The efficacy and safety of setmelanotide in individuals with Bardet-Biedl syndrome or Alström syndrome: Phase 3 trial design.

BACKGROUND: A phase 2 trial has suggested that treatment with the melanocortin-4 receptor (MC4R) agonist setmelanotide is associated with a decrease in hunger and weight-related outcomes in participants with Bardet-Biedl syndrome (BBS) and Alström syndrome. Here, we present the study design of an ongoing, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial to assess the long-term efficacy and safety of setmelanotide for the treatment of obesity and hyperphagia in individuals with BBS or Alström syndrome (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03746522). METHODS: It was initially planned that ~30 participants aged ≥6 years with a clinical diagnosis of BBS or Alström syndrome would be enrolled. Participants with obesity as defined by a body mass index ≥30 kg/m2 (in those aged ≥16 years) or a weight >97th percentile (in those aged 6-15 years) are included. Participants are initially randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive setmelanotide or placebo for 14 weeks (period 1). Following period 1, all participants receive 38 weeks of open-label treatment with setmelanotide (period 2). In each treatment period, setmelanotide is administered at 3 mg once a day following completion of dose escalation. The primary endpoint is the proportion of participants aged ≥12 years achieving a clinically meaningful reduction from baseline (≥10%) in body weight after ~52 weeks (eg, following period 2). Safety and tolerability are assessed by frequency of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: This pivotal trial is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of setmelanotide for the treatment of obesity and hyperphagia in individuals with BBS and Alström syndrome. SUBMISSION CATEGORY: Study Design, Statistical Design, Study Protocols.

Improving public health by improving clinical trial guidelines and their application.

Evidence generated from randomized controlled trials forms the foundation of cardiovascular therapeutics and has led to the adoption of numerous drugs and devices that prolong survival and reduce morbidity, as well as the avoidance of interventions that have been shown to be ineffective or even unsafe. Many aspects of cardiovascular research have evolved considerably since the first randomized trials in cardiology were conducted. In order to be large enough to provide reliable evidence about effects on major outcomes, cardiovascular trials may now involve thousands of patients recruited from hundreds of clinical sites in many different countries. Costly infrastructure has developed to meet the increasingly complex organizational and operational requirements of these clinical trials. Concerns have been raised that this approach is unsustainable, inhibiting the reliable evaluation of new and existing treatments, to the detriment of patient care. These issues were considered by patients, regulators, funders, and trialists at a meeting of the European Society of Cardiology Cardiovascular Roundtable in October 2015. This paper summarizes the key insights and discussions from the workshop, highlights subsequent progress, and identifies next steps to produce meaningful change in the conduct of cardiovascular clinical research.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist albiglutide (HARMONY 2): 52 week primary endpoint results from a randomised, placebo-controlled trial in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with diet and exercise.

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS: Additional safe and effective therapies for type 2 diabetes are needed, especially ones that do not cause weight gain and have a low risk of hypoglycaemia. The present study evaluated albiglutide as monotherapy. METHODS: In this placebo-controlled study, 309 patients (aged ≥ 18 years) with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by diet and exercise and who were not using a glucose-lowering agent (HbA1c 7.0-10.0% [53.00-85.79 mmol/mol], body mass index 20-45 kg/m(2), and fasting C-peptide ≥ 0.26 nmol/l) were randomised (1:1:1 on a fixed randomisation schedule using an interactive voice response system) to receive once-weekly albiglutide 30 mg (n = 102) or 50 mg (n = 102) or matching placebo (n = 105). The study treatments were blinded to both patients and study personnel. All study data were collected at individual patient clinic visits. The primary efficacy endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 52. The primary analysis was applied to the intent-to-treat population. Additional efficacy and safety endpoints were assessed. RESULTS: At week 52, both albiglutide 30 mg and 50 mg were superior to placebo in reducing HbA1c. The least-squares means treatment difference from placebo was -0.84% (95% CI -1.11%, -0.58%; p < 0.0001) with albiglutide 30 mg and -1.04% (-1.31%, -0.77%; p < 0.0001) with albiglutide 50 mg. Injection-site reactions were reported more frequently with albiglutide (30 mg: 17.8%; 50 mg: 22.2%) than with placebo (9.9%). Other commonly reported adverse events included nausea, diarrhoea, vomiting and hypoglycaemia; the incidences of these were generally similar across treatment groups. CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION: Albiglutide is safe and effective as monotherapy and significantly lowered HbA1c levels over 52 weeks, did not cause weight gain, and had good gastrointestinal tolerability and a low rate of hypoglycaemia compared with placebo. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00849017 Funding This study was sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline.

