Efficacy and safety of the once-daily human GLP-1 analogue, liraglutide, vs glibenclamide monotherapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes

Pharmacodynamics of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide in Japanese and Caucasian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus poorly controlled on sulphonylureas with/without metformin

AIMS

The PDY6797 study evaluated efficacy, safety and pharmacodynamics of lixisenatide in Japanese and Caucasian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) insufficiently controlled with sulphonylureas with/without metformin.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial comprised a single-dose assessment of lixisenatide 5 and 10 µg, and a 5- to 6-week repeated dose-escalation assessment of lixisenatide 5 to 30 µg once (QD) or twice daily (BID). The primary endpoint was change in postprandial plasma glucose (PPG) area under the curve (AUC)[0:29-4:30 h] after a standardized breakfast at the highest tolerated lixisenatide dose. Change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c), 2-h PPG and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) were assessed, as were adverse events.

RESULTS

Change from baseline in PPG AUC[0:29-4:30 h] with lixisenatide QD and BID was significantly greater than placebo (p < 0.0001 for all study populations), with particularly prominent effects in Japanese patients. Greater reductions in PPG AUC[0:29-4:30 h] were seen with lixisenatide QD versus BID, while the totality of evidence suggested that the lixisenatide 20 µg dose was optimal. In the overall population, changes from baseline for 2-h PPG, HbA1c and FPG were significant with lixisenatide QD and BID versus placebo (p < 0.01 for all). Lixisenatide was well tolerated.

CONCLUSIONS

Lixisenatide significantly reduced PPG AUC[0:29-4:30 h] versus placebo at the highest well-tolerated dose in patients with T2DM treated with sulphonylureas with/without metformin and had a good safety and tolerability profile. Japanese patients experienced particular benefits with lixisenatide in terms of reductions in PPG excursions.

Extracting structural requirements for activity of GPR119 agonists: a hologram quantitative structure activity relationship (HQSAR) study

GPR119 is a potential target for the treatment of diabetes mellitus. GPR119 agonists minimize the side-effects observed with sulphonyl ureas and glucagon-like peptide 1 analogs. Various reported GPR119 agonists from various patents were selected for the study and a 2D-QSAR study (HQSAR) was carried out. Fifty-five molecules were selected for the study. The study was performed on a training set of 40 structurally diverse molecules with reported biological activity. The most significant HQSAR model (q2 = 0.87, r2 = 0.99) was obtained using atoms, bond, connection, and acceptor and donor as fragment distinction. The fragment size was kept at 4–7. The predictive ability of the model was evaluated by an external test set containing 15 molecules not included in the training set, and the predicted values were in good agreement with the experimental values. The important fragments determined by the study were used to design new drug candidates having increased biological activity and comparable physicochemical properties.

GIP and GLP-1, the two incretin hormones: Similarities and differences

Gastric inhibitory polypeptide (GIP) and glucagon‐like peptide‐1 (GLP‐1) are the two primary incretin hormones secreted from the intestine on ingestion of glucose or nutrients to stimulate insulin secretion from pancreatic β cells. GIP and GLP‐1 exert their effects by binding to their specific receptors, the GIP receptor (GIPR) and the GLP‐1 receptor (GLP‐1R), which belong to the G‐protein coupled receptor family. Receptor binding activates and increases the level of intracellular cyclic adenosine monophosphate in pancreatic β cells, thereby stimulating insulin secretion glucose‐dependently. In addition to their insulinotropic effects, GIP and GLP‐1 play critical roles in various biological processes in different tissues and organs that express GIPR and GLP‐1R, including the pancreas, fat, bone and the brain. Within the pancreas, GIP and GLP‐1 together promote β cell proliferation and inhibit apoptosis, thereby expanding pancreatic β cell mass, while GIP enhances postprandial glucagon response and GLP‐1 suppresses it. In adipose tissues, GIP but not GLP‐1 facilitates fat deposition. In bone, GIP promotes bone formation while GLP‐1 inhibits bone absorption. In the brain, both GIP and GLP‐1 are thought to be involved in memory formation as well as the control of appetite. In addition to these differences, secretion of GIP and GLP‐1 and their insulinotropic effects on β cells have been shown to differ in patients with type 2 diabetes compared to healthy subjects. We summarize here the similarities and differences of these two incretin hormones in secretion and metabolism, their insulinotropic action on pancreatic β cells, and their non‐insulinotropic effects, and discuss their potential in treatment of type 2 diabetes. (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040‐1124.2010.00022.x, 2010)

Fifty-two-week, randomized, multicenter trial to compare the safety and efficacy of the novel glucagon-like peptide-1 analog liraglutide vs glibenclamide in patients with type 2 diabetes

Aims/Introduction:  We compared the safety and efficacy of liraglutide vs glibenclamide in patients with poorly controlled (HbA_1c, 7.4–10.4%) type 2 diabetes.

Materials and Methods:  Subjects were randomly assigned at a 1:2 ratio to receive 1‐year treatment with glibenclamide 1.25–2.5 mg/day or liraglutide 0.9 mg/day. Other oral anti‐diabetic drugs (OAD) were prohibited during the trial. Adverse events (AE) were monitored.

Results:  A total of 400 patients (liraglutide group, n = 268; glibenclamide group, n = 132) were randomized and exposed to trial products. At week 52 vs baseline, HbA_1c in the liraglutide and glibenclamide groups was reduced from 9.3 to 7.8% and from 9.2 to 8.2%, respectively. Treatment difference (liraglutide – glibenclamide) at the end of the study was −0.49 (95% CI, −0.71 to −0.27). In the liraglutide and glibenclamide groups, Japan Diabetes Society target HbA_1c < 6.9% was achieved by 22.1 and 8.5% of patients, respectively. Fasting plasma glucose fell from 202.8 and 202.1 mg/dL, respectively, to 145.3 and 156.7 mg/dL, respectively. Mean plasma glucose and mean postprandial plasma glucose increment were lower in the liraglutide group. Mean bodyweight was reduced by −0.8 kg in the liraglutide group and increased by 1.0 kg in the glibenclamide group. The proportion of patients reporting at least one treatment‐emergent AE (TEAE) in the liraglutide and glibenclamide groups was 91.4 and 91.7%, respectively. Most TEAE were mild in severity. No major hypoglycemic episode was observed.

Conclusions:  Once‐daily administration of liraglutide 0.9 mg for 52 weeks provides more favorable metabolic control and safety profile compared with glibenclamide. Patients on liraglutide lost bodyweight, whereas those on glibenclamide gained weight. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrial.gov (no. NCT00393718). (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040‐1124.2011.00128.x, 2011)

The once-daily human glucagon-like peptide-1 analog, liraglutide, improves β-cell function in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes

Aims/Introduction:  β‐cell function was evaluated by homeostasis model assessment of β‐cell function (HOMA‐B) index, proinsulin:insulin and proinsulin:C‐peptide ratios in adult, Japanese type 2 diabetes patients receiving liraglutide.

Materials and Methods:  Data from two randomized, controlled clinical trials (A and B) including 664 Japanese type 2 diabetes patients (mean values: glycated hemoglobin [HbA_1c] 8.61–9.32%; body mass index [BMI] 24.4–25.3 kg/m²) were analyzed. In two 24‐week trials, patients received liraglutide 0.9 mg (n = 268) or glibenclamide 2.5 mg (n = 132; trial A), or liraglutide 0.6, 0.9 mg (n = 176) or placebo (n = 88) added to previous sulfonylurea therapy (trial B).

Results:  Liraglutide was associated with improved glycemic control vs sulfonylurea monotherapy or placebo. In liraglutide‐treated groups in trials A and B, area under the curve (AUC) _{insulin 0–3 h} was improved (P < 0.001 for all) and the AUC_{insulin 0–3 h}:AUC_{glucose 0–3 h} ratio was increased (estimated treatment difference [liraglutide–comparator] 0.058 [0.036, 0.079]). HOMA‐B significantly increased with liraglutide relative to comparator in trial B (P < 0.05), but not in trial A. The reduction in fasting proinsulin:insulin ratio was 50% greater than in comparator groups.

