In the Diabetes Therapy Utilization: Researching Changes in A1C, Weight and Other Factors Through Intervention with Exenatide Once Weekly (DURATION-1) study, the safety and efficacy of 30 weeks of treatment with the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist exenatide once weekly (exenatide QW; 2 mg) was compared with exenatide BID in 295 patients with type 2 diabetes. We now report the safety and efficacy of exenatide QW in 1) patients who continued treatment for an additional 22 weeks (52 weeks total) and 2) patients who switched from exenatide BID to exenatide QW after 30 weeks.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
In this randomized, multicenter, comparator-controlled, open-label trial, 258 patients entered the 22-week open-ended assessment phase (n = 128 QW-only; n = 130 BID→QW). A1C, fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight, blood pressure, fasting lipids, safety, and tolerability were assessed.
Patients continuing exenatide QW maintained A1C improvements through 52 weeks (least squares mean −2.0% [95% CI −2.1 to −1.8%]). Patients switching from exenatide BID to exenatide QW achieved further A1C improvements; both groups exhibited the same A1C reduction and mean A1C (6.6%) at week 52. At week 52, 71 and 54% of all patients achieved A1C <7.0% and ≤6.5%, respectively. In both treatment arms, FPG was reduced by >40 mg/dl, and body weight was reduced by >4 kg after 52 weeks. Nausea occurred less frequently in this assessment period and was predominantly mild. No major hypoglycemia was observed.
Exenatide QW elicited sustained improvements in glycemic control and body weight through 52 weeks of treatment. Patients switching to exenatide QW experienced further improvements in A1C and FPG, with sustained weight loss.
In the initial 26-week, double-blind, double-dummy assessment period of the DURATION-2 trial in patients with Type 2 diabetes on metformin, the once-weekly glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist exenatide once-weekly resulted in greater HbA1c improvement and weight reduction compared with maximum approved daily doses of sitagliptin or pioglitazone. This subsequent, 26-week, open-label, uncontrolled assessment period evaluated the safety and efficacy of (i) continued exenatide once-weekly treatment and (ii) switching from sitagliptin or pioglitazone to exenatide once-weekly.
Randomised oral medications were discontinued and all patients received exenatide once-weekly. Of the 364 patients [original baseline HbA1c 8.5 ± 1.1% (70 mmol/mol), fasting plasma glucose 9.0 ± 2.5 mmol/l, weight 88 ± 20 kg) who continued into the open-label period, 319 patients (88%) completed 52 weeks.
Evaluable patients who received only exenatide once-weekly demonstrated significant 52-week improvements (least square mean ± se) in HbA1c (−1.6 ± 0.1%), fasting plasma glucose (−1.8 ± 0.3 mmol/l) and weight (−1.8 ± 0.5 kg). Evaluable patients who switched from sitagliptin to exenatide once-weekly demonstrated significant incremental improvements in HbA1c (−0.3 ± 0.1%), fasting plasma glucose (−0.7 ± 0.2 mmol/l) and weight (−1.1 ± 0.3 kg). Patients who switched from pioglitazone to exenatide once-weekly maintained HbA1c and fasting plasma glucose improvements (week 52: −1.6 ± 0.1%, −1.7 ± 0.3 mmol/l), with significant weight reduction (−3.0 ± 0.3 kg). Exenatide once-weekly was generally well tolerated and adverse events were predominantly mild or moderate in intensity. Nausea was the most frequent adverse event in this assessment period (intent-to-treat: exenatide once-weekly-only 5%; sitagliptin → exenatide once-weekly 11%; pioglitazone → exenatide once-weekly 10%). No major hypoglycaemia was observed.
Patients who switched to once-weekly exenatide from daily sitagliptin or pioglitazone had improved or sustained glycaemic control, with weight loss.
exenatide; glucagon-like peptide 1; pioglitazone; sitagliptin; Type 2 diabetes
An initial 26‐week, randomized, open‐label study compared the efficacy and safety of exenatide 10 mcg twice daily with exenatide 2 mg once weekly in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes who experienced inadequate glycemic control with oral antidiabetes medications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety of exenatide once weekly in Japanese patients, a subset of the initial patient population, who continued into this extension study for an additional 26 weeks of therapy on exenatide once weekly, followed by 10 weeks without exenatide once weekly.
Materials and Methods
Japanese patients initially assigned to exenatide twice daily (n = 62) switched to exenatide once weekly for the extended 26 weeks, and patients initially assigned to exenatide once weekly (n = 74) continued on this regimen for the remainder of the study (total treatment of 52 weeks).
A total of 68% of patients reported one or more treatment‐emergent adverse events during the extension period; the most common of these were nasopharyngitis (14%) and vomiting (6%). No major hypoglycemic episodes were reported. Improvements in glycated hemoglobin, fasting plasma glucose and postprandial glucose were maintained over 52 weeks of treatment. At week 52, bodyweight remained reduced from baseline.
Exenatide once weekly added to oral antidiabetes medication was well tolerated in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes, and was associated with glycemic control and weight loss through to 52 weeks, supporting the use of exenatide once weekly as an adjunctive treatment for type 2 diabetes in this patient population. The initial 26‐week portion of this trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT00917267).
Blood glucose; Exenatide; Japanese
Taspoglutide is a long-acting glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist developed for treatment of type 2 diabetes. The efficacy and safety of once-weekly taspoglutide was compared with twice-daily exenatide.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Overweight adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes on metformin ± a thiazolidinedione were randomized to subcutaneous taspoglutide 10 mg weekly (n = 399), taspoglutide 20 mg weekly (n = 398), or exenatide 10 µg twice daily (n = 392) in an open-label, multicenter trial. The primary end point was change in HbA1c after 24 weeks.
