Type 2 Diabetes, T2D
Conditions
Brief summary
The main purpose of this study is to determine the efficacy and safety of insulin efsitora alfa (LY3209590) administered weekly using a fixed dose escalation compared to insulin glargine in adults with type 2 diabetes (T2D) who are starting basal insulin therapy for the first time.
Interventions
Administered SC
Administered SC
Sponsors
Study design
Masking description
Sponsor will be blinded throughout the study.
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* Have a diagnosis of T2D according to the World Health Organization criteria. * Have an HbA1c of 7.0% to 10.0%, inclusive, at screening. * Are on a stable treatment of at least 1 antihyperglycemic medication, for at least 3 months prior to screening, and willing to continue the stable treatment for the duration of the study. * Are insulin naive Exceptions: * short-term insulin treatment for a maximum of 14 days, prior to screening, and * prior insulin treatment for gestational diabetes.
Exclusion criteria
* Have a diagnosis of type 1 diabetes (T1D), latent autoimmune diabetes, or specific type of diabetes other than T2D, for example, monogenic diabetes, diseases of the exocrine pancreas, or drug induced or chemical-induced diabetes. * Have a history of \>1 episode of ketoacidosis or hyperosmolar state or coma requiring hospitalization within 6 months prior to screening. * Have had severe hypoglycemia episodes within 6 months prior to screening. * Have known hemoglobinopathy, hemolytic anemia or sickle cell anemia, or any other traits of hemoglobin abnormalities known to interfere with the measurement of HbA1c. * Have had New York Heart Association Class IV heart failure or any of these cardiovascular conditions within 3 months prior to screening * acute myocardial infarction * cerebrovascular accident (stroke), or * coronary bypass surgery. * Have had gastric bypass (bariatric) surgery, restrictive bariatric surgery, for example Lap-Band, or sleeve gastrectomy within 1 year prior to screening * Have had significant weight gain or loss within 3 months prior to screening, for example, ≥5%.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) [Noninferiority Analysis] | Baseline, Week 52 | HbA1c is the glycated fraction of hemoglobin A. HbA1c is measured to identify average plasma glucose concentration over the last 2-3 months. Least Squares (LS) Mean was determined using ANCOVA model with Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Randomization Flag + Treatment (Type III sum of squares) as variables. Missing data at Week 52 were imputed by return-to-baseline multiple imputation approach. |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Fasting Glucose | Baseline, Week 52 | Change from baseline in fasting blood glucose measured by self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). LS mean was determined using ANCOVA model with Variable = Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Baseline + Hemoglobin A1c Stratum at Baseline + Treatment (Type III sum of squares). |
| Basal Insulin Dose at Week 52 | Week 52 | The insulin dose was recorded daily or weekly in an electronic diary. The average weekly basal insulin dose at Week 52 was reported. LS mean was determined using MMRM model with Baseline + Hemoglobin A1c Stratum at Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA use at Randomization + Treatment + Time + Treatment\*Time (Type III sum of squares) as variables. |
| Rate Per Year of Hypoglycemia Events | Baseline up to Week 52 | Rate of Composite Level 2 and 3 Hypoglycemia Events were reported. Hypoglycemia with glucose \<54 mg/dL (Level 2) or Severe Hypoglycemia confirmed by the investigator to be an event that required assistance for treatment (Level 3) was reported. A severe hypoglycemic event is characterized by altered mental or physical status requiring assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions for the treatment of hypoglycemia. Group mean was reported and determined by Negative binomial model using Number of episodes = Hemoglobin A1c at Baseline (%) + Treatment, with log (exposure in days/365.25) as an offset variable. |
| Percentage of Participants With Hypoglycemia Events (Incidence) | Week 52 | Incidence of hypoglycemic episodes is defined as 100 multiplied by the number of participants experiencing a hypoglycemic episode divided by the number of participants exposed to the study drug. Incidence of Composite Level 2 and 3 Hypoglycemia Events was reported. Hypoglycemic episodes are defined as an event that is associated with reported signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia with glucose \<54 mg/dL (Level 2) or severe hypoglycemia confirmed by the investigator to be an event that required assistance for treatment (Level 3). A severe hypoglycemic event is characterized by altered mental or physical status requiring assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions for the treatment of hypoglycemia. |
