Brett Lauring

Aim: To evaluate the long‐term efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled on metformin. Materials and Methods: A 104‐week Phase III, randomized double‐blind study with a 26‐week placebo‐controlled period (Phase A) and a 78‐week period (Phase B) where blinded glimepiride was added to non‐rescued placebo participants with fasting fingerstick glucose ≥6.1 mmol/L. Results through week 104 are reported. Results: Mean (standard error) change in HbA1c from baseline was −0.7% (0.07) and −1.0% (0.07) at week 52; −0.6% (0.08) and −0.9% (0.08) at week 104 for ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg. At week 52, 34.8% and 36.6% participants had HbA1c <7.0%, and 24.6% and 33.7% at week 104, for ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg. Ertugliflozin reduced fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight and systolic blood pressure (SBP) from baseline through week 104. The incidence of female genital mycotic infections (GMIs) was higher with ertugliflozin, and symptomatic hypoglycaemia was lower for ertugliflozin versus placebo/glimepiride. Minimal bone mineral density (BMD) changes were observed, similar to placebo/glimepiride, except at total hip where reduction in BMD was greater with ertugliflozin 15 mg versus placebo/glimepiride: difference in least squares means (95% CI) –0.50% (−0.95, −0.04) at week 52 and −0.84% (−1.44, −0.24) at week 104. Conclusions: Ertugliflozin maintained improvements from baseline in HbA1c, FPG, body weight and SBP through week 104. Ertugliflozin was well tolerated, with non‐clinically relevant changes in BMD. Compared with placebo/glimepiride, ertugliflozin increased female GMIs, but reduced the incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02033889.

Aim: This phase III, multicentre, randomized study ( ClinicalTrials.gov ; NCT01958671) evaluated the efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin monotherapy in adults with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c], 7.0% to 10.5% [53‐91 mmol/mol]) despite diet and exercise. Materials and methods: The 52‐week study comprised a 26‐week, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled period (Phase A) during which 461 participants received placebo, ertugliflozin 5 mg/d or ertugliflozin 15 mg/d. This was followed by a 26‐week active‐controlled period (Phase B) during which participants in the placebo group who had not received glycaemic rescue therapy had blinded metformin added. Results to Week 52 are reported. Because of the use of metformin in Phase B, no statistical comparisons of efficacy were made between the ertugliflozin and placebo/metformin groups at Week 52. Results: The mean (standard error) change from baseline to Week 52 in HbA1c was −0.9% (0.1) and −1.0% (0.1) in the ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg groups, respectively. The proportions of participants with HbA1c <7.0% at Week 52 were 25.6% and 28.5%, respectively. Ertugliflozin reduced fasting plasma glucose, body weight and systolic blood pressure (SBP). The incidence of genital mycotic infections (GMIs) in females was significantly higher in both ertugliflozin groups (5 mg, 26.9%; 15 mg, 29.0%) vs the placebo/metformin group (9.9%), and in males was significantly higher in the 15 mg group (7.8%) vs the placebo/metformin group (1.2%). Ertugliflozin was not associated with increased incidence of urinary tract infections, symptomatic hypoglycaemia or hypovolaemia adverse events compared with placebo/metformin. Conclusions: Ertugliflozin treatment over 52 weeks improved glycaemic control and reduced body weight and SBP, but increased GMIs.

Introduction Ertugliflozin is an oral sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor that is being developed to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This study assessed the efficacy and safety of co-initiation of ertugliflozin and sitagliptin compared with placebo in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled on diet and exercise. Methods In this phase III, randomized, double-blind, multicenter, placebo-controlled 26-week study (NCT02226003), patients with T2DM and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) 8.0–10.5% on diet/exercise were randomized 1:1:1 to ertugliflozin 5 mg once daily (QD) and sitagliptin 100 mg QD (E5/S100), ertugliflozin 15 mg QD and sitagliptin 100 mg QD (E15/S100), or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was the change from baseline in HbA1c at week 26. Results The mean baseline HbA1c of the randomized patients (n = 291) was 8.9%. At week 26, both ertugliflozin/sitagliptin treatments provided significant reductions from baseline in HbA1c compared with placebo [least squares mean HbA1c change (95% confidence intervals) from baseline was − 0.4% (− 0.7, − 0.2), − 1.6% (− 1.8, − 1.4), and − 1.7% (− 1.9, − 1.5) for placebo, E5/S100, and E15/S100, respectively]. At week 26, 8.3%, 35.7%, and 31.3% of patients receiving placebo, E5/S100, and E15/S100, respectively, had HbA1c < 7.0%. Significant reductions in fasting plasma glucose, 2-h post-prandial glucose, body weight, and systolic blood pressure were observed with both ertugliflozin/sitagliptin groups compared with placebo. The incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar across the groups. The incidences of the pre-specified AEs of urinary tract infection, genital mycotic infection, symptomatic hypoglycemia, and hypovolemia were low and not meaningfully different across groups. Conclusion Co-initiation of ertugliflozin with sitagliptin in patients with T2DM inadequately controlled on diet and exercise provided a clinically meaningful improvement in glycemic control over 26 weeks. Clinical Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02226003.

Introduction: This study assessed the safety and efficacy of ertugliflozin (an oral sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor) vs. glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled on metformin. Methods: This phase III, double-blind, non-inferiority study (NCT01999218) randomized patients with HbA1c ≥ 7.0% and ≤ 9.0% on stable metformin ≥ 1500 mg/day 1:1:1 to ertugliflozin 15 or 5 mg once-daily (QD), or glimepiride (titrated from 1 mg QD). The primary hypothesis was that ertugliflozin 15 mg was non-inferior to glimepiride on HbA1c (non-inferiority criterion: upper bound of the 95% confidence interval [CI] about the treatment difference < 0.3%). Results: Mean baseline HbA1c of randomized patients (N = 1326) was 7.8%. Mean and median doses of glimepiride were 3.0 mg/day throughout the study. At week 52, the least squares mean change (95% CI) from baseline in HbA1c was − 0.6% (− 0.7, − 0.5), − 0.6% (− 0.6, − 0.5), and − 0.7% (− 0.8, − 0.7) in the ertugliflozin 15 mg, ertugliflozin 5 mg, and glimepiride groups, respectively. The between-group difference for ertugliflozin 15 mg and glimepiride of 0.1% (− 0.0, 0.2) met the pre-specified non-inferiority criterion. Relative to glimepiride, greater body weight and systolic blood pressure (SBP) reductions were observed with ertugliflozin. The overall incidence of adverse events (AEs) was similar across groups. The incidence of symptomatic hypoglycemia and genital mycotic infection (GMI) were, respectively, lower and higher with ertugliflozin relative to glimepiride. The incidences of urinary tract infection and hypovolemia AEs were not meaningfully different among the groups. Conclusions: Ertugliflozin 15 mg was non-inferior to glimepiride in reducing HbA1c when added to metformin in patients with T2DM. Ertugliflozin had an acceptable safety profile and resulted in less hypoglycemia and more GMIs than glimepiride. Clinical Trial Registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01999218.

Aim: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin and sitagliptin co‐administration vs the individual agents in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled with metformin. Methods: In this study ( Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02099110), patients with glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) ≥7.5% and ≤11.0% (≥58 and ≤97 mmol/mol) with metformin ≥1500 mg/d (n = 1233) were randomized to ertugliflozin 5 (E5) or 15 (E15) mg/d, sitagliptin 100 mg/d (S100) or to co‐administration of E5/S100 or E15/S100. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 26. Results: At Week 26, least squares mean HbA1c reductions from baseline were greater with E5/S100 (−1.5%) and E15/S100 (−1.5%) than with individual agents (−1.0%, −1.1% and −1.1% for E5, E15 and S100, respectively; P < .001 for all comparisons). HbA1c <7.0% (<53 mmol/mol) was achieved by 26.4%, 31.9%, 32.8%, 52.3% and 49.2% of patients in the E5, E15, S100, E5/S100 and E15/S100 groups, respectively. Fasting plasma glucose reductions were significantly greater with E5/S100 and E15/S100 compared with individual agents. Body weight and systolic blood pressure (SBP) significantly decreased with E5/S100 and E15/S100 vs S100 alone. Glycaemic control, body weight and SBP effects of ertugliflozin were maintained to Week 52. Genital mycotic infections were more common among ertugliflozin‐treated patients compared with those treated with S100. Incidences of symptomatic hypoglycaemia and adverse events related to hypovolaemia or urinary tract infection were similar among groups. Conclusions: In patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes while using metformin, co‐administration of ertugliflozin and sitagliptin provided more effective glycaemic control through 52 weeks compared with the individual agents.

Introduction Ertugliflozin is a sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor in development for type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The safety and efficacy of ertugliflozin were evaluated over 52 weeks in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). Methods In this double-blind randomized study (NCT01986855), patients with glycated hemoglobin (A1C) 7.0–10.5% and stage 3 CKD [estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 30 to < 60 mL/min/1.73 m²] who were undergoing treatment with standard diabetes therapy (or therapies) including insulin and/or sulfonylureas were randomized to once-daily ertugliflozin 5 mg, 15 mg, or placebo. Patients on metformin underwent a pre-randomization ≥ 10-week wash-off period. The primary endpoint was change from baseline in A1C at week 26 in the overall cohort. Secondary efficacy endpoints were assessed in the stage 3A CKD cohort (eGFR ≥ 45 to < 60 mL/min/1.73 m²) at weeks 26 and 52. Safety was assessed in the overall cohort. Results 468 patients were randomized (baseline mean A1C 8.2%). At week 26, reductions from baseline in A1C were observed across groups in the overall cohort [least squares mean changes (95% confidence interval) – 0.3% (– 0.4, – 0.1), – 0.3% (– 0.4, – 0.1), and – 0.4% (– 0.6, – 0.3) for placebo and for ertugliflozin 5 mg and 15 mg, respectively]. Prohibited use of metformin was identified in ~ 17% of patients and impacted evaluation of the primary endpoint. Greater reductions from baseline in body weight, fasting plasma glucose, and systolic blood pressure were observed with ertugliflozin versus placebo at week 26 (stage 3A CKD cohort). The incidences of urinary tract infections, genital mycotic infections, and hypoglycemia adverse events were not meaningfully different between groups. The incidence of hypovolemia-related adverse events was higher with ertugliflozin relative to placebo. Conclusion Although surreptitious metformin use impacted the primary analysis, reductions in blood glucose and body weight were observed with ertugliflozin in patients with T2DM and stage 3 CKD; ertugliflozin had an acceptable safety profile. Funding Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp. a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA and Pfizer Inc. Trial Registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01986855.

Aims: To assess ertugliflozin in patients with type 2 diabetes who are inadequately controlled by metformin and sitagliptin. Materials and Methods: In this double‐blind randomized study ( Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02036515), patients (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.0% to 10.5% [53‐91 mmol/mol] receiving metformin ≥1500 mg/d and sitagliptin 100 mg/d; estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥60 mL/min/1.73 m ² ) were randomized to ertugliflozin 5 mg once‐daily, 15 mg once‐daily or placebo. The primary efficacy endpoint was change from baseline in HbA1c at Week 26; treatment was continued until Week 52. Results: A total of 464 patients were randomized (mean baseline HbA1c, 8.0% [64.3 mmol/mol]; eGFR, 87.9 mL/min/1.73 m ² ). After 26 weeks, placebo‐adjusted least squares (LS) mean changes in HbA1c from baseline were −0.7% (−7.5 mmol/mol) and −0.8% (−8.3 mmol/mol) for ertugliflozin 5 and 15 mg, respectively (both P < .001); 17.0%, 32.1% and 39.9% of patients receiving placebo, ertugliflozin 5 mg or ertugliflozin 15 mg, respectively, had HbA1c <7.0% (53 mmol/mol). Significant reductions in fasting plasma glucose, body weight (BW) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were observed with ertugliflozin relative to placebo. The positive effects of ertugliflozin on glycaemic control, BW and SBP were maintained through Week 52. A higher incidence of genital mycotic infections was observed in male and female patients receiving ertugliflozin (3.7%‐14.1%) vs placebo (0%‐1.9%) through Week 52. The incidence of urinary tract infections, symptomatic hypoglycaemia and hypovolaemia adverse events were not meaningfully different across groups. Conclusions: Ertugliflozin added to metformin and sitagliptin was well‐tolerated, and provided clinically meaningful, durable glycaemic control, BW and SBP reductions vs placebo over 52 weeks.

