Dataset Information

Liraglutide in people treated for type 2 diabetes with multiple daily insulin injections: randomised clinical trial (MDI Liraglutide trial).

ABSTRACT:

Study question

What are the effects of liraglutide, an incretin based treatment, on glycaemic control in people with type 2 diabetes treated with multiple daily insulin injections?

Methods

The study was a randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial with a parallel group design carried out at 13 hospital based outpatient clinics and one primary care unit in Sweden. Patients were considered eligible for inclusion if they had type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycaemic control (HbA1c concentrations ≥ 58 mmol/mol (7.5%) and ≤ 102 mmol/mol (11.5%)), a body mass index of 27.5-45 kg/m(2), and required multiple daily insulin injections. Overall, 124 participants were randomised 1:1 to subcutaneous liraglutide or placebo by minimisation allocation. The main outcome measure was change in HbA1c level from baseline to week 24.

Study answer and limitations

Liraglutide was associated with a significant reduction of 16.9 mmol/mol (1.5%) in HbA1c versus 4.6 mmol/mol (0.4%) for placebo, difference -12.3 mmol/mol (95% confidence interval -15.8 to -8.8 mmol/mol; -1.13%, -1.45 to -0.81 mmol/mol). Body weight was significantly reduced in participants in the liraglutide compared with placebo group (3.8 v 0.0 kg, difference -3.8, -4.9 to -2.8 kg), and total daily insulin doses were significantly reduced, by 18.1 units and 2.3 units (difference -15.8, -23.1 to -8.5 units). Reductions in mean and standard deviation of glucose levels estimated by masked continuous glucose monitoring were significantly greater in the liraglutide group than placebo group (-1.9 and -0.5 mmol/L). Neither group experienced severe hypoglycaemic events nor were there any significant differences in symptomatic or asymptomatic non-severe hypoglycaemia (<4.0 or <3.0 mmol/L). The mean number of non-severe symptomatic hypoglycaemic events (<4.0 mmol/L) during follow-up was 1.29 in the liraglutide group and 1.24 in the placebo group (P=0.96). One of the study's limitations was its relatively short duration. Sustained effects of liraglutide have, however, been found over lengthier periods in connection with other treatment regimens. Cardiovascular safety and potential adverse events during longer exposure to liraglutide need to be evaluated. Nausea was experienced by 21 (32.8%) participants in the liraglutide group and 5 (7.8%) in the placebo group and 3 (5%) and 4 (7%) participants in these groups, respectively, had any serious adverse event.

What this study adds

Adding liraglutide to multiple daily insulin injections in people with type 2 diabetes improves glycaemic control without an increased risk of hypoglycaemia, reduces body weight, and enables patients to lower their insulin doses.

Funding, competing interests, data sharing

This study was an investigator initiated trial, supported in part by Novo Nordisk and InfuCare. Potential competing interests have been reported and are available on the bmj.com.

Study registration

EudraCT 2012-001941-42.