| Rate Per Year of Nocturnal Hypoglycemia Events | Baseline up to Week 52 | The event rate of participant-reported clinically significant glucose \<54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) or severe nocturnal hypoglycemia that occurs at night and presumably during sleep between midnight and 6:00 AM), measured during treatment period up to week 52. Group mean is reported here. Group mean is determined by Negative Binomial Model using Number of episodes = .Hemoglobin A1c at Baseline (%) + Treatment, with log (exposure in days/365.25) as an offset variable. |
| Percentage of Participants With Nocturnal Hypoglycemia Events (Incidence) | Week 52 | Incidence of nocturnal hypoglycemic episodes is defined as 100 multiplied by the number of participants experiencing a hypoglycemic episode divided by the number of participants exposed to the study drug. Nocturnal hypoglycemia is defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurs between bedtime and waking. The event rate of participant-reported clinically significant glucose \<54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) or severe nocturnal hypoglycemia that occurs at night and presumably during sleep between midnight and 6:00 AM), measured during treatment period up to week 52.. |
| Change From Baseline in HbA1c [Superiority] | Baseline, Week 52 | HbA1c is the glycated fraction of hemoglobin A. HbA1c is measured to identify average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time. Least Squares (LS) Mean was determined using ANCOVA model with Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Randomization Flag + Treatment (Type III sum of squares) as variables. Missing data at Week 52 were imputed by return-to-baseline multiple imputation approach. |
| Change From Baseline in Treatment-Related Impact Measure - Diabetes (TRIM-D) Total Score | Baseline, Week 52 | The TRIM-D is a self-administered instrument, which assesses the impact of diabetes treatment on participants' functioning and well-being across available diabetes treatments. The TRIM-D consists of 28 items, each assessed on a 5-point scale. The TRIM-D questionnaire consists of 5 sub-domains. Treatment Burden (6 items) Daily Life (5 items) Diabetes Management (5 items), Compliance (4 items), and Psychological Health (8 items), where each question is scored on a 1-5-point scale with a higher score indicating a better health state (less negative impact). Mean TRIM-D individual sub-domain scores and total scores are later transformed to a 0-100 scale for analysis. LS mean change in scores from baseline to 52 weeks for total score are presented here. LS mean was determined using MMRM model with BASELINE + Hemoglobin A1c Stratum at Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA. Use at Randomization + Treatment + Time + Treatment\*Time(Type III sum of squares) as variables. |
| Change From Baseline in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire - Change Version (DTSQ-c) | Baseline, Week 52 | The DTSQ-c is a validated, patient-reported questionnaire designed to assess perceived changes in satisfaction with diabetes treatment over time. It is especially useful in clinical trials comparing a new treatment to a previous one. The DTSQ-c includes 8 items, each scored on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from -3 (Much less satisfied) to +3 (Much more satisfied). A score of 0 indicates no change in perception. This outcome reports three domains: (1) Perceived frequency of hypoglycaemia - lower scores reflect fewer perceived episodes; (2) Perceived frequency of hyperglycaemia - lower scores reflect fewer perceived episodes; (3) Treatment satisfaction -Aggregated score from the remaining 6 items assessing satisfaction with treatment, convenience, flexibility, understanding, and willingness to continue. A higher scores indicating greater improvement in satisfaction. Total score range: -18 to +18. |
| Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | Week 52 | The SIM-Q is a brief 10-item measure developed to assess the simplicity and complexity of treatment for T2D. This version of the instrument assesses the simplicity and complexity of a single medication. Only the last 2 questions/items of the SIM-Q were completed by the study participants: 1. How simple or complex is your medication treatment for diabetes? 2. Overall, how simple or complex is it to manage your diabetes, including medication, checking your blood glucose levels, diet, and any other aspects of diabetes treatment? Participants were asked to provide responses to the study intervention at Week 52. Each item is scored on a 5-point scale ranging from Very complex to Very simple. Higher scores indicate a more favorable (simpler) treatment experience. |