Aim: We evaluated the efficacy and safety of ertugliflozin, an SGLT2 inhibitor, in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) inadequately controlled (HbA1c, 7.0%‐10.5%) with metformin monotherapy (≥1500 mg/d for ≥8 weeks). Methods: This was a double‐blind, 26‐week, multicentre study with ongoing 78‐week extension ( ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02033889). A total of 621 participants were randomized 1:1:1 to placebo, or ertugliflozin 5 or 15 mg/d. The primary endpoint was change from baseline at week 26 in HbA1c. Secondary efficacy endpoints were change from baseline at week 26 in fasting plasma glucose (FPG), body weight, systolic/diastolic blood pressure (SBP/DBP) and number of participants with HbA1c P < .001), to final means of 7.3% and 7.2%, respectively. The odds of HbA1c P = .032]; male subjects: 0%; 3.1%; 3.2%, respectively), as was the incidence of urinary tract infections and symptomatic hypoglycaemia. The incidence of hypovolaemia AEs was similar across groups. Ertugliflozin had no adverse impact on BMD at week 26. Conclusions: Ertugliflozin added to metformin in patients with inadequately controlled T2DM improved glycaemic control, reduced body weight and BP, but increased the incidence of genital mycotic infections.

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of adding the once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor omarigliptin or the sulfonylurea glimepiride to the treatment regimen of patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and inadequate glycemic control on metformin monotherapy. Methods: Patients with T2DM and HbA1c ≥6.5% to ≤9.0% while on a stable dose of metformin (≥1500 mg/day) were randomized to omarigliptin 25 mg once-weekly (n = 376) or glimepiride up to 6 mg once daily (n = 375) for 54 weeks. The primary hypothesis was that omarigliptin is non-inferior to glimepiride in reducing HbA1c at week 54. Results: The mean baseline HbA1c was 7.5% in the omarigliptin group and 7.4% in the glimepiride group. After 54 weeks, the least squares (LS) mean change from baseline in HbA1c was –0.30% in the omarigliptin group and –0.48% in the glimepiride group, with a between-group difference (95% CI) of 0.18% (0.06, 0.30), which met the pre-specified criterion for declaring non-inferiority. The incidence of symptomatic hypoglycemia was 5.3% in the omarigliptin group and 26.7% in the glimepiride group. With the exception of hypoglycemia, the incidences of adverse events and discontinuations were similar between treatment groups. Relative to baseline, omarigliptin was associated with a mean weight loss (−0.4 kg) and glimepiride a mean weight gain (+1.5 kg). Conclusions: After 54 weeks, as add-on therapy to metformin, once-weekly omarigliptin was generally well tolerated and non-inferior to glimepiride in improving glycemic control, with a lower incidence of hypoglycemia and with weight loss vs weight gain.

Two open‐label, parallel‐group studies evaluated the influence of renal and hepatic insufficiency on the pharmacokinetics of a single‐dose anacetrapib 100 mg. Eligible participants included adult men and women with moderate hepatic impairment (assessed by Child–Pugh criteria) or severe renal impairment (CrCl 2). In both studies, patients were matched (race, age, sex, BMI) with healthy control subjects. Twenty‐four subjects were randomized in each study (12 with either moderate hepatic or severe renal impairment and 12 matched healthy controls). In the hepatic insufficiency study, the geometric mean ratio (GMR; mean value for the group with moderate hepatic insufficiency/mean value for the healthy controls) and 90% CIs for the area under the concentration–time curve from time zero to infinity (AUC_0–∞) and the maximum concentration of drug in plasma (C_max) were 1.16 (0.84, 1.60) and 1.02 (0.71, 1.49), respectively. In the renal insufficiency study, the GMRs (mean value for the group with severe renal insufficiency/mean value for the healthy controls) and 90% CIs for AUC_0–∞ and C_max were 1.14 (0.80, 1.63) and 1.31 (0.93, 1.83), respectively. Anacetrapib was generally well tolerated and there was no clinically meaningful effect of moderate hepatic or severe renal insufficiency on the pharmacokinetics of anacetrapib.