Mean baseline HbA1c was 8.1%. Both doses of taspoglutide reduced HbA1c significantly more than exenatide (taspoglutide 10 mg: –1.24% [SE 0.09], difference –0.26, 95% CI –0.37 to –0.15, P < 0.0001; taspoglutide 20 mg: –1.31% [0.08], difference –0.33, –0.44 to –0.22, P < 0.0001; exenatide: –0.98% [0.08]). Both taspoglutide doses reduced fasting plasma glucose significantly more than exenatide. Taspoglutide reduced body weight (taspoglutide 10 mg, –1.6 kg; taspoglutide 20 mg, –2.3 kg) as did exenatide (–2.3 kg), which was greater than with taspoglutide 10 mg (P < 0.05). HbA1c and weight effects were maintained after 52 weeks. More adverse events with taspoglutide 10 and 20 mg than exenatide developed over time (nausea in 53, 59, and 35% and vomiting in 33, 37, and 16%, respectively). Allergic and injection-site reactions were more common with taspoglutide. Discontinuations were greater with taspoglutide. Antitaspoglutide antibodies were detected in 49% of patients.
Once-weekly taspoglutide demonstrated greater glycemic control than twice-daily exenatide with comparable weight loss, but with unacceptable levels of nausea/vomiting, injection-site reactions, and systemic allergic reactions.
Aims/Introduction: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist, exenatide, in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus suboptimally controlled despite therapeutic doses of a sulfonylurea alone or combined with a biguanide or thiazolidinedione.
Materials and Methods: Patients were randomized to a placebo or exenatide, either 5 or 10 μg, given subcutaneously b.i.d. in addition to oral therapy. Patients randomized to 10 μg exenatide received 5 μg b.i.d. for the first 4 weeks, followed by 10 μg b.i.d. for the last 20 weeks.
Results: A total of 179 patients received the study drug and composed the full analysis set (n = 35, placebo; n = 72, exenatide 5 μg; n = 72, exenatide 10 μg; 68% male; 58 ± 10 years; body mass index 25.5 ± 4.1 kg/m2; HbA1c 8.2 ± 0.9%; means ± standard deviations). Baseline to end‐point (least‐squares means ± standard errors) HbA1c changes (%) were −0.28 ± 0.15 (placebo), −1.34 ± 0.11 (exenatide 5 μg) and −1.62 ± 0.11 (exenatide 10 μg) (both P < 0.001, exenatide vs placebo). Baseline to end‐point bodyweight changes (kg) were −0.47 ± 0.39 (placebo), −0.39 ± 0.28 (exenatide 5 μg) and −1.54 ± 0.27 (exenatide 10 μg; P = 0.026, exenatide 10 μg vs placebo). Nausea, generally mild to moderate, was reported in 8.6% (placebo), 25.0% (exenatide 5 μg) and 36.1% (exenatide 10 μg) of patients. Mild to moderate hypoglycemia was reported in 22.9% (placebo), 51.4% (exenatide 5 μg) and 58.3% (exenatide 10 μg) of patients.
Conclusions: Over 24 weeks, exenatide vs the placebo improved glycemic control, reduced bodyweight (10 μg) and was well tolerated in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus suboptimally controlled, despite oral therapy including a sulfonylurea. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT00577824). (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040‐1124.2010.00084.x, 2011)
Exenatide; Glycemic control; Japanese
Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a progressive metabolic disease necessitating therapies with sustained efficacy and safety over time. Exenatide once weekly (ExQW), an extended-release formulation of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist exenatide, has demonstrated improvements in glycemic and cardiometabolic measures from 30 weeks to 2 years of treatment. Here, the efficacy and safety of treatment with ExQW for 3 years are described.
Patients were initially randomized to receive either ExQW (2 mg) or exenatide twice daily for 30 weeks. Following the initial 30 weeks, all patients were treated with ExQW in an open-label extension. Analyses of primary glycemic endpoints, beta-cell function, and cardiometabolic measures were assessed for patients who completed 3 years of ExQW treatment and for the intention-to-treat population. Safety and tolerability analyses were provided for the intention-to-treat population.
Sixty-six percent of the intention-to-treat population (n = 295) completed 3 years of treatment (n = 194). At 3 years, a significant reduction in hemoglobin A1c (least squares mean ± standard error) of −1.6% ± 0.08% was observed, with 55% and 33% of patients achieving hemoglobin A1c targets of <7% and ≤6.5%, respectively. Consistent with a sustained reduction in hemoglobin A1c, improvements in beta-cell function were also observed. Body weight was significantly reduced by −2.3 ± 0.6 kg. Reductions in blood pressure, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and triglycerides were also observed. Adverse events reported most frequently during both controlled and uncontrolled periods included diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting of mostly mild intensity. The incidence of these adverse events decreased over time. Incidence of minor hypoglycemia was low and no major hypoglycemia was observed.
ExQW produced clinically meaningful improvements in glycemic control that were durable through 3 years of treatment. Significant improvements in cardiometabolic measurements were also observed. ExQW was well-tolerated during long-term treatment and no new adverse events were noted.
diabetes; exenatide; GLP-1 receptor agonist; hyperglycemia; DURATION-1
Cardiovascular effects of glucose-lowering agents are of increasing interest. Our aim was to assess the effects of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist exenatide on heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).
In this double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, subjects with T2DM on metformin and/or a thiazolidinedione were randomized to receive exenatide (5 μg for 4 weeks followed by 10 μg) or placebo BID for 12 weeks. Heart rate and BP were assessed with 24-hour ambulatory BP monitoring. The primary measure was change from baseline in mean 24-hour HR.
Fifty-four subjects (28 exenatide, 26 placebo) were randomized and comprised the intent-to-treat population. Baseline values (exenatide and placebo) were (mean ± SE) 74.4 ± 2.1 and 74.5 ± 1.9 beats/minute for HR, 126.4 ± 3.2 and 119.9 ± 2.8 mm Hg for systolic BP (SBP), and 75.2 ± 2.1 and 70.5 ± 2.0 mm Hg for diastolic BP (DBP). At 12 weeks, no significant change from baseline in 24-hour HR was observed with exenatide or placebo (LS mean ± SE, 2.1 ± 1.4 versus -0.7 ± 1.4 beats/minute, respectively; between treatments, p = 0.16). Exenatide therapy was associated with trends toward lower 24-hour, daytime, and nighttime SBP; changes in DBP were similar between groups. No changes in daytime or nighttime rate pressure product were observed. With exenatide, body weight decreased from baseline by -1.8 ± 0.4 kg (p < 0.0001; treatment difference -1.5 ± 0.6 kg, p < 0.05). The most frequently reported adverse event with exenatide was mild to moderate nausea.
Exenatide demonstrated no clinically meaningful effects on HR over 12 weeks of treatment in subjects with T2DM. The observed trends toward lower SBP with exenatide warrant future investigation.
Dyslipidemia and type 2 diabetes are two of the most significant risk factors
for the development of cardiovascular disease. Measurement of lipoprotein
subclasses provides important information about derangements in lipid
metabolism and helps refine cardiovascular risk assessment. Exenatide, a
glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, improved glycemic control,
obesity, hypertension, and dyslipidemia in patients with type 2 diabetes in
In the DURATION-1 trial, patients with type 2 diabetes were treated with
exenatide once weekly or twice daily for 30 weeks. This post hoc analysis
evaluated the impact of exenatide on lipoprotein subclasses in 211
DURATION-1 patients using vertical auto profile methodology and the
Statistical Package for the Social Sciences general linear model adjusted
for glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) and weight.
Baseline lipids and high sensitivity C-reactive protein were normal overall
based on the standard lipid panel. Once-weekly exenatide reduced
apolipoprotein B and the apolipoprotein B to apolipoprotein A1 ratio
(P < 0.05), independent of glycemic improvement and
weight loss. A significant shift in lipoprotein pattern away from small,
dense low-density lipoprotein-4 cholesterol was also observed
(P < 0.05). Exenatide once weekly increased
high-density lipoprotein-2 cholesterol, even after adjustment for changes in
HbA1c and weight (P < 0.05).
Triglycerides, very low-density lipoprotein cholesterol, and high
sensitivity C-reactive protein were reduced with both the once-weekly and
twice-daily exenatide regimens (P < 0.05).
In this post hoc analysis, exenatide significantly improved a number of
cardiovascular risk markers. Continuous exenatide exposure with exenatide
once weekly elicited a greater response than did immediate-release exenatide
twice daily, generally independent of glycemic improvement and weight loss.
Thus, in addition to improving glycemic control, exenatide induced favorable
changes in lipid and lipoprotein metabolism and decreased systemic
glucagon-like protein-1 receptor agonist; incretin mimetic; dyslipidemia; type 2 diabetes mellitus
A new formulation of exenatide has become available recently that is the first antidiabetic medication for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) dosed on a weekly schedule. This review summarizes the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of exenatide once weekly (exenatide QW). The results are interpreted in terms of the pathophysiology of T2DM, as well as the pharmacology of the new formulation.
Relevant literature on exenatide QW and diabetes was identified through PubMed database searches from inception until September 2013.
In the new once-weekly formulation of exenatide, the exenatide molecule is dispersed in microspheres. Following subcutaneous injection, these microspheres degrade in situ and slowly release active agent. In clinical trials, therapy with exenatide QW as monotherapy or in combination with other antidiabetic treatments was associated with reductions in glycated hemoglobin (−1.3% to −1.9%), fasting plasma glucose (−32 to −41 mg/dL), and body weight (−2.0 to −3.7 kg). These outcomes were achieved without an associated increase in the rate of hypoglycemic episodes, except when exenatide QW was used in combination with sulfonylureas. The primary tolerability issues in the trials were gastrointestinal adverse events, particularly during the first weeks of use, although the rate of nausea during startup with exenatide QW was lower than that with the related agents, exenatide twice daily and liraglutide once daily.
Exenatide QW may be particularly well suited to patients who desire the benefits associated with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, including significant glycemic control, low risk of hypoglycemia, and moderate weight loss, but prefer the convenience of once-weekly dosing.
Electronic supplementary material
The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0101-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Endocrinology; Exenatide once weekly; GLP-1 receptor agonists; Incretin therapy; Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Aim: The Helping Evaluate Exenatide in overweight patients with diabetes compared with Long-Acting insulin (HEELA) study was designed to examine whether the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, exenatide, could improve HbA1c (≤7.4%) with minimal weight gain (≤1 kg) compared with insulin glargine.
Methods: Patients [body mass index (BMI) >27 kg/m2] with elevated cardiovascular risk and type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on two or three oral antidiabetes drugs (OADs) were randomized to add-on exenatide 5–10 μg b.i.d. (n = 118) or insulin glargine o.d. (titrated to target fasting plasma glucose ≤5.6 mmol/l; n = 117) for 26 weeks.
