Safety and efficacy of once-weekly basal insulin Fc in people with type 2 diabetes previously treated with basal insulin: a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 study.

The burden of daily basal insulins often causes hesitancy and delays in the initiation of insulin therapy. Basal insulin Fc (BIF, insulin efsitora alfa), designed for once-weekly administration, is a fusion protein combining a novel single-chain insulin variant with a human immunoglobulin G (IgG) Fc domain. In this study, we explored the safety and efficacy of BIF in people with type 2 diabetes who had been previously treated with basal insulin. For this phase 2, 44-site (clinical research centres and hospitals), randomised, open-label, comparator-controlled, 32-week study in the USA, Puerto Rico, and Mexico, we enrolled participants with type 2 diabetes. Eligible participants had to be adults (aged ≥18 years) and to have been treated with basal insulin and up to three oral antidiabetic medicines. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to subcutaneous administration of BIF (BIF treatment group 1 [BIF-A1] or 2 [BIF-A2]) or insulin degludec. Randomisation was stratified by country, baseline HbA1c values (<8·5% or ≥8·5%; <69·4 or ≥69·4 mmol/mol), use of sulfonylureas (yes or no), and baseline BMI (<30 or ≥30 kg/m2). The randomisation scheme was performed using an interactive web-response system, which ensured balance between treatment groups. Different fasting glucose targets for the BIF-A1 (≤7·8 mmol/L or ≤140 mg/dL; titrated every 2 weeks), BIF-A2 (≤6·7 mmol/L or ≤120 mg/dL; titrated every 4 weeks), and degludec (≤5·6 mmol/L or ≤100 mg/dL) groups were selected. Patients randomly assigned to BIF received a one-time loading dose ranging from 1·5-3 times their calculated weekly dose. The first weekly dose was administered 1 week after the loading dose. We used interstitial fasting glucose measurements from the Dexcom G6 continuous glucose monitoring system to titrate the basal insulin. The primary measure of glycaemic control was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 32 for BIF. BIF was also compared with degludec (with a non-inferiority margin of 0·40%). The efficacy analysis set consisted of data from all randomised study participants who received at least one dose of the study medication and participants were analysed according to the treatment they were assigned. The safety population was the same as the efficacy analysis set. The completed trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03736785). Between Nov 15, 2018 and Feb 18, 2020, 399 participants were enrolled and randomised to BIF-A1 (n=135), BIF-A2 (n=132), or degludec (n=132); 202 (51%) were female and 197 (49%) were male. 379 were analysed for the primary outcome (BIF-A1: n=130; BIF-A2: n=125; degludec: n=124). Mean HbA1c change from baseline to week 32, the primary outcome, was -0·6% (SE 0·1%) for BIF-A1 and BIF-A2. Degludec achieved a change from baseline of -0·7% (0·1%). The pooled BIF analysis achieved non-inferiority versus degludec for the treatment difference in HbA1c (0·1% [90% CI -0·1 to 0·3]). The hypoglycaemia (≤3·9 mmol/L or ≤70 mg/dL) event rates (hypoglycaemia events per patient per year) in the BIF groups were 25% lower than those in the degludec group (treatment ratio BIF-A1 vs degludec was 0·75 [0·61-0·93]; and BIF-A2 vs degludec was 0·74 [0·58-0·94]). BIF was well tolerated; treatment-emergent adverse events were similar across groups. Weekly BIF achieved a similar efficacy compared with degludec despite higher fasting glucose targets in the BIF groups. Higher fasting glucose targets and lower glucose variability might have contributed to lower hypoglycaemia rates for BIF compared with degludec. These findings support continued development of BIF as a once-weekly insulin treatment for people with diabetes. Eli Lilly and Company.

Frias J ，Chien J ，Zhang Q ，Chigutsa E ，Landschulz W ，Syring K ，Wullenweber P ，Haupt A ，Kazda C ... -  《-》

Once-weekly tirzepatide versus once-daily insulin degludec as add-on to metformin with or without SGLT2 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes (SURPASS-3): a randomised, open-label, parallel-group, phase 3 trial.

Ludvik B ，Giorgino F ，Jódar E ，Frias JP ，Fernández Landó L ，Brown K ，Bray R ，Rodríguez Á ... -  《-》

Once-weekly insulin efsitora alfa versus once-daily insulin degludec in adults with type 1 diabetes (QWINT-5): a phase 3 randomised non-inferiority trial.

