The dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist tirzepatide improves cardiovascular risk biomarkers in patients with type 2 diabetes: A post hoc analysis

In a phase 2 trial of once-weekly tirzepatide (1, 5, 10, or 15 mg), dulaglutide (1.5 mg), or placebo, the dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist tirzepatide dose-dependently reduced HbA1c and body weight in patients with type 2 diabetes. In this post hoc analysis, inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and cellular stress biomarkers were measured at baseline, 4, 12, and 26 weeks to evaluate the additional effects of tirzepatide on cardiovascular risk factors. At 26 weeks, tirzepatide 10 and 15 mg decreased YKL-40 (also known as chitinase-3 like-protein-1), intercellular adhesion molecule 1 (ICAM-1), leptin, and growth differentiation factor 15 levels versus baseline, and YKL-40 and leptin levels versus placebo and dulaglutide. Tirzepatide 15 mg also decreased ICAM-1 levels versus placebo and dulaglutide, and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) levels versus baseline and placebo, but not dulaglutide. GlycA, interleukin 6, vascular cell adhesion molecule 1, and N-terminal-pro hormone B-type natriuretic peptide levels were not significantly changed in any group. YKL-40, hsCRP, and ICAM-1 levels rapidly decreased within 4 weeks of treatment with tirzepatide 10 and 15 mg, whereas the decrease in leptin levels was more gradual and did not plateau by 26 weeks. In this hypothesis-generating exploratory analysis, tirzepatide decreased several biomarkers that have been associated with cardiovascular risk.     

The novel dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist tirzepatide transiently delays gastric emptying similarly to selective long-acting GLP-1 receptor agonists

The effect of dual glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist (RA) tirzepatide on gastric emptying (GE) was compared to that of GLP-1RAs in non-clinical and clinical studies. GE was assessed following acute and chronic treatment with tirzepatide in diet-induced obese mice versus semaglutide or long-acting GIP analogue alone. Participants [with and without type 2 diabetes (T2DM)] from a phase 1, 4-week multiple dose study received tirzepatide, dulaglutide or placebo. GE was assessed by acetaminophen absorption. In mice, tirzepatide delayed GE to a similar degree to that achieved with semaglutide; however, these acute inhibitory effects were abolished after 2 weeks of treatment. GIP analogue alone had no effect on GE or on GLP-1's effect on GE. In participants with and without T2DM, once-weekly tirzepatide (≥5 and ≥4.5 mg, respectively) delayed GE after a single dose. This effect diminished after multiple doses of tirzepatide or dulaglutide in healthy participants. In participants with T2DM treated with an escalation schedule of tirzepatide 5/5/10/10 or 5/5/10/15 mg, a residual GE delay was still observed after multiple doses. These data suggest that tirzepatide's activity on GE is comparable to that of selective GLP-1RAs.     

Safety and efficacy of an oral insulin (Capsulin) in patients with early-stage type 2 diabetes: A dose-ranging phase 2b study

Aim

To compare the pharmacodynamic properties of different doses of regular human insulin administered in capsule form twice daily in a randomised twelve-week open-label study.

Methods

A total of 100 individuals (48 males, 52 females) with type 2 diabetes on metformin completed the study according to the protocol. The mean (SD) age was 48.5 (6.7) years, body mass index 25.7 (2.8) kg/m² and HbA1c 8.10% (0.65%). Subjects randomized upon admission were assigned to one of three groups receiving formulated regular insulin at dose levels of 75 iu BD, 150 iu insulin BD, or 300 iu BD, all in enteric-coated capsules. The primary and secondary endpoints were change from baseline in HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose (FPG), respectively.

Results

The study met its primary clinical endpoint of a decrease in HbA1c of 0.5% or higher (least square mean decrease 0.52%; P = .004, median decrease 0.6%) in the dose group receiving 150 iu BD. In a subset of this population, with starting HbA1c values of 9% to 9.5%, an average decrease of 1.575% was observed. In the total population, least square mean decreases in HbA1c for the 75 and 300 iu BD groups were −0.11% and −0.42%, respectively. Mean change in FPG in the 150 iu BD dose group was −18.8 mg/dl (P = .017) and −14.8 and −2.7 mg/dl for the 75 and 300 iu BD groups, respectively. A decrease of 20% for triglycerides (−40 mg/dl) was observed in the 150 iu BD dose group. No significant increases in body weight were observed, and significant decreases in systolic blood pressure were seen in all groups. No serious treatment-related adverse events were recorded, and no incidence of hypoglycaemia was reported throughout the entire 12-week study period.