| Change From Baseline in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) in Device Characteristics | Baseline, Week 52 | DID-EQ is a validated, self-administered, 10-item PRO instrument designed to assess participants' perceptions of diabetes injection delivery systems.This outcome measure reports only the Device Characteristics Subscale, which includes Items 1 through 7. These items evaluate specific features of injection devices such as: * Ease of preparation * Comfort during injection * Portability * Discreetness * Confidence in dose delivery * Ease of learning to use * Satisfaction with device features Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree. Responses are transformed to a 0-100 scale, where 0 represents most negative perception and 100 represents the most positive perception.Higher scores indicate more favorable perceptions of the injection device. LS Mean determined using ANCOVA model with Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Randomization + HbA1c Stratum at Baseline + Treatment + Time + Treatment\*Time (Type III sum of squares) as variables. |
| Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Week 52 | The DID-EQ is a validated, self-administered, 10-item PRO instrument designed to assess participants' perceptions of diabetes injection delivery systems. This outcome measure specifically reports the summary of DID-EQ scores for the 3 global items: * Item 8: Overall satisfaction with the injection device * Item 9: Ease of use of the injection device * Item 10: Convenience of the injection device Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale: * Strongly Disagree * Disagree * Agree * Strongly Agree Responses are transformed to a 0-100 scale, where: * 0 = Most negative perception * 100 = Most positive perception Higher scores indicate more favorable perceptions of the injection device's global characteristics. |
| Change From Baseline in Body Weight | Baseline, Week 52 | Change from baseline in body weight was reported. LS mean was determined using ANCOVA model with Variable = Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Baseline + Hemoglobin A1c Stratum at Baseline + Treatment (Type III sum of squares). |
Countries
Argentina, Mexico, Puerto Rico, United States
Participant flow
Participants by arm
| Arm | Count |
|---|---|
| Efsitora Participants received Insulin Efsitora Alfa (insulin efsitora; 500 U/ml) administered subcutaneously (SC) once weekly (QW) for 52 weeks, with titration using fixed-doses 100 U, 150 U, 250 U, and 400 U. | 397 |
| Glargine Participants received Insulin glargine (100 U/ml) administered SC once daily (QD) for 52 weeks with titration by standard sliding-scale dose adjustments. | 398 |
| Total | 795 |
Withdrawals & dropouts
| Period | Reason | FG000 | FG001 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study | Assigned Treatment by Mistake | 5 | 7 |
| Overall Study | Death | 3 | 3 |
| Overall Study | Due to Bariatric surgery | 1 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Lost to Follow-up | 3 | 8 |
| Overall Study | Non-compliance with study drug | 4 | 1 |
| Overall Study | Physician Decision | 1 | 2 |
| Overall Study | Protocol Deviation | 2 | 1 |
| Overall Study | Subject Missed the Schedule | 1 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Subject Moving out of State | 0 | 1 |
| Overall Study | The Patient Moved to Another City | 1 | 0 |
| Overall Study | Withdrawal by Subject | 14 | 14 |
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristic | Total | Efsitora | Glargine |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | 56.30 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.84 | 56.40 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 10.02 | 56.20 years STANDARD_DEVIATION 9.67 |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Hispanic or Latino | 674 Participants | 338 Participants | 336 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Not Hispanic or Latino | 120 Participants | 59 Participants | 61 Participants |
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 1 Participants | 0 Participants | 1 Participants |
| HemoglobinA1c (HbA1c) | 8.24 Percentage of HbA1c STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.99 | 8.20 Percentage of HbA1c STANDARD_DEVIATION 0.91 | 8.28 Percentage of HbA1c STANDARD_DEVIATION 1.06 |
| Race (NIH/OMB) American Indian or Alaska Native | 213 Participants | 106 Participants | 107 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Asian | 9 Participants | 3 Participants | 6 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Black or African American | 23 Participants | 13 Participants | 10 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) More than one race | 4 Participants | 3 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander | 2 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) Unknown or Not Reported | 2 Participants | 1 Participants | 1 Participants |
| Race (NIH/OMB) White | 542 Participants | 270 Participants | 272 Participants |
| Region of Enrollment Argentina | 341 participants | 170 participants | 171 participants |
| Region of Enrollment Mexico | 258 participants | 129 participants | 129 participants |
| Region of Enrollment United States | 196 participants | 98 participants | 98 participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Female | 397 Participants | 194 Participants | 203 Participants |
