Safety and efficacy of sitagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic renal insufficiency

Current type 2 diabetes guidelines: Individualized treatment and how to make the most of metformin

Evidence-based guidelines provide the premise for the delivery of quality care to preserve health and prevent disabilities and premature death. The systematic gathering of observational, mechanistic and experimental data contributes to the hierarchy of evidence used to guide clinical practice. In the field of diabetes, metformin was discovered more than 100 years ago, and with 60 years of clinical use, it has stood the test of time regarding its value in the prevention and management of type 2 diabetes. Although some guidelines have challenged the role of metformin as the first-line glucose-lowering drug, it is important to point out that the cardiovascular-renal protective effects of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists were gathered from patients with type 2 diabetes, the majority of whom were treated with metformin. Most national, regional and international guidelines recommend metformin as a foundation therapy with emphasis on avoidance of therapeutic inertia and early attainment of multiple treatment goals. Moreover, real-world evidence has confirmed the glucose-lowering and cardiovascular-renal benefits of metformin accompanied by an extremely low risk of lactic acidosis. In patients with type 2 diabetes and advanced chronic kidney disease (estimated glomerular filtration rate 15-30 mL/min/1.73m2), metformin discontinuation was associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular-renal events compared with metformin persistence. Meanwhile, it is understood that microbiota, nutrients and metformin can interact through the gut-brain-kidney axis to modulate homeostasis of bioactive molecules, systemic inflammation and energy metabolism. While these biological changes contribute to the multisystem effects of metformin, they may also explain the gastrointestinal side effects and vitamin B12 deficiency associated with metformin intolerance. By understanding the interactions between metformin, foods and microbiota, healthcare professionals are in a better position to optimize the use of metformin and mitigate potential side effects. The United Kingdom Prospective Diabetes Study and the Da Qing Diabetes Prevention Program commenced 40 years ago provided the first evidence that type 2 diabetes is preventable and treatable. To drive real-world impact from this evidence, payors, practitioners and planners need to co-design and implement an integrated, data-driven, metformin-based programme to detect people with undiagnosed diabetes and prediabetes (intermediate hyperglycaemia), notably impaired glucose tolerance, for early intervention. The systematic data collection will create real-world evidence to bring out the best of metformin and make healthcare sustainable, affordable and accessible.

2023 UPDATE: Luso-Brazilian evidence-based guideline for the management of antidiabetic therapy in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

The management of antidiabetic therapy in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) has evolved beyond glycemic control. In this context, Brazil and Portugal defined a joint panel of four leading diabetes societies to update the guideline published in 2020.

METHODS

The panelists searched MEDLINE (via PubMed) for the best evidence from clinical studies on treating T2D and its cardiorenal complications. The panel searched for evidence on antidiabetic therapy in people with T2D without cardiorenal disease and in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), heart failure (HF), or diabetic kidney disease (DKD). The degree of recommendation and the level of evidence were determined using predefined criteria.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

All people with T2D need to have their cardiovascular (CV) risk status stratified and HbA1c, BMI, and eGFR assessed before defining therapy. An HbA1c target of less than 7% is adequate for most adults, and a more flexible target (up to 8%) should be considered in frail older people. Non-pharmacological approaches are recommended during all phases of treatment. In treatment naïve T2D individuals without cardiorenal complications, metformin is the agent of choice when HbA1c is 7.5% or below. When HbA1c is above 7.5% to 9%, starting with dual therapy is recommended, and triple therapy may be considered. When HbA1c is above 9%, starting with dual therapyt is recommended, and triple therapy should be considered. Antidiabetic drugs with proven CV benefit (AD1) are recommended to reduce CV events if the patient is at high or very high CV risk, and antidiabetic agents with proven efficacy in weight reduction should be considered when obesity is present. If HbA1c remains above target, intensification is recommended with triple, quadruple therapy, or even insulin-based therapy. In people with T2D and established ASCVD, AD1 agents (SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP-1 RA with proven CV benefit) are initially recommended to reduce CV outcomes, and metformin or a second AD1 may be necessary to improve glycemic control if HbA1c is above the target. In T2D with HF, SGLT2 inhibitors are recommended to reduce HF hospitalizations and mortality and to improve HbA1c. In patients with DKD, SGLT2 inhibitors in combination with metformin are recommended when eGFR is above 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. SGLT2 inhibitors can be continued until end-stage kidney disease.

Benefits and harms of sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2-I) and renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system inhibitors (RAAS-I) versus SGLT2-Is alone in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Introduction

It is uncertain if the combination of sodium‐glucose co‐transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2‐Is) and renin‐angiotensin‐aldosterone system inhibitors (RAAS‐Is) provides better cardio‐renal clinical outcomes in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) compared with SGLT2‐Is alone. Using a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs), we evaluated the efficacy and safety with respect to cardio‐renal outcomes of the combination of SGLT2 and RAAS inhibitors vs SGLT2‐Is in patients with T2DM.

Methods

Studies were identified from MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library and search of bibliographies to May 2021. The Cochrane risk of bias tool was used to assess the risk of bias of each study. Study‐specific risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were pooled. Quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE.

Results

Nine articles comprising 8 RCT evaluations (n = 34,551 participants) that compared SGLT2‐Is with placebo in patients with T2DM against a background of standard care and reported subgroup results for those treated with or without RAAS‐Is at baseline were included. No RCT specifically investigated the combination of SGLT2 and RAAS inhibitors compared with SGLT2‐Is alone. The RRs (95% CIs) for composite cardiovascular outcome and composite CVD death/heart failure hospitalization comparing SGLT2‐Is vs placebo in patients on RAAS‐Is were 0.93 (0.85–1.01) and 0.88 (0.76–1.02), respectively. The corresponding estimates for patients not on RAAS‐Is were 0.78 (0.65–0.93) and 0.73 (0.65–0.82), respectively. There was no evidence of interactions between RAAS‐I status and the effects of SGLT2‐Is for both outcomes. Single study results showed that SGLT2‐Is vs placebo reduced the risk of composite kidney outcome and cardiovascular death in patients with RAAS inhibition. The effect of SGLT2 inhibition vs placebo on kidney parameters, genital infections, volume depletion, hyperkalaemia, hypokalaemia, hypoglycaemia and other adverse events was similar in patients with or without RAAS inhibition. The quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate.

Conclusions

Aggregate published data suggest that the combination of SGLT2 and RAAS inhibitors in the treatment of patients with T2DM may be similar in efficacy and safety if not superior to SGLT2‐Is alone. Head‐to‐head comparisons of the two interventions are warranted to inform T2DM management. The use of SGLT2 inhibition as a first‐line therapy in T2DM or its early use in the prevention of renal deterioration and cardiovascular complications in addition to its glycaemic control deserves further study.