Advancing basal insulin replacement in type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled with insulin glargine plus oral agents: a comparison of adding albiglutide, a weekly GLP-1 receptor agonist, versus thrice-daily prandial insulin lispro.

OBJECTIVE: GLP-1 receptor agonists may provide an alternative to prandial insulin for advancing basal insulin therapy. Harmony 6 was a randomized, open-label, active-controlled trial testing once-weekly albiglutide vs. thrice-daily prandial insulin lispro as an add-on to titrated once-daily insulin glargine. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients taking basal insulin (with or without oral agents) with HbA1c 7-10.5% (53-91 mmol/mol) entered a glargine standardization period, followed by randomization to albiglutide, 30 mg weekly (n = 282), subsequently uptitrated to 50 mg, if necessary, or thrice-daily prandial lispro (n = 281) while continuing metformin and/or pioglitazone. Glargine was titrated to fasting plasma glucose of <5.6 mmol/L, and lispro was adjusted based on glucose monitoring. The primary end point was the difference in the HbA1c change from baseline at week 26. RESULTS: At week 26, HbA1c decreased from baseline by -0.82 ± SE 0.06% (9.0 mmol/mol) with albiglutide and -0.66 ± 0.06% (7.2 mmol/mol) with lispro; treatment difference, -0.16% (95% CI -0.32 to 0.00; 1.8 mmol/mol; P < 0.0001), meeting the noninferiority end point (margin, 0.4%). Weight decreased with albiglutide but increased with lispro (-0.73 ± 0.19 kg vs. +0.81 ± 0.19 kg). The mean glargine dose increased from 47 to 53 IU (albiglutide) and from 44 to 51 IU (lispro). Adverse events for albiglutide versus lispro included severe hypoglycemia (0 vs. 2 events), documented symptomatic hypoglycemia (15.8% vs. 29.9%), nausea (11.2% vs. 1.4%), vomiting (6.7% vs. 1.4%), and injection site reactions (9.5% vs. 5.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Weekly albiglutide is a simpler therapeutic option than thrice-daily lispro for advancing basal insulin glargine therapy, resulting in comparable HbA1c reduction with weight loss and lower hypoglycemia risk.

Safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of albiglutide, a long-acting GLP-1-receptor agonist, in Japanese subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of albiglutide in Japanese subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: This randomized, single-blind, placebo-controlled study examined four doses/dose schedules of subcutaneously (sc) administered albiglutide: 15 mg weekly, 30 mg weekly, 50 mg biweekly, and 100 mg monthly (cohorts A-D, respectively) in 40 subjects (mean age 54.5 years, mean range of glycosylated hemoglobin [HbA(1c)] 7.1-8.3%), over a 4-week treatment period. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Safety parameters, including adverse events, clinical laboratory tests, vital signs, and 12-lead electrocardiogram; plasma concentrations of albiglutide; and pharmacodynamic parameters, including change from baseline and weighted mean AUC(0-4) in plasma glucose, glucagon, insulin, and C-peptide levels. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT00530309. RESULTS: At day 29, mean changes from baseline (vs. placebo) in fasting plasma glucose (FPG) were: cohort A, -1.92 mmol/L; B, -1.98 mmol/L; C, -1.74 mmol/L; D, -0.73 mmol/L; changes in weighted mean glucose AUC(0-4) were: cohort A, -2.86 mmol/L; B, -3.58 mmol/L; C, -2.51 mmol/L; D, -1.44 mmol/L (for FPG and AUC(0-4), all p < or = 0.002 except 100 mg sc monthly, p = NS); changes from baseline HbA(1c) were: cohort A, -0.58%; B, -0.57%; C, -0.63%; and D, -0.51% (all p < 0.03). Albiglutide sc had a median half-life of 5.3 days, plasma apparent systemic clearance of 68.7 mL/h, and apparent volume of distribution of 12.6 L. Incidence of adverse events was low and comparable to sc placebo in all albiglutide treatment arms except 100 mg sc monthly, where gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events were most common. Limitations of this study include the small sample size, short treatment duration, and enrollment of predominantly male subjects. CONCLUSIONS: Weekly and biweekly albiglutide improved glycemic control and were well-tolerated in Japanese subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of albiglutide, a long-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 mimetic, in patients with type 2 diabetes.

