1. Academic Validation
  2. A Randomized, Open-Label Comparison of Once-Weekly Insulin Icodec Titration Strategies Versus Once-Daily Insulin Glargine U100

A Randomized, Open-Label Comparison of Once-Weekly Insulin Icodec Titration Strategies Versus Once-Daily Insulin Glargine U100

  • Diabetes Care. 2021 Jul;44(7):1595-1603. doi: 10.2337/dc20-2878.
Ildiko Lingvay 1 2 John B Buse 3 Edward Franek 4 Melissa V Hansen 5 Mette M Koefoed 5 Chantal Mathieu 6 Jeremy Pettus 7 Karolina Stachlewska 5 Julio Rosenstock 8
Affiliations

Affiliations

  • 1 Endocrinology Division, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX [email protected].
  • 2 Department of Population and Data Sciences, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX.
  • 3 School of Medicine, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC.
  • 4 Mossakowski Medical Research Centre, Warsaw, Poland.
  • 5 Novo Nordisk A/S, Søborg, Denmark.
  • 6 Clinical and Experimental Endocrinology, University of Leuven, Leuven, Belgium.
  • 7 School of Medicine, University of California, San Diego, San Diego, CA.
  • 8 Dallas Diabetes Research Center at Medical City, Dallas, TX.
Abstract

Objective: Insulin icodec is a novel once-weekly basal Insulin analog. This trial investigated the efficacy and safety of icodec using different once-weekly titration algorithms.

Research design and methods: This was a phase 2, randomized, open-label, 16-week, treat-to-target study. Insulin-naive adults (n = 205) with type 2 diabetes and HbA1c 7-10% while treated with oral glucose-lowering medications initiated once-weekly icodec titrations A (prebreakfast self-measured blood glucose target 80-130 mg/dL; adjustment ±21 units/week; n = 51), B (80-130 mg/dL; ±28 units/week; n = 51), or C (70-108 mg/dL; ±28 units/week; n = 52), or once-daily Insulin glargine 100 units/mL (IGlar U100) (80-130 mg/dL; ±4 units/day; n = 51), all titrated weekly. Percentage of time in range (TIR) (70-180 mg/dL) during weeks 15 and 16 was measured using continuous glucose monitoring.

Results: TIR improved from baseline (means: A, 57.0%; B, 55.2%; C, 51.0%; IGlar U100, 55.3%) to weeks 15 and 16 (estimated mean: A, 76.6%; B, 83.0%; C, 80.9%; IGlar U100, 75.9%). TIR was greater for titration B than for IGlar U100 (estimated treatment difference 7.08%-points; 95% CI 2.12 to 12.04; P = 0.005). No unexpected safety signals were observed. Level 2 hypoglycemia (<54 mg/dL) was low in all groups (0.05, 0.15, 0.38, 0.00 events per patient-year of exposure for icodec titrations A, B, and C and IGlar U100, respectively), with no episodes of severe hypoglycemia.

Conclusions: Once-weekly icodec was efficacious and well tolerated across all three titration algorithms investigated. The results for icodec titration A (80-130 mg/dL; ±21 units/week) displayed the best balance between glycemic control and risk of hypoglycemia.

Figures