The effect of initial therapy with the fixed-dose combination of sitagliptin and metformin compared with metformin monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Aims: This study was conducted to compare the glycaemic efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with the fixed‐dose combination of sitagliptin and metformin versus metformin monotherapy in drug‐naive patients with type 2 diabetes. Methods: This double‐blind study (18‐week Phase A and 26‐week Phase B) randomized 1250 drug‐naÏve patients with type 2 diabetes [mean baseline haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 9.9%] to sitagliptin/metformin 50/500 mg bid or metformin 500 mg bid (uptitrated over 4 weeks to achieve maximum doses of sitagliptin/metformin 50/1000 mg bid or metformin 1000 bid). Results of the primary efficacy endpoint (mean HbA1c reductions from baseline at the end of Phase A) are reported herein. Results: At week 18, mean change from baseline HbA1c was ?2.4% for sitagliptin/metformin FDC and ?1.8% for metformin monotherapy (p < 0.001); more patients treated with sitagliptin/metformin FDC had an HbA1c value <7% (p < 0.001) versus metformin monotherapy. Changes in fasting plasma glucose were significantly greater with sitagliptin/metformin FDC (?3.8 mmol/l) versus metformin monotherapy (?3.0 mmol/l; p < 0.001). Homeostasis model assessment of β‐cell function (HOMA‐β) and fasting proinsulin/insulin ratio were significantly improved with sitagliptin/metformin FDC versus metformin monotherapy. Baseline body weight was reduced by 1.6 kg in each group. Both treatments were generally well tolerated with a low and similar incidence of hypoglycaemia. Abdominal pain (1.1 and 3.9%; p = 0.002) and diarrhoea (12.0 and 16.6%; p = 0.021) occurred significantly less with sitagliptin/metformin FDC versus metformin monotherapy; the incidence of nausea and vomiting was similar in both groups. Conclusion: Compared with metformin monotherapy, initial treatment with sitagliptin/metformin FDC provided superior glycaemic improvement with a similar degree of weight loss and lower incidences of abdominal pain and diarrhoea.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Linagliptin monotherapy provides superior glycaemic control versus placebo or voglibose with comparable safety in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized, placebo and active comparator-controlled, double-blind study

Aims: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of linagliptin 5 and 10 mg vs. placebo and voglibose in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: This study enrolled patients with inadequately controlled T2DM who were previously treated with one or two oral antidiabetics or were drug naÏve. After a 2 to 4‐week washout and placebo run‐in, 561 patients were randomized (2 : 2 : 2 : 1) to double‐blind treatment with linagliptin 5 or 10 mg qd, voglibose 0.2 mg tid or placebo. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) with linagliptin vs. placebo after 12 weeks and vs. voglibose after 26 weeks. Results: Baseline characteristics were well balanced across treatment groups (overall mean HbA1c was 8.01%). The adjusted mean (95% confidence interval) treatment differences at week 12 were ?0.87% (?1.04, ?0.70; p < 0.0001) and ?0.88% (?1.05, ?0.71; p < 0.0001) for linagliptin 5 and 10 mg vs. placebo and at week 26 were ?0.32% (?0.49, ?0.15; p = 0.0003) and ?0.39% (?0.56, ?0.21; p < 0.0001) for linagliptin 5 and 10 mg vs. voglibose. At week 12, mean HbA1c was 7.58, 7.48 and 8.34% in patients receiving linagliptin 5 mg, linagliptin 10 mg and placebo, respectively. At week 26, mean HbA1c was 7.63% with linagliptin 5 mg, 7.50% with linagliptin 10 mg and 7.91% with voglibose. Drug‐related adverse event rates were comparable across treatment groups over 12 weeks (9.4% linagliptin 5 mg, 8.8% linagliptin 10 mg and 10.0% placebo) and 26 weeks (11.3% linagliptin 5 mg, 10.6% linagliptin 10 mg and 18.5% voglibose). There were no documented cases of hypoglycaemia. Conclusions: Linagliptin showed superior glucose‐lowering efficacy and comparable safety and tolerability to both placebo and voglibose 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.     