CONTEXT: Native glucagon-like peptide-1 increases insulin secretion, decreases glucagon secretion, and reduces appetite but is rapidly inactivated by dipeptidyl peptidase-4. Albiglutide is a novel dipeptidyl peptidase-4-resistant glucagon-like peptide-1 dimer fused to human albumin designed to have sustained efficacy in vivo. OBJECTIVES: The objectives were to investigate pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of albiglutide in type 2 diabetes subjects. METHODS: In a single-blind dose-escalation study, 54 subjects were randomized to receive placebo or 9-, 16-, or 32-mg albiglutide on d 1 and 8. In a complementary study, 46 subjects were randomized to a single dose (16 or 64 mg) of albiglutide to the arm, leg, or abdomen. RESULTS: Significant dose-dependent reductions in 24-h mean weighted glucose [area under the curve((0-24 h))] were observed, with placebo-adjusted least squares means difference values in the 32-mg cohort of -34.8 and -56.4 mg/dl [95% confidence interval (-54.1, -15.5) and (-82.2, -30.5)] for d 2 and 9, respectively. Placebo-adjusted fasting plasma glucose decreased by -26.7 and -50.7 mg/dl [95% confidence interval (-46.3, -7.06) and (-75.4, -26.0)] on d 2 and 9, respectively. Postprandial glucose was also reduced. No hypoglycemic episodes were detected in the albiglutide cohorts. The frequency and severity of the most common adverse events, headache and nausea, were comparable with placebo controls. Albiglutide half-life ranged between 6 and 7 d. The pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamic of albiglutide was unaffected by injection site. CONCLUSIONS: Albiglutide improved fasting plasma glucose and postprandial glucose with a favorable safety profile in subjects with type 2 diabetes. Albiglutide's long half-life may allow for once-weekly or less frequent dosing.

Fluid retention and vascular effects of rosiglitazone in obese, insulin-resistant, nondiabetic subjects.

OBJECTIVE: The use of thiazolidinedione (TZD) derivatives is associated with fluid retention, especially when combined with insulin. Because TZDs improve the metabolic effect of insulin, they may also reverse the blunted vascular response to insulin. We hypothesize that improvement of the action of insulin on vascular tone or permeability is the key mechanism of TZD-related fluid retention. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: In a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over study in 18 obese, nondiabetic subjects with features of the metabolic syndrome, we investigated the effects of a 12-week treatment with 4 mg rosiglitazone twice a day on glucose disposal, hemodynamics (including forearm vasoconstrictor response to nitric oxide [NO]), synthase inhibition by N-monomethyl-L-arginine-acetate (L-NMMA), vascular permeability (transcapillary escape rate of albumin), and plasma volume during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp (120 min, 120 mU/m(2) per min). RESULTS: As expected, rosiglitazone increased the glucose infusion rate during clamping. However, neither vascular permeability nor forearm blood flow response to hyperinsulinemia or L-NMMA was affected by rosiglitazone. Compared with placebo, rosiglitazone decreased diastolic blood pressure by 5 mmHg (95% CI 2.35-6.87, P = 0.0005) and increased plasma volume by 255 ml/1.73 m(2) (80-430, P = 0.007). Interestingly, the positive effect of rosiglitazone on glucose disposal correlated with change in foot volume (R(2) = 0.53, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Rosiglitazone improved insulin sensitivity but had no effect on NO-dependent vasodilatation in the forearm or vascular permeability in obese, insulin-resistant, nondiabetic subjects. As such, TZD-related fluid retention was not caused by improvement of the vascular actions of insulin. Nonetheless, rosiglitazone-induced improvement in insulin sensitivity appears to be correlated to edema formation.

