Cargando…

Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Post‐hoc analyses of a randomized, double‐blind, phase III study

AIMS/INTRODUCTION: To investigate the efficacy/safety of dulaglutide once‐weekly monotherapy versus glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a post‐hoc analysis of a Chinese randomized, double‐blind, non‐inferiority, phase III study. Patients (n = 572) wi...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shi, Li Xin, Liu, Xiao Min, Shi, Yong Quan, Li, Quan Min, Ma, Jian Hua, Li, Yan Bing, Du, Li Ying, Wang, Feng, Chen, Lu Lu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6944837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31102326
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdi.13075
_version_ 1783485083592687616
author Shi, Li Xin
Liu, Xiao Min
Shi, Yong Quan
Li, Quan Min
Ma, Jian Hua
Li, Yan Bing
Du, Li Ying
Wang, Feng
Chen, Lu Lu
author_facet Shi, Li Xin
Liu, Xiao Min
Shi, Yong Quan
Li, Quan Min
Ma, Jian Hua
Li, Yan Bing
Du, Li Ying
Wang, Feng
Chen, Lu Lu
author_sort Shi, Li Xin
collection PubMed
description AIMS/INTRODUCTION: To investigate the efficacy/safety of dulaglutide once‐weekly monotherapy versus glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a post‐hoc analysis of a Chinese randomized, double‐blind, non‐inferiority, phase III study. Patients (n = 572) with inadequate glycemic control received dulaglutide 1.5 mg (n = 189) or 0.75 mg (n = 194) once‐weekly or glimepiride (1–3 mg/day; n = 189) for 26 weeks. The primary objective of the study was to investigate the non‐inferiority of dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus glimepiride by the change from baseline to week 26 in glycated hemoglobin (non‐inferiority margin 0.4%). RESULTS: Dulaglutide 1.5 mg and 0.75 mg were non‐inferior (P < 0.001) and superior (P ≤ 0.002) versus glimepiride for the change in glycated hemoglobin from baseline to week 26. The least‐squares mean differences (95% confidence interval) versus glimepiride were dulaglutide 1.5 mg, −0.53% (−0.74, −0.32) and dulaglutide 0.75 mg, −0.32% (−0.53, −0.12). Significantly more patients attained glycated hemoglobin <7.0% at week 26 in the dulaglutide 1.5 mg (71.7%) versus the glimepiride (57.5%; P = 0.005) group. The decrease from baseline to week 26 in fasting blood glucose was significantly more pronounced in both the dulaglutide groups versus the glimepiride group (P < 0.01). The overall incidence and rate of hypoglycemia were lower in both of the dulaglutide groups versus the glimepiride group. At week 26, bodyweight had increased from baseline in the glimepiride group and decreased from baseline in both dulaglutide groups. The most frequent gastrointestinal drug‐related adverse events with dulaglutide were diarrhea, abdominal distension, nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support once‐weekly dulaglutide monotherapy as a treatment for Chinese patients with early stage type 2 diabetes.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6944837
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher John Wiley and Sons Inc.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-69448372020-01-09 Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Post‐hoc analyses of a randomized, double‐blind, phase III study Shi, Li Xin Liu, Xiao Min Shi, Yong Quan Li, Quan Min Ma, Jian Hua Li, Yan Bing Du, Li Ying Wang, Feng Chen, Lu Lu J Diabetes Investig Articles AIMS/INTRODUCTION: To investigate the efficacy/safety of dulaglutide once‐weekly monotherapy versus glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a post‐hoc analysis of a Chinese randomized, double‐blind, non‐inferiority, phase III study. Patients (n = 572) with inadequate glycemic control received dulaglutide 1.5 mg (n = 189) or 0.75 mg (n = 194) once‐weekly or glimepiride (1–3 mg/day; n = 189) for 26 weeks. The primary objective of the study was to investigate the non‐inferiority of dulaglutide 1.5 mg versus glimepiride by the change from baseline to week 26 in glycated hemoglobin (non‐inferiority margin 0.4%). RESULTS: Dulaglutide 1.5 mg and 0.75 mg were non‐inferior (P < 0.001) and superior (P ≤ 0.002) versus glimepiride for the change in glycated