| Once-weekly Insulin Efsitora Alfa Versus Once-Daily Insulin Glargine U100 in Adults with Type 2 Diabetes Treated with Basal and Prandial Insulin (QWINT-4): A Phase 3, Randomised, Non-Inferiority Trial |
| Design |
Phase 3, randomised, parallel-design, open-label, non-inferiority trial
N= 730
|
| Objective |
To assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly efsitora compared with insulin glargine U100 in adults with type 2 diabetes treated with basal and prandial insulin |
| Study Groups |
Efsitora (n= 365)
Glargine U100 (n= 365)
|
| Inclusion Criteria |
Patients aged ≥18 years with type 2 diabetes, HbA1c of 7.0–10.0%, BMI ≤45.0 kg/m², willing to continue basal insulin and at least two injections of prandial insulin per day, treated with stable doses of zero to three non-insulin glucose-lowering agents for at least 90 days before screening and willing to continue stable treatment throughout the study. |
| Exclusion Criteria |
Patients treated with insulin mixtures |
| Methods |
Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either once-weekly efsitora or once-daily insulin glargine U100, administered subcutaneously using a multidose pen.
Efsitora was initiated with a one-time loading dose in eligible patients, followed by weekly dosing based on the participant’s pre-study basal insulin dose; glargine U100 was initiated at an equivalent dose to the pre-study basal insulin, with dose reductions for certain prior insulin regimens.
Basal insulin doses were titrated weekly through week 12 and monthly thereafter based on fasting blood glucose and hypoglycemia. All participants also received mealtime insulin lispro, which was titrated based on glucose levels, hypoglycemia, and clinical factors.
Blood glucose was monitored using a blood glucose meter and an intermittently worn continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) device throughout the study.
|
| Duration |
26-week treatment period, 5-week safety follow-up period |
| Outcome Measures |
Primary: Change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 (non-inferiority)
Secondary: Change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 (superiority), proportion of participants achieving HbA1c <7% at week 26 without nocturnal level 2 or 3 hypoglycaemia, event rate of participant-reported combined clinically significant or severe nocturnal hypoglycaemia, change in fasting blood glucose, time in, below, and above glucose range during 4-week CGM session, glycaemic variability during the CGM session before week 26, insulin doses at week 26, hypoglycaemia incidence, other adverse events
|
| Baseline Characteristics |
|
Efsitora (n= 365) |
Glargine U100 (n= 365) |
| Age, years |
58.3 ± 10.5 |
59.4 ± 10.5 |
| Female |
193 (53%) |
176 (48%) |
| Weight, kg |
87.8 ± 19.9 |
88.4 ± 19.7 |
| BMI, kg/m² |
31.85 ± 5.48 |
31.84 ± 5.48 |
|
Race
American Indian or Alaska native
Asian
Black or African American
White
|
46 (13%)
54 (15%)
20 (5%)
245 (67%)
|
45 (12%)
51 (14%)
11 (3%)
258 (71%)
|
|
Ethnicity
Hispanic or Latin American
Not Hispanic or Latin American
|
201 (55%)
163 (45%)
|
203 (56%)
161 (44%)
|
| HbA1c concentration at screening, % |
8.36 ± 0.78 |
8.36 ± 0.80 |
|
Fasting serum glucose, mg/dL
|
148.3 ± 49.4 |
152.9 ± 54.7 |
|
eGFR, mL/min/1.73 m²
<60
≥60 to <90
≥90
|
48 (13%)
122 (33%)
195 (53%)
|
61 (17%)
117 (32%)
187 (51%)
|
|
Duration of diabetes, years
|
16.6 ± 8.8 |
16.9 ± 9.0 |
|
Non-insulin glucose-lowering agents at screening
Biguanides (metformin)
SGLT2 inhibitors
DPP-4 inhibitors
GLP-1 receptor agonists
Combination oral non-insulin glucose-lowering agents
|
245 (67%)
115 (32%)
62 (17%)
63 (17%)
13 (4%)
|
249 (68%)
97 (27%)
54 (15%)
68 (19%)
10 (3%)
|
|
Baseline total insulin dose, units/day
|
53.6 (37.9–77.9)
|
56.0 (38.8–82.5)
|
| Results |
|
Efsitora (n= 365) |
Glargine U100 (n= 365) |
p-value |
| Change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 (non-inferiority [NI]) |
-1.01% |
-1.00% |
(NI met) |
| Change in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 (superiority) |
7.17% |
7.18% |
0.85 |
| HbA1c <7% at week 26 without nocturnal level 2 or 3 hypoglycaemia |
139 (39%) |
130 (36%) |
- |
| Change in fasting glucose, mg/dL |
–33.4 |
-28.4 |
0.056 |
| Time in range (70 mg/dL to 180 mg/dL) |
60.7% |
58.6% |
0.15 |
|
Time below range
<54 mg/dL
54 mg/dL to 69 mg/dL
|
0.4%
1.2%
|
0.4%
1.1%
|
0.23
0.27
|
| Time above range (>180 mg/dL) |
37.6% |
39.9% |
0.11 |
|
Insulin doses at week 26, units/day
Total
Basal
Prandial
|
84.7
55.9
27.0
|
95.2
61.0
34.6
|
<0.001
0.0008
<0.001
|
| Combined clinically significant (level 2) or severe (level 3) hypoglycaemia |
203 (56%) |
203 (56%) |
- |
| Overall hypoglycaemia events per patient-year |
6.6 |
5.9 |
0.44 |
| Nocturnal hypoglycaemia events per patient-year |
0.67 |
1.00 |
0.058 |
|
Within-day glycaemic variability was similar during the 24 h period, significantly lower during the night-time period, and significantly higher during the daytime period for efsitora compared with glargine U100. Between-day glycaemic variability was similar during the daytime, night-time, and 24 h periods with efsitora versus glargine U100.
There was no difference in the rate of patient-reported composite level 2 and 3 hypoglycaemia over 24 hours.
|
| Adverse Events |
Treatment-emergent adverse events: 196 (54%) in the efsitora group vs 189 (52%) in the glargine U100 group. The most frequently reported in both groups were nasopharyngitis and urinary tract infection.
Serious adverse events: 25 (7%) in the efsitora group vs 23 (6%) in the glargine U100 group.
Deaths: 1 reported in each group (unrelated to treatment).
|
| Study Author Conclusions |
Efsitora showed non-inferior HbA1c reductions and similar rates of combined clinically significant or severe hypoglycaemia versus glargine U100 in participants with type 2 diabetes treated with basal and prandial insulin. These findings show that efsitora is a well-tolerated and efficacious once-weekly alternative to daily basal insulin, with a reduced injection frequency, for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes. |
| Critique |
This study was well-designed with a large, multinational sample size and robust methodology, including masked continuous glucose monitoring. However, the open-label design may introduce bias, and the study population's racial composition may limit generalizability. Additionally, the lack of specific timing for glargine U100 administration could affect the interpretation of glucodynamic data. |