Conclusions

Capsulin oral insulin administered twice per day at a dose of 150 iu per capsule is safe, with no confirmed treatment-linked hypoglycaemic events, and results in significant decreases from baseline in HbA1c, FPG and triglycerides.     

Efficacy,safety and cardiovascular outcomes of once-daily oral semaglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes: The PIONEER programme

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are recommended for glycaemic management in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Oral semaglutide, the first oral GLP-1RA, has recently been approved for clinical use, based on the results of the randomized, Phase 3a Peptide InnOvatioN for Early diabEtes tReatment (PIONEER) clinical trials. The PIONEER programme tested oral semaglutide in patients with T2D of duration ranging from 3.5 to 15 years, from monotherapy through to insulin add-on, in global populations and two trials dedicated to Japanese patients. Outcomes (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] and body weight reduction, plus other relevant efficacy and safety endpoints) were tested against both placebo and active standard-of-care medications. A separate trial evaluated the cardiovascular safety of oral semaglutide in patients with T2D at high cardiovascular risk. Over periods of treatment up to 78 weeks, oral semaglutide 7 and 14 mg once daily reduced HbA1c and body weight across the spectrum of T2D, and improved other diabetes-related endpoints, such as fasting plasma glucose. Oral semaglutide provided significantly better efficacy than placebo and commonly used glucose-lowering medications from the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (sitagliptin) and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitor (empagliflozin) classes, as well as the subcutaneous GLP-1RAs liraglutide and dulaglutide. Oral semaglutide was well tolerated in line with the known safety profile of GLP-1RAs, with transient gastrointestinal events being the most common side effects reported. Cardiovascular safety was demonstrated for oral semaglutide in patients with cardiovascular disease or high cardiovascular risk. The results of the PIONEER programme suggest that oral semaglutide is efficacious and well tolerated for glycaemic control of T2D. The availability of oral semaglutide may help to broaden treatment choice and facilitate adoption of earlier GLP-1RA treatment in the paradigm of T2D management.     

Achievement of glycaemic targets with weight loss and without hypoglycaemia in type 2 diabetes with the once-weekly glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist tirzepatide: A post hoc analysis of the SURPASS-1 to -5 studies

Aim

To assess composite endpoints combining glycaemic control (HbA1c < 7.0%, ≤ 6.5% or < 5.7%) with weight loss (≥ 5%, ≥ 10% or ≥ 15%) and without hypoglycaemia with tirzepatide in type 2 diabetes (T2D).

Materials and Methods

Data from the phase 3 SURPASS programme were evaluated post hoc by trial. Participants with T2D were randomized to tirzepatide (5, 10 and 15 mg), placebo (SURPASS-1,5), semaglutide 1 mg (SURPASS-2) or titrated basal insulin (SURPASS-3,4). The proportions of participants achieving the composite endpoints were compared between tirzepatide and the respective comparator groups at week 40/52.

Results

The proportions of participants achieving an HbA1c value of less than 7.0% with 5% or more weight loss and without hypoglycaemia ranged from 43% to 82% with tirzepatide across the SURPASS-1 to -5 trials versus 4%-5% with placebo, 51% with semaglutide 1 mg and 5% with basal insulin (P < .001 vs. all comparators). The proportions of participants achieving an HbA1c value of less than 7.0% with 10% or more, or 15% or more weight loss and without hypoglycaemia were significantly higher with all tirzepatide doses versus comparators across trials (P < .001 or P < .05). Similar results were observed for all other combinations of endpoints with an HbA1c value of 6.5% or less, or less than 5.7%, with more tirzepatide-treated participants achieving these endpoints versus those in the comparator groups, including semaglutide.

Conclusions

Across the SURPASS-1 to -5 clinical trials, more tirzepatide-treated participants with T2D achieved clinically meaningful composite endpoints, which included reaching glycaemic targets with various degrees of weight loss and without hypoglycaemia, than those in the comparator groups.     