| Sex: Female, Male Male | 398 Participants | 203 Participants | 195 Participants |
Adverse events
| Event type | EG000 affected / at risk | EG001 affected / at risk |
|---|---|---|
| deaths Total, all-cause mortality | 3 / 397 | 3 / 398 |
| other Total, other adverse events | 104 / 397 | 121 / 398 |
| serious Total, serious adverse events | 26 / 397 | 21 / 398 |
Outcome results
Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) [Noninferiority Analysis]
HbA1c is the glycated fraction of hemoglobin A. HbA1c is measured to identify average plasma glucose concentration over the last 2-3 months. Least Squares (LS) Mean was determined using ANCOVA model with Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Randomization Flag + Treatment (Type III sum of squares) as variables. Missing data at Week 52 were imputed by return-to-baseline multiple imputation approach.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had HbA1c measurement at baseline or Week 52, excluding participants discontinuing the study treatment due to inadvertent enrollment. All measurements were included regardless of the use of study treatment or rescue medication.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) [Noninferiority Analysis] | -1.19 Percentage of HbA1c | Standard Error 0.0546 |
| Glargine | Change From Baseline in Hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) [Noninferiority Analysis] | -1.16 Percentage of HbA1c | Standard Error 0.0545 |
Basal Insulin Dose at Week 52
The insulin dose was recorded daily or weekly in an electronic diary. The average weekly basal insulin dose at Week 52 was reported. LS mean was determined using MMRM model with Baseline + Hemoglobin A1c Stratum at Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA use at Randomization + Treatment + Time + Treatment\*Time (Type III sum of squares) as variables.
Time frame: Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had evaluable data for this outcome.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Basal Insulin Dose at Week 52 | 289.1 Units per week (U/week) | Standard Error 6.81 |
| Glargine | Basal Insulin Dose at Week 52 | 332.8 Units per week (U/week) | Standard Error 6.68 |
Change From Baseline in Body Weight
Change from baseline in body weight was reported. LS mean was determined using ANCOVA model with Variable = Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Baseline + Hemoglobin A1c Stratum at Baseline + Treatment (Type III sum of squares).
Time frame: Baseline, Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline value for this outcome. Participants who discontinued the study drug due to inadvertent enrollment were excluded.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Change From Baseline in Body Weight | 3.86 Kilogram (kg) | Standard Error 0.19 |
| Glargine | Change From Baseline in Body Weight | 3.29 Kilogram (kg) | Standard Error 0.189 |
Change From Baseline in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) in Device Characteristics
DID-EQ is a validated, self-administered, 10-item PRO instrument designed to assess participants' perceptions of diabetes injection delivery systems.This outcome measure reports only the Device Characteristics Subscale, which includes Items 1 through 7. These items evaluate specific features of injection devices such as: * Ease of preparation * Comfort during injection * Portability * Discreetness * Confidence in dose delivery * Ease of learning to use * Satisfaction with device features Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale: Strongly Disagree, Disagree, Agree, Strongly Agree. Responses are transformed to a 0-100 scale, where 0 represents most negative perception and 100 represents the most positive perception.Higher scores indicate more favorable perceptions of the injection device. LS Mean determined using ANCOVA model with Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Randomization + HbA1c Stratum at Baseline + Treatment + Time + Treatment\*Time (Type III sum of squares) as variables.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline value for this outcome. Participants who discontinued the study drug due to inadvertent enrollment were excluded.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Change From Baseline in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) in Device Characteristics | 91.4 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.71 |
| Glargine | Change From Baseline in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) in Device Characteristics | 89.6 score on a scale | Standard Error 0.71 |
Change From Baseline in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire - Change Version (DTSQ-c)