Rosiglitazone/metformin fixed-dose combination compared with uptitrated metformin alone in type 2 diabetes mellitus: a 24-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study.

BACKGROUND: Management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) that involves uptitration of monotherapy to the maximum dose has been associated with delays in achieving glycemic control and an increased number of adverse events (AEs). Studies have reported the benefits of adding a thiazolidinedione to metformin (MET), but none has compared the effect of adding a thiazolidinedione to MET versus increasing the daily dose of MET to 3 g. OBJECTIVE: The goal of this study was to investigate the benefits of fixed-dose combination rosiglitazone and MET (RSG/MET) compared with high-dose MET monotherapy in patients with type 2 DM. METHODS: This was a 24-week, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel-group study. Patients previously treated with MET entered a 4-week, single-blind, run-in period with MET 2 g/d and were then randomized to RSG/MET 4 mg/2 g per day or MET 2.5 g/d. At week 8, medication was escalated to RSG/MET 8 mg/2 g per day or MET 3 g/d. The primary efficacy end point was change in glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) at week 24. Tolerability was assessed, including the frequency and severity of AEs. RESULTS: A total of 568 patients comprised the safety population (MET, 280; RSG/MET, 288) and 551 formed the intent-to-treat group (MET, 272; RSG/MET, 279). Baseline characteristics of the safety population were comparable in the 2 groups; body mass index (mean [SD]) was 32.2 (4.8) kg/m(2) and 32.1 (4.9) kg/m(2) in the RSG/MET and MET groups, respectively. RSG/MET reduced HbA(1c) (mean [SD]) from 7.4% (1.0%) to 7.1% (1.1%) at week 24, compared with a reduction from 7.5% (1.0%) to 7.4% (1.1%) with MET (treatment difference, -0.22%; P = 0.001). Fasting plasma glucose (mean [SD]) was reduced from 166.2 (29) to 144.1 (33) mg/dL with RSG/MET and from 169.3 (33) to 164.0 (37) mg/dL with MET (treatment difference, -18.3 mg/dL; P < 0.001). In addition, 54% of patients treated with RSG/MET achieved HbA(1c) levels <7.0%, compared with 36% with MET (odds ratio, 2.42; P < 0.001). RSG/MET increased homeostasis model assessment (HOMA) estimates of insulin sensitivity by 34.4% versus 6.5% with MET (treatment difference, 24.8%; P < 0.001). HOMA beta-cell function increased by 15.9% with RSG/MET versus 2.5% with MET (treatment difference, 14.0%; P < 0.001). RSG/MET decreased C-reactive protein by a mean of 39.4% versus 16.0% with MET (treatment difference, -33.8%; P < 0.001). RSG/MET was generally well tolerated, with the majority of AEs mild to moderate in nature. Serious AEs were reported in 3% of patients receiving RSG/MET and 2% with MET. Overall rates of gastrointestinal AEs were 23% with RSG/MET and 26% with MET; however, there was an increased incidence of diarrhea (14% vs 6%) and abdominal pain (9% vs 6%) with MET. There was a mean (SE) increase in weight with RSG/MET (1.3 [0.22] kg) and a mean decrease (-0.9 [0.26] kg) with MET. Patients receiving RSG/MET reported improvements in treatment satisfaction compared with MET. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, the RSG/MET fixed-dose combination (8 mg/2 g per day) was an effective and well-tolerated treatment for type 2 DM and enabled more patients to reach glycemic targets than high-dose MET (3 g/d).