Efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide 2·0 mg versus 1·0 mg in patients with type 2 diabetes (SUSTAIN FORTE): a double-blind, randomised, phase 3B trial. Frías Juan P,Auerbach Pernille,Bajaj Harpreet S,Fukushima Yasushi,Lingvay Ildiko,Macura Stanislava,Søndergaard Anette L,Tankova Tsvetalina I,Tentolouris Nikolaos,Buse John B The lancet. Diabetes & endocrinology BACKGROUND:Semaglutide is an effective treatment for type 2 diabetes; however, 20-30% of patients given semaglutide 1·0 mg do not reach glycaemic treatment goals. We aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of once-weekly semaglutide 2·0 mg versus 1·0 mg in adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes on a stable dose of metformin with or without a sulfonylurea. METHODS:We did a 40-week, randomised, active-controlled, parallel-group, double-blind, phase 3B trial (SUSTAIN FORTE) at 125 outpatient clinics in ten countries. Participants (≥18 years) with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (HbA 8·0-10·0%) with metformin and with or without sulfonylurea were randomly assigned (1:1) by an interactive web-response system to 2·0 mg or 1·0 mg once-weekly semaglutide. Participants, site personnel, the clinical study group, and investigators were masked to the randomised treatment. Outcomes included change from baseline at week 40 in HbA (primary outcome) and bodyweight (secondary confirmatory outcome), evaluated through trial product estimand (no treatment discontinuation or without rescue medication) and treatment policy estimand (regardless of treatment discontinuation or rescue medication) strategies. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03989232; EudraCT, 2018-004529-96; and WHO, U1111-1224-5162. FINDINGS:Between June 19 and Nov 28, 2019, of 1515 adults assessed for eligibility, 961 participants (mean age 58·0 years [SD 10·0]; 398 [41%] women) were included. Participants were randomly assigned to once-weekly semaglutide 2·0 mg (n=480 [50%]) or 1·0 mg (n=481 [50%]); 462 (96%) patients in the semaglutide 2·0 mg group and 471 (98%) in the semaglutide 1·0 mg group completed the trial. Mean baseline HbA was 8·9% (SD 0·6; 73·3 mmol/mol [SD 6·9]) and BMI was 34·6 kg/m (SD 7·0). Mean change in HbA from baseline at week 40 was -2·2 percentage points with semaglutide 2·0 mg and -1·9 percentage points with semaglutide 1·0 mg (estimated treatment difference [ETD] -0·23 percentage points [95% CI -0·36 to -0·11]; p=0·0003; trial product estimand) and -2·1 percentage points with semaglutide 2·0 mg and -1·9 percentage points with semaglutide 1·0 mg (ETD -0·18 percentage points [-0·31 to -0·04]; p=0·0098; treatment policy estimand). Mean change in bodyweight from baseline at week 40 was -6·9 kg with semaglutide 2·0 mg and -6·0 kg with semaglutide 1·0 mg (ETD -0·93 kg [95% CI -1·68 to -0·18]; p=0·015; trial product estimand) and -6·4 kg with semaglutide 2·0 mg and -5·6 kg with semaglutide 1·0 mg (ETD -0·77 kg [-1·55 to 0·01]; p=0·054; treatment policy estimand). Gastrointestinal disorders were the most commonly reported adverse events (163 [34%] in the 2·0 mg group and 148 [31%] in the 1·0 mg group). Serious adverse events were similar between treatment groups, reported for 21 (4%) participants given semaglutide 2·0 mg and 25 (5%) participants given semaglutide 1·0 mg. Three deaths were reported during the trial (one in the semaglutide 1·0 mg group and two in the semaglutide 2·0 mg group). INTERPRETATION:Semaglutide 2·0 mg was superior to 1·0 mg in reducing HbA, with additional bodyweight loss and a similar safety profile. This higher dose provides a treatment intensification option for patients with type 2 diabetes treated with semaglutide in need of additional glycaemic control. FUNDING:Novo Nordisk. 10.1016/S2213-8587(21)00174-1

Outcomes of Various Classes of Oral Antidiabetic Drugs on Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease. JAMA internal medicine Importance:Several oral antidiabetic drug (OAD) classes can potentially improve patient outcomes in nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) to varying degrees, but clinical data on which class is favored are lacking. Objective:To investigate which OAD is associated with the best patient outcomes in NAFLD and type 2 diabetes (T2D). Design, Setting, and Participants:This retrospective nonrandomized interventional cohort study used the National Health Information Database, which provided population-level data for Korea. This study involved patients with T2D and concomitant NAFLD. Exposures:Receiving either sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, thiazolidinediones, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, or sulfonylureas, each combined with metformin for 80% or more of 90 consecutive days. Main Outcomes