Insulin efsitora alfa (efsitora) is a once-weekly basal insulin. This phase 3 study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of efsitora compared with insulin degludec (degludec) in adults with type 1 diabetes. This randomised, 52-week, parallel-design, open-label, treat-to-target non-inferiority study conducted at 82 global health-care centres, randomly assigned (1:1) adults (ie, those aged ≥18 years) with type 1 diabetes glycated haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) 7·0-10·0% (53·0-85·8 mmol/mol) to efsitora (n=343) or, degludec (n=349), both in combination with insulin lispro. The primary endpoint was the change in HbA1c from baseline to week-26 (non-inferiority margin=0·4%). The trial was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05463744) and is completed. Between Aug 12, 2022, and May 7, 2024, of 893 participants enrolled, 692 (77%) participants were randomly assigned to once-weekly efsitora or once-daily degludec, and 623 (90%) participants completed the study. Mean HbA1c decreased from 7·88% (62·66 mmol/mol) at baseline to 7·41% (57·5 mmol/mol) at week 26 with efsitora and from 7·94% (63·3 mmol/mol) at baseline to 7·36% (56·9 mmol/mol) at week 26 with degludec. Mean HbA1c change from baseline to week 26 was -0·51% with efsitora and -0·56% with degludec (estimated treatment difference 0·052%, 95% CI -0·077 to 0·181; p=0·43), confirming a non-inferiority margin of 0·4% for efsitora compared with degludec. Rates of combined level 2 (<54 mg/dL [3·0 mmol/L]) or level 3 severe hypoglycaemia were higher with efsitora compared with degludec (14·03 vs 11·59 events per patient year of exposure; estimated rate ratio 1·21, 95% CI 1·04 to 1·41; p=0·016) during weeks 0-52, with the highest rates during weeks 0-12. Severe hypoglycaemia incidence was higher with efsitora (35 [10%] of 343) versus degludec (11 [3%] of 349) during weeks 0-52. Overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events was similar across treatment groups. One death not related to the study treatment occurred in the degludec group. In adults with type 1 diabetes, once-weekly efsitora showed non-inferior HbA1c reduction compared with daily insulin degludec. Higher rates of combined level 2 or level 3 hypoglycaemia and greater incidence of severe hypoglycaemia in participants treated with efsitora compared with participants treated with degludec might suggest the need for additional evaluation of efsitora dose initiation and optimisation in people with type 1 diabetes. Eli Lilly and Company.

Bergenstal RM ，Weinstock RS ，Mathieu C ，Onishi Y ，Vijayanagaram V ，Katz ML ，Carr MC ，Chang AM ... -  《-》

Once-Weekly Basal Insulin Fc Demonstrated Similar Glycemic Control to Once-Daily Insulin Degludec in Insulin-Naive Patients With Type 2 Diabetes: A Phase 2 Randomized Control Trial.

Basal insulin Fc (BIF) (insulin efsitora alfa; LY3209590), a fusion protein combining a novel single-chain insulin variant with a human IgG Fc domain, is designed for once-weekly basal insulin administration. This phase 2 study assessed the safety and efficacy of BIF versus degludec in insulin-naive patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) previously treated with oral antihyperglycemic medications. During this randomized, parallel, open-label study, 278 insulin-naive patients with T2D were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive BIF once weekly or degludec once daily over the 26-week treatment period. Both groups were titrated to fasting glucose of 80-100 mg/dL (4.4 to <5.6 mmol/L). The primary end point was HbA1c change from baseline to week 26 (noninferiority margin 0.4%). Secondary end points included fasting blood glucose (FBG), six-point glucose profiles, and rate of hypoglycemia. After 26 weeks of treatment, BIF demonstrated a noninferior HbA1c change from baseline versus degludec, with a treatment difference of 0.06% (90% CI -0.11, 0.24; P = 0.56). Both BIF and degludec treatment led to significant reductions in FBG from baseline. At week 26, the between-treatment difference for BIF versus degludec was 4.7 mg/dL (90% CI 0.1, 9.3; P = 0.09). The rate of level 2 hypoglycemia was low and not significantly different between treatment groups (BIF 0.22 events/patient/year, degludec 0.15 events/patient/year; P = 0.64); there was no severe hypoglycemia. The occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse events was also similar between BIF and degludec. Once-weekly BIF achieved excellent glycemic control similar to degludec, with no concerning hypoglycemia or other safety findings.

Bue-Valleskey JM ，Kazda CM ，Ma C ，Chien J ，Zhang Q ，Chigutsa E ，Landschulz W ，Haupt A ，Frias JP ... -  《-》

Novel Once-Weekly Basal Insulin Fc Achieved Similar Glycemic Control With a Safety Profile Comparable to Insulin Degludec in Patients With Type 1 Diabetes.

Basal Insulin Fc (BIF; insulin efsitora alfa; LY3209590), a fusion protein combining a novel single-chain insulin variant with a human IgG Fc domain, is designed for once-weekly basal insulin administration. This phase 2 study assessed safety and efficacy of BIF versus degludec in 265 patients with type 1 diabetes (T1D) using multiple daily injections. During this randomized, parallel, open-label study, patients with T1D were randomized (1:1) to receive BIF once weekly or degludec once daily over the 26-week treatment period. Both groups were titrated to a fasting glucose level of 80-100 mg/dL. The primary end point was HbA1c change from baseline to week 26 (noninferiority margin, 0.4%). Secondary end points included percent time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL), continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) fasting glucose (FG) level, and rate of hypoglycemia. After 26 weeks, patients receiving BIF had noninferior HbA1c change from baseline versus those receiving degludec, with a statistically significant treatment difference of 0.17% (90% CI 0.01, 0.32; P = 0.07) favoring the comparator. Percent TIR was similar for patients in the BIF (56.1%) and degludec (58.9%; P = 0.112) groups at week 26. FG values were significantly higher for patients receiving BIF (158.8 mg/dL) versus degludec (143.2 mg/dL; P = 0.003). Rates of CGM-derived hypoglycemia were not statistically significantly different for BIF and degludec over 24 h for level 1 (P = 0.960) or level 2 (P = 0.517) hypoglycemia during the treatment period. Occurrence of serious adverse events was similar between the BIF and degludec groups. Once-weekly BIF demonstrated noninferior glycemic control to once-daily degludec (treatment difference: 0.17% favoring degludec) and no difference in hypoglycemia or other safety findings in patients with T1D.

Kazda CM ，Bue-Valleskey JM ，Chien J ，Zhang Q ，Chigutsa E ，Landschulz W ，Wullenweber P ，Haupt A ，Dahl D ... -  《-》