Consensus Recommendations by the Asian Pacific Society of Cardiology: Optimising Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes

The Asian Pacific Society of Cardiology convened a consensus statement panel for optimising cardiovascular (CV) outcomes in type 2 diabetes, and reviewed the current literature. Relevant articles were appraised using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation system, and consensus statements were developed in two meetings and were confirmed through online voting. The consensus statements indicated that lifestyle interventions must be emphasised for patients with prediabetes, and optimal glucose control should be encouraged when possible. Sodium–glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are recommended for patients with chronic kidney disease with adequate renal function, and for patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction. In addition to SGLT2i, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists are recommended for patients at high risk of CV events. A blood pressure target below 140/90 mmHg is generally recommended for patients with type 2 diabetes. Antiplatelet therapy is recommended for secondary prevention in patients with atherosclerotic CV disease.

DPP-4 Inhibitors: Renoprotective Potential and Pharmacokinetics in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients with Renal Impairment

The continuously increasing incidence of diabetes worldwide has attracted the attention of the scientific community and driven the development of a novel class of antidiabetic drugs that can be safely and effectively used in diabetic patients. Of particular interest in this context are complications associated with diabetes, such as renal impairment, which is the main cause of high cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in diabetic patients. Intensive control of glucose levels and other risk factors associated with diabetes and metabolic syndrome provides the foundations for both preventing and treating diabetic nephropathy. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors represent a highly promising novel class of oral agents used in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus that may be successfully combined with currently available antidiabetic therapeutics in order to achieve blood glucose goals. Beyond glycemic control, emerging evidence suggests that DPP-4 inhibitors may have desirable off-target effects, including renoprotection. All type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with impaired renal function require dose adjustment of any DPP-4 inhibitor administered except for linagliptin, for which renal excretion is a minor elimination pathway. Thus, linagliptin is the drug most frequently chosen to treat type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with renal failure.

Metabolic effects of antihyperglycemic agents and mortality: meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The effects of antihyperglycemic medications on cardiovascular events and mortality are heterogeneous and their effects on intermediate factors might explain these differences. This systematic review explores the relationship between metabolic factors, mechanism of action, and mortality effects of antihyperglycemic medications in type 2 diabetes. Randomized trials assessing the effects of antihyperglycemic medications on all-cause or cardiovascular mortality in type 2 diabetes were included. Myocardial infarction, stroke, and heart failure were secondary outcomes. The effects of medications on HbA1c, severe hypoglycemia (SH), body weight, systolic blood pressure (SBP), and mechanism of action were evaluated. Meta-analyses and meta-regressions were performed grouping studies according to the above-cited factors. All-cause mortality was lower for medications that reduced HbA1c, SH, body weight, and SBP. Decreased cardiovascular mortality was associated with lower HbA1c, SH, SBP. Myocardial infarction and stroke were also associated with favorable metabolic profile. These findings were not confirmed in meta-regression models. Medications associated with lower SH, body weight and SBP had a lower risk of heart failure. In conclusion, medications with better metabolic profile were associated with reduced all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. These findings are based on indirect comparisons and must be applied cautiously.

Portuguese-Brazilian evidence-based guideline on the management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

In current management of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), cardiovascular and renal prevention have become important targets to be achieved. In this context, a joint panel of four endocrinology societies from Brazil and Portugal was established to develop an evidence-based guideline for treatment of hyperglycemia in T2DM.

METHODS

MEDLINE (via PubMed) was searched for randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and observational studies related to diabetes treatment. When there was insufficient high-quality evidence, expert opinion was sought. Updated positions on treatment of T2DM patients with heart failure (HF), atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and patients with no vascular complications were developed. The degree of recommendation and the level of evidence were determined using predefined criteria.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In non-pregnant adults, the recommended HbA_1c target is below 7%. Higher levels are recommended in frail older adults and patients at higher risk of hypoglycemia. Lifestyle modification is recommended at all phases of treatment. Metformin is the first choice when HbA_1c is 6.5-7.5%. When HbA_1c is 7.5-9.0%, dual therapy with metformin plus an SGLT2i and/or GLP-₁RA (first-line antidiabetic agents, AD1) is recommended due to cardiovascular and renal benefits. If an AD1 is unaffordable, other antidiabetic drugs (AD) may be used. Triple or quadruple therapy should be considered when HbA_1c remains above target. In patients with clinical or subclinical atherosclerosis, the combination of one AD1 plus metformin is the recommended first-line therapy to reduce cardiovascular events and improve blood glucose control. In stable heart failure with low ejection fraction (< 40%) and glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) > 30 mL/min/1.73 m², metformin plus an SGLT-2i is recommended to reduce cardiovascular mortality and heart failure hospitalizations and improve blood glucose control. In patients with diabetes-associated chronic kidney disease (CKD) (eGFR 30-60 mL/min/1.73 m² or eGFR 30-90 mL/min/1.73 m² with albuminuria > 30 mg/g), the combination of metformin and an SGLT2i is recommended to attenuate loss of renal function, reduce albuminuria and improve blood glucose control. In patients with severe renal failure, insulin-based therapy is recommended to improve blood glucose control. Alternatively, GLP-₁RA, DPP4i, gliclazide MR and pioglitazone may be considered to reduce albuminuria. In conclusion, the current evidence supports individualizing anti-hyperglycemic treatment for T2DM.

Cardiovascular risk of sitagliptin in treating patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have a very high risk of cardiovascular related events, and reducing complications is an important evaluation criterion of efficacy and safety of hypoglycemic drugs. Previous studies have shown that the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors (DPP4i), such as sitagliptin, might reduce the incidence of major cardiovascular events (MACEs). However, the safety and efficacy of sitagliptin remains controversial, especially the safety for cardiovascular related events. Here, a systematic review was conducted to assess the cardiovascular safety of sitagliptin in T2DM patients. The literature research dating up to October 2018 was performed in the electronic database. The clinical trials about sitagliptin for T2DM patients were included. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The primary outcome was the MACE, and the secondary outcome was all-cause mortality. Finally, 32 clinical trials composed of 16082 T2DM patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that: there was no significant difference between sitagliptin group and the control group on MACE (odds ratio (OR) = 0.85, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) = 0.63–1.15), myocardial infarction (MI) (OR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.38–1.16), stroke (OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.44–1.54) and mortality (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.26–1.07). These results demonstrated that sitagliptin did not increase the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with T2DM.

The Role of DPP-4 Inhibitors in the Treatment Algorithm of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: When to Select, What to Expect

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a growing global public health problem, the prevalence of which is projected to increase in the succeeding decades. It is potentially associated with many complications, affecting multiple organs and causing a huge burden to the society. Due to its multi-factorial pathophysiology, its treatment is varied and based upon a multitude of pharmacologic agents aiming to tackle the many aspects of the disease pathophysiology (increasing insulin availability [either through direct insulin administration or through agents that promote insulin secretion], improving sensitivity to insulin, delaying the delivery and absorption of carbohydrates from the gastrointestinal tract, or increasing urinary glucose excretion). DPP-4 (dipeptidyl peptidase-4) inhibitors (or “gliptins”) represent a class of oral anti-hyperglycemic agents that inhibit the enzyme DPP-4, thus augmenting the biological activity of the “incretin” hormones (glucagon-like peptide-1 [GLP-1] and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide [GIP]) and restoring many of the pathophysiological problems of diabetes. They have already been used over more than a decade in the treatment of the disease. The current manuscript will review the mechanism of action, therapeutic utility, and the role of DPP-4 inhibitors for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

The efficacy and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors for type 2 diabetes: a Bayesian network meta-analysis of 58 randomized controlled trials

AIMS

The aim is to evaluate the efficacy and safety of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4-I: sitagliptin, saxagliptin, linagliptin, vildagliptin and alogliptin) in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Library, PubMed, EMBASE, Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM), China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and the Wanfang Database from inception to April, 2018. Randomized controlled trials were included if they compared the different versions of DPP4-I with each other or with placebo in treatment of type 2 diabetes. Bayesian network meta-analysis and pairwise meta-analysis were performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the different kinds of DPP4-I and placebo. The data were analyzed using STATA 12.0 and WinBUGS1.4 software.