The DTSQ-c is a validated, patient-reported questionnaire designed to assess perceived changes in satisfaction with diabetes treatment over time. It is especially useful in clinical trials comparing a new treatment to a previous one. The DTSQ-c includes 8 items, each scored on a 7-point Likert scale ranging from -3 (Much less satisfied) to +3 (Much more satisfied). A score of 0 indicates no change in perception. This outcome reports three domains: (1) Perceived frequency of hypoglycaemia - lower scores reflect fewer perceived episodes; (2) Perceived frequency of hyperglycaemia - lower scores reflect fewer perceived episodes; (3) Treatment satisfaction -Aggregated score from the remaining 6 items assessing satisfaction with treatment, convenience, flexibility, understanding, and willingness to continue. A higher scores indicating greater improvement in satisfaction. Total score range: -18 to +18.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline value for this outcome. Participants who discontinued the study drug due to inadvertent enrollment were excluded.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Change From Baseline in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire - Change Version (DTSQ-c) | Perceived frequency of hypoglycemia score | -1.2 Score on a scale | Standard Error 1.95 |
| Efsitora | Change From Baseline in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire - Change Version (DTSQ-c) | Perceived frequency of hyperglycemia score | -1.0 Score on a scale | Standard Error 1.84 |
| Efsitora | Change From Baseline in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire - Change Version (DTSQ-c) | Treatment satisfaction score | 15.1 Score on a scale | Standard Error 4.57 |
| Glargine | Change From Baseline in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire - Change Version (DTSQ-c) | Perceived frequency of hypoglycemia score | -1.3 Score on a scale | Standard Error 1.89 |
| Glargine | Change From Baseline in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire - Change Version (DTSQ-c) | Perceived frequency of hyperglycemia score | -0.9 Score on a scale | Standard Error 1.8 |
| Glargine | Change From Baseline in Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire - Change Version (DTSQ-c) | Treatment satisfaction score | 14.5 Score on a scale | Standard Error 4.73 |
Change From Baseline in Fasting Glucose
Change from baseline in fasting blood glucose measured by self-monitoring blood glucose (SMBG). LS mean was determined using ANCOVA model with Variable = Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Baseline + Hemoglobin A1c Stratum at Baseline + Treatment (Type III sum of squares).
Time frame: Baseline, Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline value for this outcome. Participants who discontinued the study drug due to inadvertent enrollment were excluded.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Change From Baseline in Fasting Glucose | -46.76 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) | Standard Error 2.0797 |
| Glargine | Change From Baseline in Fasting Glucose | -50.92 milligrams per deciliter (mg/dL) | Standard Error 2.0595 |
Change From Baseline in HbA1c [Superiority]
HbA1c is the glycated fraction of hemoglobin A. HbA1c is measured to identify average plasma glucose concentration over prolonged periods of time. Least Squares (LS) Mean was determined using ANCOVA model with Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA Use at Randomization Flag + Treatment (Type III sum of squares) as variables. Missing data at Week 52 were imputed by return-to-baseline multiple imputation approach.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had HbA1c measurement at baseline or Week 52, excluding participants discontinuing the study treatment due to inadvertent enrollment. All measurements were included regardless of the use of study treatment or rescue medication.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Change From Baseline in HbA1c [Superiority] | -1.19 Percentage of HbA1c | Standard Error 0.0546 |
| Glargine | Change From Baseline in HbA1c [Superiority] | -1.16 Percentage of HbA1c | Standard Error 0.0545 |
Change From Baseline in Treatment-Related Impact Measure - Diabetes (TRIM-D) Total Score
The TRIM-D is a self-administered instrument, which assesses the impact of diabetes treatment on participants' functioning and well-being across available diabetes treatments. The TRIM-D consists of 28 items, each assessed on a 5-point scale. The TRIM-D questionnaire consists of 5 sub-domains. Treatment Burden (6 items) Daily Life (5 items) Diabetes Management (5 items), Compliance (4 items), and Psychological Health (8 items), where each question is scored on a 1-5-point scale with a higher score indicating a better health state (less negative impact). Mean TRIM-D individual sub-domain scores and total scores are later transformed to a 0-100 scale for analysis. LS mean change in scores from baseline to 52 weeks for total score are presented here. LS mean was determined using MMRM model with BASELINE + Hemoglobin A1c Stratum at Baseline + Country + GLP-1 RA. Use at Randomization + Treatment + Time + Treatment\*Time(Type III sum of squares) as variables.