hemoglobin from baseline to week 26. The least‐squares mean differences (95% confidence interval) versus glimepiride were dulaglutide 1.5 mg, −0.53% (−0.74, −0.32) and dulaglutide 0.75 mg, −0.32% (−0.53, −0.12). Significantly more patients attained glycated hemoglobin <7.0% at week 26 in the dulaglutide 1.5 mg (71.7%) versus the glimepiride (57.5%; P = 0.005) group. The decrease from baseline to week 26 in fasting blood glucose was significantly more pronounced in both the dulaglutide groups versus the glimepiride group (P < 0.01). The overall incidence and rate of hypoglycemia were lower in both of the dulaglutide groups versus the glimepiride group. At week 26, bodyweight had increased from baseline in the glimepiride group and decreased from baseline in both dulaglutide groups. The most frequent gastrointestinal drug‐related adverse events with dulaglutide were diarrhea, abdominal distension, nausea and vomiting. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support once‐weekly dulaglutide monotherapy as a treatment for Chinese patients with early stage type 2 diabetes. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2019-06-13 2020-01 /pmc/articles/PMC6944837/ /pubmed/31102326 http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdi.13075 Text en 2019 Eli Lilly and Company. Journal of Diabetes Investigation published by Asian Association for the Study of Diabetes (AASD) and John Wiley & Sons Australia, 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 Articles
Shi, Li Xin
Liu, Xiao Min
Shi, Yong Quan
Li, Quan Min
Ma, Jian Hua
Li, Yan Bing
Du, Li Ying
Wang, Feng
Chen, Lu Lu
Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Post‐hoc analyses of a randomized, double‐blind, phase III study
title Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Post‐hoc analyses of a randomized, double‐blind, phase III study
title_full Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Post‐hoc analyses of a randomized, double‐blind, phase III study
title_fullStr Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Post‐hoc analyses of a randomized, double‐blind, phase III study
title_full_unstemmed Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Post‐hoc analyses of a randomized, double‐blind, phase III study
title_short Efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: Post‐hoc analyses of a randomized, double‐blind, phase III study
title_sort efficacy and safety of dulaglutide monotherapy compared with glimepiride in chinese patients with type 2 diabetes: post‐hoc analyses of a randomized, double‐blind, phase iii study
topic Articles
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6944837/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31102326
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/jdi.13075
work_keys_str_mv AT shilixin efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideinchinesepatientswithtype2diabetesposthocanalysesofarandomizeddoubleblindphaseiiistudy
AT liuxiaomin efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideinchinesepatientswithtype2diabetesposthocanalysesofarandomizeddoubleblindphaseiiistudy
AT shiyongquan efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideinchinesepatientswithtype2diabetesposthocanalysesofarandomizeddoubleblindphaseiiistudy
AT liquanmin efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideinchinesepatientswithtype2diabetesposthocanalysesofarandomizeddoubleblindphaseiiistudy
AT majianhua efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideinchinesepatientswithtype2diabetesposthocanalysesofarandomizeddoubleblindphaseiiistudy
AT liyanbing efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideinchinesepatientswithtype2diabetesposthocanalysesofarandomizeddoubleblindphaseiiistudy
AT duliying efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideinchinesepatientswithtype2diabetesposthocanalysesofarandomizeddoubleblindphaseiiistudy
AT wangfeng efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideinchinesepatientswithtype2diabetesposthocanalysesofarandomizeddoubleblindphaseiiistudy
AT chenlulu efficacyandsafetyofdulaglutidemonotherapycomparedwithglimepirideinchinesepatientswithtype2diabetesposthocanalysesofarandomizeddoubleblindphaseiiistudy