Added benefit of lixisenatide is not proven

August 2, 2013

Lixisenatide (trade name: Lyxumia) has been approved in Germany since February 2013 for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in combination with oral blood-glucose lowering drugs or basal insulin when these, together with diet and exercise, do not provide adequate glycaemic control. In an early benefit assessment pursuant to the Act on the Reform of the Market for Medicinal Products (AMNOG), the German Institute for Quality and Efficiency in Health Care (IQWiG) examined whether this new drug offers an added benefit over the current standard therapy. No such added benefit can be derived from the dossier, however, because the drug manufacturer did not present any suitable data for any of the possible therapeutic indications of lixisenatide.

G-BA specified appropriate comparator therapy

Lixisenatide is approved in combination with other blood-glucose lowering drugs, including basal insulin. Depending on the type of prior treatment, there are different subindications within the therapeutic indication for the use of lixisenatide, for which the Federal Joint Committee (G-BA) specified different comparator therapies. For the combination of lixisenatide with , sulfonylurea (glibenclamide or ) plus metformin is the appropriate comparator therapy.

Two subpopulations are differentiated for the subindication "lixisenatide plus sulfonylurea" regarding the appropriate comparator therapy: For patients for whom metformin is suitable, the comparison is made with the combination of metformin and sulfonylurea. For patients who do not tolerate metformin, the comparison is made with human insulin. A sulfonylurea may be given in addition to human insulin if this is necessary for the individual patient.

The triple combination of lixisenatide with metformin and sulfonylurea is to be compared with human insulin (if applicable, plus metformin). If lixisenatide is combined with basal insulin with or without metformin, the appropriate comparator therapy specified is also human insulin (if applicable, plus metformin).

Manufacturer deviated from appropriate comparator therapy

In the subindication "lixisenatide plus metformin", the manufacturer additionally defined two specific patient groups, for which it specified comparator therapies deviating from the G-BA. In both cases, the manufacturer did not give sufficient reasons for deviating from the comparator therapy defined by the G-BA.

The manufacturer confined itself to a certain part of the specified comparator therapy in the subindications "lixisenatide plus sulfonylurea" when metformin is unsuitable, and "lixisenatide plus basal insulin (if applicable, plus metformin)": It only made a comparison with basal insulin or with intensified conventional insulin treatment instead of considering all treatment options with human insulin. It therefore also only presented data for this comparison.

The manufacturer compared the triple combination "lixisenatide plus metformin plus sulfonylurea" with basal insulin plus metformin plus sulfonylurea. IQWiG did not accept the reasons given by the manufacturer for the deviation, either, because this treatment option is not advisable from a medical point of view because of more frequent side effects, among other things.

Indirect comparisons unsuitable

The manufacturer did not present a direct comparative study between lixisenatide and the appropriate comparator therapy for any of the four subindications mentioned.

For two subindications, it conducted adjusted indirect comparisons based on several studies. In principle, such indirect comparisons can be suitable to prove an added benefit. The three studies it used for the combination of lixisenatide with metformin were unsuitable, however: In two cases, sulfonylureas were not used according to their approval status, and in one case, the study participants differed considerably from the patients in the lixisenatide study, including with regards to baseline levels, age, and BMI. Hence treatment effects from the indirect comparison could not be interpreted.

As to the combination of lixisenatide and (if applicable, plus metformin), the pharmaceutical company also drew on an adjusted indirect comparison. But the four studies with intermediate comparators were also unsuitable for this comparison because of different patient populations, deviating aims of treatment, and heterogeneous comparator therapies, among other things. Hence the treatment effects could also not be interpreted.

The manufacturer itself did not identify any relevant studies for lixisenatide in dual combination with sulfonylurea versus the appropriate comparator therapy. In the triple combination with metformin plus sulfonylurea, it deviated from the appropriate comparator therapy and did not present any relevant studies.

Hence the dossier did not contain any study results for any of the four therapeutic indications that would be suitable to prove an added benefit.

G-BA decides on the extent of added benefit

The dossier assessment is part of the overall procedure for early benefit assessments supervised by the G-BA. After publication of the manufacturer's dossier and IQWiG's assessment, the G-BA conducts a commenting procedure, which may provide further information and result in a change to the benefit assessment. The G-BA then decides on the extent of the added benefit, thus completing the early benefit assessment.

Explore further: Added benefit of dapagliflozin is not proven

Related Stories

Added benefit of dapagliflozin is not proven

June 6, 2013
Dapagliflozin (trade name: Forxiga) has been approved in Germany since November 2012 for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. In an early benefit assessment pursuant to the Act on the Reform of the Market for Medicinal ...

Added benefit of saxagliptin/metformin combination is not proven

April 29, 2013
The fixed combination of the drugs saxagliptin and metformin (Komboglyze) has been approved in Germany since November 2011 for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus. In an early benefit assessment pursuant to the "Act ...

Added benefit of linagliptin is not proven

January 6, 2012
Linagliptin (trade name: Trajenta) has been approved since August 2011 to improve blood glucose control ("glycaemic control") in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus whose elevated blood glucose levels are inadequately controlled ...

Linagliptin: Once again, no proof of added benefit

January 30, 2013
Linagliptin (trade name Trajenta) has been approved since August 2011 to improve blood glucose control in adults with type 2 diabetes. The assessment of the new dossier according to the German Act on the Reform of the Market ...

Added benefit of ingenol mebutate is not proven

June 6, 2013
The drug ingenol mebutate (trade name: Picato) has been approved in Germany since November 2012 as a gel for the treatment of certain forms of actinic keratosis in adults. In an early benefit assessment pursuant to the Act ...

Aflibercept in AMD: No proof of added benefit

June 5, 2013
It is not proven that patients with wet age-related macular degeneration benefit from the new drug aflibercept, as the drug manufacturer did not present any suitable data for a comparison with the current standard therapy ...

Recommended for you

Study suggests ending opioid epidemic will take years

July 20, 2017
The question of how to stem the nation's opioid epidemic now has a major detailed response. A new study chaired by University of Virginia School of Law Professor Richard Bonnie provides extensive recommendations for curbing ...

Team-based model reduces prescription opioid use among patients with chronic pain by 40 percent

July 17, 2017
A new, team-based, primary care model is decreasing prescription opioid use among patients with chronic pain by 40 percent, according to a new study out of Boston Medical Center's Grayken Center for Addiction Medicine, which ...

Private clinics' peddling of unproven stem cell treatments is unsafe and unethical

July 7, 2017
Stem cell science is an area of medical research that continues to offer great promise. But as this week's paper in Science Translational Medicine highlights, a growing number of clinics around the globe, including in Australia, ...

Popular heartburn drugs linked to higher death risk

July 4, 2017
Popular heartburn drugs called proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been linked to a variety of health problems, including serious kidney damage, bone fractures and dementia. Now, a new study from Washington University School ...

Most reproductive-age women using opioids also use another substance

June 30, 2017
The majority of reproductive-age and pregnant women who use opioids for non-medical purposes also use at least one other substance, ranging from nicotine or alcohol to cocaine, according to a University of Pittsburgh Graduate ...

At-risk chronic pain patients taper opioids successfully with psychological tools

June 28, 2017
Psychological support and new coping skills are helping patients at high risk of developing chronic pain and long-term, high-dose opioid use taper their opioids and rebuild their lives with activities that are meaningful ...

0 comments

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.