Time frame: Baseline, Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had a baseline and at least one post-baseline value for this outcome. Participants who discontinued the study drug due to inadvertent enrollment were excluded.
| Arm | Measure | Value (LEAST_SQUARES_MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Change From Baseline in Treatment-Related Impact Measure - Diabetes (TRIM-D) Total Score | 15.4 Score on a scale | Standard Error 0.608 |
| Glargine | Change From Baseline in Treatment-Related Impact Measure - Diabetes (TRIM-D) Total Score | 13.87 Score on a scale | Standard Error 0.607 |
Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items)
The DID-EQ is a validated, self-administered, 10-item PRO instrument designed to assess participants' perceptions of diabetes injection delivery systems. This outcome measure specifically reports the summary of DID-EQ scores for the 3 global items: * Item 8: Overall satisfaction with the injection device * Item 9: Ease of use of the injection device * Item 10: Convenience of the injection device Each item is rated on a 4-point Likert scale: * Strongly Disagree * Disagree * Agree * Strongly Agree Responses are transformed to a 0-100 scale, where: * 0 = Most negative perception * 100 = Most positive perception Higher scores indicate more favorable perceptions of the injection device's global characteristics.
Time frame: Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had evaluable data for this outcome. Participants who discontinued the study drug due to inadvertent enrollment were excluded.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Satisfied with the Injection Device (Disagree) | 0 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Easy to Use the Injection Device (Agree) | 14.0 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Satisfied with the Injection Device (Strongly Agree) | 84.3 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Satisfied with the Injection Device (Strongly disagree) | 0.3 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Convenient to Use the Injection Device (Strongly disagree) | 0.3 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Easy to Use the Injection Device (Strongly disagree) | 0.3 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Convenient to Use the Injection Device (Disagree) | 0 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Satisfied with the Injection Device (Agree) | 15.4 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Convenient to Use the Injection Device (Agree) | 17.4 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Easy to Use the Injection Device (Disagree) | 0 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Convenient to Use the Injection Device (Strongly agree) | 82.3 percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Easy to Use the Injection Device (Strongly Agree) | 85.8 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Convenient to Use the Injection Device (Strongly agree) | 78.3 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Satisfied with the Injection Device (Strongly disagree) | 1.2 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Satisfied with the Injection Device (Disagree) | 0.3 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Satisfied with the Injection Device (Agree) | 19.1 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Satisfied with the Injection Device (Strongly Agree) | 79.4 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Easy to Use the Injection Device (Strongly disagree) | 0.9 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Easy to Use the Injection Device (Disagree) | 0.3 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Easy to Use the Injection Device (Agree) | 17.1 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Easy to Use the Injection Device (Strongly Agree) | 81.7 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Convenient to Use the Injection Device (Strongly disagree) | 1.2 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Convenient to Use the Injection Device (Disagree) | 0.3 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants in Treatment Experience in Diabetes Injection Device Experience Questionnaire (DID-EQ) (3-Global Items) | Convenient to Use the Injection Device (Agree) | 20.3 percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version
The SIM-Q is a brief 10-item measure developed to assess the simplicity and complexity of treatment for T2D. This version of the instrument assesses the simplicity and complexity of a single medication. Only the last 2 questions/items of the SIM-Q were completed by the study participants: 1. How simple or complex is your medication treatment for diabetes? 2. Overall, how simple or complex is it to manage your diabetes, including medication, checking your blood glucose levels, diet, and any other aspects of diabetes treatment? Participants were asked to provide responses to the study intervention at Week 52. Each item is scored on a 5-point scale ranging from Very complex to Very simple. Higher scores indicate a more favorable (simpler) treatment experience.