The effect of linagliptin on glycaemic control and tolerability in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim: Linagliptin is a new dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitor recently approved for use in the USA. The objective of this systematic review and meta‐analysis was to assess effect of linagliptin on glycaemic control, biomarkers and incidence of adverse events (AEs) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Methods: Five published and four unpublished randomized, clinical trials were identified from multiple databases. Qualitative assessments and quantitative analyses were performed. Results: Nine studies included 4246 participants with 53% men, 59.4% Caucasians, 38.7% Asians, and age range 45–69 years. Linagliptin was given as monotherapy (vs. placebo) or combined with metformin (vs. metformin + placebo), sulphonylurea (vs. sulphonylurea + placebo) or pioglitazone (vs. pioglitazone + placebo). Linagliptin 5 mg/day for 12–24 weeks, significantly reduced haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (?0.63%, p < 0.00001), fasting plasma glucose (FPG) (?1.01 mmol/l, p < 0.00001) and improved disposition index (DI, product of insulin sensitivity and acute insulin secretion) (p = 0.0001). Linagliptin monotherapy was not more effective than metformin at reducing HbA1c or FPG. Similar proportion of patients in linagliptin and placebo groups reported AEs including upper respiratory tract infections, headaches, nausea, hypertension and back pain. Conclusions: Linagliptin was associated with modest but significant reduction in HbA1c and FPG and improved DI after 12–24 weeks. Patients who would probably benefit most are those with HbA1c <9%, already on an active agent, compliant with weight reduction strategies, and can recognize and manage hypoglycaemia, fluid retention and upper respiratory tract infections. Long‐term studies are needed to determine durability of response, incidence of microvascular and macrovacular complications, cost‐effectiveness and safety.     

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.     

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.     

The oral DPP-4 inhibitor linagliptin significantly lowers HbA1c after 4 weeks of treatment in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Aim: To investigate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of linagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: After screening and a 14‐day washout, subjects received linagliptin 2.5, 5 or 10 mg or placebo once‐daily for 28 days in this randomized, double‐blind, parallel, placebo‐controlled within‐dose groups study. Results: Seventy‐seven patients entered the study (linagliptin: 61; placebo: 16). Four patients withdrew prematurely. There was little evidence of linagliptin accumulation. Exposure, maximum and trough plasma concentrations of linagliptin increased less than dose‐proportionally. Rapid and sustained inhibition of dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 reached 91–93% across linagliptin doses at steady state. At the end of the 24‐h dosing interval, inhibition was still high (82–90%). There were marked increases in plasma glucagon‐like peptide‐1 after 28 days of dosing. Compared to placebo, all linagliptin doses resulted in statistically significant decreases of the area under the glucose curve following a meal tolerance test on day 29, that is, 24 h after the last study drug intake. After 28 days of treatment with linagliptin the placebo‐corrected mean change in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) (median baseline 7.0%) was ?0.31% (2.5‐mg dose), ?0.37% (5‐mg dose) and ?0.28% (10‐mg dose). The frequency of adverse events was similar for linagliptin (31%) and placebo (34%). There were no notable safety concerns. Conclusions: Linagliptin administration led to attenuation of postprandial glucose excursions and, despite a low HbA1c at baseline, statistically significant reductions in HbA1c after only 4 weeks of treatment. Linagliptin had a safety and tolerability profile similar to placebo in T2DM patients.     

The addition of sitagliptin to ongoing metformin therapy significantly improves glycemic control in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes*(†)

Background: The present study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy, safety and tolerability of sitagliptin added to ongoing metformin therapy in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) who failed to achieve adequate glycemic control with metformin monotherapy. Methods: After a metformin titration/stabilization period and a 2‐week, single‐blind, placebo run‐in period, 395 Chinese patients with T2DM aged 25–77 years (baseline HbA1c 8.5%) were randomized (1:1) to double‐blind placebo or sitagliptin 100 mg q.d. added to ongoing open‐label metformin (1000 or 1700 mg/day) for 24 weeks. Results: Significant (P < 0.001) changes from baseline in HbA1c (?0.9%), fasting plasma glucose (?1.2 mmol/L), and 2‐h post‐meal plasma glucose (?1.9 mmol/L) were seen with sitagliptin compared with placebo. There were no significant differences between sitagliptin and placebo in the incidence of hypoglycemia or gastrointestinal adverse events. A small decrease from baseline body weight was observed in the placebo group compared with no change in the sitagliptin group (between‐group difference 0.5 kg; P = 0.018). Conclusions: The addition of sitagliptin 100 mg to ongoing metformin therapy significantly improved glycemic control and was generally well tolerated in Chinese patients with T2DM who had inadequate glycemic control on metformin alone.     