RESULTS

We identified 58 eligible studies (with 31356 patients) involving 14 treatment arms. Indirect comparison results showed that except for alogliptin, a decrease was found for all DPP4-I versus the placebo for hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) with vildagliptin50 twice daily (BID) showing the highest probability. Linagliptin5 once daily (QD) decreased the level of fasting plasma glucose (FPG) the most for all DPP4-I versus the placebo; when comparing them with each other, alogliptin25QD was more effective when compared with sitagliptin100QD and vildaglipti50BID; linagliptin5qd had the highest decrease impact on body mass index (BMI). Except for hypoglycemia and upper respiratory tract infection (URTI), there are no statistical significance on incidence of adverse events and the body weight when DPP4-I are compared with each other or with placebo.

CONCLUSION

Our network meta-analysis presents the associations of DPP4-I versus placebos on HbA1c, FPG, 2 h postprandial blood glucose (2HPPG), BMI, body weight and adverse events. DPP4-I have a lowering effect on the glycemic level (HbA1c, FPG), especially vildaglipti50BID and linagliptin10QD, respectively. Besides, linagliptin5QD has the greatest probabilities of reducing BMI. In addition, DPP4-I were associated with not increasing the incidence of adverse events. Among them, vildagliptin100QD and sitagliptin100QD have the lowest probability in reducing the incidence of hypoglycemia and URTI, respectively.

DPP-4 Inhibition and the Path to Clinical Proof

In the 1990s it was discovered that the enzyme dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inactivates the incretin hormones glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP). DPP-4 inhibition results in raised levels of the two incretin hormones which in turn result in lowering of circulating glucose through stimulation of insulin secretion and inhibition of glucagon secretion. Since then, several small orally available molecules have been developed with DPP-4 inhibitory action. Early studies in the 1990s showed that the DPP-4 inhibitors improve glycemia in animals. Subsequent clinical studies during the 2000s showed a glucose-lowering action of DPP-4 inhibitors also in human subjects with type 2 diabetes. This action was seen when DPP-4 inhibitors were used both as monotherapy and as add-on to other therapies, i.e., metformin, sulfonylureas, tiazolidinediones or exogenous insulin. The DPP-4 inhibitors were also found to have a low risk of adverse events, including hypoglycemia. Five of the DPP-4 inhibitors (sitagliptin, vildagliptin, alogliptin, saxagliptin and linagliptin) were approved by regulatory authorities and entered the market between 2006 and 2013. DPP-4 inhibitors have thereafter undergone long-term cardiovascular outcome trials, showing non-inferiority for risk of major acute cardiovascular endpoints. Also the risk of other potential adverse events is low in these long-term studies. DPP-4 inhibitors are at present included in guidelines as a glucose-lowering concept both as monotherapy and in combination therapies. This article summarizes the development of the DPP-4 inhibition concept from its early stages in the 1990s. The article underscores that the development has its basis in scientific studies on pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes and the importance of targeting the islet dysfunction, that the development has been made possible through academic science in collaboration with the research-oriented pharmaceutical industry, and that the development of a novel concept takes time and requires focused efforts, persistence and long-term perserverance.

Insulin and glucose-lowering agents for treating people with diabetes and chronic kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is the commonest cause of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Both conditions commonly co-exist. Glucometabolic changes and concurrent dialysis in diabetes and CKD make glucose-lowering challenging, increasing the risk of hypoglycaemia. Glucose-lowering agents have been mainly studied in people with near-normal kidney function. It is important to characterise existing knowledge of glucose-lowering agents in CKD to guide treatment.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of insulin and other pharmacological interventions for lowering glucose levels in people with diabetes and CKD.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 February 2018 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs looking at head-to-head comparisons of active regimens of glucose-lowering therapy or active regimen compared with placebo/standard care in people with diabetes and CKD (estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2) were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four authors independently assessed study eligibility, risk of bias, and quality of data and performed data extraction. Continuous outcomes were expressed as post-treatment mean differences (MD). Adverse events were expressed as post-treatment absolute risk differences (RD). Dichotomous clinical outcomes were presented as risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI).

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four studies (128 records, 13,036 participants) were included. Nine studies compared sodium glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors to placebo; 13 studies compared dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors to placebo; 2 studies compared glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists to placebo; 8 studies compared glitazones to no glitazone treatment; 1 study compared glinide to no glinide treatment; and 4 studies compared different types, doses or modes of administration of insulin. In addition, 2 studies compared sitagliptin to glipizide; and 1 study compared each of sitagliptin to insulin, glitazars to pioglitazone, vildagliptin to sitagliptin, linagliptin to voglibose, and albiglutide to sitagliptin. Most studies had a high risk of bias due to funding and attrition bias, and an unclear risk of detection bias.Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 1092 participants: MD -0.29%, -0.38 to -0.19 (-3.2 mmol/mol, -4.2 to -2.2); I2 = 0%), fasting blood glucose (FBG) (5 studies, 855 participants: MD -0.48 mmol/L, -0.78 to -0.19; I2 = 0%), systolic blood pressure (BP) (7 studies, 1198 participants: MD -4.68 mmHg, -6.69 to -2.68; I2 = 40%), diastolic BP (6 studies, 1142 participants: MD -1.72 mmHg, -2.77 to -0.66; I2 = 0%), heart failure (3 studies, 2519 participants: RR 0.59, 0.41 to 0.87; I2 = 0%), and hyperkalaemia (4 studies, 2788 participants: RR 0.58, 0.42 to 0.81; I2 = 0%); but probably increase genital infections (7 studies, 3086 participants: RR 2.50, 1.52 to 4.11; I2 = 0%), and creatinine (4 studies, 848 participants: MD 3.82 μmol/L, 1.45 to 6.19; I2 = 16%) (all effects of moderate certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may reduce weight (5 studies, 1029 participants: MD -1.41 kg, -1.8 to -1.02; I2 = 28%) and albuminuria (MD -8.14 mg/mmol creatinine, -14.51 to -1.77; I2 = 11%; low certainty evidence). SGLT2 inhibitors may have little or no effect on the risk of cardiovascular death, hypoglycaemia, acute kidney injury (AKI), and urinary tract infection (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether SGLT2 inhibitors have any effect on death, end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), hypovolaemia, fractures, diabetic ketoacidosis, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.62%, -0.85 to -0.39 (-6.8 mmol/mol, -9.3 to -4.3); I2 = 59%) but may have little or no effect on FBG (low certainty evidence). DPP-4 inhibitors probably have little or no effect on cardiovascular death (2 studies, 5897 participants: RR 0.93, 0.77 to 1.11; I2 = 0%) and weight (2 studies, 210 participants: MD 0.16 kg, -0.58 to 0.90; I2 = 29%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, DPP-4 inhibitors may have little or no effect on heart failure, upper respiratory tract infections, and liver impairment (low certainty evidence). Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether DPP-4 inhibitors have any effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, GLP-1 agonists probably reduce HbA1c (7 studies, 867 participants: MD -0.53%, -1.01 to -0.06 (-5.8 mmol/mol, -11.0 to -0.7); I2 = 41%; moderate certainty evidence) and may reduce weight (low certainty evidence). GLP-1 agonists may have little or no effect on eGFR, hypoglycaemia, or discontinuation due to adverse effects (low certainty evidence). It is uncertain whether GLP-1 agonists reduce FBG, increase gastrointestinal symptoms, or affect the risk of pancreatitis (very low certainty evidence).Compared to placebo, it is uncertain whether glitazones have any effect on HbA1c, FBG, death, weight, and risk of hypoglycaemia (very low certainty evidence).Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin probably reduces hypoglycaemia (2 studies, 551 participants: RR 0.40, 0.23 to 0.69; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, sitagliptin may have had little or no effect on HbA1c, FBG, weight, and eGFR (low certainty evidence). Compared to glipizide, it is uncertain if sitagliptin has any effect on death or discontinuation due to adverse effects (very low certainty).For types, dosages or modes of administration of insulin and other head-to-head comparisons only individual studies were available so no conclusions could be made.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence concerning the efficacy and safety of glucose-lowering agents in diabetes and CKD is limited. SGLT2 inhibitors and GLP-1 agonists are probably efficacious for glucose-lowering and DPP-4 inhibitors may be efficacious for glucose-lowering. Additionally, SGLT2 inhibitors probably reduce BP, heart failure, and hyperkalaemia but increase genital infections, and slightly increase creatinine. The safety profile for GLP-1 agonists is uncertain. No further conclusions could be made for the other classes of glucose-lowering agents including insulin. More high quality studies are required to help guide therapeutic choice for glucose-lowering in diabetes and CKD.