Conclusions:  In Japanese type 2 diabetes patients, liraglutide was associated with effective glycemic control, restoration of prandial insulin response and indications of improved β‐cell function. This trial was registered with Clinicaltrials.gov (trial A: no. NCT00393718/JapicCTI‐060328 and trial B: no. NCT00395746/JapicCTI‐060324). (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040‐1124.2012.00193.x, 2012)

Liraglutide is effective in type 2 diabetic patients with sustained endogenous insulin-secreting capacity

Aims/Introduction:  Recently, glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists of liraglutide have become available in Japan. It has not yet been clarified what clinical parameters could discriminate liraglutide-effective patients from liraglutide-ineffective patients.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  We reviewed 23 consecutive patients with type 2 diabetes admitted to Osaka University Hospital for glycemic control. All of the patients were treated with diet plus insulin (or plus oral antidiabetic drugs) to improve fasting plasma glucose (FPG) and postprandial glucose below 150 and 200 mg/dL, respectively. After insulin secretion and insulin resistance were evaluated, insulin was replaced by liraglutide. The efficacy of liraglutide was determined according to whether glycemic control was maintained at the target levels.

RESULTS

  Liraglutide was effective in 13 of 23 patients. There were significant differences in the parameters of insulin secretion, including fasting C-peptide (F-CPR), C-peptide index (CPI), insulinogenic index (I.I.) and urine C-peptide (U-CPR), between liraglutide-effective and -ineffective patients. The duration of diabetes was significantly shorter in liraglutide-effective patients than in liraglutide-ineffective patients. In receiver operating characteristic analyses, the cut-off value for predicting the efficacy of liraglutide was 0.14 for I.I., 1.1 for CPI, 1.5 ng/mL for F-CPR, 33.3 μg/day for U-CPR and 19.5 years for duration of type 2 diabetes.

CONCLUSIONS

  Insulin secretion evaluated by F-CPR, CPI, I.I., U-CPR and the duration of type 2 diabetes were useful parameters for predicting the efficacy of liraglutide in patients with type 2 diabetes. (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040-1124.2011.00168.x, 2011).

Efficacy of liraglutide therapy in Japanese type 2 diabetic patients insufficiently controlled with basal-supported oral therapy

(J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040‐1124.2012.00223.x, 2012)

Aims/Introduction:  We assessed the efficacy of liraglutide therapy in Japanese type 2 diabetic patients insufficiently controlled with basal‐supported oral therapy (BOT).

Materials and Methods:  We retrospectively analyzed the data of 37 patients who had postprandial hyperglycemia (≥10.0 mmol/L) with BOT (long‐acting insulin plus glimepiride) with their insulin titrated enough to keep preprandial glycemia <7.2 mmol/L, and who had their treatment changed to liraglutide monotherapy, with the subsequent addition of glimepiride, when required. Those who achieved the glycemic target at all points (preprandial glycemia <7.2 mmol/L and postprandial glycemia <10.0 mmol/L) were regarded as responders and the efficacy of liraglutide therapy was assessed. We also explored the predictive clinical characteristics associated with its efficacy.

Results:  Daily doses of insulin and glimepiride with BOT were 14 ± 9 units and 1.5 ± 0.9 mg, respectively. After the change to liraglutide therapy, 37% of the patients appeared to be responders to the therapy, whereas 12% had their glycemic control rather deteriorated. Efficacy of liraglutide therapy was significantly associated with baseline insulin dosage and post‐breakfast glycemia with BOT. The C‐statistic of the model was calculated to be 0.90.

Conclusions:  There were responders and non‐responders to liraglutide therapy in Japanese BOT failures. It is likely that baseline insulin dosage and post‐breakfast glycemia with BOT are clinically useful indicators for the efficacy of liraglutide therapy.

Incretin treatment and risk of pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised and non-randomised studies

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the risk of pancreatitis associated with the use of incretin-based treatments in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Randomised and non-randomised controlled clinical trials, prospective or retrospective cohort studies, and case-control studies of treatment with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus compared with placebo, lifestyle modification, or active anti-diabetic drugs.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of trained reviewers independently screened for eligible studies, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data. A modified Cochrane tool for randomised controlled trials and a modified version of the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for observational studies were used to assess bias. We pooled data from randomised controlled trials using Peto odds ratios, and conducted four prespecified subgroup analyses and a post hoc subgroup analysis. Because of variation in outcome measures and forms of data, we describe the results of observational studies without a pooled analysis.

RESULTS

60 studies (n=353,639), consisting of 55 randomised controlled trials (n=33,350) and five observational studies (three retrospective cohort studies, and two case-control studies; n=320,289) were included. Pooled estimates of 55 randomised controlled trials (at low or moderate risk of bias involving 37 pancreatitis events, raw event rate 0.11%) did not suggest an increased risk of pancreatitis with incretins versus control (odds ratio 1.11, 95% confidence interval 0.57 to 2.17). Estimates by type of incretin suggested similar results (1.05 (0.37 to 2.94) for GLP-1 agonists v control; 1.06 (0.46 to 2.45) for DPP-4 inhibitors v control). Analyses according to the type of control, mode, duration of treatment, and individual incretin agents suggested no differential effect by subgroups, and sensitivity analyses by alternative statistical modelling and effect measures did not show important differences in effect estimates. Three retrospective cohort studies (moderate to high risk of bias, involving 1466 pancreatitis events, raw event rate 0.47%) also did not suggest an increased risk of pancreatitis associated with either exenatide (adjusted odds ratios 0.93 (0.63 to 1.36) in one study and 0.9 (0.6 to 1.5) in another) or sitagliptin (adjusted hazard ratio 1.0, 0.7 to 1.3); a case-control study at moderate risk of bias (1003 cases, 4012 controls) also suggested no significant association (adjusted odds ratio 0.98, 0.69 to 1.38). Another case-control study (1269 cases, 1269 controls) at moderate risk of bias, however, suggested that the use of either exenatide or sitagliptin was associated with significantly increased odds of acute pancreatitis (use within two years v no use, adjusted odds ratio 2.07, 1.36 to 3.13).

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence suggests that the incidence of pancreatitis among patients using incretins is low and that the drugs do not increase the risk of pancreatitis. Current evidence, however, is not definitive, and more carefully designed and conducted observational studies are warranted to definitively establish the extent, if any, of increased risk.

Exogenous glucagon-like peptide 1 reduces contractions in human colon circular muscle

Glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1) is a naturally occurring peptide secreted by intestinal L-cells. Though its primary function is to serve as an incretin, GLP1 reduces gastrointestinal motility. However, only a handful of animal studies have specifically evaluated the influence of GLP1 on colonic motility. Consequently, the aims of this study were to investigate the effects induced by exogenous GLP1, to analyze the mechanism of action, and to verify the presence of GLP1 receptors (GLP1Rs) in human colon circular muscular strips. Organ bath technique, RT-PCR, western blotting, and immunofluorescence were used. In human colon, exogenous GLP1 reduced, in a concentration-dependent manner, the amplitude of the spontaneous contractions without affecting the frequency and the resting basal tone. This inhibitory effect was significantly reduced by exendin (9-39), a GLP1R antagonist, which per se significantly increased the spontaneous mechanical activity. Moreover, it was abolished by tetrodotoxin, a neural blocker, or Nω-nitro-l-arginine - a blocker of neuronal nitric oxide synthase (nNOS). The biomolecular analysis revealed a genic and protein expression of the GLP1R in the human colon. The double-labeling experiments with anti-neurofilament or anti-nNOS showed, for the first time, that immunoreactivity for the GLP1R was expressed in nitrergic neurons of the myenteric plexus. In conclusion, the results of this study suggest that GLP1R is expressed in the human colon and, once activated by exogenous GLP1, mediates an inhibitory effect on large intestine motility through NO neural release.

Incorporating incretin-based therapies into clinical practice for patients with type 2 diabetes

Background

Effective, evidence-based management of type 2 diabetes (T2D) requires the integration of the best available evidence with clinical experience and patient preferences.

Methods

Studies published from 2000 to 2012 evaluating glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) or dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4 inhibitors) were identified using PubMed. The author contextualized the study findings with his clinical experience.

Results

Incretin-based therapy targets multiple dysfunctional organs in T2D. Injectable GLP-1RAs provide substantial glycemic control and weight reduction; while oral DPP-4 inhibitors provide moderate glycemic control and weight neutrality. Both classes are effective, well tolerated, and associated with a low incidence of hypoglycemia when used alone or in combination with other antidiabetes agents. GLP-1RAs are associated with transient nausea and, like DPP-4 inhibitors, rare pancreatitis.