Fixed-dose combination of empagliflozin and linagliptin for the treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis

The present meta-analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin + linagliptin combination compared with either monotherapy [n=6 randomized controlled trials; 2857 adults with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) on diet + exercise ± metformin; 39.7% women; mean age: 54.6–59.9 years]. The combination of empagliflozin 10 mg + linagliptin 5 mg led to significantly greater reductions in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) compared with either drug alone over 24 weeks: weighted mean difference [WMD; −0.72%, 95% confidence interval (CI): −1.04, −0.40], and fasting plasma glucose (−1.60 mmol/L 95% CI: −2.21, −1.00). Similar results were observed when empagliflozin 25 mg + linagliptin 5 mg was compared with linagliptin 5 mg monotherapy or with empagliflozin 10 or 25 mg monotherapy. Patients with T2DM treated with the drug combination had more than three times higher likelihood of achieving HbA1c <7% than those on either monotherapy. Weight reduction was significantly greater in the combination group only when compared with linagliptin monotherapy. Safety profile was similar between combination treatment and monotherapies. Overall, the empagliflozin + linagliptin combination had superior efficacy and similar safety in achieving euglycaemia compared with either monotherapy. This combination, administered once daily, has the potential to reduce regimen complexity, enhance adherence and improve outcomes in clinical practice.     

Vildagliptin plus metformin combination therapy provides superior glycaemic control to individual monotherapy in treatment-naive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Aim: To compare the efficacy and safety of vildagliptin and metformin initial combination therapy with individual monotherapies in treatment‐naive patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Methods: This was a 24‐week, randomized, double‐blind, active‐controlled study. Treatment‐naive patients with T2DM who had a glycated haemoglobin (HbA_1c) of 7.5–11% (N = 1179) were randomized equally to receive vildagliptin plus high‐dose metformin combination therapy (50 mg + 1000 mg twice daily), vildagliptin plus low‐dose metformin combination therapy (50 mg + 500 mg twice daily), vildagliptin monotherapy (50 mg twice daily) or high‐dose metformin monotherapy (1000 mg twice daily). The primary objective was to demonstrate that HbA_1c reduction from baseline with either combination therapy is superior to both monotherapies at the week 24 endpoint. Patients who failed glycaemic‐screening criteria [HbA_1c >11% or fasting plasma glucose (FPG) >15 mmol/l (270 mg/dl)] could enter a 24‐week, single‐arm substudy. These patients (N = 94) received open‐label vildagliptin plus high‐dose metformin combination therapy (100 mg + 1000 mg twice daily). Results: From comparable baseline values (8.6–8.7%), HbA_1c decreased in all four treatment groups, to the greatest extent with vildagliptin plus high‐dose metformin combination therapy. Mean (SE) HbA_1c change from baseline was ?1.8% (0.06%), ?1.6% (0.06%), ?1.1% (0.06%) and ?1.4% (0.06%) with vildagliptin plus high‐dose metformin combination therapy, vildagliptin plus low‐dose metformin combination therapy, and vildagliptin and metformin monotherapies respectively. The between‐group difference was superior with vildagliptin plus high‐dose metformin combination therapy (p < 0.001 vs. both monotherapies) and vildagliptin plus low‐dose metformin combination therapy (p < 0.001 and p = 0.004, vs. vildagliptin and metformin monotherapies, respectively). Higher baseline HbA_1c values were linked to greater HbA_1c reductions, with changes of ?3.2% (0.22%), ?2.7% (0.22%), ?1.5% (0.24%) and ?2.6% (0.26%) respectively, occurring in patients with baseline HbA_1c≥10%. Reductions in FPG were superior with vildagliptin plus high‐dose metformin combination therapy [change from baseline ?2.63 (0.13) mmol/l] compared with both monotherapies [?1.26 (0.13) mmol/l and ?1.92 (0.13) mmol/l, respectively; p < 0.001]. There was no incidence of hypoglycaemia or severe hypoglycaemia with either combination therapy, and neither was associated with weight gain. All treatments were well tolerated and displayed a comparable incidence of adverse events overall. Despite superior HbA_1c lowering, the vildagliptin plus low‐dose metformin combination therapy group demonstrated a favourable gastrointestinal (GI) tolerability profile compared with metformin monotherapy. Conclusions: In treatment‐naive patients, combinations of vildagliptin and both high‐dose and low‐dose metformin provide superior efficacy to monotherapy treatments with a comparable overall tolerability profile and low risk of hypoglycaemia. The potential dose‐sparing effect of adding vildagliptin to low‐dose metformin in preference to the up‐titration of metformin may allow patients to achieve equivalent or superior HbA_1c lowering without the GI tolerability issues associated with higher doses of metformin.     