SUBMITTER: Lind M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4624838 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:AimUse of the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist liraglutide has been shown to reduce weight. Different types of anthropometric measurements can be used to measure adiposity. This study evaluated the effect of liraglutide on sagittal abdominal diameter, waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio and adiponectin levels in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) treated with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI).Materials and methodsIn the multicentre, double-blind, placebo-controlled MDI-liraglutide trial, 124 individuals with T2D treated with MDI were randomized to either liraglutide or placebo. Basal values of weight, waist circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, sagittal abdominal diameter and adiponectin were compared with measurements at 12 and 24 weeks after randomization.ResultsBaseline-adjusted mean weight loss was 3.8 ± 2.9 kg greater in liraglutide than placebo-treated individuals (p < 0.0001). Waist circumference was reduced by 2.9 ± 4.3 cm and 0.2 ± 3.6 cm in the liraglutide and placebo groups, respectively, after 24 weeks (baseline-adjusted mean difference: 2.6 ± 4.0 cm, p = 0.0005). Corresponding reductions in sagittal abdominal diameter were 1.1 ± 1.7 cm and 0.0 ± 1.8 cm (baseline-adjusted mean difference: 1.1 ± 1.7 cm, p = 0.0008). Hip circumference was reduced in patients randomized to liraglutide (baseline-adjusted mean difference between treatment groups: 2.8 ± 3.8 cm, p = 0.0001), but there was no significant difference between the groups in either waist-to-hip ratio (baseline-adjusted mean difference: 0.0 ± 0.04 cm, p = 0.51) or adiponectin levels (baseline-adjusted mean difference: 0.8 ± 3.3 mg L-1, p = 0.17). Lower HbA1c and mean glucose levels measured by masked continuous glucose monitoring at baseline were associated with greater effects of liraglutide on reductions in waist circumference and sagittal abdominal diameter.ConclusionsIn patients with T2D, adding liraglutide to MDI may reduce abdominal and hip obesity to a similar extent, suggesting an effect on both visceral and subcutaneous fat. Liraglutide had greater effects on reducing abdominal obesity in patients with less pronounced long-term hyperglycaemia but did not affect adiponectin levels.

Project description:IntroductionThe effects of the GLP-1 analogue liraglutide on time in hypoglycaemia, time in hyperglycaemia, and time in range for type 2 diabetes patients initially treated with multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) were investigated. Variables associated with hypoglycaemia in the current population were also identified.MethodsAnalyses were based on data from a previously performed double-blind, placebo-controlled trial in which 124 MDI-treated patients with type 2 diabetes were randomized to liraglutide or placebo. Masked continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was performed at baseline and week 24 in 99 participants.ResultsThe mean time in hypoglycaemia was similar for participants receiving liraglutide and those receiving placebo after 24 weeks of treatment. Mean time in target was greater in the liraglutide group than in the placebo group: 430 versus 244 min/24 h (p < 0.001) and 960 versus 695 min/24 h (p < 0.001) for the two glycaemic ranges considered, 4-7 mmol/l and 4-10 mmol/l, respectively. Mean time in hyperglycaemia was lower in the liraglutide group: 457 versus 723 min/24 h (p = 0.001) and 134 versus 264 min/24 h (p = 0.023) for the two cutoffs considered, > 10 mmol/l and > 14 mmol/l, respectively. Lower mean glucose level, lower C-peptide, and higher glucose variability were associated with an increased risk of hypoglycaemia in both treatment groups. Higher proinsulin level was associated with a lower risk of hypoglycaemia in the liraglutide group.ConclusionFor type 2 diabetes patients initially treated with MDI, introducing liraglutide had a beneficial effect on glucose profiles estimated by masked CGM. Mean glucose level, glycaemic variability, C-peptide, and proinsulin level influenced the risk of hypoglycaemia in this population.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov, number (EudraCT nr: 2012-001941-42).FundingNovo Nordisk funded this study. The Diabetes Research Unit, NU-Hospital Group funded the journal's Rapid Service Fee.