Conclusion

Data indicate and clinical experience confirms that incretins are well tolerated in appropriate patients and provide sustained glycemic control and weight loss or weight neutrality throughout T2D progression.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s12325-014-0100-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Clinical experience with Liraglutide in 196 patients with type 2 diabetes from a tertiary care center in India

CONTEXT

GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) are unique antidiabetic agents that have the ability to lower blood glucose without causing hypoglycemia, while at the same time promoting weight loss. Information on the efficacy and safety of GLP-1 RA in the Indian diabetic population is limited.

AIMS

(1) To evaluate the effect of GLP-1 RA, Liraglutide on glycemic control, and weight in obese Indian patients with type 2 diabetes. (2) To study the adverse event profile of Liraglutide in these patients in real-world clinical setting.

SETTINGS AND DESIGN

Observational study conducted in a tertiary care hospital.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Liraglutide was prescribed to 196 obese patients with type 2 diabetes who had poor glycemic control on oral medications ± insulin. The initial dose of Liraglutide was 0.6 mg, which was up-titrated to 1.2 mg after 1 week; further up-titration to 1.8 mg was done based on tolerance. Dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-IV) inhibitors were discontinued and dose of other medications adjusted according to clinical judgment during the study period.

RESULTS

Mean age of patients was 49.9 ± 9.6 years. Three month data were available for 175 patients out of a total of 196. At 3 months, glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) was 7.6 ± 0.9% vs. 9.2 ± 1.9% at baseline (P = 0.007) and mean body weight was 96.0 ± 16.5 kg vs. 100.1 ± 17.5 kg at baseline (P < 0.001). Most common adverse events were nausea, burping, and eructation (10%).

CONCLUSION

Liraglutide significantly improves glycemic control with low risk of hypoglycemia and is associated with significant weight loss in obese Indian patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

The incidence of mild and severe hypoglycaemia in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus treated with sulfonylureas: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus using sulfonylurea derivatives or insulin may experience hypoglycaemia. However, recent data regarding the incidence of hypoglycaemia are scarce. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus that experience hypoglycaemia when treated with sulfonylurea or insulin. We searched MEDLINE and EMBASE for randomized controlled trials that compared incretin-based drugs to sulfonylureas or insulin and assessed hypoglycaemia incidence in the latter therapies. Subgroup and meta-regression analyses were performed to study possible associations with potential risk factors for hypoglycaemia. Data of 25 studies were extracted, 22 for sulfonylurea and 3 for insulin. Hypoglycaemia with glucose ≤3.1 mmol/L or ≤2.8 mmol/L was experienced by 10.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 7.3-13.8%] and 5.9% (95% CI 2.5-13.4%) of patients with any sulfonylurea treatment. Severe hypoglycaemia was experienced by 0.8% (95% CI 0.5-1.3%) of patients. Hypoglycaemia with glucose ≤3.1 mmol/L and severe hypoglycaemia occurred least frequently with gliclazide: in 1.4% (95% CI 0.8-2.4%) and 0.1% (95% CI 0-0.7%) of patients, respectively. None of the risk factors were significant in a stepwise multivariate meta-regression analysis. Too few studies had insulin as comparator, so these data could not be meta-analysed. The majority of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus on sulfonylurea therapy in clinical trials remain free of any relevant hypoglycaemia. Gliclazide was associated with the lowest risk of hypoglycaemia. Because participants in randomized controlled trials differ from the general population, care should be taken when translating these data into clinical practice.

PSCs and GLP-1R: occurrence in normal pancreas, acute/chronic pancreatitis and effect of their activation by a GLP-1R agonist

There is increasing concern about the development of pancreatitis in patients with diabetes mellitus who received long-term glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analog treatment. Its pathogenesis is unknown. The effects of GLP-1 agonists on pancreatic endocrine cells are well studied; however, there is little information on effects on other pancreatic tissues that might be involved in inflammatory processes. Pancreatic stellate cells (PSCs) can have an important role in pancreatitis, secreting various inflammatory cytokines/chemokines, as well as collagen. In this study, we investigated GLP-1R occurrence in normal pancreas, acute pancreatitis (AP)/chronic pancreatitis (CP), and the effects of GLP-1 analog on normal PSCs, their ability to stimulate inflammatory mediator secretion or proliferation. GLP-1 receptor (GLP-1R) expression/localization in normal pancreas and pancreatitis (AP/CP) tissues were evaluated with histological/immunohistochemical analysis. PSCs were isolated from male Wistar rats. GLP-1R expression and effects of GLP-1 analog on activated PSCs was examined with real-time PCR, MTS assays and western blotting. In normal pancreas, pancreatic β cells expressed GLP-1R, with only low expression in acinar cells, whereas in AP or CP, acinar cells, ductal cells and activated PSCs expressed GLP-1R. With activation of normal PSCs, GLP-1R is markedly increased, as is multiple other incretin-related receptors. The GLP-1 analog, liraglutide, did not induce inflammatory genes expression in activated PSCs, but induced proliferation. Liraglutide activated multiple signaling cascades in PSCs, and the extracellular signal-regulated kinase pathway mediated the PSCs proliferation. GLP-1Rs are expressed in normal pancreas and there is marked enhanced expression in AP/CP. GLP-1-agonist induced cell proliferation of activated PSCs without increasing release of inflammatory mediators. These results suggest chronic treatment with GLP-1R agonists could lead to proliferation/chronic activation of PSCs, which may lead to important effects in the pancreas.

Early use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in type 2 diabetes

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the available glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) exenatide and liraglutide (marketed as Byetta * and Victoza † , respectively) in first- or second-line pharmacotherapy for type 2 diabetes (T2D), described here as 'early use'.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

MEDLINE, EMBASE and Google Scholar databases were queried for clinical trial reports using the terms incretin, GLP-1, exenatide and liraglutide. Relevant articles were those that employed these agents in treatment-naïve patients with T2D and in patients who had failed on metformin monotherapy. Additional targeted searches were conducted on diabetes treatment guidelines and on the range of physiological responses to GLP-1 RAs. Most evidence is level I and II.

RESULTS

Effective therapy for T2D should be implemented early in the course of this progressive disease. The recently revised 2013 Canadian Diabetes Association (CDA) guidelines now identify the GLP-1 RAs among various injected and oral agents recommended for the management of T2D. The rationale for early use of GLP-1 RAs in T2D management is manifold: these agents offer effective management of hyperglycemia in early-stage T2D, minimal risk of hypoglycemia, weight loss, improvement in multiple non-glycemic cardiovascular risk factors, and potential enhancement of patient adherence to antihyperglycemic treatment. Available data from clinical trials support second-line use of GLP-1 RAs among patients who fail on metformin, as well as first-line use of these agents in a subset of T2D patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability to achieve glycemic targets using GLP-1 RAs while simultaneously avoiding hypoglycemia and weight gain could provide substantial reassurance to physicians and patients who might otherwise resist the transition to injected therapies. Exenatide and liraglutide represent appropriate second-line choices for pharmacological treatment of T2D, as indicated in the 2013 CDA guidelines.

Sulphonylureas and risk of cardiovascular disease: systematic review and meta-analysis

AIMS

Sulphonylurea use has been linked with increased cardiovascular disease risk; however, previous studies have been inconsistent. Type 2 diabetes independently increases risk for cardiovascular disease, so understanding the link between longer-term use of anti-diabetic medications and cardiovascular disease has important clinical implications.

METHODS

Literature search in MEDLINE and CENTRAL was conducted throughout December 2011 for clinical and observational studies that reported the association between sulphonylurea and cardiovascular disease events. Ratios (relative risk, odds ratios or hazard ratios) adjusted for potential confounders (concomitant medications, baseline cardiovascular risk, diabetes severity) were pooled using a random-effects model to yield relative risks and associated 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

This meta-analysis included 33 studies (n = 1,325,446 patients), followed for a range of 0.46-10.4 years. In all studies, compared with other oral diabetes drugs, sulphonylurea use was associated with a significantly increased risk of cardiovascular death (relative risk 1.27, 95% confidence interval 1.18-1.34, n = 27 comparisons) and composite cardiovascular event (including myocardial infarction, stroke, cardiovascular-related hospitalization or cardiovascular death) (relative risk 1.10, 95% confidence interval 1.04-1.16, n = 43 comparisons). In studies comparing sulphonylurea vs. metformin, these relative risks were 1.26 (95% confidence interval 1.17-1.35, n = 17 comparisons) and 1.18 (95%confidence interval 1.13-1.24, n = 16 comparisons), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Results suggest that sulphonylurea use may elevate the risk of cardiovascular disease among patients with diabetes. This meta-analysis expands the pool of studies evaluating cardiovascular mortality compared with prior observations while using adjusted estimates, and assessing an additional outcome of a composite cardiovascular event. This finding warrants consideration in clinical practice when other treatment options may be available.

Cardiovascular safety of sulfonylureas: a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials

AIM

Cardiovascular safety of sulfonylurea has been questioned by some authors. This article aims at collecting all available data on this issue from randomized trials.

METHODS

A meta-analysis was performed including all trials with a duration of at least 6 months, comparing a sulfonylurea with a non-sulfonylurea agent in type 2 diabetes. Major cardiovascular events (MACE) and mortality were retrieved and combined to calculate Mantel-Haenzel odds ratio (MH-OR).

RESULTS

Of the 115 selected trials, 62 reported information on MACE, and 30 reported at least one event. MH-OR for sulfonylurea was 1.08 [0.86-1.36], p = 0.52 (1.85 [1.20-2.87], p = 0.005, in the five trials vs. DPP4 inhibitors, no significant differences vs. other comparators). The MH-OR for myocardial infarction and stroke was 0.88 [0.75-1.04], p = 0.13 and 1.28 [1.03-1.60], p = 0.026, respectively. Mortality was significantly increased with sulfonylureas (MH-OR: 1.22 [1.01-1.49], p = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

In type 2 diabetes, the use of sulfonylureas is associated with increased mortality and a higher risk of stroke, whereas the overall incidence of MACE appears to be unaffected. Significant differences in cardiovascular risk could be present in direct comparisons with specific classes of glucose-lowering agents, such as DPP4 inhibitors, but this hypothesis needs to be confirmed in long-term cardiovascular outcomes trials. The results of this meta-analysis need to be interpreted with caution, mainly because of limitations in trial quality and under-reporting of information on cardiovascular events and mortality. However, the cardiovascular safety of sulfonylureas cannot be considered established unless it is evaluated in long-term cardiovascular outcomes trials.

Retrospective analysis of safety and efficacy of insulin-to-liraglutide switch in Japanese type 2 diabetes: A caution against inappropriate use in patients with reduced β-cell function

Aims/Introduction

The safety and efficacy of insulin‐to‐liraglutide switch in type 2 diabetes has not been studied adequately. Here, we retrospectively characterize clinical parameters that might predict insulin‐to‐liraglutide treatment switch without termination due to hyperglycemia, and examine the effects of switching the therapies on glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c) and bodyweight in Japanese type 2 diabetes.

Materials and Methods

Japanese type 2 diabetes patients who underwent the switch of therapy were evaluated for their clinical data including β‐cell function‐related indices, such as increment of serum C‐peptide during glucagon stimulation test (GST‐ΔCPR). HbA_1c and bodyweight were analyzed in patients continuing with liraglutide after switching from insulin for 12 weeks.

Results

Of 147 patients, 28 failed in the switch due to hyperglycemia, nine failed because of other reasons and 110 continued with liraglutide for the 12‐week period. Patients failing in the switch due to hyperglycemia showed longer duration and higher daily insulin dose, as well as lower GST‐ΔCPR. Receiver–operating characteristic analysis showed that GST‐ΔCPR of 1.34 ng/mL is a cut‐off point for insulin‐to‐liraglutide switch without termination due to hyperglycemia. In patients continuing liraglutide for 12 weeks, the switch significantly reduced HbA_1c and bodyweight with no severe hypoglycemia, irrespective of sulfonylurea co‐administration, body mass index, duration and total daily insulin dose. The switch also significantly reduced the percentage of body fat and visceral fat areas.

Conclusions

Insulin‐to‐liraglutide switch can improve glycemic control and reduce bodyweight in Japanese type 2 diabetes patients. However, caution must be taken with the switch in patients with reduced insulin secretory capacity as predicted by GST‐ΔCPR.

A review of newer treatment approaches for type-2 diabetes: Focusing safety and efficacy of incretin based therapy

Diabetes resulting from both genetic and lifestyle factors causes high insulin deficiency or its resistance. As hyperglycemia and decreased insulin secretion and/or its sensitivity appear to be the primary defects associated with diabetes, available treatments focus on reducing those defects. A novel approach of treatment is to target the incretin mimetic hormones, which are secreted by intestinal cells in response to food intake, provoking glucose-dependent insulin secretion from the pancreas. Efficacy and safety studies of dipetidyl peptidase inhibitors (DPP-IV), sitagliptin, vildagliptin and linagliptin provide similar improvements in HbA1c levels when compared with metformin, sulfonylureas or glitazones without contributing to weight gain and hypoglycemia. Caution is required when choosing the gliptin in people with renal or hepatic impairment and with a risk of pancreatitis. The glucagon like peptide (GLP-1) analogues Exenatide and Liraglutide also have positive impact on glycemic control especially when used as a combination therapy. Another upcoming approach is using sodium-glucose co transporter two inhibitors in kidney, by exploring pathophysiology of renal glucose re absorption in the proximal tubule.

Sulphonylurea monotherapy for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a growing health problem worldwide. Whether sulphonylureas show better, equal or worse therapeutic effects in comparison with other antidiabetic interventions for patients with T2DM remains controversial.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of sulphonylurea monotherapy versus placebo, no intervention or other antidiabetic interventions for patients with T2DM.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched publications in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded, LILACS and CINAHL (all until August 2011) to obtain trials fulfilling the inclusion criteria for our review.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included clinical trials that randomised patients 18 years old or more with T2DM to sulphonylurea monotherapy with a duration of 24 weeks or more.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed the risk of bias. The primary outcomes were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Secondary outcomes were other patient-important outcomes and metabolic variables. Where possible, we used risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (95% CI) to analyse the treatment effect of dichotomous outcomes. We used mean differences with 95% CI to analyse the treatment effect of continuous outcomes. We evaluated the risk of bias. We conducted trial sequential analyses to assess whether firm evidence could be established for a 10% relative risk reduction (RRR) between intervention groups.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 72 randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with 22,589 participants; 9707 participants randomised to sulphonylureas versus 12,805 participants randomised to control interventions. The duration of the interventions varied from 24 weeks to 10.7 years. We judged none of the included trials as low risk of bias for all bias domains. Patient-important outcomes were seldom reported.First-generation sulphonylureas (FGS) versus placebo or insulin did not show statistical significance for all-cause mortality (versus placebo: RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.87 to 2.45; P = 0.15; 2 trials; 553 participants; high risk of bias (HRB); versus insulin: RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.59; P = 0.26; 2 trials; 1944 participants; HRB). FGS versus placebo showed statistical significance for cardiovascular mortality in favour of placebo (RR 2.63, 95% CI 1.32 to 5.22; P = 0.006; 2 trials; 553 participants; HRB). FGS versus insulin did not show statistical significance for cardiovascular mortality (RR 1.36, 95% CI 0.68 to 2.71; P = 0.39; 2 trials; 1944 participants; HRB). FGS versus alpha-glucosidase inhibitors showed statistical significance in favour of FGS for adverse events (RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52 to 0.76; P = 0.01; 2 trials; 246 participants; HRB) and for drop-outs due to adverse events (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.67; P = 0.004; 2 trials; 246 participants; HRB).Second-generation sulphonylureas (SGS) versus metformin (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.61 to 1.58; P = 0.68; 6 trials; 3528 participants; HRB), thiazolidinediones (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.60 to 1.41; P = 0.70; 7 trials; 4955 participants; HRB), insulin (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.18; P = 0.72; 4 trials; 1642 participants; HRB), meglitinides (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.47 to 4.42; P = 0.52; 7 trials; 2038 participants; HRB), or incretin-based interventions (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.52 to 3.68; P = 0.51; 2 trials; 1503 participants; HRB) showed no statistically significant effects regarding all-cause mortality in a random-effects model. SGS versus metformin (RR 1.47; 95% CI 0.54 to 4.01; P = 0.45; 6 trials; 3528 participants; HRB), thiazolidinediones (RR 1.30, 95% CI 0.55 to 3.07; P = 0.55; 7 trials; 4955 participants; HRB), insulin (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.73 to 1.28; P = 0.80; 4 trials; 1642 participants; HRB) or meglitinide (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.27 to 3.53; P = 0.97; 7 trials, 2038 participants, HRB) showed no statistically significant effects regarding cardiovascular mortality. Mortality data for the SGS versus placebo were sparse. SGS versus thiazolidinediones and meglitinides did not show statistically significant differences for a composite of non-fatal macrovascular outcomes. SGS versus metformin showed statistical significance in favour of SGS for a composite of non-fatal macrovascular outcomes (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.93; P = 0.02; 3018 participants; 3 trials; HRB). The definition of non-fatal macrovascular outcomes varied among the trials. SGS versus metformin, thiazolidinediones and meglitinides showed no statistical significance for non-fatal myocardial infarction. No meta-analyses could be performed for microvascular outcomes. SGS versus placebo, metformin, thiazolidinediones, alpha-glucosidase inhibitors or meglitinides showed no statistical significance for adverse events. SGS versus alpha-glucosidase inhibitors showed statistical significance in favour of SGS for drop-outs due to adverse events (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.96; P = 0.04; 9 trials; 870 participants; HRB). SGS versus meglitinides showed no statistical significance for the risk of severe hypoglycaemia. SGS versus metformin and thiazolidinediones showed statistical significance in favour of metformin (RR 5.64, 95% CI 1.22 to 26.00; P = 0.03; 4 trials; 3637 participants; HRB) and thiazolidinediones (RR 6.11, 95% CI 1.57 to 23.79; P = 0.009; 6 trials; 5660 participants; HRB) for severe hypoglycaemia.Third-generation sulphonylureas (TGS) could not be included in any meta-analysis of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality or non-fatal macro- or microvascular outcomes. TGS versus thiazolidinediones showed statistical significance regarding adverse events in favour of TGS (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.99; P = 0.03; 3 trials; 510 participants; HRB). TGS versus thiazolidinediones did not show any statistical significance for drop-outs due to adverse events. TGS versus other comparators could not be performed due to lack of data.For the comparison of SGS versus FGS no meta-analyses of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality, non-fatal macro- or microvascular outcomes, or adverse events could be performed.Health-related quality of life and costs of intervention could not be meta-analysed due to lack of data.In trial sequential analysis, none of the analyses of mortality outcomes, vascular outcomes or severe hypoglycaemia met the criteria for firm evidence of a RRR of 10% between interventions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence from RCTs to support the decision as to whether to initiate sulphonylurea monotherapy. Data on patient-important outcomes are lacking. Therefore, large-scale and long-term randomised clinical trials with low risk of bias, focusing on patient-important outcomes are required.

Type 2 diabetes in East Asians: similarities and differences with populations in Europe and the United States

There is an epidemic of diabetes in Asia. Type 2 diabetes develops in East Asian patients at a lower mean body mass index (BMI) compared with those of European descent. At any given BMI, East Asians have a greater amount of body fat and a tendency to visceral adiposity. In Asian patients, diabetes develops at a younger age and is characterized by early β cell dysfunction in the setting of insulin resistance, with many requiring early insulin treatment. The increasing proportion of young-onset and childhood type 2 diabetes is posing a particular threat, with these patients being at increased risk of developing diabetic complications. East Asian patients with type 2 diabetes have a higher risk of developing renal complications than Europeans and, with regard to cardiovascular complications, a predisposition for developing strokes. In addition to cardiovascular-renal disease, cancer is emerging as the other main cause of mortality. While more research is needed to explain these interethnic differences, urgent and concerted actions are needed to raise awareness, facilitate early diagnosis, and encourage preventive strategies to combat these growing disease burdens.

Effects of liraglutide, a human glucagon-like peptide-1 analogue, on body weight, body fat area and body fat-related markers in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of six-month liraglutide treatment on body weight, visceral and subcutaneous fat and related markers in Japanese type 2 diabetic patients.

METHODS

A total of 59 patients with type 2 diabetes were treated with liraglutide (0.3 mg/day for ≥1 week and then 0.6 mg/day for ≥1 week, gradually increasing the dose to 0.9 mg/day) for six months. Changes in body weight, body mass index (BMI), HbA1c, the fasting blood glucose level, visceral and subcutaneous fat areas, hepatic and renal CT values and the associated markers proinsulin, adiponectin and pentraxin (PTX) 3 were measured.

RESULTS

The study included one treatment-naïve patient, 10 patients who were switched from oral antidiabetic drugs and 35 patients who were switched from insulin therapy. At six months after treatment, the preprandial blood glucose levels were higher (148.8±40.5 mg/dL) than the baseline values (130.8±36.7, p<0.05); however, body weight, BMI and abdominal circumference were lower, and the liver/kidney CT ratio improved significantly from 1.64±0.44 at baseline to 1.78±0.42. An analysis of the patients who were not pretreated with insulin resistance ameliorators showed that six months of liraglutide treatment significantly decreased the subcutaneous but not visceral fat areas, significantly decreased the serum adiponectin levels and significantly increased the serum PTX3 levels.

CONCLUSION

In addition to its glucose-lowering effects, liraglutide exhibits weight loss promotion actions, reducing subcutaneous fat areas in particular. The weight and total fat area reduction properties of liraglutide are likely to be beneficial when this medication is used in combination with other oral antidiabetic drugs and insulin.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the once-daily GLP-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled on basal insulin with or without a sulfonylurea (GetGoal-L-Asia)

AIMS

To assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily lixisenatide versus placebo in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled on basal insulin ± sulfonylurea.

METHODS

In this 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre study, participants (mean baseline HbA(1c) 8.53%) from Japan, Republic of Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines received lixisenatide (n = 154) or placebo (n = 157) in a stepwise dose increase to 20 µg once daily. The primary endpoint was HbA(1c) change from baseline to week 24.

RESULTS

Once-daily lixisenatide significantly improved HbA(1c) versus placebo (LS mean difference vs. placebo = -0.88% [95%CI= -1.116, -0.650]; p < 0.0001), and allowed more patients to achieve HbA(1c) <7.0% (35.6 vs. 5.2%) and ≤ 6.5% (17.8 vs. 1.3%). Lixisenatide also significantly improved 2-h postprandial plasma glucose and glucose excursion, average 7-point self-monitored blood glucose and fasting plasma glucose. Lixisenatide was well tolerated; 86% of patients on lixisenatide completed the study versus 92% on placebo. Ten (6.5%) lixisenatide and 9 (5.7%) placebo patients experienced serious adverse events. More lixisenatide patients [14 (9.1%)] discontinued for adverse events versus placebo [5 (3.2%)], mainly with gastrointestinal causes. Nausea and vomiting were reported in 39.6 and 18.2% of patients on lixisenatide versus 4.5 and 1.9% on placebo. Symptomatic hypoglycaemia was more frequent with lixisenatide (42.9%) versus placebo (23.6%), but was similar between groups (32.6 vs. 28.3%, respectively), in those not receiving sulfonylureas. No severe hypoglycaemia was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

In an Asian type 2 diabetes population insufficiently controlled by basal insulin  ±  sulfonylurea, once-daily lixisenatide significantly improved glycaemic control, with a pronounced postprandial effect, and was well tolerated.

Efficacy of liraglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogue, on body weight, eating behavior, and glycemic control, in Japanese obese type 2 diabetes

Background

We recently reported that short-term treatment with liraglutide (20.0 ± 6.4 days) reduced body weight and improved some scales of eating behavior in Japanese type 2 diabetes inpatients. However, it remained uncertain whether such liraglutide-induced improvement is maintained after discharge from the hospital. The aim of the present study was to determine the long-term effects of liraglutide on body weight, glycemic control, and eating behavior in Japanese obese type 2 diabetics.

Methods

Patients with obesity (body mass index (BMI) >25 kg/m²) and type 2 diabetes were hospitalized at Osaka University Hospital between November 2010 and December 2011. BMI and glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c) were examined on admission, at discharge and at 1, 3, and 6 months after discharge. For the liraglutide group (BMI; 31.3 ± 5.3 kg/m², n = 29), patients were introduced to liraglutide after correction of hyperglycemic by insulin or oral glucose-lowering drugs and maintained on liraglutide after discharge. Eating behavior was assessed in patients treated with liraglutide using The Guideline For Obesity questionnaire issued by the Japan Society for the Study of Obesity, at admission, discharge, 3 and 6 months after discharge. For the insulin group (BMI; 29.1 ± 3.0 kg/m², n = 28), each patient was treated with insulin during hospitalization and glycemic control maintained by insulin after discharge.

Results

Liraglutide induced significant and persistent weight loss from admission up to 6 months after discharge, while no change in body weight after discharge was noted in the insulin group. Liraglutide produced significant improvements in all major scores of eating behavior questionnaire items and such effect was maintained at 6 months after discharge. Weight loss correlated significantly with the decrease in scores for recognition of weight and constitution, sense of hunger, and eating style.

Conclusion

Liraglutide produced meaningful long-term weight loss and significantly improved eating behavior in obese Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes.

Liraglutide administration in type 2 diabetic patients who either received no previous treatment or were treated with an oral hypoglycemic agent showed greater efficacy than that in patients switching from insulin

Aims/Introduction

Liraglutide, a glucagon‐like peptide‐1 receptor agonist, is expected to provide a new treatment option for diabetes. However, the suitable timing of liraglutide administration in type 2 diabetic patients has not yet been clarified.

Materials and Methods

We reviewed type 2 diabetic patients (n = 155) who visited the Osaka Red Cross Hospital for glycemic control, with administration of liraglutide at a dose of 0.6 mg (average glycated hemoglobin [HbA_1c] level, 8.7 ± 0.1%). The effect of liraglutide based on the pretreatment status was compared. We also analyzed the background factors of both a successful and failed group of patients who switched to liraglutide from insulin.

Results

An improvement in blood glucose levels was confirmed in 122 of 155 patients. During the 4‐month observation period, the improvement in HbA_1c levels was significantly greater in the group of drug‐naïve/previous oral hypoglycemic agent (9.1 ± 0.2 to 7.2 ± 0.2%) than that in the group switching from insulin (8.6 ± 0.2 to 7.8 ± 0.2%). In addition, C‐peptide immunoreactivity levels (fasting > 2.2 ng/mL; delta >1.6 ng/mL; urine > 70 μg/day), younger age and a smaller number of insulin units used per day were considered important when deciding on switching to liraglutide from insulin.

Conclusions

Liraglutide was more effective in patients who had not been treated previously or received oral hypoglycemic agents than in patients switching from insulin. With respect to switching to liraglutide from insulin, the most important factors to be considered were C‐peptide immunoreactivity levels, age, and the number of insulin units used per day.

Liraglutide: a review of its use in the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Liraglutide (Victoza®) is a subcutaneously administered glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist produced by recombinant DNA technology and used as an adjunct to diet and exercise in the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus. This article reviews the clinical efficacy and tolerability of liraglutide in adults with type 2 diabetes, and provides a summary of its pharmacological properties. Recently published pharmacoeconomic studies of liraglutide are also reviewed. Administered subcutaneously, liraglutide (usually 1.2 or 1.8 mg once daily) generally produced greater improvements in glycaemic control than active comparators or placebo when administered as monotherapy or in combination with one or two oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs) to adults with type 2 diabetes in numerous randomized, controlled phase III trials. These included six trials in the LEAD trial programme that was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of liraglutide across a continuum of antihyperglycaemic management for patients with type 2 diabetes. Liraglutide was generally well tolerated, with a low risk of hypoglycaemia evident, in the phase III trials. The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal and included nausea and diarrhoea; most events were mild to moderate in severity and decreased in incidence over time. In conclusion, liraglutide has an important place in the management of adults with type 2 diabetes across a continuum of care. As well as providing effective glycaemic control, liraglutide improves pancreatic β-cell function and leads to bodyweight loss, thereby addressing some of the unmet needs of patients treated with traditional OADs.

Discovery and biological evaluation of novel 4-amino-2-phenylpyrimidine derivatives as potent and orally active GPR119 agonists

Novel 4-amino-2-phenylpyrimidine derivatives were synthesized and evaluated as GPR119 agonists. Optimization of the substituents on the phenyl ring at the 2-position and the amino group at the 4-position led to the identification of 3,4-dihalogenated and 2,4,5-trihalogenated phenyl derivatives showing potent GPR119 agonistic activity. The advanced analog (2R)-3-{[2-(4-chloro-2,5-difluorophenyl)-6-ethylpyrimidin-4-yl]amino}propane-1,2-diol (24g) was found to improve glucose tolerance at 1mg/kg po in mice and to show excellent pharmacokinetic profiles in mice and monkeys. Compound 24g also showed an excellent antidiabetic effect in diabetic kk/Ay mice after one week of single daily treatment. These results demonstrate that novel GPR119 agonist 24g improves glucose tolerance not only by enhancing glucose-dependent insulin secretion but also by preserving pancreatic β-cell function.

An overview of the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of liraglutide

OBJECTIVE

Incretin-based therapies, including glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, are the latest addition to the range of available medications for the management of patients with type 2 diabetes. The GLP-1 analog liraglutide has been approved for use in Europe and the US for over a year and has undergone evaluation in several pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamics studies and in an extensive phase 3 clinical program. The aim of this review is to assess the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and safety of the phase 3 data.

METHODS

Data are presented from the pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics studies of liraglutide and from nine published phase 3 studies, including the six Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes (LEAD) studies.

RESULTS

Liraglutide is effective at improving indices of glycemic control, and has a good tolerability and safety profile. Beneficial effects on weight (mean reduction of 1-3.4 kg) and blood pressure (systolic blood pressure decreased by 2.1-6.7 mmHg) are also observed.

CONCLUSION

Liraglutide is an effective and well tolerated option for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Exenatide twice daily versus glimepiride for prevention of glycaemic deterioration in patients with type 2 diabetes with metformin failure (EUREXA): an open-label, randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Glycaemic control deteriorates progressively over time in patients with type 2 diabetes. Options for treatment escalation remain controversial after failure of first-line treatment with metformin. We compared add-on exenatide with glimepiride for durability of glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes inadequately controlled by metformin alone.

METHODS

We did an open-label, randomised controlled trial at 128 centres in 14 countries between Sept 5, 2006, and March 29, 2011. Patients aged 18-85 years with type 2 diabetes inadequately treated by metformin were randomly assigned via a computer-generated randomisation sequence to receive exenatide twice daily or glimepiride once daily as add-on to metformin. Randomisation was stratified by predetermined categories of glycated haemoglobin (HbA(1C)) concentration. The primary outcome was time to inadequate glycaemic control and need for alternative treatment, defined as an HbA(1c) concentration of more than 9% after the first 3 months of treatment, or more than 7% at two consecutive visits after the first 6 months. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with EudraCT, number 2005-005448-21, and ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00359762.

FINDINGS

We randomly assigned 515 patients to the exenatide group and 514 to the glimepiride group, of whom 490 versus 487 were the intention-to-treat population. 203 (41%) patients had treatment failure in the exenatide group compared with 262 (54%) in the glimepiride group (risk difference 12·4 [95% CI 6·2-18·6], hazard ratio 0·748 [0·623-0·899]; p=0·002). 218 (44%) of 490 patients in the exenatide group, and 150 (31%) of 487 in the glimepiride group achieved an HbA(1c) concentration of less than 7% (p<0·0001), and 140 (29%) versus 87 (18%) achieved concentrations of 6·5% and less (p=0·0001). We noted a significantly greater decrease in bodyweight in patients given exenatide than in those given glimepiride (p<0·0001). Five patients in each treatment group died from causes unrelated to treatment. Significantly fewer patients in the exenatide group than in the glimepiride group reported documented symptomatic (p<0·0001), nocturnal (p=0·007), and non-nocturnal (p<0·0001) hypoglycaemia. Discontinuation because of adverse events (mainly gastrointestinal) was significantly higher (p=0·0005) in the exenatide group than in the glimepiride group in the first 6 months of treatment, but not thereafter.

