This is the authors' abstract. We don't add key points for this paper.
AIMS: This study assessed efficacy and safety of the fixed ratio combination iGlarLixi 100/33 (insulin glargine 100 U/mL plus lixisenatide 33 μg/mL) in people with type 2 diabetes (PwT2D) in daily clinical practice. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This non-interventional, multicentre, prospective, single-arm 24-week study documented PwT2D with an HbA1c of 7.5%-10.0%, currently treated with a basal insulin supported oral therapy (BOT) in German primary care facilities, after the physician had decided to change treatment to iGlarLixi 100/33, independent of study participation. Primary end-point was the absolute change in HbA1c (%) from baseline. RESULTS: Of 93 participants included, 70 comprised the full analysis set for efficacy assessment. Approximately 24 weeks after switching to iGlarLixi 100/33 HbA1c (mean ± standard deviation) changed from 8.52 ± 0.82% by -0.74 ± 0.81% to 7.74 ± 0.76%, FPG from 174.3 ± 44.6 mg/dL (9.67 ± 2.48 mmol/L) by -32.9 ± 46.3 mg/dL (-1.83 ± 2.57 mmol/L) to 141.4 ± 34.1 mg/dL (7.85 ± 1.89 mmol/L) and body weight from 104.3 ± 22.5 kg by -3.0 ± 7.5 kg to 101.3 ± 21.6 kg (all p < 0.01). Furthermore, use of DPP4 inhibitors was significantly reduced from 34.8% to 6.8% of participants. Derived (from 7-point self-measured plasma glucose) time in range (TIR) increased and time above range (TAR) decreased after 24 weeks to target ranges (all p < 0.05). Flash glucose monitoring data of 20 patients showed similar patterns for TIR and TAR, respectively, and a reduction in time below range (p = 0.007). Hypoglycaemia events did not change significantly and were low in number. No severe hypoglycaemia was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Modifying antiglycaemic treatment from a BOT regimen to iGlarLixi 100/33 in suboptimal controlled PwT2D in daily clinical practice improved glycaemic control without increasing hypoglycaemia and with favourable body weight change.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Seufert et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: