4.4 Review

Addition of exenatide twice daily to basal insulin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes: clinical studies and practical approaches to therapy

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CLINICAL PRACTICE
Volume 66, Issue 12, Pages 1147-1157

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/ijcp.12032

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Eli Lilly and Co.
  2. sanofi-aventis
  3. Amylin Pharmaceuticals, LLC

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Type 2 diabetes is a progressive disease that requires stepwise additions of non-insulin and insulin therapies to meet recommended glycaemic goals. The final stage of intensification may require prandial insulin, adding complexity and increased risks of hypoglycaemia and weight gain. Aims: This review assesses the benefits and risks of adding exenatide twice daily, a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, in patients with type 2 diabetes who are currently treated with basal insulin, but have failed to reach their glycaemic goals. Methods and Results: Based on data from published studies, exenatide has a number of actions that complement basal insulin therapy. Exenatide has been shown to increase glucose-dependent insulin production, suppress abnormal plasma glucagon production, slow gastric emptying, enhance liver uptake of glucose and promote satiety. A recently published randomised clinical trial reported that the addition of exenatide twice daily to titrated basal insulin provided greater glycaemic control than titrated basal insulin alone, and did so without an increase in hypoglycaemic events and with modest weight loss. Exenatide use was associated with gastrointestinal side effects. The recent randomised trial confirmed and extended data from a number of prior observational studies that demonstrated the efficacy and safety of insulin/exenatide combination therapy. Practical considerations for adding exenatide twice daily to ongoing basal insulin are discussed.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available