Results: The study population had baseline mean (s.d.) age of 56.5 (9.1) years and BMI of 34.1 (5.3) kg/m2, and 58.5% of patients were taking two OADs. Mean baseline HbA1c was 8.65 (0.68)% in the exenatide group and 8.48 (0.66)% in the insulin glargine group. The proportions of patients achieving the composite endpoint of HbA1c ≤7.4% with weight gain ≤1 kg were 53.4% for the exenatide group and 19.8% for the insulin glargine group (p < 0.001 for exenatide vs. insulin glargine). Exenatide and insulin glargine did not demonstrate a significant difference in HbA1c improvements [least square (LS) mean [s.e.m.]: −1.25 [0.09]% and −1.26 [0.09]% respectively; p = 0.924], but had divergent effects on body weight (−2.73 [0.31] vs. +2.98 [0.31] kg respectively, p < 0.001) after 26 weeks. There were more treatment-related adverse events with exenatide but a lower incidence of nocturnal hypoglycaemia, with no differences in overall or severe hypoglycaemia.
Conclusions: Additional treatment with exenatide resulted in significantly more overweight and obese patients with an elevated cardiovascular risk and type 2 diabetes achieving better glycaemic control with minimal weight gain compared with insulin glargine.
exenatide; glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonist; glycaemic control; insulin glargine; randomized controlled trial; type 2 diabetes; weight gain
To assess change in patient-reported outcomes in subjects with type 2 diabetes treated with exenatide once weekly compared with those treated with sitagliptin or pioglitazone.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
In this 26-week randomized, multicenter, double-dummy study, 491 subjects received 2 mg of exenatide once weekly or maximum daily doses of sitagliptin (100 mg) or pioglitazone (45 mg) on a background of metformin. Weight-related quality of life, health utility, psychological well-being, and diabetes treatment satisfaction were assessed at baseline and week 26. Mean group changes from baseline to week 26 were estimated by ANCOVA.
Weight-related quality of life total scores improved significantly in the exenatide once weekly and sitagliptin arms only; the exenatide once weekly group experienced significantly greater improvement than the pioglitazone group in weight-related quality of life total scores and in several domain scores. Health utility scores improved significantly for exenatide once weekly and sitagliptin groups (P < 0.05) with no significant difference between the exenatide once weekly group and either comparison group. All groups experienced significant improvements on the psychological well-being global scale and all six domain scores, with no significant difference between the exenatide once weekly group and either comparator. All groups experienced significant improvements in total diabetes treatment satisfaction scores. The exenatide once weekly group experienced greater improvement than the sitagliptin group in treatment satisfaction total scores.
In combination with clinical outcomes from this study, these results indicate it is possible for patients treated with metformin to initiate exenatide therapy with potential benefits in both clinical and patient-reported outcomes.
To share our clinical experience with exenatide in obese North Indian subjects with type 2 diabetes.
Materials and Methods:
We share our experience with use of exenatide in 74 patients treated at Indraprastha Apollo Hospital, a tertiary care centre in New Delhi, India Subjects included obese / overweight subjects (mean weight and BMI; 97.67 ± 5.6 kg and 34.56 kg/m2) with known history of type 2 DM (Mean: 9 ± 5.6 years) and maintaining suboptimal glycemic control (HbA1c >7%) on oral antidiabetic agents, with or without basal insulin. Metformin and sulphonylureas were continued (with dose adjustment if indicated), as was basal insulin (glargine / detemir). TZDs and DPP4 inhibitors were discontinued. The dose of exenatide was increased to 10 mcg twice a day after 4-12 weeks. 56 patients completed minimum 3 month therapy. 42 patients completed 6 months, 32, 9 months and 25 completed 12 months. Data of patients who had completed at-least 3 months of therapy was included for analysis.
Results and Discussion:
69.77, 67.44, and 13.95% of the patients were receiving metformin, secretagogues or thiazolidinediones alone or in combination; 17.76% of the patients were on basal insulin. The change in fasting and post-prandial blood glucose levels were significant at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months with p-value <0.05. The mean weight loss at one, three, and six months and one year was 1.7 ± 1.3, 3.8 ± 2.5, 6.3 ± 3.4, and 8.3 ± 4.3 kg, respectively (P <0.05). The mean HbA1c (baseline: 8.8 ± 1.3%) at 3, 6 months and at one year was 7.8 ± 0.9, 7.7 ± 0.8 and 7.2 ± 0.8 (P <0.05). Thirty-five percent of the patients had a ‘good’ A1c value (< 7%) at the end of 12 months. 13 patients discontinued exenatide (three due to lack of response, six due to cost of therapy and four due to severe nausea). Nausea was the most common side effect, occurring in 95% patients within 1 month, although the incidence declined with passage of time.
Clinical use of Exenatide is associated with significant improvement in glycemic control and major weight loss (8.3±4.3 kg at 1 year) in obese subjects with type 2 diabetes. Nausea is the most common side effect. In conclusion, exenatide is a effective and useful option for treatment of type 2 diabetes in obese Indian subjects.
Asian Indians; obese; type 2 diabetes mellitus
Exenatide twice daily is a first-in-class glucagon-like peptide receptor agonist approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The objective of this analysis was to evaluate the safety profile of exenatide twice daily and to compare its profile with that of a pooled comparator (placebo and insulin) in patients with type 2 diabetes.
Data from 19 completed, randomized, controlled clinical trials of exenatide twice daily (5 μg and 10 μg) were pooled and analyzed; the pooled data included 5594 intent-to-treat patients who were followed for 12–52 weeks. Incidence rates, exposure-adjusted incidence rates, and 95% confidence intervals around risk differences between groups were calculated.