and Measures:The main outcomes were NAFLD regression assessed by the fatty liver index and composite liver-related outcome (defined as liver-related hospitalization, liver-related mortality, liver transplant, and hepatocellular carcinoma) using the Fine-Gray model regarding competing risks. Results:In total, 80 178 patients (mean [SD] age, 58.5 [11.9] years; 43 007 [53.6%] male) were followed up for 219 941 person-years, with 4102 patients experiencing NAFLD regression. When compared with sulfonylureas, SGLT2 inhibitors (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [ASHR], 1.99 [95% CI, 1.75-2.27]), thiazolidinediones (ASHR, 1.70 [95% CI, 1.41-2.05]), and DPP-4 inhibitors (ASHR, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.31-1.59]) were associated with NAFLD regression. SGLT2 inhibitors were associated with a higher likelihood of NAFLD regression when compared with thiazolidinediones (ASHR, 1.40 [95% CI, 1.12-1.75]) and DPP-4 inhibitors (ASHR, 1.45 [95% CI, 1.30-1.62]). Only SGLT2 inhibitors (ASHR, 0.37 [95% CI, 0.17-0.82]), not thiazolidinediones or DPP-4 inhibitors, were significantly associated with lower incidence rates of adverse liver-related outcomes when compared with sulfonylureas. Conclusions and Relevance:The results of this cohort study suggest that physicians may lean towards prescribing SGLT2 inhibitors as the preferred OAD for individuals with NAFLD and T2D, considering their potential benefits in NAFLD regression and lower incidences of adverse liver-related outcomes. This observational study should prompt future research to determine whether prescribing practices might merit reexamination. 10.1001/jamainternmed.2023.8029

Cardiovascular and kidney outcomes with finerenone in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease: the FIDELITY pooled analysis. European heart journal AIMS:The complementary studies FIDELIO-DKD and FIGARO-DKD in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD) examined cardiovascular and kidney outcomes in different, overlapping stages of CKD. The purpose of the FIDELITY analysis was to perform an individual patient-level prespecified pooled efficacy and safety analysis across a broad spectrum of CKD to provide more robust estimates of safety and efficacy of finerenone compared with placebo. METHODS AND RESULTS:For this prespecified analysis, two phase III, multicentre, double-blind trials involving patients with CKD and type 2 diabetes, randomized 1:1 to finerenone or placebo, were combined. Main time-to-event efficacy outcomes were a composite of cardiovascular death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, or hospitalization for heart failure, and a composite of kidney failure, a sustained ≥57% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate from baseline over ≥4 weeks, or renal death. Among 13 026 patients with a median follow-up of 3.0 years (interquartile range 2.3-3.8 years), the composite cardiovascular outcome occurred in 825 (12.7%) patients receiving finerenone and 939 (14.4%) receiving placebo [hazard ratio (HR), 0.86; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.78-0.95; P = 0.0018]. The composite kidney outcome occurred in 360 (5.5%) patients receiving finerenone and 465 (7.1%) receiving placebo (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.67-0.88; P = 0.0002). Overall safety outcomes were generally similar between treatment arms. Hyperkalaemia leading to permanent treatment discontinuation occurred more frequently in patients receiving finerenone (1.7%) than placebo (0.6%). CONCLUSION:Finerenone reduced the risk of clinically important cardiovascular and kidney outcomes vs. placebo across the spectrum of CKD in patients with type 2 diabetes. KEY QUESTION:Does finerenone, a novel selective, nonsteroidal mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist, added to maximum tolerated renin-angiotensin system inhibition reduce cardiovascular disease and kidney disease progression over a broad range of chronic kidney disease in patients with type 2 diabetes? KEY FINDING:In a prespecified, pooled individual-level analysis from two randomized trials, we found reductions both in cardiovascular events and kidney failure outcomes with finerenone. Because 40% of the patients had an estimated glomerular filtration rate of >60 mL/min/1.73m2 they were identified solely on the basis of albuminuria. TAKE HOME MESSAGE:Finerenone reduces the risk of clinical cardiovascular outcomes and kidney disease progression in a broad range of patients with chronic kidney disease and type 2 diabetes. Screening for albuminuria to identify at-risk patients among patients with type 2 diabetes facilitates reduction of both cardiovascular and kidney disease burden. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehab777