OBJECTIVETo evaluate weekly subcutaneous albiglutide versus daily sitagliptin in renally impaired patients with type 2 diabetes and inadequately controlled glycemia on a regimen of diet and exercise and/or oral antihyperglycemic medications. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODSIn this phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, 52-week study, the primary study end point was HbA 1c change from baseline at week 26 in patients with renal impairment, as assessed with estimated glomerular filtration rate and categorized as mild, moderate, or severe ( ‡60 to £89, ‡30 to £59, and ‡15 to £29 mL/min/1.73 m 2 , respectively). Secondary end points included fasting plasma glucose (FPG), weight, achievement of treatment targets, hyperglycemic rescue, and safety. RESULTSBaseline demographics were similar across treatment and renal impairment groups with overall mean age of 63.3 years, BMI of 30.4 kg/m 2 , HbA 1c of 8.2% (66 mmol/mol), and diabetes disease duration of 11.2 years. HbA 1c change from baseline at week 26 was significantly greater for albiglutide than sitagliptin (20.83% vs. 20.52%, P = 0.0003). Decreases in HbA 1c , FPG, and weight were seen through week 52. Time to hyperglycemic rescue through week 52 was significantly longer for albiglutide than sitagliptin (P = 0.0017). Results of safety assessments were similar between groups, and most adverse events (AEs) were mild or moderate. The incidences of gastrointestinal AEs for albiglutide and sitagliptin were as follows: overall, 31.7%, 25.2%; diarrhea, 10.0%, 6.5%; nausea, 4.8%, 3.3%; and vomiting, 1.6%, 1.2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONSOnce-weekly albiglutide therapy in renally impaired patients with type 2 diabetes provided statistically superior glycemic improvement with almost similar tolerability compared with daily sitagliptin therapy.

Aims/hypothesisAdditional safe and effective therapies for type 2 diabetes are needed, especially ones that do not cause weight gain and have a low risk of hypoglycaemia. The present study evaluated albiglutide as monotherapy.MethodsIn this placebo-controlled study, 309 patients (aged ≥18 years) with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by diet and exercise and who were not using a glucose-lowering agent (HbA1c 7.0–10.0% [53.00–85.79 mmol/mol], body mass index 20–45 kg/m2, and fasting C-peptide ≥0.26 nmol/l) were randomised (1:1:1 on a fixed randomisation schedule using an interactive voice response system) to receive once-weekly albiglutide 30 mg (n = 102) or 50 mg (n = 102) or matching placebo (n = 105). The study treatments were blinded to both patients and study personnel. All study data were collected at individual patient clinic visits. The primary efficacy endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline to week 52. The primary analysis was applied to the intent-to-treat population. Additional efficacy and safety endpoints were assessed.ResultsAt week 52, both albiglutide 30 mg and 50 mg were superior to placebo in reducing HbA1c. The least-squares means treatment difference from placebo was −0.84% (95% CI −1.11%, −0.58%; p < 0.0001) with albiglutide 30 mg and −1.04% (−1.31%, −0.77%; p < 0.0001) with albiglutide 50 mg. Injection-site reactions were reported more frequently with albiglutide (30 mg: 17.8%; 50 mg: 22.2%) than with placebo (9.9%). Other commonly reported adverse events included nausea, diarrhoea, vomiting and hypoglycaemia; the incidences of these were generally similar across treatment groups.Conclusions/interpretationAlbiglutide is safe and effective as monotherapy and significantly lowered HbA1c levels over 52 weeks, did not cause weight gain, and had good gastrointestinal tolerability and a low rate of hypoglycaemia compared with placebo.Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00849017Funding This study was sponsored by GlaxoSmithKline.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00125-015-3795-1) contains peer-reviewed but unedited supplementary material, which is available to authorised users.

Superior glycaemic control was achieved with AVM compared with MET monotherapy. The superior glycaemic effects were shown to be durable over 18 months of treatment. AVM was associated with a significantly reduced BMD in comparison with MET at week 80 in the lumbar spine and total hip.

Systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) is a chronic autoimmune inflammatory disease affecting both adults and children. Belimumab is the only biologic approved for SLE, and the first in a class of drugs known as B-lymphocyte stimulator-specific inhibitors. The introduction of intravenous belimumab in 2011 was a major advance, being the first new therapy approved for SLE in over 50 years. As of April 2021, more than 7200 people with SLE have received belimumab in clinical studies, and it is approved in over 75 countries for the treatment of adults with SLE. A subcutaneous, self-injectable belimumab formulation was licensed in 2017 by both the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA). Belimumab was then approved for use in children in Europe, the USA and Japan in 2019, and China and Brazil in 2020. Recently, belimumab became the first FDA-approved drug for the treatment of adults with active lupus nephritis (LN), the most-common severe manifestation of SLE. Over the past 10 years, belimumab has established its position as a disease modifier in the SLE treatment paradigms. Robust evidence from randomised clinical studies and observational, real-world studies has demonstrated the tolerability and efficacy of belimumab for reducing disease activity and the risk of new, severe SLE flares. This enables patients to taper their glucocorticoid use, which limits damage accumulation. Significantly more patients with active LN met the criteria for renal responses and were at less risk of a renal-related event or death after receiving belimumab plus standard therapy, compared with standard therapy on top of mandatory steroid reduction. Ongoing clinical studies are evaluating belimumab’s effectiveness in various indications beyond SLE. Post-marketing and registry studies are gathering additional data on key areas such as pregnancy outcomes after belimumab exposure and belimumab co-administration with other biologics.

No abstract