Semaglutide (SUSTAIN and PIONEER) reduces cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes across varying cardiovascular risk

The inside front cover image is based on the Original Article Semaglutide (SUSTAIN and PIONEER) reduces cardiovascular events in type 2 diabetes across varying cardiovascular risk by Mansoor Husain, ILDIKO LINGVAY, Marianne Treppendahl et al., https://doi.org/10.1111/dom.13955 .

     

Safety and efficacy of once‐weekly semaglutide vs additional oral antidiabetic drugs in Japanese people with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes: A randomized trial

Aim

To evaluate the safety and efficacy of once‐weekly subcutaneous semaglutide as monotherapy or combined with an oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) vs an additional OAD added to background therapy in Japanese people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) inadequately controlled on diet/exercise or OAD monotherapy.

Methods

In this phase III, open‐label trial, adults with T2D were randomized 2:2:1 to semaglutide 0.5 mg or 1.0 mg, or one additional OAD (a dipeptidyl peptidase‐4 inhibitor, biguanide, sulphonylurea, glinide, α‐glucosidase inhibitor or thiazolidinedione) with a different mode of action from that of background therapy. The primary endpoint was number of adverse events (AEs) after 56 weeks.

Results

Baseline characteristics were balanced between treatment arms (601 randomized). More AEs were reported in the semaglutide 0.5 mg (86.2%) and 1.0 mg (88.0%) groups than in the additional OAD group (71.7%). These were typically mild/moderate. Gastrointestinal AEs were most frequent with semaglutide, which diminished over time. The mean glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration (baseline 8.1%) was significantly reduced with semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg vs additional OAD (1.7% and 2.0% vs 0.7%, respectively; estimated treatment difference [ETD] vs additional OAD ?1.08% and ?1.37%, both P < .0001). Body weight (baseline 71.5 kg) was reduced by 1.4 kg and 3.2 kg with semaglutide 0.5 mg and 1.0 mg, vs a 0.4‐kg increase with additional OAD (ETD ?1.84 kg and ?3.59 kg; both P < .0001). For semaglutide‐treated participants, >80% achieved an HbA1c concentration <7.0% (Japanese Diabetes Society target).

Conclusions

Semaglutide was well tolerated, with no new safety issues identified. Semaglutide treatment significantly reduced HbA1c and body weight vs additional OAD treatment in Japanese people with T2D.     

Safety and tolerability of semaglutide across the SUSTAIN and PIONEER phase IIIa clinical trial programmes

Aim

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists improve glycaemic control: some are now available as oral and subcutaneous formulations, and some have indications for reducing cardiovascular risk. The expanded scope for these therapies warrants comprehensive safety evaluations. We report the safety/tolerability of subcutaneous and oral semaglutide from the SUSTAIN and PIONEER clinical trial programmes, respectively.

Materials and methods

Adverse events (AEs) from 16 randomized placebo- or active-controlled phase IIIa trials in patients with type 2 diabetes (n = 11 159) including once-weekly subcutaneous semaglutide (n = 3150; SUSTAIN trials) or once-daily oral semaglutide (n = 4116; PIONEER trials) were analysed. Data pools were analysed for each programme, with separate analyses of cardiovascular outcomes trials (CVOTs; n = 6480).

Results

In the phase IIIa pools, gastrointestinal disorders were reported in 41.9%/39.1% of patients with subcutaneous/oral semaglutide, respectively (most prevalent during initiation/escalation) versus 22.0%/24.8% with comparators. Rates of kidney disorders, acute pancreatitis, malignant neoplasms, hypoglycaemia, diabetic retinopathy, heart failure and other cardiovascular events were similar for semaglutide versus comparators. Cholelithiasis incidence was higher with subcutaneous and oral semaglutide versus placebo. Diabetic retinopathy incidence was higher with subcutaneous semaglutide versus placebo in SUSTAIN 6. Small pulse rate increases occurred with both formulations; there was no increased rate of arrhythmias. Fatal AE incidence was similar between semaglutide and comparators. Versus placebo, CVOTs showed a reduced risk of major adverse cardiovascular events with subcutaneous semaglutide and non-inferiority criteria were met with oral semaglutide.

Conclusions

The most common AEs with semaglutide were gastrointestinal disorders, which decreased with continued therapy. These comprehensive safety/tolerability data may better inform patient selection and guidance in care.     

Relationship between body weight change and glycaemic control with tirzepatide treatment in people with type 2 diabetes: A post hoc assessment of the SURPASS clinical trial programme

Aim

To assess the relationship between HbA1c and body weight reductions with tirzepatide treatment (5, 10 or 15 mg).

