Cargando…

Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, active comparator, phase III trial

AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of once‐weekly glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist dulaglutide 1.5 and 0.75 mg with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase III, multinational, multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐ar...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Chen, Yu Hong, Huang, Chien‐Ning, Cho, Young Min, Li, Pengfei, Gu, Liqun, Wang, Feng, Yang, Jun, Wang, Wei Qing
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6099453/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29708650
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dom.13340
_version_ 1783348668705800192
author Chen, Yu Hong
Huang, Chien‐Ning
Cho, Young Min
Li, Pengfei
Gu, Liqun
Wang, Feng
Yang, Jun
Wang, Wei Qing
author_facet Chen, Yu Hong
Huang, Chien‐Ning
Cho, Young Min
Li, Pengfei
Gu, Liqun
Wang, Feng
Yang, Jun
Wang, Wei Qing
author_sort Chen, Yu Hong
collection PubMed
description AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of once‐weekly glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist dulaglutide 1.5 and 0.75 mg with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase III, multinational, multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, 26‐week study, patients with inadequate glycaemic control were randomized 1:1:1 to once‐weekly dulaglutide 1.5 or 0.75 mg or daily glimepiride (1‐3 mg/d). The primary endpoint was assessment of the non‐inferiority of dulaglutide (1.5 mg), as measured by change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), compared with glimepiride using a 0.4% non‐inferiority margin. RESULTS: A total of 737 patients were randomized (dulaglutide 1.5 mg, n = 244; dulaglutide 0.75 mg, n = 248; glimepiride, n = 245). At week 26, both doses of dulaglutide were non‐inferior and also superior to glimepiride for HbA1c reduction from baseline with a least squares mean difference of −6.34 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval [CI] −8.31, −4.26) or ‐0.58% (95% CI −0.76, −0.39) for dulaglutide 1.5 mg and −3.50 mmol/mol (95% CI −5.47, −1.42) or −0.32% (95% CI −0.50, −0.13) for dulaglutide 0.75 mg (P < .001). A greater proportion of patients in the dulaglutide 1.5 mg group achieved the HbA1c target of <53 mmol/mol (<7.0%) compared with the glimepiride group (74.1% vs 57.4%; P < .001). The mean body weight decreased (P < .005) and total hypoglycaemia rates were lower (P < .001) in the dulaglutide groups compared with the glimepiride group. The most common drug‐related adverse events in both dulaglutide groups (≥5% of patients) included diarrhoea, nausea, increased lipase, decreased appetite, abdominal distension and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: Dulaglutide (both doses) demonstrated superior glycaemic control vs glimepiride, with a favourable tolerability and safety profile in East‐Asian patients with T2D.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6099453
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Blackwell Publishing Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-60994532018-08-24 Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, active comparator, phase III trial Chen, Yu Hong Huang, Chien‐Ning Cho, Young Min Li, Pengfei Gu, Liqun Wang, Feng Yang, Jun Wang, Wei Qing Diabetes Obes Metab Original Articles AIMS: To compare the efficacy and safety of once‐weekly glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist dulaglutide 1.5 and 0.75 mg with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this phase III, multinational, multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, 26‐week study, patients with inadequate glycaemic control were randomized 1:1:1 to once‐weekly dulaglutide 1.5 or 0.75 mg or daily glimepiride (1‐3 mg/d). The primary endpoint was assessment of the non‐inferiority of dulaglutide (1.5 mg), as measured by change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), compared with glimepiride using a 0.4% non‐inferiority margin. RESULTS: A total of 737 patients were randomized (dulaglutide 1.5 mg, n = 244; dulaglutide 0.75 mg, n = 248; glimepiride, n = 245). At week 26, both doses of dulaglutide were non‐inferior and also superior to glimepiride for HbA1c reduction from baseline with a least squares mean difference of −6.34 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval [CI] −8.31, −4.26) or ‐0.58% (95% CI −0.76, −0.39) for dulaglutide 1.5 mg and −3.50 mmol/mol (95% CI −5.47, −1.42) or −0.32% (95% CI −0.50, −0.13) for dulaglutide 0.75 mg (P < .001). A greater proportion of patients in the dulaglutide 1.5 mg group achieved the HbA1c target of <53 mmol/mol (<7.0%) compared with the glimepiride group (74.1% vs 57.4%; P < .001). The mean body weight decreased (P < .005) and total hypoglycaemia rates were lower (P < .001) in the dulaglutide groups compared with the glimepiride group. The most common drug‐related adverse events in both dulaglutide groups (≥5% of patients) included diarrhoea, nausea, increased lipase, decreased appetite, abdominal distension and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: Dulaglutide (both doses) demonstrated superior glycaemic control vs glimepiride, with a favourable tolerability and safety profile in East‐Asian patients with T2D. Blackwell Publishing Ltd 2018-06-05 2018-09 /pmc/articles/PMC6099453/ /pubmed/29708650 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dom.13340 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Diabetes, Obesity and Metabolism published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made.
spellingShingle Original Articles
Chen, Yu Hong
Huang, Chien‐Ning
Cho, Young Min
Li, Pengfei
Gu, Liqun
Wang, Feng
Yang, Jun
Wang, Wei Qing
Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, active comparator, phase III trial
title Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, active comparator, phase III trial
title_full Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, active comparator, phase III trial
title_fullStr Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, active comparator, phase III trial
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, active comparator, phase III trial
title_short Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in East‐Asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, active comparator, phase III trial
title_sort efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in east‐asian patients with type 2 diabetes in a multicentre, double‐blind, randomized, parallel‐arm, active comparator, phase iii trial
topic Original Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6099453/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29708650
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/dom.13340
work_keys_str_mv AT chenyuhong efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideineastasianpatientswithtype2diabetesinamulticentredoubleblindrandomizedparallelarmactivecomparatorphaseiiitrial
AT huangchienning efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideineastasianpatientswithtype2diabetesinamulticentredoubleblindrandomizedparallelarmactivecomparatorphaseiiitrial
AT choyoungmin efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideineastasianpatientswithtype2diabetesinamulticentredoubleblindrandomizedparallelarmactivecomparatorphaseiiitrial
AT lipengfei efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideineastasianpatientswithtype2diabetesinamulticentredoubleblindrandomizedparallelarmactivecomparatorphaseiiitrial
AT guliqun efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideineastasianpatientswithtype2diabetesinamulticentredoubleblindrandomizedparallelarmactivecomparatorphaseiiitrial
AT wangfeng efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideineastasianpatientswithtype2diabetesinamulticentredoubleblindrandomizedparallelarmactivecomparatorphaseiiitrial
AT yangjun efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideineastasianpatientswithtype2diabetesinamulticentredoubleblindrandomizedparallelarmactivecomparatorphaseiiitrial
AT wangweiqing efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideineastasianpatientswithtype2diabetesinamulticentredoubleblindrandomizedparallelarmactivecomparatorphaseiiitrial