SGLT2 inhibitors and renal outcomes in type 2 diabetes with or without renal impairment: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors may have renal protective effects in people with impaired kidney function. We assessed the use of SGLT2 inhibitors in people with type 2 diabetes with or without renal impairment [defined as estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of ≥30 and <60ml/min/1.73m² and/or UACR>300 and ≤5000mg/g] by conducting a systematic review and meta-analysis of available studies.

METHODS

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from MEDLINE, EMABASE, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, and search of bibliographies to March 2017. No relevant observational study was identified. Summary measures were presented as mean differences and narrative synthesis performed for studies that could not be pooled.

RESULTS

42 articles which included 40 RCTs comprising 29,954 patients were included. In populations with renal impairment, SGLT2 inhibition compared with placebo was consistently associated with an initial decrease in eGFR followed by an increase and return to baseline levels. In pooled analysis of 17 studies in populations without renal impairment, there was no significant change in eGFR comparing SGLT2 inhibitors with placebo (mean difference, 0.51ml/min/1.73m²; 95% CI: -0.69, 1.72; p=403). SGLT2 inhibition relative to placebo was associated with preservation in serum creatinine levels or initial increases followed by return to baseline levels in patients with renal impairment, but levels were preserved in patients without renal impairment. In populations with or without renal impairment, SGLT2 inhibitors (particularly canagliflozin and empagliflozin) compared with placebo were associated with decreased urine albumin, improved albuminiuria, slowed progression to macroalbuminuria, and reduced the risk of worsening renal impairment, the initiation of kidney transplant, and death from renal disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Emerging data suggests that with SGLT2 inhibition, renal function seems to be preserved in people with diabetes with or without renal impairment. Furthermore, SGLT2 inhibition prevents further renal function deterioration and death from kidney disease in these patients.

Concordance with prescribing information dosage recommendations for dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitors among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the proportion of patients with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease (CKD) whose initial dipeptidyl-peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4-i) dosage was concordant with prescribing information (label) recommendations in the United States.

METHODS

Adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who initiated a DPP4-i (linagliptin, sitagliptin, saxagliptin) between 1 January 2011 and 30 June 2014 were identified using electronic medical records and administrative claims, with index date being the date of first observed DPP4-i treatment. Patients were required to have chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 3b, 4 or 5 (estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate [eGFR] value <45 ml/min/1.73 m²) during the 12 month pre-index period. Patients were classified as concordant or not concordant based on whether the first prescribed dose was consistent with label recommendations. Demographics, clinical characteristics, resource use and costs during pre-index were evaluated by DPP4-i concordance status.

RESULTS

Of the 492 patients (323 sitagliptin, 57 saxagliptin, 112 linagliptin), 36.2% were prescribed doses that were not concordant with label recommendations (44.9% for sitagliptin, 57.9% for saxagliptin and 0% for linagliptin [which does not require dosage adjustment]). Concordant patients were slightly older (mean age 71 years vs. 68, p = .01) but had similar gender distribution (55% vs. 60% female, p = .31) compared to those who were not concordant. They had lower general health status (Charlson Comorbidity Score 2.6 vs. 2.2, p = .03), and had similar pre-index all-cause total costs ($25,245 vs. $21,972, p = .68) and lower pre-index T2DM-related costs ($1618 vs. $1922, p = .05).

CONCLUSIONS

More than a third of DPP4-i patients with CKD stage 3b or higher were prescribed doses not concordant with DPP4-i label dosage recommendations.

Comparative efficacy and safety of gemigliptin versus linagliptin in type 2 diabetes patients with renal impairment: A 40-week extension of the GUARD randomized study

AIMS

The long-term safety and efficacy of gemigliptin was evaluated in the present extension study after a 12-week study during a 40-week follow-up period.

METHODS

The main study was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded, phase IIIb study in which 50 mg of gemigliptin (N = 66) or placebo (N = 66) was administered to patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and moderate or severe renal impairment over a 12-week period. Patients with a glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) level of 7% to 11% and an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) of 15 to 59 mL/min/1.73 m² were enrolled in the main study. After 12 weeks, patients in the gemigliptin group continued to receive gemigliptin (N = 50), whereas patients in the placebo group were transitioned from placebo to linagliptin (N = 52). Each group received the indicated treatment over the subsequent 40-week period. A total of 102 patients consented to participate in the extension study, and 79 patients ultimately completed the study.

RESULTS

The HbA1c levels of both groups were significantly reduced at week 52 compared with baseline. Specifically, the adjusted mean change ± standard error in HbA1c level in the gemigliptin and placebo/linagliptin groups was 1.00% ± 0.21% and 0.65% ± 0.22% lower at week 52 than at baseline (P < .001 and P = .003), respectively. No significant difference in the change in HbA1c level was found between the 2 groups (P = .148). Trends in fasting plasma glucose, fructosamine and glycated albumin levels in the 2 groups were similar to trends in HbA1c levels. The eGFR of both groups was also significantly lower at week 52 than at baseline, and no significant difference in change in eGFR was found between the 2 groups. In contrast, both drugs had little effect on urinary albumin excretion, although both drugs significantly reduced the urinary type IV collagen level. The overall rates of adverse events were similar between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Gemigliptin and linagliptin did not differ with respect to safety and efficacy in patients with T2DM and renal impairment. The 2 drugs had similar glucose-lowering effects, and the changes in eGFR and albuminuria were also similar. Additionally, the risk of side effects, including hypoglycaemia, was similar between the 2 groups.

