OBJECTIVE Efficacy and safety of the glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analog oral semaglutide and the sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor empagliflozin were compared in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on metformin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS Patients were randomized to once-daily open-label treatment with oral semaglutide 14 mg (n = 412) or empagliflozin 25 mg (n = 410) in a 52-week trial. Key end points were change from baseline to week 26 in HbA_1c (primary) and body weight (confirmatory secondary). Two estimands addressed efficacy-related questions: treatment policy (regardless of trial product discontinuation or rescue medication) and trial product (on trial product without rescue medication) in all randomized patients. RESULTS Four hundred (97.1%) patients in the oral semaglutide group and 387 (94.4%) in the empagliflozin group completed the trial. Oral semaglutide provided superior reductions in HbA_1c versus empagliflozin at week 26 (treatment policy –1.3% vs. –0.9% [–14 vs. –9 mmol/mol], estimated treatment difference [ETD] –0.4% [95% CI –0.6, –0.3] [–5 mmol/mol (–6, –3)]; P < 0.0001). The treatment difference in HbA_1c significantly favored oral semaglutide at week 26 for the trial product estimand (–1.4% vs. –0.9% [–15 vs. –9 mmol/mol], ETD –0.5% [95% CI –0.7, –0.4] [–6 mmol/mol (–7, –5)]; P < 0.0001) and at week 52 for both estimands (P < 0.0001). Superior weight loss was not confirmed at week 26 (treatment policy), but oral semaglutide was significantly better than empagliflozin at week 52 (trial product −4.7 vs. −3.8 kg; P = 0.0114). Gastrointestinal adverse events were more common with oral semaglutide. CONCLUSIONS Oral semaglutide was superior to empagliflozin in reducing HbA_1c but not body weight at 26 weeks in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled on metformin. At week 52, HbA_1c and body weight (trial product estimand) were significantly reduced versus empagliflozin. Oral semaglutide was well tolerated within the established safety profile of GLP-1 receptor agonists.

Context Combination therapy with insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) is important for treating type 2 diabetes (T2D). This trial assesses the efficacy and safety of semaglutide, a GLP-1RA, as an add-on to basal insulin. Objective To demonstrate the superiority of semaglutide vs placebo on glycemic control as an add-on to basal insulin in patients with T2D. Design Phase 3a, double-blind, placebo-controlled, 30-week trial. Setting This study included 90 sites in five countries. Patients We studied 397 patients with uncontrolled T2D receiving stable therapy with basal insulin with or without metformin. Interventions Subcutaneous semaglutide 0.5 or 1.0 mg once weekly or volume-matched placebo. Main Outcome Measures Primary endpoint was change in glycated Hb (HbA_1c) from baseline to week 30. Confirmatory secondary endpoint was change in body weight from baseline to week 30. Results At week 30, mean HbA_1c reductions [mean baseline value, 8.4% (67.9 mmol/mol)] with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg were 1.4% (15.8 mmol/mol) and 1.8% (20.2 mmol/mol) vs 0.1% (1.0 mmol/mol) with placebo [estimated treatment difference (ETD) vs placebo, –1.35 (14.8 mmol/mol); 95% CI, –1.61 to –1.10 and ETD, –1.75% (19.2 mmol/mol); 95% CI, –2.01 to –1.50; both P < 0.0001]. Severe or blood glucose–confirmed hypoglycemic episodes were reported in 11 patients (17 events) and 14 patients (25 events) with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg, respectively, vs seven patients (13 events) with placebo (estimated rate ratio vs placebo, 2.08; 95% CI, 0.67 to 6.51 and estimated rate ratio vs placebo, 2.41; 95% CI, 0.84 to 6.96 for 0.5 and 1.0 mg; both P = nonsignificant). Mean body weight decreased with semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg vs placebo from baseline to end of treatment: 3.7, 6.4, and 1.4 kg (ETD, –2.31; 95% CI, –3.33 to –1.29 and ETD, –5.06; 95% CI, –6.08 to –4.04 kg; both P < 0.0001). Premature treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was higher for semaglutide 0.5 and 1.0 mg vs placebo (4.5%, 6.1%, and 0.8%), mainly due to gastrointestinal disorders. Conclusions Semaglutide, added to basal insulin, significantly reduced HbA_1c and body weight in patients with uncontrolled T2D vs placebo.

Sodium–glucose cotransporter (SGLT) inhibitors are new oral antidiabetes medications shown to effectively reduce glycated hemoglobin (A1C) and glycemic variability, blood pressure, and body weight without intrinsic properties to cause hypoglycemia in people with type 1 diabetes. However, recent studies, particularly in individuals with type 1 diabetes, have demonstrated increases in the absolute risk of diabetic ketoacidosis (DKA). Some cases presented with near-normal blood glucose levels or mild hyperglycemia, complicating the recognition/diagnosis of DKA and potentially delaying treatment. Several SGLT inhibitors are currently under review by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and European regulatory agencies as adjuncts to insulin therapy in people with type 1 diabetes. Strategies must be developed and disseminated to the medical community to mitigate the associated DKA risk. This Consensus Report reviews current data regarding SGLT inhibitor use and provides recommendations to enhance the safety of SGLT inhibitors in people with type 1 diabetes.

OBJECTIVE In patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes on basal insulin, prandial insulin may be initiated. We assessed the efficacy and safety of initiating insulin degludec/liraglutide fixed-ratio combination (IDegLira) versus basal-bolus insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A phase 3b trial examined patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes on insulin glargine (IGlar U100) 20–50 units/day and metformin, randomized to IDegLira or IGlar U100 and insulin aspart four or fewer times per day. RESULTS Glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) decreased from 8.2% (66 mmol/mol) to 6.7% (50 mmol/mol) with IDegLira, and from 8.2% (67 mmol/mol) to 6.7% (50 mmol/mol) with basal-bolus (estimated treatment difference [ETD] −0.02% [95% CI −0.16, 0.12]; −0.2 mmol/mol [95% CI −1.7, 1.3]), confirming IDegLira noninferiority versus basal-bolus (P < 0.0001). The number of severe or blood glucose–confirmed symptomatic hypoglycemia events was lower with IDegLira versus basal-bolus (risk ratio 0.39 [95% CI 0.29, 0.51]; rate ratio 0.11 [95% CI 0.08, 0.17]). Body weight decreased with IDegLira and increased with basal-bolus (ETD −3.6 kg [95% CI −4.2, −2.9]). Fasting plasma glucose reductions were similar; lunch, dinner, and bedtime self-monitored plasma glucose measurements were significantly lower with basal-bolus. Sixty-six percent of patients on IDegLira versus 67.0% on basal-bolus achieved HbA_1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol). Total daily insulin dose was lower with IDegLira (40 units) than basal-bolus (84 units total; 52 units basal). CONCLUSIONS In patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes on IGlar U100 and metformin, IDegLira treatment elicited HbA_1c reductions comparable to basal-bolus, with statistically superior lower hypoglycemia rates and weight loss versus weight gain.