Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Clinical Trial
. 2023 Jun;11(6):414-425.
doi: 10.1016/S2213-8587(23)00093-1. Epub 2023 May 3.

Switching to once-weekly insulin icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec in individuals with basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (ONWARDS 2): a phase 3a, randomised, open label, multicentre, treat-to-target trial

Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Switching to once-weekly insulin icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec in individuals with basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes (ONWARDS 2): a phase 3a, randomised, open label, multicentre, treat-to-target trial

Athena Philis-Tsimikas et al. Lancet Diabetes Endocrinol. 2023 Jun.

Erratum in

Abstract

Background: Insulin icodec (icodec) is a once-weekly basal insulin currently under development. ONWARDS 2 aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of once-weekly icodec versus once-daily insulin degludec (degludec) in basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes.

Methods: This 26-week, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, multicentre, treat-to-target phase 3a trial was conducted in 71 sites in nine countries. Eligible participants with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled on once-daily or twice-daily basal insulin, with or without non-insulin glucose-lowering agents, were randomly assigned (1:1) to once-weekly icodec or once-daily degludec. The primary outcome was change from baseline to week 26 in HbA1c; the margin used to establish non-inferiority of icodec compared with degludec was 0·3 percentage points. Safety outcomes (hypoglycaemic episodes and adverse events) and patient-reported outcomes were also assessed. The primary outcome was evaluated in all randomly assigned participants; safety outcomes were evaluated descriptively based on all randomly assigned participants who received at least one dose of trial product, with statistical analyses based on all randomly assigned participants. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04770532, and is now complete.

Findings: Between March 5 and July 19, 2021, 635 participants were screened, of whom 109 were ineligible or withdrew, and 526 were randomly assigned to icodec (n=263) or degludec (n=263). From a mean baseline of 8·17% (icodec; 65·8 mmol/mol) and 8·10% (degludec; 65·0 mmol/mol), HbA1c was reduced to a greater extent with icodec than degludec (7·20% vs 7·42% [55·2 vs 57·6 mmol/mol], respectively) at week 26. This translates to an estimated treatment difference (ETD) of -0·22 percentage points (95% CI -0·37 to -0·08) or -2·4 mmol/mol (95% CI -4·1 to -0·8), demonstrating non-inferiority (p<0·0001) and superiority (p=0·0028). The estimated mean change from baseline to week 26 in bodyweight was +1·40 kg for icodec and -0·30 kg for degludec (ETD 1·70 [95% CI 0·76 to 2·63]). Overall rates of combined level 2 or level 3 hypoglycaemia were less than one event per patient-year of exposure for both groups (0·73 [icodec] vs 0·27 [degludec]; estimated rate ratio 1·93 [95% CI 0·93 to 4·02]). Overall, 161 (61%) of 262 participants receiving icodec and 134 (51%) of 263 participants receiving degludec experienced an adverse event; 22 (8%) and 16 (6%), respectively, experienced a serious adverse event. One serious adverse event (degludec) was assessed as being possibly related to treatment. No new safety issues were identified in relation to icodec compared with degludec in this trial.

Interpretation: Among adults with basal insulin-treated type 2 diabetes, treatment with once-weekly icodec versus once-daily degludec demonstrated non-inferiority and statistical superiority in HbA1c reduction after 26 weeks, associated with modest weight gain. Overall rates of hypoglycaemia were low, with numerically but not statistically significantly higher event rates of level 2 or level 3 hypoglycaemia with icodec versus degludec.

Funding: Novo Nordisk.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of interests AP-T performs research and serves as an advisor on behalf of their employer for Abbott, Dexcom, Eli Lilly, Medtronic, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi; there have been no direct or indirect transfer of funds. EF serves as an advisor for Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Novo Nordisk, and has received lecture fees from Bayer, Bioton, Boehringer-Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, and Servier. TJ, MA, and KS are employees and shareholders of Novo Nordisk. JR has served on advisory panels for Applied Therapeutics, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Intarcia, Novo Nordisk, Oramed, Hanmi, Sanofi, and Zealand, and has received research support from Applied Therapeutics, AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, Genentech, Novartis, Intarcia, Merck, Novo Nordisk, Oramed, Pfizer, and Sanofi. HW acted as an advisory board member for Novo Nordisk, as a speaker for Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly Japan, FUJIFILM Pharma, Kissei Pharmaceutical, Kowa Pharmaceutical, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis, Novo Nordisk, Ono Pharmaceutical, Sanofi, Sanwa Kagaku Kenkyusho, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, and Takeda Pharmaceutical, and is receiving grants from Astellas Pharma, AstraZeneca, Daiichi Sankyo, Eli Lilly Japan, Johnson & Johnson, Kowa, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Mitsubishi Tanabe Pharma, Mochida Pharmaceutical, Nippon Boehringer Ingelheim, Novartis Pharma, Novo Nordisk Pharma, Ono Pharmaceutical, Pfizer Japan, Sanofi, Sumitomo Dainippon Pharma, Taisho Toyama Pharmaceutical, Takeda Pharmaceutical, and Terumo. MK received honoraria for speaker's bureau or advisory board attendance with Abbott Diabetes Care, AstraZeneca, Bayer AG, Boehinger Ingelheim, Eli Lilly, MSD, Novo Nordisk, and Sanofi, and has also participated in randomised controlled trials funded by AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly, and Novo Nordisk.

Comment in

Publication types

Associated data