Renal Function During an Open-Label Prospective Observational Trial of Sitagliptin in Patients With Diabetes: A Sub-Analysis of the JAMP Study

BACKGROUND

The aim of the study was to determine the effects of sitagliptin on renal function in a diabetic population including patients with normal renal function.

METHODS

We analyzed the association between 12-month, 50 mg/day sitagliptin and renal function in outpatients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and poor blood glucose control in a subset of patients in the larger Januvia Multicenter Prospective Trial in Type 2 Diabetes observational study. Stratified analyses of changes in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio (UACR) were performed. Factors associated with changes in eGFR at 3 months were examined by multivariate regression analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 779 patients enrolled, 585 were followed up for 12 months. eGFR decreased significantly from baseline at 3 and 12 months in patients with a baseline eGFR of ≥ 90 mL/min/1.73 m2 and in those with a baseline eGFR of ≥ 60 to < 90 mL/min/1.73 m2. Conversely, eGFR tended to increase at 3 and 12 months in patients with a baseline eGFR of ≥ 45 to < 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 and in those with a baseline eGFR of ≥ 30 to < 45 mL/min/1.73 m2. UACR decreased significantly (-21.6 (-46.8, 7.8)) at 3 months in patients with a baseline UACR of ≥ 30 mg/g Cre. Multivariate regression analysis of factors associated with changes in eGFR at 3 months revealed that higher baseline eGFR and greater decline in UACR were associated with more conspicuous decreases in eGFR.

CONCLUSIONS

In this group of diabetic patients receiving sitagliptin, eGFR declined in patients with high baseline eGFR, but not in those with a low baseline eGFR.

The renoprotective effect and safety of a DPP-4 inhibitor, sitagliptin, at a small dose in type 2 diabetic patients with a renal dysfunction when changed from other DPP-4 inhibitors: REAL trial

BACKGROUND

We conducted the multicenter, prospective, open-label study in type 2 diabetic (T2DM) patients with renal dysfunction, to clarify the efficacy and the safety in relation to renal function and glycemic control, and the economic effect when other dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors were switched to a small dose of sitagliptin depending on their renal function.

METHODS

Vildagliptin, alogliptin, or linagliptin received for more than 2 months were changed to sitagliptin at 25 or 12.5 mg/day depending on their renal function in 49 T2DMs. Renal function and glycemic control, and the drug cost were assessed during 6 months.

RESULTS

Estimated glomerular filtration rate was not changed in patients not on hemodialysis (n = 29). The HbA1c levels were not altered in all of the patients including those on hemodialysis (n = 20). The active glucagon-like peptide-1 levels or other renal parameters were not altered significantly. There were no adverse events to be related to the drugs. The daily drug expense was reduced by 88.1 yen per patient.

CONCLUSION

Switching to a small dose of sitagliptin according to the renal function in T2DM patients with renal dysfunction demonstrated the same efficacy and safety as those with other full-dose DPP-4 inhibitors, indicating a therapeutic option with a high cost performance.

Effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes patients with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease: Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials using unadjusted data

BACKGROUND

Three meta-analyses recently evaluated the effects of dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD). However, the combination of adjusted and unadjusted data in these meta-analyses may be questionable. The present study performed a meta-analysis of the effects of DPP-4 inhibitors in T2D patients with moderate to severe CKD using unadjusted data from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

METHODS

The PubMed, Embase (via Ovid), and Cochrane Central databases were searched for papers regarding the effects of DPP-4 inhibitors in CKD patients published before 1 August 2016. Data were independently extracted by two authors. A pooled analysis of unadjusted data was performed using random-effects models.

RESULTS

Twelve studies representing 10 RCTs were included in the present analysis. Comparing mean HbA1c change between placebo and treatment, DPP-4 inhibitors significantly improved HbA1c levels at 12 weeks (mean difference [MD] -0.42; 95% confidence interval [CI] -0.54, -0.29), but improvements in HbA1c were seen only in dialysis patients at 24 weeks (MD -0.52; 95% CI -0.72, -0.32)*. Improvements in HbA1c were equivalent between DPP-4 inhibitors and sulfonylureas at 52 or 54 weeks. There were no significant differences in the incidence of severe or any hypoglycemic events between DPP-4 inhibitors and control (placebo or sulfonylureas) at 12, 24, and 52 or 54 weeks. However, DPP-4 inhibitors induced fewer symptomatic hypoglycemic events compared with sulfonylureas at 52 or 54 weeks. *[Correction added on 30 October 2017, after first online publication: The value '0.32' has been corrected to '-0.32'.] CONCLUSIONS: The present analysis shows that DPP-4 inhibitors are effective and comparable with sulfonylureas in T2D patients with moderate to severe CKD.

Renoprotective Effect of Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitors in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetic nephropathy is one of three major complications of diabetes mellitus, often leading to chronic renal failure requiring dialysis. Recently developed dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors may exhibit renoprotective effects in addition to antihyperglycemic effects. In this study, we retrospectively investigated temporal changes in the renal function index of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) and examined the influence of DPP-4 inhibitors on renal function. Patients with type 2 DM (>18 years old) prescribed hypoglycemic agents at Gifu Municipal Hospital for ≥3 months between March 2010 and April 2014 were included in the study. Renal function was evaluated as estimated the decline in 12-month glomerular filtration rate from the baseline in patients receiving and not receiving DPP-4 inhibitors. Patient data from the DPP-4 inhibitor-treated (501 patients, 58.6%) and untreated (354, 41.4%) groups were analyzed using multiple logistic regression analysis, as well as Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis (616, 55.6% and 491, 44.4%, for DPP-4 inhibitors-treated and untreated groups). Multiple logistic regression analysis indicated that DPP-4 inhibitors significantly lowered the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) decline [20% over 12 months; odds ratio (OR), 0.626; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.409–0.958; P = 0.031]. Similar results were obtained using Cox proportional-hazards regression analysis (hazard ratio [HR], 0.707; 95% CI, 0.572–0.874; P = 0.001). These findings suggest that DPP-4 inhibitors suppress the decrease of estimated glomerular filtration rate in patients with type 2 DM and show a renoprotective effect.

Gastrointestinal Adverse Events of Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitors in Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to systematically evaluate the effect of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors on gastrointestinal adverse events in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from inception through April 28, 2016. Randomized controlled trials that compared dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor-based therapies with placebo and other hypoglycemic agents in type 2 diabetes were included. The duration of studies was at least 4 weeks.