Baseline demographics and exposure time were comparable between groups (exenatide, N = 3261; pooled comparator, N = 2333; mean exposure time 166–171 days). Transient, mild- to-moderate nausea was the most frequent adverse event with exenatide (36.9% versus 8.3% in the pooled comparator). The incidence of hypoglycemia (minor or major) with concomitant sulfonylurea (exenatide 26.5%, pooled comparator 20.7%) was higher than that without sulfonylurea (exenatide 3.1%, pooled comparator 2.7%) in all groups. Serious adverse events, discontinuations due to serious adverse events, and deaths were reported with similar frequency in the exenatide and pooled comparator groups. Composite exposure-adjusted incidence rates were not statistically different between groups for pancreatitis, renal impairment, or major adverse cardiac events; there was a difference in incidence rates for benign thyroid neoplasm (0.3% versus 0%).
Overall, this analysis, representing over 1500 patient-years of exposure, demonstrated that exenatide twice daily was safe and generally well tolerated in patients with type 2 diabetes. The incidence of most adverse events, including serious adverse events, was similar in both exenatide-treated and comparator-treated patients. The most distinct differences between groups were in gastrointestinal-related adverse events, which is consistent with other therapies within the glucagon-like peptide class.
exenatide; safety; adverse events; risk difference
To compare efficacy and safety of lixisenatide once daily versus exenatide twice daily in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Adults with diabetes inadequately controlled (HbA1c 7–10%) with metformin were randomized to lixisenatide 20 μg once daily (n = 318) or exenatide 10 μg twice daily (n = 316) in a 24-week (main period), open-label, parallel-group, multicenter study. The primary objective was a noninferiority assessment of lixisenatide versus exenatide in HbA1c change from baseline to week 24.
Lixisenatide once daily demonstrated noninferiority in HbA1c reduction versus exenatide twice daily. The least squares mean change was −0.79% (mean decrease 7.97 to 7.17%) for lixisenatide versus −0.96% (mean decrease 7.96 to 7.01%) for exenatide, and treatment difference was 0.17% (95% CI, 0.033–0.297), meeting a predefined noninferiority upper CI margin of 0.4%. Responder rate (HbA1c <7.0%) and improvements in fasting plasma glucose were comparable. Both agents induced weight loss (from 94.5 to 91.7 kg and from 96.7 to 92.9 kg with lixisenatide and exenatide, respectively). Incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar for lixisenatide and exenatide, as was incidence of serious AEs (2.8 and 2.2%, respectively). Discontinuations attributable to AEs occurred in 33 lixisenatide (10.4%) and 41 exenatide (13.0%) patients. In the lixisenatide group, fewer participants experienced symptomatic hypoglycemia (2.5 vs. 7.9%; P < 0.05), with fewer gastrointestinal events (especially nausea; 24.5 vs. 35.1%; P < 0.05).
Add-on lixisenatide once daily in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with metformin demonstrated noninferior improvements in HbA1c, with slightly lower mean weight loss, lower incidence of hypoglycemia, and better gastrointestinal tolerability compared with exenatide twice daily.
To assess treatment satisfaction and weight-related quality of life (QOL) in subjects with Type 2 diabetes treated with exenatide once weekly (QW) or twice daily (BID).
In this 52-week randomized, multi-centre, open-label study, 295 subjects managed with diet and exercise and/or oral glucose-lowering medications received either exenatide QW or BID during weeks 1–30; thereafter, subjects receiving exenatide BID were switched to exenatide QW, with 258 total subjects receiving exenatide QW during weeks 30–52. Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire—status (DTSQ-s) and Impact of Weight on Quality of Life—Lite (IWQOL-Lite) were assessed at baseline and weeks 30 and 52. Mean group changes from baseline to week 30 were estimated by ancova; changes from week 30 to week 52 were assessed by Student’s t-test.
Statistically significant improvements from baseline to week 30 were observed in both treatment groups for DTSQ-s and IWQOL-Lite measures, with significantly greater reduction in perceived frequency of hyperglycaemia and greater satisfaction with continuing treatment in the QW group compared with the BID group. Effect sizes for change in DTSQ-s total scores were 0.84 QW, 0.64 BID; for IWQOL-Lite: 0.96 QW, 0.82 BID. Treatment satisfaction and QOL improved significantly between weeks 30 and 52 for those switching from BID to QW. Occurrence of adverse events did not affect patients’ improvements in treatment satisfaction and QOL.
Patients treated with exenatide QW or BID experienced significant and clinically meaningful improvements in treatment satisfaction and QOL. Patients who switched from exenatide BID to exenatide QW administration reported further significant improvements.
exenatide; treatment satisfaction; Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Diabetes is associated with a higher risk for adverse cardiovascular outcomes. To improve the health outcomes of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM), the American Diabetes Association (ADA) recommended target goals for the improvement of glycemic control and the reduction of cardiovascular risk factors associated with the disease. This retrospective analysis calculated the absolute benefit increase (ABI) of using exenatide once weekly (QW), a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, vs an oral glucose-lowering medication or insulin glargine to achieve ADA-recommended goals. The number needed to treat (NNT) to achieve these goals was also calculated and provides a useful clinical metric for comparing potential therapies from different drug classes.
Patient data from three double-blind or open label, 26-week, randomized, controlled trials were retrospectively analyzed separately. ABI and NNT were calculated by comparing the percentage of patients treated with exenatide QW (N = 641) vs metformin (N = 246), sitagliptin (N = 329), pioglitazone (N = 328), or insulin glargine (N = 223), who achieved a single glycemic, weight, blood pressure, or lipid goal or a composite of these recommended goals, during the DURATION-2, -3, and -4 clinical trials.