Efficacy and safety of linagliptin in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus and poor glycemic control: Pooled analysis of data from three placebo-controlled phase III trials

AimsTo evaluate the efficacy/safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, linagliptin, in subjects with insufficiently controlled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), and factors influencing treatment response.MethodsPooled analysis of data from 2258 subjects in three 24-week phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group studies, who received oral linagliptin (5 mg/day) or placebo as monotherapy, added-on to metformin, or added-on to metformin plus sulfonylurea was performed.ResultsAmong 388 subjects with HbA1c ≥ 9.0%, adjusted mean baseline HbA1c (9.4% both groups) declined to 8.3% in linagliptin group and 9.1% in placebo group at 24 weeks (P < .0001) and adjusted mean change from baseline was 1.2% (vs. 0.4%, placebo). Linagliptin significantly lowered fasting plasma glucose levels vs. placebo (1.6 mmol/l vs. 0.4 mmol/l); treatment difference, 1.1 mmol/l (95% CI, ? 1.7 to ? 0.5). Treatment and washout of previous oral antidiabetes drugs were the only factors to independently affect HbA1c change at week 24. Adverse event rates were similar for linagliptin (61.9%) and placebo (62.7%). Hypoglycemia was rare with linagliptin monotherapy/add-on to metformin (≤ 1%) and increased when linagliptin was added to metformin plus sulfonylurea (linagliptin, 17.9% vs. placebo, 8.3%).ConclusionsLinagliptin was an effective, well-tolerated treatment in subjects with T2DM and insufficient glycemic control, both as monotherapy or added-on to metformin/metformin plus sulfonylurea.     

Efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and pioglitazone in patients with type 2 diabetes: a 54-week study

Aim: To assess the 54‐week efficacy of initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and pioglitazone, compared with pioglitazone monotherapy, and to assess safety in these groups during the 30 weeks after the dosage of pioglitazone was increased from 30 to 45 mg/day, in drug‐naÏve patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and inadequate glycaemic control [haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 8–12%]. Methods: Following a 24‐week, randomized, double‐blind, parallel‐group study (Sitagliptin Protocol 064, Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT00397631; Yoon KH, Shockey GR, Teng R et al. Effect of initial combination therapy with sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitor, and pioglitazone on glycaemic control and measures of beta‐cell function in patients with type 2 diabetes. Int J Clin Pract 2011; 65: 154–164) in which patients were treated with the combination of sitagliptin 100 mg/day and pioglitazone 30 mg/day or monotherapy with pioglitazone 30 mg/day, patients entered a 30‐week extension study. In the extension study, the pioglitazone dose was increased from 30 to 45 mg/day in both groups. Depending upon treatment allocation, patients took one tablet of sitagliptin 100 mg or matching placebo daily. Pioglitazone was administered in an open‐label fashion as a single 45‐mg tablet taken once daily. Patients not meeting specific glycaemic goals in the extension study were rescued with metformin therapy. Efficacy and safety results for the extension study excluded data after initiation of rescue therapy. Results: Of the 520 patients initially randomized, 446 completed the base study and, of these, 317 entered the extension. In this extension study cohort, the mean reductions from baseline in HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) at the end of the base study (week 24) were ?2.5% and ?62.1 mg/dl with the combination of sitagliptin 100 mg and pioglitazone 30 mg versus ?1.9% and ?48.7 mg/dl with pioglitazone monotherapy. At the end of the extension study (week 54), the mean reduction in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) was ?2.4% with the combination of sitagliptin 100 mg and pioglitazone 45 mg versus ?1.9% with pioglitazone monotherapy [between‐group difference (95% CI) = ?0.5% (?0.8, ?0.3)] and the mean reduction in FPG was ?61.3 mg/dl versus ?52.8 mg/dl, respectively [between‐group difference (95% CI) = ?8.5 mg/dl (?16.3, ?0.7)]. Safety and tolerability of initial treatment with the combination of sitagliptin and pioglitazone and pioglitazone monotherapy were similar. As expected, increases in body weight from baseline were observed in both treatment groups at week 54: 4.8 and 4.1 kg in the combination and monotherapy groups, respectively [between‐group difference (95% CI) = 0.7 kg (?0.7, 2.1)]. Conclusion: In this study, initial combination therapy with sitagliptin 100 mg and pioglitazone 30 mg increased to 45 mg after 24 weeks led to a substantial and durable incremental improvement in glycaemic control compared with initial treatment with pioglitazone monotherapy during a 54‐week treatment period. Both initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and pioglitazone and pioglitazone monotherapy were generally well tolerated (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01028391).     