Project description:ObjectiveTo investigate the long term effects of continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (insulin pump therapy) on cardiovascular diseases and mortality in people with type 1 diabetes.DesignObservational study.SettingSwedish National Diabetes Register, Sweden 2005-12.Participants18,168 people with type 1 diabetes, 2441 using insulin pump therapy and 15,727 using multiple daily insulin injections.Main outcome measuresCox regression analysis was used to estimate hazard ratios for the outcomes, with stratification of propensity scores including clinical characteristics, risk factors for cardiovascular disease, treatments, and previous diseases.ResultsFollow-up was for a mean of 6.8 years until December 2012, with 114,135 person years. With multiple daily injections as reference, the adjusted hazard ratios for insulin pump treatment were significantly lower: 0.55 (95% confidence interval 0.36 to 0.83) for fatal coronary heart disease, 0.58 (0.40 to 0.85) for fatal cardiovascular disease (coronary heart disease or stroke), and 0.73 (0.58 to 0.92) for all cause mortality. Hazard ratios were lower, but not significantly so, for fatal or non-fatal coronary heart disease and fatal or non-fatal cardiovascular disease. Unadjusted absolute differences were 3.0 events of fatal coronary heart disease per 1000 person years; corresponding figures were 3.3 for fatal cardiovascular disease and 5.7 for all cause mortality. When lower body mass index and previous cardiovascular diseases were excluded, results of subgroup analyses were similar to the results from complete data. A sensitivity analysis of unmeasured confounders in all individuals showed that an unmeasured confounders with hazard ratio of 1.3 would have to be present in >80% of the individuals treated with multiple daily injections versus not presence in those treated with pump therapy to invalidate the significantly lower hazard ratios for fatal cardiovascular disease. Data on patient education and frequency of blood glucose monitoring were missing, which might have influenced the observed association.ConclusionAmong people with type 1 diabetes use of insulin pump therapy is associated with lower cardiovascular mortality than treatment with multiple daily insulin injections.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To compare perinatal outcome and glycaemic control in two groups of pregnant diabetic patients receiving two insulin regimens. DESIGN:Randomised controlled open label study. SETTING:University affiliated hospital, Israel. PARTICIPANTS:138 patients with gestational diabetes mellitus and 58 patients with pregestational diabetes mellitus received insulin four times daily, and 136 patients with gestational diabetes and 60 patients with pregestational diabetes received insulin twice daily. INTERVENTION:Three doses of regular insulin before meals and an intermediate insulin dose before bedtime (four times daily regimen), and a combination of regular and intermediate insulin in the morning and evening (twice daily regimen). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Maternal glycaemic control and perinatal outcome. RESULTS:Mean daily insulin concentration before birth was higher in the women receiving insulin four times daily compared with twice daily: by 22 units (95% confidence interval 12 to 32) in patients with gestational diabetes and by 28 units (15 to 41) in patients with pregestational diabetes. Glycaemic control was better with the four times daily regimen than with the twice daily regimen: in patients with gestational diabetes mean blood glucose concentrations decreased by 0.19 mmol/l (0.13 to 0.25), HbA(1c) by 0.3% (0.2% to 0.4%), and fructosamine by 41 micromol/l (37 to 45), and adequate glycaemic control (mean blood glucose concentration <5.8 mmol/l) was achieved in 17% (8% to 26%) more women; in patients with pregestational diabetes mean blood glucose concentration decreased by 0.44 mmol/l (0.28 to 0.60), HbA(1c) by 0.5% (0.2% to 0.8%), and fructosamine by 51 micromol/l (45 to 57), and adequate glycaemic control was achieved in 31% (15% to 47%) more women. Maternal severe hypoglycaemic events, caesarean section, preterm birth, macrosomia, and low Apgar scores were similar in both dose groups. In women with gestational diabetes the four times daily regimen resulted in a lower rate of overall neonatal morbidity than the twice daily regimen (relative risk 0.59, 0.38 to 0.92), and the relative risk for hyperbilirubinaemia and hypoglycaemia was lower (0.51, 0.29 to 0.91 and 0.12, 0.02 to 0.97 respectively). The relative risk of hypoglycaemia in newborn infants to mothers with pregestational diabetes was 0.17 (0.04 to 0.74). CONCLUSIONS:Giving insulin four times rather than twice daily in pregnancy improved glycaemic control and perinatal outcome without further risking the mother.

