Coviello, Andrea D.

OBJECTIVE To evaluate a regimen of inhaled Technosphere insulin (TI) plus insulin degludec in adults with type 1 diabetes, who prestudy were predominately using either an automated insulin delivery (AID) system or multiple daily insulin injections (MDI) with continuous glucose monitoring. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS At 19 sites, adults with type 1 diabetes were randomly assigned to TI plus insulin degludec (N = 62) or usual care (UC) with continuation of prestudy insulin delivery method (N = 61) for 17 weeks. RESULTS Prestudy, AID was used by 48% and MDI by 45%. Mean ± SD HbA1c was 7.57% ± 0.97% at baseline and 7.62% ± 1.06% at 17 weeks in the TI group and 7.59% ± 0.80% and 7.54% ± 0.77%, respectively, in the UC group (adjusted difference 0.11%, 95% CI −0.10 to 0.33, P value for noninferiority = 0.01). HbA1c improved from baseline to 17 weeks by >0.5% (5.5 mmol/mol) in 12 (21%) in the TI group and in 3 (5%) in the UC group and worsened by >0.5% (5.5 mmol/mol) in 15 (26%) in the TI group and in 2 (3%) in the UC group. The most common TI side effect was a brief cough; eight participants discontinued TI due to side effects. CONCLUSIONS In adults with type 1 diabetes, HbA1c after 17 weeks with a regimen of TI and degludec was noninferior to UC, which consisted predominately of either AID or MDI. TI should be considered an option for people with type 1 diabetes, particularly those who are motivated to further reduce postprandial hyperglycemia.

OBJECTIVE To compare postprandial glucose excursions following a bolus with inhaled technosphere insulin (TI) or subcutaneous rapid-acting analog (RAA) insulin. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS A meal challenge was completed by 122 adults with type 1 diabetes who were using multiple daily injections (MDI), a nonautomated pump, or automated insulin delivery (AID) and who were randomized to bolus with their usual RAA insulin (n = 61) or TI (n = 61). RESULTS The primary outcome, the treatment group difference in area under the curve for glucose >180 mg/dL over 2 h, was less with TI versus RAA (adjusted difference −12 mg/dL, 95% CI −22 to −2, P = 0.02). With TI, the glucose excursion was smaller (P = 0.01), peak glucose lower (P = 0.01), and time to peak glucose shorter (P = 0.006). Blood glucose <70 mg/dL occurred in one participant in each group. CONCLUSIONS Postmeal glucose excursion was smaller with TI than with RAA insulin in a cohort that included both AID and MDI users.

Objective: To determine out-of-pocket (OOP) costs 2 years after sleeve gastrectomy (SG) or initiating Ozempic for patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) and obesity. Background: Individuals with obesity and T2D have a variety of treatment options. The risks and benefits of these treatment options are becoming more well-documented; however, the real-world patient costs of these options are not known. Methods: Adults with body mass index of 35 kg/m2 or higher and T2D who had an SG or used Ozempic were identified in the employer-based retrospective claims database Merative (previously Truven IBM Marketscan) from 2017 to 2021. SG cohort was defined as having an SG (without filling a prescription for Ozempic), and the Ozempic cohort was defined as continuously filling a prescription for Ozempic for at least 2 years (and not having any bariatric surgery). Individuals in each cohort were 1:1 propensity matched on demographics, obesity-related comorbidities, and baseline OOP costs. in the year before treatment. OOP costs were compared in the 2 years after treatment using paired t tests. Results: A total of 302 SGs were matched to 302 Ozempic patients (mean age: 50, mean baseline body mass index: 40, 41% males). OOP health care costs were similar for the SG ($2267) and Ozempic ($2131) cohorts 1 year after the index date (difference = $136, P = 0.19). OOP health care costs were significantly lower in the SG cohort ($1155 vs $2,084, P < 0.01) 2 years after the index date. Conclusions: Within 2 years of starting treatment, OOP health care costs were significantly lower among individuals who had a SG versus those treated with Ozempic.