Significant ABIs favoring exenatide QW over all four glucose-lowering medications were observed for at least one HbA1c glycemic goal. NNTs of 4 and 5 were calculated when exenatide QW was compared to sitagliptin for attaining HbA1c goals of <7.0% and ≤6.5%, respectively. Additionally, significantly more patients using exenatide QW compared to sitagliptin, pioglitazone, or insulin glargine attained the composite goal of HbA1c <7% or ≤6.5%, without weight gain or hypoglycemia. Exenatide QW was also favored over sitagliptin and insulin glargine for the achievement of the composite goals of HbA1c <7% (or ≤6.5%), systolic blood pressure <130 mm Hg, and low-density lipoprotein <2.59 mmol/L. For most goals, exenatide QW and metformin had similar effects in treatment naïve patients.
This analysis assessed the between-therapy differences in achieving therapeutic goals with therapies commonly used for glycemic control in patients with T2DM. In clinical trials, exenatide QW assisted more patients in reaching the majority of ADA-recommended therapeutic goals than treatment with sitagliptin, pioglitazone, or insulin glargine.
NCT00637273, NCT00641056, NCT00676338
Number needed to treat; Absolute benefit; Exenatide; Type 2 diabetes; Diabetes mellitus; ADA treatment guidelines; GLP-1
Patient-reported measures can be used to examine whether drug differences other than clinical efficacy have an impact on outcomes that may be important to patients. Although exenatide and insulin glargine appear to have similar efficacy for treatment of type 2 diabetes, there are several differences between the two treatments that could influence outcomes from the patient's perspective. The purpose of the current study was to examine whether the two drugs were comparable as assessed by patient-reported outcomes using data from a clinical trial in which these injectable medications were added to pre-existing oral treatment regimens.
Patients were randomized to either twice daily exenatide or once daily insulin glargine during a 26-week international trial. At baseline and endpoint, five patient-reported outcome measures were administered: the Vitality Scale of the SF-36, The Diabetes Symptom Checklist – Revised (DSC-R), the EuroQol EQ-5D, the Treatment Flexibility Scale (TFS), and the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ). Change from baseline to endpoint was analyzed within each treatment group. Group differences were examined with General linear models (GLMs), controlling for country and baseline scores.
A total of 549 patients with type 2 diabetes were enrolled in the trial, and current analyses were conducted with data from the 455 per protocol patients (228 exenatide and 227 insulin glargine). The sample was primarily Caucasian (79.6%), with slightly more men (55.2%) than women, and with a mean age of 58.5 years. Paired t-tests found that both treatment groups demonstrated statistically significant baseline to endpoint change on several of the health outcomes instruments including the DSC-R, DTSQ, and the SF-36 Vitality subscale. GLMs found no statistically significant differences between groups in change on the health outcomes instruments.
This analysis found that both exenatide and insulin glargine were associated with significant improvements in patient-reported outcomes when added to oral medications among patients with type 2 diabetes. Despite an additional daily injection and a higher rate of gastrointestinal adverse events, treatment satisfaction in the exenatide group was comparable to that of the glargine group, possibly because of weight reduction observed in patients treated with exenatide.
Exenatide (also known as exendin-4) is a glucagon-like peptide-1 mimetic, which is indicated for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. The currently available formulation of this drug is a twice-daily exenatide (exenatide BID) injection that should be administered within 60 minutes of food. Once-weekly exenatide (exenatide QW) formulation is now being assessed in a clinical trial program. Exenatide QW has been shown to be the only noninsulin monotherapy to achieve glycosylated hemoglobin levels of <7% in >75% of treated patients. It has also demonstrated potential cardiovascular benefits by lowering total and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol concentrations, triglyceride levels, and both systolic and diastolic blood pressure. In addition, patients treated with exenatide QW achieved significant weight loss, which may also lead to significant cardiovascular risk reduction. Exenatide QW is associated with a lower incidence of gastrointestinal adverse effects compared with exenatide BID, and no patients treated with exenatide QW monotherapy experienced a confirmed hypoglycemic event. Exenatide QW results in 24-hour coverage with exenatide concentrations that are known to improve glycemic control and remain well tolerated in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This review defines the state of play with exenatide QW by critically appraising its role in clinical practice.
GLP-1 mimetic; HbA1c; weight loss
Type 2 diabetes (T2DM) is a disease of epidemic proportion associated with significant morbidity and excess mortality. Optimal glucose control reduces the risk of microvascular and possibly macrovascular complications due to diabetes. However, glycemic control is rarely optimal and several therapeutic interventions for the treatment of diabetes cause hypoglycemia and weight gain; some may exacerbate cardiovascular risk. Exenatide (synthetic exendin-4) is a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonist developed as a first-in-class diabetes therapy. This review presents an overview of the evolution of exenatide as a T2DM treatment, beginning with the seminal preclinical discoveries and continuing through to clinical pharmacology investigations and phase 3 clinical trials. In patients with T2DM, exenatide enhanced glucose-dependent insulin secretion, suppressed inappropriately elevated glucagon secretion, slowed gastric emptying, and enhanced satiety. In controlled phase 3 clinical trials ranging from 12 to 52 weeks, 10-mcg exenatide twice daily (ExBID) reduced mean HbA1c by -0.8% to -1.7% as monotherapy or in combination with metformin (MET), sulfonylureas (SFU), and/or thiazolidinediones (TZD); with mean weight losses of -1.2 kg to -8.0 kg. In controlled phase 3 trials ranging from 24 to 30 weeks, a 2-mg once-weekly exenatide formulation (ExQW) reduced mean HbA1c by -1.3% to -1.9%, with mean weight reductions of -2.3 to -3.7 kg. Exenatide was generally well-tolerated. The most common side effects were gastrointestinal in nature, mild, and transient. Nausea was the most prevalent adverse event. The incidence of hypoglycemia was generally low. By building upon early observations exenatide was successfully developed into an effective diabetes therapy.