Project description:BackgroundIntensive insulin therapy with continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) devices or multiple daily injections (MDI) reduces the risk of long-term vascular complications of type I diabetes (TID). Both treatments are used routinely, but there is little evidence to demonstrate superiority of either treatment. If CSII treatment reduces the risk of long-term complications or is associated with an improved quality of life (QoL), the additional cost of this therapy may be compensated for by a reduction in long-term health expenditure. If there is no demonstrable difference between treatments, health-care resources may be better invested elsewhere. This study aims to address this gap in knowledge.Methods/designThis is a pragmatic, randomised controlled trial (RCT). Fifteen centres, selected to represent a population with a broad demographic, will recruit 316 patients, newly diagnosed with TID, aged between 7 months and 15 years. Exclusion criteria include additional pathologies or treatments likely to affect glycaemic control and a first-degree relative with TID. Randomisation to CSII or MDI is stratified for age, gender and recruiting centre. The randomised treatment starts within 15 days of diagnosis. Patients will be trained to adjust their insulin dose according to carbohydrate intake and blood glucose level. Study visits coincide with routine clinic appointments at 3, 6, 9 and 12 months when data relating to routine clinical assessments, adverse events and concomitant medications are collected. Health utilities questionnaires are completed at each visit and a diabetes-specific QoL questionnaire (PedsQL) at diagnosis, 6 and 12 months. The primary outcome is glycaemic control (HbA1c) at 12 months. Secondary outcome measures include QoL, insulin use, growth and weight gain, adverse events and a health economics appraisal.DiscussionThis is the first adequately powered RCT comparing CSII and MDI in a non-selected population, treated according to standard practice guidelines. It will produce data that are meaningful to individual patients and local and national policymakers.Trial registrationThe study was registered with the European Clinical Trials Database on 4 November 2010, reference 2010-023792-25.

Project description:Aims/hypothesisHypomagnesaemia has been associated with insulin resistance and an increased risk of type 2 diabetes. Whether magnesium supplementation improves insulin sensitivity in people with type 2 diabetes and a low serum magnesium level is unknown.MethodsUsing a randomised, double-blind (both participants and investigators were blinded to the participants' treatment sequences), placebo-controlled, crossover study design, we compared the effect of oral magnesium supplementation (15 mmol/day) for 6 weeks with that of matched placebo in individuals with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (age ≥18 years, BMI 18-40 kg/m2, HbA1c <100 mmol/mol [11.3%], serum magnesium ≤0.79 mmol/l). Participants were recruited from the outpatient clinic and through advertisements. Randomisation to a treatment sequence order was done using a randomisation list. We used block randomisation and the two possible treatment sequences were evenly distributed among the trial population. The primary outcome was the mean glucose infusion rate during the final 30 min of a hyperinsulinaemic-euglycaemic clamp (i.e. M value). Secondary outcomes included variables of glucose control, insulin need, BP, lipid profile and hypomagnesaemia-related symptoms during follow-up.ResultsWe recruited 14 participants (50% women, 100% White, mean ± SD age 67±6 years, BMI 31±5 kg/m2, HbA1c 58±9 mmol/mol [7.4±0.9%]) with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes. Magnesium supplementation increased both mean ± SEM serum magnesium level (0.75±0.02 vs 0.70±0.02 mmol/l, p=0.016) and urinary magnesium excretion (magnesium/creatinine ratio, 0.23±0.02 vs 0.15±0.02, p=0.005), as compared with placebo. The M value of the glucose clamp did not differ between the magnesium and placebo study arms (4.6±0.5 vs 4.4±0.6 mg kg-1 min-1, p=0.108). During the 6 weeks of treatment, continuous glucose monitoring outcomes, HbA1c, insulin dose, lipid profile and BP also did not differ, except for a lower HDL-cholesterol concentration after magnesium compared with placebo (1.14±0.08 vs 1.20±0.09 mmol/l, p=0.026). Symptoms potentially related to hypomagnesaemia were similar for both treatment arms.Conclusions/interpretationDespite an albeit modest increase in serum magnesium concentration, oral magnesium supplementation does not improve insulin sensitivity in people with insulin-treated type 2 diabetes and low magnesium levels.Trial registrationEudraCT number 2021-001243-27.FundingThis study was supported by a grant from the Dutch Diabetes Research Foundation (2017-81-014).