FINDINGS

A total of 165 randomized controlled trials and 122,072 patients were included in the study. Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors did not increase the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events after the treatment with alogliptin (odds ratio [OR] = 0.83; 95% CI, 0.59-1.15), linagliptin (OR = 1.11; 95% CI, 0.92-1.35), saxagliptin (OR = 0.96; 95% CI, 0.80-1.15), sitagliptin (OR = 0.95; 95% CI, 0.64-1.14), teneligliptin (OR = 1.50; 95% CI, 0.81-2.77), and vildagliptin (OR = 0.80; 95% CI, 0.63-1.01) compared with placebo. Compared with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors significantly decreased the incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events with alogliptin (OR = 0.26; 95% CI, 0.15-0.44), linagliptin (OR = 0.43; 95% CI, 0.25-0.74), saxagliptin (OR = 0.28; 95% CI, 0.17-0.46), sitagliptin (OR = 0.24; 95% CI, 0.17-0.35), and vildagliptin (OR = 0.27; 95% CI, 0.18-0.41). Dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors were not associated with an increased risk of gastrointestinal adverse events relative to metformin and α-glucosidase inhibitors, respectively.

IMPLICATIONS

The network meta-analysis found that compared with glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists, metformin, and α-glucosidase inhibitor, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors are associated with a lower incidence of gastrointestinal adverse events.

The use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes & chronic kidney disease

There is a need for treatment options in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and kidney disease to achieve glucose targets without risk of hypoglycemia. This article describes management options for these patients using glucose-lowering therapies, in particular dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors.

A randomised, double-blind, trial of the safety and efficacy of omarigliptin (a once-weekly DPP-4 inhibitor) in subjects with type 2 diabetes and renal impairment

AIMS

To assess the safety and efficacy of omarigliptin in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic renal impairment (RI).

METHODS

Patients with T2DM with moderate RI (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] ≥30 to <60 mL/min/1.73 m2 ) (N=114), severe RI (eGFR <30 mL/min/1.73 m2 ) (N=55) or end-stage renal disease on dialysis (N=44), who were either not on an antihyperglycaemic agent therapy for at least 12 weeks at screening, washed-off of oral antihyperglycaemic agent monotherapy or low-dose dual combination therapy, or on insulin monotherapy, with baseline glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) of 6.5%-10.0% were randomised to omarigliptin or to placebo for 24 weeks (primary end-point) followed by a 30-week period with subjects on placebo switched to blinded glipizide (if not on insulin).

RESULTS

After 24 weeks, from a mean baseline HbA1c of 8.4% in the omarigliptin group and 8.3% in the placebo group, the least squares mean (95% CI) change from baseline in HbA1c in the overall population (all renal strata combined) was -0.77% (-1.00 to -0.54) in the omarigliptin group and -0.44% (-0.67 to -0.21) in the placebo group; between-group difference of -0.33% (-0.63 to -0.02); P=0.035. After 24 weeks, the incidences of subjects with symptomatic hypoglycaemia, one or more adverse event (AE), drug-related AE, serious AE and discontinuation due to an AE were similar in the omarigliptin and placebo groups.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study in subjects with T2DM and RI, relative to placebo, omarigliptin provided clinically meaningful reductions in HbA1c, had a similar incidence of symptomatic hypoglycaemia and was generally well tolerated.

Cancer risk of sulfonylureas in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Increasing evidence suggests that oral hypoglycemic agents used in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) may affect cancer risk. Sulfonylureas (SUs) are the most frequently used antidiabetic medications for T2DM. Whether using SUs has any effect on cancer has received considerable attention. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of SUs on cancer risk in T2DM patients.

METHODS

Published studies were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Register of Clinical Studies, and ClinicalTrials.gov was searched for additional information to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs), cohort studies, and case-control studies. The abstracts and full text were screened, data collected, and the risk of bias assessed for each individual study.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven studies (33 RCTs, 27 cohort studies, and 17 case-control studies) were analyzed. The RCTs did not report a difference in the risk of malignant tumor between SU-treated T2DM patients and controls (odds ratio [OR] 0.96; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.78-1.18); cohort studies showed that cancer risk was higher in patients using SUs than metformin (relative risk 1.60 [95%CI 1.37-1.87]; adjusted hazard ratio 1.13 [95%CI 1.06-1.19]), and case-control studies suggested a trend for increased cancer risk in those using SUs compared with non-SU users (adjusted OR 1.13; 95%CI 0.93-1.37).

CONCLUSIONS

The available evidence clearly shows that SUs can significantly increase the risk of cancer compared with metformin. Although the evidence suggests the possibility that SU users may have a higher risk of cancer than those using alternative medications in addition to metformin, it remains inadequate to enable definitive conclusions to be drawn.

Current therapeutic approaches in the management of hyperglycemia in chronic renal disease

Diabetes mellitus (DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) are intricately intertwined. DM is the most common cause of CKD. Adequate control of DM is necessary for prevention of progression of CKD, while careful management of the metabolic abnormalities in CKD will assist in achieving better control of DM. Two of the key organs involved in glucose production are the kidney and the liver. Furthermore, the kidney also plays a role in glucose filtration and reabsorption. In CKD, monitoring of glycemic control using traditional methods such as Hemoglobin A1c (Hba1c) must be done with caution secondary to associated hematological abnormalities in CKD. With regard to medication management in the care of patients with DM, CKD has significant effects. For example, the dosages of oral and non-insulin anti-hyperglycemic agents often need to be modified according to renal function. Insulin metabolism is altered in CKD, and a reduction in insulin dose is almost always needed. Dialysis also affects various aspects of glucose homeostasis, necessitating appropriate changes in therapy. Due to the aforementioned factors glycemic management in patients with DM and CKD can be quiet challenging.

Cost-effectiveness of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor monotherapy versus sulfonylurea monotherapy for people with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease in Thailand

OBJECTIVE

With a high prevalence of chronic kidney disease (CKD) in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) in Thailand, the appropriate treatment for the patients has become a major concern. This study aimed to evaluate long-term cost-effective of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor monothearpy vs sulfonylurea (SFU) monotherapy in people with T2DM and CKD.

METHODS

A validated IMS CORE Diabetes Model was used to estimate the long-term costs and outcomes. The efficacy parameters were identified and synthesized using a systematic review and meta-analysis. Baseline characteristics and cost parameters were obtained from published studies and hospital databases in Thailand. Costs were expressed in 2014 US Dollars. Outcomes were presented as an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER). One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to estimate parameter uncertainty.

RESULTS

From a societal perspective, treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors yielded more quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) (0.024) at a higher cost (>66,000 Thai baht (THB) or >1,829.27 USD) per person than SFU, resulting in the ICER of >2.7 million THB/QALY (>74,833.70 USD/QALY). The cost-effectiveness results were mainly driven by differences in HbA1c reduction, hypoglycemic events, and drug acquisition cost of DPP-4 inhibitors. At the ceiling ratio of 160,000 THB/QALY (4,434.59 USD/QALY), the probability that DPP-4 inhibitors are cost-effective compared to SFU was less than 10%.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to SFU, DPP-4 inhibitor monotherapy is not a cost-effective treatment for people with T2DM and CKD in Thailand.