INTERPRETATION

These findings provide evidence for the benefits of exenatide versus glimepiride for control of glycaemic deterioration in patients with type-2 diabetes inadequately controlled by metformin alone.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company; Amylin Pharmaceuticals.

Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the once-daily GLP-1 receptor agonist lixisenatide in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled on basal insulin with or without a sulfonylurea (GetGoal-L-Asia)

AIMS

To assess the efficacy and safety of once-daily lixisenatide versus placebo in Asian patients with type 2 diabetes insufficiently controlled on basal insulin ± sulfonylurea.

METHODS

In this 24-week, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, multicentre study, participants (mean baseline HbA(1c) 8.53%) from Japan, Republic of Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines received lixisenatide (n = 154) or placebo (n = 157) in a stepwise dose increase to 20 µg once daily. The primary endpoint was HbA(1c) change from baseline to week 24.

RESULTS

Once-daily lixisenatide significantly improved HbA(1c) versus placebo (LS mean difference vs. placebo = -0.88% [95%CI= -1.116, -0.650]; p < 0.0001), and allowed more patients to achieve HbA(1c) <7.0% (35.6 vs. 5.2%) and ≤ 6.5% (17.8 vs. 1.3%). Lixisenatide also significantly improved 2-h postprandial plasma glucose and glucose excursion, average 7-point self-monitored blood glucose and fasting plasma glucose. Lixisenatide was well tolerated; 86% of patients on lixisenatide completed the study versus 92% on placebo. Ten (6.5%) lixisenatide and 9 (5.7%) placebo patients experienced serious adverse events. More lixisenatide patients [14 (9.1%)] discontinued for adverse events versus placebo [5 (3.2%)], mainly with gastrointestinal causes. Nausea and vomiting were reported in 39.6 and 18.2% of patients on lixisenatide versus 4.5 and 1.9% on placebo. Symptomatic hypoglycaemia was more frequent with lixisenatide (42.9%) versus placebo (23.6%), but was similar between groups (32.6 vs. 28.3%, respectively), in those not receiving sulfonylureas. No severe hypoglycaemia was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

In an Asian type 2 diabetes population insufficiently controlled by basal insulin  ±  sulfonylurea, once-daily lixisenatide significantly improved glycaemic control, with a pronounced postprandial effect, and was well tolerated.

Managing diabetes in Asia: overcoming obstacles and the role of DPP-IV inhibitors

Asia bears the world's greatest burden of type 2 diabetes (T2DM) and prevalence is increasing rapidly. Compared to other races, Asians develop T2DM younger, at a lower degree of obesity, suffer longer from its complications and die earlier. Curbing this epidemic requires an integrated, risk-based, and multidisciplinary approach. Inadequately managed T2DM has macrovascular and microvascular sequelae, Asians with T2DM being particularly susceptible to diabetic nephropathy. Earlier and more intensive monitoring and management of risk factors are required, especially for patients with, or at risk of, renal impairment. Particular challenges of T2DM management in Asia include: lack of access to specialist healthcare, insufficient clinical evaluation and delayed diagnosis. As in Caucasians, conventional treatment modalities are limited by deteriorating glycaemic control with disease progression and there is an unmet need for efficacious, safe, cost-effective and convenient pharmacotherapies for treating different stages of T2DM and preventing its complications, particularly in high-risk patients. There is a trend towards increasing use of DPP-IV inhibitors, which are no less efficacious and safe in Asians than Caucasians and may have some advantages over existing oral antidiabetic agents, particularly for certain high-risk groups. Such agents may play a significant future role in the management of T2DM.

Liraglutide narrows the range of circadian glycemic variations in Japanese type 2 diabetes patients and nearly flattens these variations in drug-naive type 2 diabetes patients: a continuous glucose monitoring-based study

BACKGROUND

Liraglutide was examined for its effects on 24-h glucose fluctuations in Japanese type 2 diabetes patients as well as for its differential effects depending on glucose tolerance status after favorable glycemic control was obtained in these patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

In this prospective open-label pilot study, a total of 20 type 2 diabetes patients hospitalized for glycemic control were given liraglutide 0.3 mg, followed by liraglutide 0.6 mg and 0.9 mg, with each given at 1-week intervals. The patients were continuously monitored for their 24-h glucose levels before treatment and during the course of treatment with liraglutide 0.3 mg, 0.6 mg, and 0.9 mg, respectively, using continuous glucose monitoring (CGM). At the start of treatment with liraglutide, 12 patients were on diet therapy alone, of which six were drug-naive, and eight were being treated with glimepiride.

RESULTS

Liraglutide not only significantly reduced 24-h mean glucose levels but also significantly improved all the indices for glycemic variation evaluated, which included SDs of 24-h glucose levels, mean amplitude of glycemic excursions (MAGE), and total area under the glucose fluctuation curve (AUC) for 24 h. The study showed a significant negative correlation for mean glucose levels, SD, and AUC immediately before treatment versus their changes with liraglutide. A 75-g oral glucose tolerance test (OGTT) was given in 11 patients treated with liraglutide monotherapy once favorable glycemic control was achieved. The OGTT revealed that of these, six were found to have normal glucose tolerance, four had impaired glucose tolerance, and one had diabetes, and that of the six drug-naive patients, five patients were found to have normal glucose tolerance, and one had impaired glucose tolerance.

CONCLUSIONS

Study results showed that liraglutide is expected not only to reduce mean glucose levels but also to improve 24-h glucose fluctuations, including postprandial glucose excursions, with its effects being particularly conspicuous in patients with early-stage type 2 diabetes.

Liraglutide in adults with type 2 diabetes: global perspective on safety, efficacy and patient preference

Incretin-based therapies have been gaining much attention recently as a new class of therapeutics for type 2 diabetes worldwide. Among them, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide has been rapidly increasing its global usage. Once daily injection of liraglutide significantly ameliorates glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes by enhancing insulin secretion and suppressing glucagon secretion glucose-dependently. Liraglutide delays gastric emptying and suppresses food intakes, both of which contribute to glucose lowering and weight reduction. Efficacy and safety of liraglutide in management of type 2 diabetes have been well documented in several key clinical trials such as series of phase 3 Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes (LEAD) trials, and the liraglutide-versus-sitagliptin trial. Recent two trials dealing with monotherapy and sulfonylurea combination therapy on Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes furthermore indicate liraglutide's effectiveness in non-obese diabetes. In this review, we summarize results from such clinical trials, and discuss efficacy and safety of liraglutide in management of type 2 diabetes in various countries, along with a pitfall of liraglutide usage in real clinical setting.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 analog liraglutide in combination with sulfonylurea safely improves blood glucose measures vs sulfonylurea monotherapy in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes: Results of a 52-week, randomized, multicenter trial

Aims/Introduction:  Sulfonylurea (SU) agents are the most effective drugs at lowering blood glucose when used alone. However, their effectiveness declines after a certain period. The addition of liraglutide to existing SU therapy might reverse some of the known drawbacks of SU.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  This multicenter, randomized, 52-week study assessed the long-term efficacy and safety of adding liraglutide at 0.6 or 0.9 mg/day to existing SU therapy in Japanese patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes.

RESULTS

  In total, 264 patients were enrolled and received treatment. At week 52, HbA1c in the liraglutide 0.6 mg, liraglutide 0.9 mg and placebo groups was reduced from 9.00 to 7.91%, from 8.61 to 7.33%, and from 8.85 to 8.79%, respectively. The mean difference of HbA1c (95% CI) in the liraglutide 0.6 and 0.9 mg groups vs the placebo group was 0.96 (-1.25 to -0.67) and -1.33 (-1.62 to -1.04), respectively. For the liraglutide 0.6 mg, 0.9 mg and placebo groups, the Japanese Diabetes Society target HbA1c of <6.9% was achieved by 15.1, 39.1 and 4.5% of patients, respectively. Mean fasting plasma glucose at week 52 was lower in the liraglutide groups compared with the placebo group, and mean bodyweight remained unchanged in the liraglutide groups. Most subjects in all three treatment groups reported mild adverse events. No major hypoglycemic episode was reported.

CONCLUSIONS

  Once-daily administration of liraglutide in combination with SU for 52 weeks provided favorable metabolic control, a safety profile and did not alter bodyweight. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrial.gov (no. NCT00395746). (J Diabetes Invest,doi: 10.1111/j.2040-1124.2011.00103.x, 2011).

