Objective: This trial aimed to evaluate the glycemic control of polyethylene glycol loxenatide measured with continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), with the hypothesis that participants given PEG-Loxe would spend more time in time-in-range (TIR) than participants were given insulin glargine after 24 weeks of treatment.Methods: This 24-week, randomized, open-label, parallel-group study was conducted in the Department of Endocrine and Metabolic Diseases, Longhu Hospital, Shantou, China. Participants with T2DM, who were ≥45 years of age, HbA1c of 7.0%–11.0%, and treated at least 3 months with metformin were randomized (1:1) to receive PEG-Loxe or insulin glargine. The primary endpoint was TIR (blood glucose range: 3.9–10.0 mmol/L) during the last 2 weeks of treatment (weeks 22–24).Results: From March 2020 to April 2022, a total of 107 participants with T2DM were screened, of whom 78 were enrolled into the trial (n = 39 per group). At the end of treatment (weeks 22–24), participants given PEG-Loxe had a greater proportion of time in TIR compared with participants given insulin glargine [estimated treatment difference (ETD) of 13.4% (95% CI, 6.8 to 20.0, p < 0.001)]. The tight TIR (3.9–7.8 mmol/L) was greater with PEG-Loxe versus insulin glargine, with an ETD of 15.6% (95% CI, 8.9 to 22.4, p < 0.001). The time above range (TAR) was significantly lower with PEG-Loxe versus insulin glargine [ETD for level 1: −10.5% (95% CI: −14.9 to −6.0), p < 0.001; ETD for level 2: −4.7% (95% CI: −7.9 to −1.5), p = 0.004]. The time below range (TBR) was similar between the two groups. The mean glucose was lower with PEG-Loxe versus insulin glargine, with an ETD of −1.2 mmol/L (95% CI, −1.9 to −0.5, p = 0.001). The SD of CGM glucose levels was 1.88 mmol/L for PEG-Loxe and 2.22 mmol/L for insulin glargine [ETD -0.34 mmol/L (95% CI: −0.55 to −0.12), p = 0.002], with a similar CV between the two groups.Conclusion: The addition of once-weekly GLP-1RA PEG-Loxe to metformin was superior to insulin glargine in improving glycemic control and glycemic variability evaluated by CGM in middle-aged and elderly patients with T2DM.

AimTo report the global, regional, and national burden of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in 2019, assess its trends in the past, and forecast its trends in the future.MethodsThe main data source was the Global Burden of Disease 2019 database. We assessed the changes in T2DM burden from 1990 to 2019 with joinpoint regression analysis. Age-period-cohort analysis was used to forecast the T2DM incidence and mortality rate from 2020 to 2034.ResultsThe burden of T2DM has increased from 1990 to 2019 generally. The low-middle socio-demographic index (SDI) region had the highest increase in age-standardized incidence rate (ASIR), age-standardized prevalence rate (ASPR), age-standardized mortality rate (ASMR), and age-standardized disability-adjusted life years (ASDR) due to T2DM. Nationally, the increase in ASIR (r=0.151, p=0.046) and the decrease in ASMR (r=0.355, p<0.001) were positively correlated with SDIs. In 2019, the global ASIR, ASPR, ASMR, ASDR due to T2DM were 259.9 (95% UI 240.3-281.4), 5282.9 (95% UI 4853.6-5752.1), 18.5 (95% UI 17.2-19.7), and 801.5 (95% UI 55477000-79005200) per 100,000 population, respectively. Additionally, the ASIR (r=0.153, p=0.030) and ASPR (r=0.159, p=0.024) of T2DM were positively correlated with SDIs, while ASMR (r=-0.226, p=0.001) and ASDR (r=-0.171, p=0.015) due to T2DM were negatively correlated with SDIs. The ASIR was estimated to increase to 284.42, and ASMR was estimated to increase to 19.1 from 2030 to 2034, per 100,000 population.ConclusionGlobally, the burden of T2DM has increased in the past and was forecast to continue increasing. Greater investment in T2DM prevention is needed.

AimTo evaluate the treatment effect Fand pharmacoeconomic value of Dugaglutide in women with type 2 diabetes.MethodsWomen (n=96) with type 2 diabetes recruited from June 2019 to December 2021 were randomized into two equal groups. The control group was treated with Liraglutide, and the observation group was treated with Dulaglutide, both for 24 weeks. The blood glucose levels, biochemical index, insulin resistance index (HOMA-IR), cost-effect ratio (CER), and drug safety were determined and compared between the two groups.ResultsBlood glucose levels, the biochemical index, and HOMA-IR were lower in both groups after the treatment (P < 0.05), and there was no statistical difference in the blood glucose levels, biochemical index and HOMA-IR between the two groups (P > 0.05). The CER levels did not differ statistically between the two groups (P > 0.05). Both the cost and the incidence of drug side effects during solution injection were lower in the observation group than in the control group after 24 weeks of treatment (P < 0.05).ConclusionBoth Dulaglutide and Liraglutide can reduce blood glucose levels, improve biochemical index, and HOMA-IR levels in women with type 2 diabetes. Dulaglutide is more cost-effective and safe.Clinical trial registrationhttps://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx, identifier ChiCTR1900026514.