This study will examine the safety and efficacy of once-weekly omarigliptin in participants 18 to \<45 years of age with Type 2 diabetes mellitus and inadequate glycemic control. The study hypothesis is that treatment with omarigliptin compared with placebo provides greater reduction in hemoglobin A1c (A1C) in participants after 24 weeks.
Study Type
INTERVENTIONAL
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
DOUBLE
Enrollment
203
Omarigliptin 25 mg capsule administered orally once weekly
Matching placebo to omarigliptin 25 mg capsule administered orally once weekly
Open-label metformin (dosed daily according to the country-specific product label) was to be initiated for participants meeting protocol-specified glycemic criteria, but was otherwise prohibited.
Change From Baseline in A1C at Week 24
A1C (%) is used to report average blood glucose levels over prolonged periods of time. The unexpected absence of a treatment effect in this study led to investigations that included measurement of metformin levels in available samples collected for future research during the study. Of the 92 participants with samples who had not been rescued with metformin, 57% (25/44) in the placebo group and 29% (14/48) in the omarigliptin group had detectable metformin, indicating the use of metformin that was prohibited by the protocol. The use of metformin prohibited by the protocol was without investigator knowledge and is a confounding factor impacting the ability to draw any conclusions regarding the efficacy results from this study.
Time frame: Baseline and Week 24
Percentage of Participants Who Experienced at Least One Adverse Event (AE)
An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease associated with the use of a medical treatment or procedure, regardless of whether it is considered related to the medical treatment or procedure, that occurs during the course of the study. Data presented exclude data following the initiation of glycemic rescue. The safety database was analyzed in a standard fashion in the all participants as treated (APaT) population for all participants who took at least one dose of study medication. This analysis may have been confounded by the use of metformin prohibited by the protocol (see efficacy results description above).
Time frame: Up to Week 27
Percentage of Participants Who Discontinued Study Drug Due to an AE
An AE is defined as any unfavorable and unintended sign including an abnormal laboratory finding, symptom or disease associated with the use of a medical treatment or procedure, regardless of whether it is considered related to the medical treatment or procedure, that occurs during the course of the study. Data presented exclude data following the initiation of glycemic rescue. The safety database was analyzed in a standard fashion in the APaT population for all participants who took at least one dose of study medication. This analysis may have been confounded by the use of metformin prohibited by the protocol (see efficacy results description above).
This platform is for informational purposes only and does not constitute medical advice. Always consult a qualified healthcare professional.
Time frame: Up to Week 24
Change From Baseline in 2-hr PMG at Week 24
Blood glucose was measured 120 minutes from start of meal. The unexpected absence of a treatment effect in this study led to investigations that included measurement of metformin levels in available samples collected for future research during the study. Of the 92 participants with samples who had not been rescued with metformin, 57% (25/44) in the placebo group and 29% (14/48) in the omarigliptin group had detectable metformin, indicating the use of metformin that was prohibited by the protocol. The use of metformin prohibited by the protocol was without investigator knowledge and is a confounding factor impacting the ability to draw any conclusions regarding the efficacy results from this study.
Time frame: Baseline and Week 24
Change in Baseline in FPG at Week 24
Blood glucose was measured on a fasting basis. The unexpected absence of a treatment effect in this study led to investigations that included measurement of metformin levels in available samples collected for future research during the study. Of the 92 participants with samples who had not been rescued with metformin, 57% (25/44) in the placebo group and 29% (14/48) in the omarigliptin group had detectable metformin, indicating the use of metformin that was prohibited by the protocol. The use of metformin prohibited by the protocol was without investigator knowledge and is a confounding factor impacting the ability to draw any conclusions regarding the efficacy results from this study.
Time frame: Baseline and Week 24
Percentage of Participants Attaining A1C Glycemic Goals of <7.0% at Week 24
Percentage of participants was estimated using standard multiple imputation techniques (constrained longitudinal data analysis \[cLDA\] model). Within-group confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated via the Wilson score method. The unexpected absence of a treatment effect in this study led to investigations that included measurement of metformin levels in available samples collected for future research during the study. Of the 92 participants with samples who had not been rescued with metformin, 57% (25/44) in the placebo group and 29% (14/48) in the omarigliptin group had detectable metformin, indicating the use of metformin that was prohibited by the protocol. The use of metformin prohibited by the protocol was without investigator knowledge and is a confounding factor impacting the ability to draw any conclusions regarding the efficacy results from this study.
Time frame: Week 24
Percentage of Participants Attaining A1C Glycemic Goals of <6.5% (48 mmol/Mol) at Week 24
Percentage of participants was estimated using standard multiple imputation techniques (cLDA). Within-group CIs were calculated via the Wilson score method. The unexpected absence of a treatment effect in this study led to investigations that included measurement of metformin levels in available samples collected for future research during the study. Of the 92 participants with samples who had not been rescued with metformin, 57% (25/44) in the placebo group and 29% (14/48) in the omarigliptin group had detectable metformin, indicating the use of metformin that was prohibited by the protocol. The use of metformin prohibited by the protocol was without investigator knowledge and is a confounding factor impacting the ability to draw any conclusions regarding the efficacy results from this study.
Time frame: Week 24
Percentage of Participants Who Required Glycemic Rescue by Week 24
Participants exceeding pre-specified glycemic thresholds after starting the double-blind treatment period may have received rescue therapy (per protocol) with open-label metformin initiated by the investigator. This analysis may have been confounded by the use of metformin prohibited by the protocol (see efficacy results description above).
Time frame: Up to Week 24