Review of the therapeutic uses of liraglutide

BACKGROUND

Glucagon-like peptide (GLP-1) is a neuroendocrine hormone that increases blood glucose and is a drug target for treatment of type 2 diabetes. Liraglutide, a subcutaneous, once-daily GLP-1 agonist, is approved for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in the United States and Europe. It also has been studied for weight loss.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this article is to review all of the relevant literature on the chemistry, pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, metabolism, clinical trials, safety, drug interactions, cost, and place in therapy of liraglutide.

METHODS

Literature searches of MEDLINE between 1969 and September 2010, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts between 1970 and September 2010, American Diabetes Association Meeting abstracts (2008-2010), and European Association for the Study of Diabetes abstracts (2008-2010) were performed using liraglutide, Victoza, and NN2211 as key terms.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized controlled trials were identified and summarized. Liraglutide has been shown to increase glucose-dependent insulin release by 34% to 118% and reduce postprandial glucagon levels by 20%. Studies showed that liraglutide, as monotherapy and in combination with glimepiride, metformin, and/or rosiglitazone, lowers glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA(1c)) between 0.84% and 1.5%. Transient nausea was reported by 7% to 40% of subjects. Severe hypoglycemia-glucose <55 mg/dL-was observed by 2.5% of subjects in 1 trial.

CONCLUSION

Liraglutide safely and effectively reduces HbA(1c) in patients with type 2 diabetes. The most recent American Diabetes Association guidelines recommended a GLP-1 agonist along with metformin as a second-tier therapy for type 2 diabetes. Although the American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinologists' guidelines recommended it for first-line monotherapy in patients with HbA(1c) between 6.5% and 7.5% and with metformin if HbA(1c) is between 7.6% and 8.5%, liraglutide should be considered for patients who cannot tolerate first-line agents or if an additional agent is needed to help reach target HbA(1c) goals.

Improved glycemic control and reduced bodyweight with exenatide: A double-blind, randomized, phase 3 study in Japanese patients with suboptimally controlled type 2 diabetes over 24 weeks

Aims/Introduction:  To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist, exenatide, in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus suboptimally controlled despite therapeutic doses of a sulfonylurea alone or combined with a biguanide or thiazolidinedione.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

  Patients were randomized to a placebo or exenatide, either 5 or 10 μg, given subcutaneously b.i.d. in addition to oral therapy. Patients randomized to 10 μg exenatide received 5 μg b.i.d. for the first 4 weeks, followed by 10 μg b.i.d. for the last 20 weeks.

RESULTS

  A total of 179 patients received the study drug and composed the full analysis set (n = 35, placebo; n = 72, exenatide 5 μg; n = 72, exenatide 10 μg; 68% male; 58 ± 10 years; body mass index 25.5 ± 4.1 kg/m(2); HbA1c 8.2 ± 0.9%; means ± standard deviations). Baseline to end-point (least-squares means ± standard errors) HbA1c changes (%) were -0.28 ± 0.15 (placebo), -1.34 ± 0.11 (exenatide 5 μg) and -1.62 ± 0.11 (exenatide 10 μg) (both P < 0.001, exenatide vs placebo). Baseline to end-point bodyweight changes (kg) were -0.47 ± 0.39 (placebo), -0.39 ± 0.28 (exenatide 5 μg) and -1.54 ± 0.27 (exenatide 10 μg; P = 0.026, exenatide 10 μg vs placebo). Nausea, generally mild to moderate, was reported in 8.6% (placebo), 25.0% (exenatide 5 μg) and 36.1% (exenatide 10 μg) of patients. Mild to moderate hypoglycemia was reported in 22.9% (placebo), 51.4% (exenatide 5 μg) and 58.3% (exenatide 10 μg) of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

  Over 24 weeks, exenatide vs the placebo improved glycemic control, reduced bodyweight (10 μg) and was well tolerated in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus suboptimally controlled, despite oral therapy including a sulfonylurea. This trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (no. NCT00577824). (J Diabetes Invest, doi: 10.1111/j.2040-1124.2010.00084.x, 2011).

GLP-1 and calcitonin concentration in humans: lack of evidence of calcitonin release from sequential screening in over 5000 subjects with type 2 diabetes or nondiabetic obese subjects treated with the human GLP-1 analog, liraglutide

BACKGROUND

Serum calcitonin (CT) is a well-accepted marker of C-cell proliferation, particularly in medullary thyroid carcinoma. Chronic glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist administration in rodents has been associated with increased serum CT levels and C-cell tumor formation. There are no longitudinal studies measuring CT in humans without medullary thyroid carcinoma or a family history of medullary thyroid carcinoma and no published studies on the effect of GLP-1 receptor agonists on human serum CT concentrations.

AIM

The aim of the study was to determine serum CT response over time to the GLP-1 receptor agonist liraglutide in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus or nondiabetic obese subjects.

METHODS

Unstimulated serum CT concentrations were measured at 3-month intervals for no more than 2 yr in a series of trials in over 5000 subjects receiving liraglutide or control therapy.

RESULTS

Basal mean CT concentrations were at the low end of normal range in all treatment groups and remained low throughout the trials. At 2 yr, estimated geometric mean values were no greater than 1.0 ng/liter, well below upper normal ranges for males and females. Proportions of subjects whose CT levels increased above a clinically relevant cutoff of 20 ng/liter were very low in all groups. There was no consistent dose or time-dependent relationship and no consistent difference between treatment groups.

CONCLUSIONS

These data do not support an effect of GLP-1 receptor activation on serum CT levels in humans and suggest that findings previously reported in rodents may not apply to humans. However, the long-term consequences of GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment are a subject of further studies.

Novel GPR119 agonist AS1535907 contributes to first-phase insulin secretion in rat perfused pancreas and diabetic db/db mice

G protein-coupled receptor (GPR) 119 is highly expressed in pancreatic β-cells and enhances the effect of glucose-stimulated insulin secretion (GSIS) on activation. The development of an oral GPR119 agonist that specifically targets the first phase of GSIS represents a promising strategy for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. In the present study, we evaluated the therapeutic potential of a novel small molecule GPR119 agonist, AS1535907, which was modified from the previously identified 2,4,6-tri-substituted pyrimidine core agonist AS1269574. AS1535907 displayed an EC50 value of 4.8 μM in HEK293 cells stably expressing human GPR119 and stimulated insulin secretion in rat islets only under high-glucose (16.8 mM) conditions. In isolated perfused pancreata from normal rats, AS1535907 enhanced the first phase of insulin secretion at 16.8 mM glucose, but had no effect at 2.8mM glucose. In contrast, the sulfonylurea glibenclamide predominantly induced insulin release in the second phase at 16.8 mM glucose and also markedly stimulated insulin secretion at 2.8 mM glucose. In in vivo studies, a single 10 μM administration of AS1535907 to diabetic db/db mice reduced blood glucose levels due to the rapid secretion of insulin secretion following oral glucose loading. These results demonstrate that GPR119 agonist AS1535907 has the ability to stimulate the first phase of GSIS, which is important for preventing the development of postprandial hypoglycemia. In conclusion, the GPR119 agonist AS1535907 induces a more rapid and physiological pattern of insulin release than glibenclamide, and represents a novel strategy for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Liraglutide, the once-daily human GLP-1 analog, in the treatment of Type 2 diabetes

Type 2 diabetes is a progressive disorder characterized by continuous deterioration in β-cell function requiring an escalation of therapeutic efforts in order to maintain glycemic control. Recent studies have demonstrated that the current antidiabetic treatments, including metformin, sulfonylureas and thiazolidinediones, are not durable, resulting in an increase of hemoglobin A_1c over time with all three therapies. Many current antidiabetic treatments (sulfonylureas, thiazolidinediones and insulin) are associated with the undesirable feature of weight gain. In addition, sulfonylureas and insulin are associated with an increased risk for hypoglycemia. The unsatisfactory results with the current pharmacological therapies for Type 2 diabetes have encouraged the development of a number of novel treatments. Among these are the incretin-based therapies, which include glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 receptor agonists; this article focuses on one of these agonists, the human GLP-1 analog liraglutide. Liraglutide has been approved for use in Type 2 diabetic individuals in several countries, including Europe, the USA and Japan.