NRF2 activation by antioxidant antidiabetic agents accelerates tumor metastasis

Cancer is a common comorbidity of diabetic patients; however, little is known about the effects that antidiabetic drugs have on tumors. We discovered that common classes of drugs used in type 2 diabetes mellitus, the hypoglycemic dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i) saxagliptin and sitagliptin, as well as the antineuropathic α-lipoic acid (ALA), do not increase tumor incidence but increase the risk of metastasis of existing tumors. Specifically, these drugs induce prolonged activation of the nuclear factor E2-related factor 2 (NRF2)-mediated antioxidant response through inhibition of KEAP1-C151-dependent ubiquitination and subsequent degradation of NRF2, resulting in up-regulated expression of metastasis-associated proteins, increased cancer cell migration, and promotion of metastasis in xenograft mouse models. Accordingly, knockdown of NRF2 attenuated naturally occurring and DPP-4i-induced tumor metastasis, whereas NRF2 activation accelerated metastasis. Furthermore, in human liver cancer tissue samples, increased NRF2 expression correlated with metastasis. Our findings suggest that antioxidants that activate NRF2 signaling may need to be administered with caution in cancer patients, such as diabetic patients with cancer. Moreover, NRF2 may be a potential biomarker and therapeutic target for tumor metastasis.

Incretin-Based Therapy and Risk of Pancreatic Cancer in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

INTRODUCTION

The present study aims to evaluate the risk of pancreatic cancer with incretin-based therapy among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov for eligible studies published up to March 06 2016. This meta-analysis includes all studies reporting adverse events of pancreatic cancer with use of incretin-based therapies compared with placebo or non-incretin anti-diabetic drugs in patients with T2DM. We used fixed-effect model to compare pooled relative risk (RR) with related 95% confidence intervals (CI).

RESULTS

A total of 159 randomized trials were identified. Out of these, 135 studies were excluded as pancreatic cancer occurrence had not been included as an end point. The remaining 24 trials enrolling 47,904 participants were further assessed. Overall, no increased risk of pancreatic cancer were detected in association with incretin-based treatment (RR = 0.7, 95% CI 0.37-1.05). The incidence of pancreatic neoplasm was even lower among incretin-based groups than controls (RR = 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.87) in trials with duration more than 104 weeks. There was even decreased risk of pancreatic cancer within groups paralleled by incretin-matched placebos (RR = 0.55, 95% CI 0.32-0.93) than by non-incretin anti-diabetic drugs. Neither monotherapy (RR = 0.62, 95% CI 0.38-1.01) nor combination regimen (RR = 0.92, 95% CI 0.45-1.90) of incretin mimetics increased the risk of pancreatic cancer.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis shows that incretin-based therapies are not associated with increase in the risk of pancreatic cancer. Interestingly, subgroup analyses suggested lower risk of pancreatic cancer in incretin groups than placebo in long-term studies (>104 weeks). Considering the inconsistent results among randomized trials and previous epidemiological investigations, more such studies should be conducted to clarify the existence or non-existence of this association.

FUNDING

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 81270476 and 81470830).

Adverse safety events in patients with Chronic Kidney Disease (CKD)

INTRODUCTION

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) confers a higher risk of adverse safety events as a result of many factors including medication dosing errors and use of nephrotoxic drugs, which can cause kidney injury and renal function decline. CKD patients may also have comorbidities such as hypertension and diabetes for which they require more frequent care from different providers, and for which standard, but countervailing treatments, may put them at risk for adverse safety events. Areas covered: In addition to the well-known agents such as iodinated radiocontrast, antimicrobials, diuretics and angiotensin converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors which can directly affect renal function, safety considerations in the treatment of common CKD complications such as anemia, diabetes, analgesia and thrombosis will also be discussed. Expert opinion: Better outcomes in CKD may be achieved by alerting care providers to the special care needs of kidney patients and encouraging patients to self-manage their disease with the decision support of multidisciplinary patient care teams.

Update on the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

To achieve good metabolic control in diabetes and keep long term, a combination of changes in lifestyle and pharmacological treatment is necessary. Achieving near-normal glycated hemoglobin significantly, decreases risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications. At present there are different treatments, both oral and injectable, available for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Treatment algorithms designed to reduce the development or progression of the complications of diabetes emphasizes the need for good glycaemic control. The aim of this review is to perform an update on the benefits and limitations of different drugs, both current and future, for the treatment of T2DM. Initial intervention should focus on lifestyle changes. Moreover, changes in lifestyle have proven to be beneficial, but for many patients is a complication keep long term. Physicians should be familiar with the different types of existing drugs for the treatment of diabetes and select the most effective, safe and better tolerated by patients. Metformin remains the first choice of treatment for most patients. Other alternative or second-line treatment options should be individualized depending on the characteristics of each patient. This article reviews the treatments available for patients with T2DM, with an emphasis on agents introduced within the last decade.

Systematic Literature Review of DPP-4 Inhibitors in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Renal Impairment

INTRODUCTION

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors are widely used in the management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and renal impairment (RI). A systematic literature review was performed to compare the efficacy and safety of DPP-4 inhibitors in patients with T2DM and RI.

METHODS

We searched EMBASE, MEDLINE, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (cut-off, June 2015) to identify ≥12-week, randomized, placebo-controlled trials on DPP-4 inhibitors in ≥50 patients with T2DM and RI. Outcomes of interest included change in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), overall safety, and incidence of hypoglycemic events (HEs).

RESULTS

Seven trials of ≤52-54 weeks duration were retrieved, which included one study each on vildagliptin, saxagliptin, and sitagliptin, two on linagliptin, and the remaining two were extension studies of vildagliptin and saxagliptin. Majority of patients were on insulin at baseline (53-86%), except in the sitagliptin study, where approximately 11% received insulin during the placebo-controlled phase. After 52 weeks, vildagliptin and saxagliptin reduced HbA1c levels by 0.6-0.7% (baseline 7.8-8.4%) versus placebo in the overall population. HbA1c reductions were similar at weeks 12 and 52. In the 12-week, placebo-controlled phase, sitagliptin and linagliptin reduced mean HbA1c by approximately 0.4% (baseline 7.7-8.1%) versus placebo. Rates of HEs with DPP-4 inhibitors were not significantly different versus placebo in any study. Rates of adverse events (AEs) and changes involving renal function were similar in the active- and placebo-treated groups.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that DPP-4 inhibitors have the potential to improve glycemic control in patients with RI without increasing the risk of HEs or overall AEs.

FUNDING

Novartis Pharma AG.