Empagliflozin as add‐on to linagliptin in a fixed‐dose combination in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: Glycaemic efficacy and safety profile in a 52‐week,randomized, placebo‐controlled trial

Aims

This double‐blind, randomized, placebo‐controlled trial ( ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02453555) evaluated the efficacy and safety of empagliflozin (Empa) 10 or 25 mg as add‐on to linagliptin (Lina) 5 mg (fixed‐dose combination, Empa/Lina 10/5 or 25/5) in insufficiently controlled Japanese type 2 diabetes patients.

Methods

The trial (40 sites; May 2015‐March 2017) involved screening 433 adults (≥20 years) who were treatment‐naive or were using one oral antidiabetic drug for ≥12 weeks, which was discontinued at enrolment. Patients with HbA1c 7.5%‐10.0% after ≥16 weeks of using Lina (pre‐enrolment or during a 16‐week, open‐label period) and 2 weeks of using placebo (Plc) for Empa/Lina 10/5, plus Lina, were randomized (2:1) to once‐daily Empa/Lina 10/5 (n = 182) or Plc/Lina 10/5 (n = 93) for 24 weeks. Patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% at Week 24 received Empa/Lina up‐titrated to 25/5 (n = 126) or the corresponding placebo (n = 80), per randomization, from Week 28; 172 Empa/Lina and 84 Plc/Lina patients completed 52 weeks.

Results

Change from baseline in HbA1c was greater (P < .0001) with Empa/Lina than with Plc/Lina at Week 24 (primary outcome, ?0.93% vs 0.21%; adjusted mean difference, ?1.14%) and Week 52 (?1.16% vs 0.06%; adjusted mean difference, ?1.22%). More patients with HbA1c < 7.0% and greater decreases in fasting plasma glucose, body weight and systolic blood pressure were seen in the Empa/Lina group than in the Plc/Lina group. Empa/Lina was well tolerated. The adverse events that were more frequent with Empa/Lina were known empagliflozin‐associated events (eg, increased urination, increased blood ketones). There were no adjudication‐confirmed diabetic ketoacidosis events or lower limb amputations.

Conclusions

These results support the notion that empagliflozin‐linagliptin in fixed‐dose combination is a therapeutic option for Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.     

Oral glucose lowering with linagliptin and metformin compared with linagliptin alone as initial treatment in Asian patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes and marked hyperglycemia: Subgroup analysis of a randomized clinical trial

Aims/Introduction

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is an epidemic in Asia, yet clinical trials of glucose‐lowering therapies often enroll predominantly Western populations. We explored the initial combination of metformin and linagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitor, in newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in Asia with marked hyperglycemia.

Materials and Methods

This was a post‐hoc subgroup analysis of a multinational, parallel‐group clinical trial in which 316 newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with glycated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 8.5–12.0% were randomized to double‐blind oral treatment with linagliptin/metformin or linagliptin monotherapy. The primary end‐point was the change from baseline in HbA1c at week 24. We evaluated data for the 125 participants from Asian countries.

Results

After 24 weeks, the mean ± standard error reduction from baseline in HbA1c (mean 10.0%) was ?2.99 ± 0.18% with linagliptin/metformin and ?1.84 ± 0.18% with linagliptin; a treatment difference of ?1.15% (95% confidence interval ?1.65 to ?0.66, P < 0.0001). HbA1c <7.0% was achieved by 60% of participants receiving linagliptin/metformin. The mean bodyweight change after 24 weeks was ?0.45 ± 0.41 kg and 1.33 ± 0.45 kg in the linagliptin/metformin and linagliptin groups, respectively (treatment difference ?1.78 kg [95% confidence interval ?2.99 to ?0.57, P = 0.0043]). Drug‐related adverse events occurred in 9.7% of participants receiving linagliptin/metformin and 4.8% of those receiving linagliptin. Hypoglycemia occurred in 6.5% and 4.8% of the linagliptin/metformin and linagliptin groups, respectively, with no severe episodes. Gastrointestinal disorders occurred in 12.9% and 12.7% of the linagliptin/metformin and linagliptin groups, respectively, with no associated treatment discontinuations.