Materials and Methods

HbA1c and body weight data at 40 weeks (SURPASS-1, -2 and -5) and 52 weeks (SURPASS-3 and -4) were analysed by trial.

Results

Across the SURPASS clinical trials, HbA1c reductions from baseline were observed in 96%-99%, 98%-99% and 94%-99% of participants treated with tirzepatide 5, 10 and 15 mg, respectively. Moreover, 87%-94%, 88%-95% and 88%-97% of participants, respectively, experienced weight loss associated with HbA1c reductions. Statistically significant associations (correlation coefficients ranging from 0.1438 to 0.3130 across studies; P ≤ .038) between HbA1c and body weight changes were observed with tirzepatide in SURPASS-2, -3, -4 (all doses) and -5 (tirzepatide 5 mg only).

Conclusions

In this post hoc analysis, consistent reductions in both HbA1c and body weight were observed in most participants treated with tirzepatide at doses of 5, 10 or 15 mg. A statistically significant but modest association between HbA1c and body weight change was observed in SURPASS-2, SURPASS-3 and SURPASS-4, suggesting that both weight-independent and weight-dependent mechanisms are responsible for the tirzepatide-induced improvement in glycaemic control.     

Glucose-lowering activity of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor saxagliptin in drug-naive patients with type 2 diabetes

Aim: Enhancing the physiologic actions of the endogenous incretin hormones, glucagon-like peptide-1 and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide, by inhibiting dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4), the enzyme responsible for their degradation, is an emerging treatment for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of dose ranges of the DPP-4 inhibitor saxagliptin (BMS-477118) in patients with T2DM. Methods: In a 12-week, multicentre, randomized, parallel-group, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted at 152 out-patient US study centres, 338 (low-dose cohort) and 85 (high-dose cohort) drug-naive patients with T2DM and inadequate glycaemic control (baseline HbA1c ≥6.8 and ≤9.7%) were randomized. Following a 2-week washout, patients received saxagliptin 2.5, 5, 10, 20 or 40 mg once daily, or placebo, for 12 weeks (low-dose cohort). In a second cohort, patients received saxagliptin 100 mg once daily, or placebo, for 6 weeks (high-dose cohort). The main outcome measure was saxagliptin dose response assessed as change from baseline in HbA1c following double-blind treatment. Results: In all treatment arms, saxagliptin significantly reduced HbA1c by 0.7–0.9% from an average baseline of 7.9% vs. placebo (0.3% reduction) in the low-dose cohort. Placebo-subtracted HbA1c reductions were 0.45–0.63% (low-dose cohort). Saxagliptin had significant placebo-subtracted reductions in fasting serum glucose (14–25 mg/dl). Postprandial glucose levels at 60 min following a standard liquid meal test were reduced by 24–41 mg/dl vs. placebo. Saxagliptin was weight neutral. Adverse events were similar across treatment groups, including placebo, with a very low incidence of confirmed hypoglycaemia in saxagliptin treatment arms. Conclusions: Saxagliptin effectively improved glycaemic control in drug-naive patients with T2DM and was generally safe, with a tolerability profile similar to placebo.     

Cardiovascular biomarkers in clinical studies of type 2 diabetes

When planning cardiovascular (CV) studies in type 2 diabetes (T2D), selection of CV biomarkers is a complex issue. Because the pathophysiology of CV disease (CVD) in T2D is multifactorial, ideally, the selected CV biomarkers should cover all aspects of the known pathophysiology of the disease. This will allow the researcher to distinguish between effects on different aspects of the pathophysiology. To this end, we discuss a host of biomarkers grouped according to their role in the pathogenesis of CVD, namely: (1) cardiac damage biomarkers; (2) inflammatory biomarkers; and (3) novel biomarkers (oxidative stress and endothelial dysfunction biomarkers). Within each category we present the best currently validated biomarkers, with special focus on the population of interest (people with T2D). For each individual biomarker, we discuss the physiological role, validation in the general population and in people with T2D, analytical methodology, modifying factors, effects of glucose‐lowering drugs, and interpretation. This approach will provide clinical researchers with the information necessary for planning, conducting and interpreting results from clinical trials. Furthermore, a systematic approach to selection of CV biomarkers in T2D research will improve the quality of future research.