Time frame: Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug and had evaluable data for this outcome. Participants who discontinued the study drug due to inadvertent enrollment were excluded.
| Arm | Measure | Group | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes: Complex | 4.7 Percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes : A Little Complex | 16.4 Percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes: Simple | 41.0 Percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes: Very Simple | 36.3 Percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: Very Complex | 2.5 Percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: Complex | 0.3 Percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: A Little Complex | 6.0 Percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: Simple | 37.2 Percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: Very Simple | 53.9 Percentage of participants |
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes: Very Complex | 1.6 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: Simple | 41.2 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes: Complex | 4.8 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: Complex | 1.2 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes : A Little Complex | 15.5 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes: Very Complex | 3.0 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes: Simple | 40.3 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: A Little Complex | 6.6 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - Overall How to Manage Diabetes: Very Simple | 36.4 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: Very Simple | 48.7 Percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants Reporting Treatment Experience Using the Simplicity of Diabetes Treatment Questionnaire (SIM-Q) Single Medication Status Version | SIMQF - How Simple or Complex Medication: Very Complex | 2.4 Percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants With Hypoglycemia Events (Incidence)
Incidence of hypoglycemic episodes is defined as 100 multiplied by the number of participants experiencing a hypoglycemic episode divided by the number of participants exposed to the study drug. Incidence of Composite Level 2 and 3 Hypoglycemia Events was reported. Hypoglycemic episodes are defined as an event that is associated with reported signs and symptoms of hypoglycemia with glucose \<54 mg/dL (Level 2) or severe hypoglycemia confirmed by the investigator to be an event that required assistance for treatment (Level 3). A severe hypoglycemic event is characterized by altered mental or physical status requiring assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions for the treatment of hypoglycemia.
Time frame: Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants With Hypoglycemia Events (Incidence) | 25.94 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants With Hypoglycemia Events (Incidence) | 29.90 percentage of participants |
Percentage of Participants With Nocturnal Hypoglycemia Events (Incidence)
Incidence of nocturnal hypoglycemic episodes is defined as 100 multiplied by the number of participants experiencing a hypoglycemic episode divided by the number of participants exposed to the study drug. Nocturnal hypoglycemia is defined as any hypoglycemic event that occurs between bedtime and waking. The event rate of participant-reported clinically significant glucose \<54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) or severe nocturnal hypoglycemia that occurs at night and presumably during sleep between midnight and 6:00 AM), measured during treatment period up to week 52..
Time frame: Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.
| Arm | Measure | Value (NUMBER) |
|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Percentage of Participants With Nocturnal Hypoglycemia Events (Incidence) | 3.53 percentage of participants |
| Glargine | Percentage of Participants With Nocturnal Hypoglycemia Events (Incidence) | 5.03 percentage of participants |
Rate Per Year of Hypoglycemia Events
Rate of Composite Level 2 and 3 Hypoglycemia Events were reported. Hypoglycemia with glucose \<54 mg/dL (Level 2) or Severe Hypoglycemia confirmed by the investigator to be an event that required assistance for treatment (Level 3) was reported. A severe hypoglycemic event is characterized by altered mental or physical status requiring assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or other resuscitative actions for the treatment of hypoglycemia. Group mean was reported and determined by Negative binomial model using Number of episodes = Hemoglobin A1c at Baseline (%) + Treatment, with log (exposure in days/365.25) as an offset variable.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Rate Per Year of Hypoglycemia Events | 0.50 Events per year | Standard Deviation 0.062 |
| Glargine | Rate Per Year of Hypoglycemia Events | 0.88 Events per year | Standard Deviation 0.152 |
Rate Per Year of Nocturnal Hypoglycemia Events
The event rate of participant-reported clinically significant glucose \<54 mg/dL (3.0 mmol/L) or severe nocturnal hypoglycemia that occurs at night and presumably during sleep between midnight and 6:00 AM), measured during treatment period up to week 52. Group mean is reported here. Group mean is determined by Negative Binomial Model using Number of episodes = .Hemoglobin A1c at Baseline (%) + Treatment, with log (exposure in days/365.25) as an offset variable.
Time frame: Baseline up to Week 52
Population: All randomized participants who received at least one dose of the study drug.
| Arm | Measure | Value (MEAN) | Dispersion |
|---|---|---|---|
| Efsitora | Rate Per Year of Nocturnal Hypoglycemia Events | 0.05 Events per year | Standard Error 0.013 |
| Glargine | Rate Per Year of Nocturnal Hypoglycemia Events | 0.08 Events per year | Standard Error 0.021 |