Conclusions

In people from Asia with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus and marked hyperglycemia, the initial combination of linagliptin and metformin substantially improved glycemic control without weight gain and with infrequent hypoglycemia. Initial oral combination therapy might be a viable treatment for such individuals.

     

Metformin extended‐release versus immediate‐release: An international,randomized, double‐blind,head‐to‐head trial in pharmacotherapy‐naïve patients with type 2 diabetes

This international, randomized, double‐blind trial (NCT01864174) compared the efficacy and safety of metformin extended‐release (XR) and immediate‐release (IR) in patients with type 2 diabetes. After a 4‐week placebo lead‐in, pharmacotherapy‐naïve adults with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) at 7.0% to 9.2% were randomized (1:1) to receive once‐daily metformin XR 2000 mg or twice‐daily metformin IR 1000 mg for 24 weeks. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c after 24 weeks. Secondary endpoints were change in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), mean daily glucose (MDG) and patients (%) with HbA1c <7.0% after 24 weeks. Overall, 539 patients were randomized (metformin XR, N = 268; metformin IR, N = 271). Adjusted mean changes in HbA1c, FPG, MDG and patients (%) with HbA1c <7.0% after 24 weeks were similar for XR and IR: ?0.93% vs ?0.96%; ?21.1 vs ?20.6 mg/dL (?1.2 vs ?1.1 mmol/L); ?24.7 vs ?27.1 mg/dL (?1.4 vs ?1.5 mmol/L); and 70.9% vs 72.0%, respectively. Adverse events were similar between groups and consistent with previous studies. Overall, metformin XR demonstrated efficacy and safety similar to that of metformin IR over 24 weeks, with the advantage of once‐daily dosing.     

Efficacy and safety of sitagliptin and metformin as initial combination therapy and as monotherapy over 2 years in patients with type 2 diabetes

Aim: To assess the 104‐week efficacy and safety of sitagliptin and metformin as initial combination therapy and as monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycaemic control (HbA_1c 7.5–11%) on diet and exercise. Methods: This study was a 50‐week, double‐blind extension of a 54‐week, randomized, double‐blind, factorial study of the initial combination of sitagliptin and metformin, metformin monotherapy and sitagliptin monotherapy (104 weeks total duration). Patients assigned to active therapy in the 54‐week base study remained on those treatments in the extension study: sitagliptin 50 mg b.i.d. + metformin 1000 mg b.i.d. (higher dose combination), sitagliptin 50 mg b.i.d. + metformin 500 mg b.i.d. (lower dose combination), metformin 1000 mg b.i.d. (higher dose), metformin 500 mg b.i.d. (lower dose) and sitagliptin 100 mg q.d. Patients randomized to receive the sequence of placebo/metformin were switched, in a blinded manner, from placebo to metformin monotherapy uptitrated to 1000 mg b.i.d. beginning at week 24 and remained on higher dose metformin through the extension. Results: Amongst patients who entered the extension study without having initiated glycaemic rescue therapy, least‐squares mean changes in HbA_1c from baseline at week 104 were ?1.7% (higher dose combination), ?1.4% (lower dose combination), ?1.3% (higher dose), ?1.1% (lower dose) and ?1.2% (sitagliptin). The proportions of patients with an HbA_1c <7% at week 104 were 60% (higher dose combination), 45% (lower dose combination), 45% (higher dose), 28% (lower dose) and 32% (sitagliptin). Fasting and postmeal measures of glycaemic control and β‐cell function improved in all groups, with glycaemic responses generally maintained over the 104‐week treatment period. The incidence of hypoglycaemia was low across all groups. The incidences of gastrointestinal adverse experiences were generally lower in the sitagliptin group and similar between the metformin monotherapy and combination groups. Conclusions: Initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and metformin and monotherapy with either drug alone provided substantial and sustained glycaemic improvements and were well tolerated over 104 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes.     

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.