matched at baseline. The mean age, body mass index (BMI) and HbA1c were 59.1 years, 24.9 kg/m² and 7.6%, respectively. At baseline, fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and 2‐h postprandial glucose (PPG) were 9.01 mmol/l (162.2 mg/dl) and 13.57 mmol/l (244.3 mg/dl), respectively. The adjusted mean change in HbA1c from baseline to endpoint was ?0.95 ± 0.04% in the vildagliptin‐treated patients and ?0.38 ± 0.04% in those receiving voglibose (between‐group change = 0.57 ± 0.06%, 95% confidence interval (CI) (?0.68 to ?0.46%), p < 0.001), showing that vildagliptin was superior to voglibose. Endpoint HbA1c ≤ 6.5% was achieved in 51% vildagliptin‐treated patients compared with 24% patients who were on voglibose (p < 0.001). Vildagliptin also exhibited significantly (p < 0.001) greater reduction compared with voglibose in both FPG [1.34 vs. 0.43 mmol/l (24.1 vs. 7.8 mg/dl)] and 2‐h PPG [2.86 vs. 1.1 mmol/l (51.5 vs. 19.8 mg/dl)]. Overall adverse events (AEs) were lower in the vildagliptin‐treated patients compared with that in the voglibose‐treated patients (61.2 vs. 71.4%), with no incidence of hypoglycaemia and serious adverse events with vildagliptin. Gastrointestinal AEs were significantly lower with vildagliptin compared with that of the voglibose (18.6 vs. 32.8%; p = 0.002). Conclusions: Vildagliptin (50 mg bid) showed superior efficacy and better tolerability compared with voglibose in Japanese patients with T2D.