Diabetes mellitus; Exenatide; Exendin-4; GLP-1 receptor agonist.
Glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) analogues are a new class of drugs used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes. They are given by injection, and regulate glucose levels by stimulating glucose-dependent insulin secretion and biosynthesis, suppressing glucagon secretion, and delaying gastric emptying and promoting satiety. This systematic review aims to provide evidence on the clinical effectiveness of the GLP-1 agonists in patients not achieving satisfactory glycaemic control with one or more oral glucose lowering drugs.
MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched to find the relevant papers. We identified 28 randomised controlled trials comparing GLP-1 analogues with placebo, other glucose-lowering agents, or another GLP-1 analogue, in patients with type 2 diabetes with inadequate control on a single oral agent, or on dual therapy. Primary outcomes included HbA1c, weight change and adverse events.
Studies were mostly of short duration, usually 26 weeks. All GLP-1 agonists reduced HbA1c by about 1% compared to placebo. Exenatide twice daily and insulin gave similar reductions in HbA1c, but exenatide 2 mg once weekly and liraglutide 1.8 mg daily reduced it by 0.20% and 0.30% respectively more than glargine. Liraglutide 1.2 mg daily reduced HbA1c by 0.34% more than sitagliptin 100 mg daily. Exenatide and liraglutide gave similar improvements in HbA1c to sulphonylureas. Exenatide 2 mg weekly and liraglutide 1.8 mg daily reduced HbA1c by more than exenatide 10 μg twice daily and sitagliptin 100 mg daily. Exenatide 2 mg weekly reduced HbA1c by 0.3% more than pioglitazone 45 mg daily.
Exenatide and liraglutide resulted in greater weight loss (from 2.3 to 5.5 kg) than active comparators. This was not due simply to nausea. Hypoglycaemia was uncommon, except when combined with a sulphonylurea. The commonest adverse events with all GLP-1 agonists were initial nausea and vomiting. The GLP-1 agonists have some effect on beta-cell function, but this is not sustained after the drug is stopped.
GLP-1 agonists are effective in improving glycaemic control and promoting weight loss.
Traditional blood glucose–lowering agents do not sustain adequate glycemic control in most type 2 diabetic patients. Preclinical studies with exenatide have suggested sustained improvements in β-cell function. We investigated the effects of 52 weeks of treatment with exenatide or insulin glargine followed by an off-drug period on hyperglycemic clamp–derived measures of β-cell function, glycemic control, and body weight.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
Sixty-nine metformin-treated patients with type 2 diabetes were randomly assigned to exenatide (n = 36) or insulin glargine (n = 33). β-Cell function was measured during an arginine-stimulated hyperglycemic clamp at week 0, at week 52, and after a 4-week off-drug period. Additional end points included effects on glycemic control, body weight, and safety.
Treatment-induced change in combined glucose- and arginine-stimulated C-peptide secretion was 2.46-fold (95% CI 2.09–2.90, P < 0.0001) greater after a 52-week exenatide treatment compared with insulin glargine treatment. Both exenatide and insulin glargine reduced A1C similarly: −0.8 ± 0.1 and −0.7 ± 0.2%, respectively (P = 0.55). Exenatide reduced body weight compared with insulin glargine (difference −4.6 kg, P < 0.0001). β-Cell function measures returned to pretreatment values in both groups after a 4-week off-drug period. A1C and body weight rose to pretreatment values 12 weeks after discontinuation of either exenatide or insulin glargine therapy.
Exenatide significantly improves β-cell function during 1 year of treatment compared with titrated insulin glargine. After cessation of both exenatide and insulin glargine therapy, β-cell function and glycemic control returned to pretreatment values, suggesting that ongoing treatment is necessary to maintain the beneficial effects of either therapy.
To evaluate efficacy and safety of switching from twice-daily exenatide to once-daily liraglutide or of 40 weeks of continuous liraglutide therapy.
RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS
When added to oral antidiabetes drugs in a 26-week randomized trial (Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes [LEAD]-6), liraglutide more effectively improved A1C, fasting plasma glucose, and the homeostasis model of β-cell function (HOMA-B) than exenatide, with less persistent nausea and hypoglycemia. In this 14-week extension of LEAD-6, patients switched from 10 μg twice-daily exenatide to 1.8 mg once-daily liraglutide or continued liraglutide.
Switching from exenatide to liraglutide further and significantly reduced A1C (0.32%), fasting plasma glucose (0.9 mmol/l), body weight (0.9 kg), and systolic blood pressure (3.8 mmHg) with minimal minor hypoglycemia (1.30 episodes/patient-year) or nausea (3.2%). Among patients continuing liraglutide, further significant decreases in body weight (0.4 kg) and systolic blood pressure (2.2 mmHg) occurred with 0.74 episodes/patient-year of minor hypoglycemia and 1.5% experiencing nausea.
Conversion from exenatide to liraglutide is well tolerated and provides additional glycemic control and cardiometabolic benefits.
Aims/Introduction: We assessed the long‐term (52 weeks) safety and efficacy of exenatide b.i.d. in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes and suboptimal glycemic control.
Materials and Methods: Participants completing a 24‐week randomized controlled trial of exenatide (5 μg, 10 μg or placebo b.i.d.) were invited to continue in a 28‐week open‐label extension study (5 μg, n = 64; 10 μg, n = 53). Safety measures included treatment‐emergent adverse events (TEAE). Efficacy measures included change from baseline in glycosylated hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels, proportion of participants achieving HbA1c target levels, fasting and seven‐point, self‐monitored blood glucose concentrations (SMBG), 1,5‐anhydroglucitol concentrations, and bodyweight.
Results: A total of 60 and 49 participants in the exenatide 5 and 10 μg groups completed the study. The 52‐week incidence of TEAE considered by investigators as related to the study drug was 80.6% (58/72) and 88.9% (64/72) in the exenatide 5 and 10 μg groups, respectively. Mild hypoglycemia and nausea were the most common TEAE. Most TEAE occurred during the first 24 weeks. Eight participants experienced serious adverse events. Exenatide treatment was associated with sustained decreases in HbA1c values, with 33.3–47.9% of participants achieving <6.9% HbA1c, sustained decreases in fasting plasma glucose concentrations and SMBG, and sustained increases in 1,5‐anhydroglucitol concentrations. Exenatide 10 μg was associated with sustained weight loss.
Conclusions: Long‐term exenatide treatment had a similar safety profile to that observed previously and was efficacious in improving glycemic control in Japanese patients with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT00577824). (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040‐1124.2011.00137.x, 2011)
Exenatide; Japan; Type 2 diabetes mellitus
Exenatide belongs to a new therapeutic class in the treatment of diabetes (incretin mimetics), allowing glucose-dependent glycaemic control in Type 2 diabetes. Randomised controlled trial data suggest that exenatide is as effective as insulin glargine at reducing HbA1c in combination therapy with metformin and sulphonylureas; with reduced weight but higher incidence of adverse gastrointestinal events. The objective of this study is to evaluate the cost effectiveness of exenatide versus insulin glargine using RCT data and a previously published model of Type 2 diabetes disease progression that is based on the United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study; the perspective of the health-payer of the United Kingdom National Health Service.
The study used a discrete event simulation model designed to forecast the costs and health outcome of a cohort of 1,000 subjects aged over 40 years with sub-optimally-controlled Type 2 diabetes, following initiation of either exenatide, or insulin glargine, in addition to oral hypoglycaemic agents. Sensitivity analysis for a higher treatment discontinuation rate in exenatide patients was applied to the cohort in three different scenarios; (1) either ignored or (2) exenatide-failures excluded or (3) exenatide-failures switched to insulin glargine. Analyses were undertaken to evaluate the price sensitivity of exenatide in terms of relative cost effectiveness. Baseline cohort profiles and effectiveness data were taken from a published randomised controlled trial.
The relative cost-effectiveness of exenatide and insulin glargine was tested under a variety of conditions, in which insulin glargine was dominant in all cases. Using the most conservative of assumptions, the cost-effectiveness ratio of exenatide vs. insulin glargine at the current UK NHS price was -£29,149/QALY (insulin glargine dominant) and thus exenatide is not cost-effective when compared with insulin glargine, at the current UK NHS price.
This study evaluated the relative cost effectiveness of insulin glargine versus exenatide in the management of Type 2 diabetes using a published model. Given no significant difference in glycaemic control and applying the additional effectiveness of exenatide over insulin glargine, with respect to weight loss, and using the current UK NHS prices, insulin glargine was found to be dominant over exenatide in all modelled scenarios. With current clinical evidence, exenatide does not appear to represent a cost-effective treatment option for patients with Type 2 diabetes when compared to insulin glargine.
Exenatide has been demonstrated to improve glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes, with no effect on heart rate corrected QT (QTc) at therapeutic concentrations. This randomized, placebo- and positive-controlled, crossover, thorough QT study evaluated the effects of therapeutic and supratherapeutic exenatide concentrations on QTc.
Intravenous infusion was employed to achieve steady-state supratherapeutic concentrations in healthy subjects within a reasonable duration (i.e. days). Subjects received exenatide, placebo and moxifloxacin, with ECGs recorded pre-therapy and during treatment. Intravenous exenatide was expected to increase heart rate to a greater extent than subcutaneous twice daily or once weekly formulations. To assure proper heart rate correction, a wide range of baseline heart rates was assessed and prospectively defined methodology was applied to determine the optimal QT correction.
Targeted steady-state plasma exenatide concentrations were exceeded (geometric mean ± SEM 253 ± 8.5 pg ml−1, 399 ± 11.9 pg ml−1 and 627 ± 21.2 pg ml−1). QTcP, a population-based method, was identified as the most appropriate heart rate correction and was prespecified for primary analysis. The upper bound of the two-sided 90% confidence interval for placebo-corrected, baseline-adjusted QTcP (ΔΔQTcP) was <10 ms at all time points and exenatide concentrations. The mean of three measures assessed at the highest steady-state plasma exenatide concentration of ∼500 pg ml−1 (ΔΔQTcPavg) was −1.13 [−2.11, −0.15). No correlation was observed between ΔΔQTcP and exenatide concentration. Assay sensitivity was confirmed with moxifloxacin.
These results demonstrated that exenatide, at supratherapeutic concentrations, does not prolong QTc and provide an example of methodology for QT assessment of drugs with an inherent heart rate effect.
cardiac repolarization; exenatide; thorough QT/QTc study