Short-term and long-term effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with renal impairment: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

To assess the short-term and long-term effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with renal impairment, a meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of DPP-4 inhibitor interventions in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with renal impairment was performed. PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched through the end of March 2015. Randomized clinical trials were selected if (1) DPP-4 inhibitors were compared with a placebo or other active-comparators, (2) the treatment duration was ≥12 weeks and (3) data regarding changes in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c ), changes in fasting plasma glucose or hypoglycaemia and other adverse events were reported. Of 790 studies, ten studies on eight randomized clinical trials were included. Compared with the control group, DPP-4 inhibitors were associated with a greater HbA1c reduction in both the short-term [mean differences (MD) = -0.45, 95% confidence intervals (-0.57, -0.33), p < 0.0001] and long-term [MD = -0.33, 95% confidence intervals (-0.63, -0.03), p = 0.03] treatments. However, the long-term greater reduction in HbA1c with DPP-4 inhibitor treatment was only significant when the control treatment comprised placebo plus stable background treatment, but not glipizide plus stable background treatment. DPP-4 inhibitors were associated with a greater fasting plasma glucose reduction [MD = -12.59, 95% confidence intervals (-22.01, -3.17), p = 0.009] over the short-term; however, this effect was not present over the long-term. Regarding the hypoglycaemia adverse events assessment, the long-term treatment data indicated there was no increased risk of hypoglycaemia compared with placebo or active-controlled anti-diabetic drugs. The present meta-analysis confirms that DPP-4 inhibitors are effective and equivalent to other agents in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients with renal impairment. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Treatment intensification in patients with inadequate glycemic control on basal insulin: rationale and clinical evidence for the use of short-acting and other glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists

A substantial proportion of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus do not reach glycemic targets, despite treatment with oral anti-diabetic drugs and basal insulin therapy. Several options exist for treatment intensification beyond basal insulin, and the treatment paradigm is complex. In this review, the options for treatment intensification will be explored, focusing on drug classes that act via the incretin system and paying particular attention to the short-acting glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists exenatide and lixisenatide. Current treatment guidelines will be summarized and discussed. © 2016 The Authors. Diabetes/Metabolism Research and Reviews Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

Interactions between kidney disease and diabetes: dangerous liaisons

BACKGROUND

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM) globally affects 18-20 % of adults over the age of 65 years. Diabetic kidney disease (DKD) is one of the most frequent and dangerous complications of DM2, affecting about one-third of the patients with DM2. In addition to the pancreas, adipocytes, liver, and intestines, the kidneys also play an important role in glycemic control, particularly due to renal contribution to gluconeogenesis and tubular reabsorption of glucose.

METHODS

In this review article, based on a report of discussions from an interdisciplinary group of experts in the areas of endocrinology, diabetology and nephrology, we detail the relationship between diabetes and kidney disease, addressing the care in the diagnosis, the difficulties in achieving glycemic control and possible treatments that can be applied according to the different degrees of impairment.

DISCUSSION

Glucose homeostasis is extremely altered in patients with DKD, who are exposed to a high risk of both hyperglycemia and hypoglycemia. Both high and low glycemic levels are associated with increased morbidity and shortened survival in this group of patients. Factors that are associated with an increased risk of hypoglycemia in DKD patients include decreased renal gluconeogenesis, deranged metabolic pathways (including altered metabolism of medications) and decreased insulin clearance. On the other hand, decrease glucose filtration and excretion, and inflammation-induce insulin resistance are predisposing factors to hyperglycemic episodes.

CONCLUSION

Appropriate glycaemic monitoring and control tailored for diabetic patients is required to avoid hypoglycaemia and other glycaemic disarrays in patients with DM2 and kidney disease. Understanding the renal physiology and pathophysiology of DKD has become essential to all specialties treating diabetic patients. Disseminating this knowledge and detailing the evidence will be important to initiate breakthrough research and to encourage proper treatment of this group of patients.

An updated systematic review and meta-analysis on the efficacy and tolerability of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in patients with type 2 diabetes with moderate to severe chronic kidney disease

OBJECTIVE

This updated meta-analysis determines the effect of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors on glycemic and tolerability outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic kidney disease with glomerular filtration rate of ⩽60 mL/min or on dialysis.

METHODS

In all, 14 citations were identified from multiple databases. Qualitative assessments and quantitative analyses were performed.

RESULTS

There were 2261 participants, 49-79 years of age, 49% men and 44% Caucasians. In seven placebo-comparator studies, reduction in hemoglobin A1c at weeks 12-24 was 0.55% (95% confidence interval: -0.68 to -0.43), P < 0.00001). In three sulfonylurea-comparator studies, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors did not significantly reduce hemoglobin A1c at weeks 52-54 (-0.15% (95% confidence interval: -0.32 to 0.02)). In one sitagliptin versus albiglutide study, albiglutide significantly reduced hemoglobin A1c in patients with moderate renal impairment (-0.51%). A similar reduction in hemoglobin A1c was seen with sitagliptin versus vildagliptin (-0.56% vs -0.54%). Compared with placebo or sulfonylurea, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors did not significantly reduce hemoglobin A1c after 12 and 54 weeks in patients on dialysis. Hypoglycemia was reported by ~30% of patients in both dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and placebo groups over 24-52 weeks. While hypoglycemia was more common with a sulfonylurea at 52-54 weeks (risk ratio: 0.46 (95% confidence interval: 0.18 to 1.18)), there was significant heterogeneity (I (2) = 87%). Limitations included high drop-out rate from most studies and small number of active-comparator studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in patients with chronic kidney disease caused a modest reduction in hemoglobin A1c versus placebo, but not when compared with sulfonylureas or albiglutide, or when used in patients on dialysis. Additional active-comparator studies are needed to further elucidate the role of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors in patients with chronic kidney disease stages 3-5 or on dialysis.

Sitagliptin and risk of heart failure hospitalization in patients with type 2 diabetes on dialysis: A population-based cohort study

The incidence of heart failure hospitalization (HHF) after taking sitagliptin in type 2 diabetes (T2DM) patients with end stage renal disease (ESRD) on dialysis is unclear. In this population-based cohort study, we identified individuals with T2DM and ESRD on dialysis who were treated with sitagliptin between 2009 and 2011 and randomly selected a control cohort matched by age, sex, duration of T2DM, hypertension medications, use of statin and aspirin, sulfonylureas, glinides, and insulin usage, atherosclerotic heart disease, congestive heart failure and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease at a 1:4 ratio. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression analysis was used to evaluate HHF risk. The overall incidence of HHF was higher in the sitagliptin cohort than in the control cohort (1130 vs. 754 per 10000 person-years; adjusted hazard ratio (HR): 1.52, 95% CI = 1.21–1.90). There was a significant trend towards increased HHF risk associated with increased sitagliptin dose (p for trend < 0.01). Subjects at greater risk of HHF after taking sitagliptin were those without severe hypoglycemia, without ACE inhibitors treatment, with history of heart failure or receiving hemodialysis rather than peritoneal dialysis. In conclusion, use of sitagliptin was associated with an increased risk of HHF in patients with T2DM on dialysis.

Sitagliptin/metformin fixed-dose combination in type 2 diabetes mellitus: an evidence-based review of its place in therapy

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a progressive disease associated with significant morbidity and mortality. There is good evidence showing that intensive glycemic control reduces the development and progression of complications. In order to achieve glycemic targets, patients often require a combination of oral therapy and/or insulin in addition to lifestyle modification. Unfortunately, many of the traditional therapies for type 2 diabetes are associated with weight gain and hypoglycemia, resulting in poor compliance and subsequent worsening of glycemic control. The dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin is a therapy for type 2 diabetes and is available as a fixed-dose combination with metformin. Phase III clinical trials have demonstrated beneficial effects on glycemic control and minimal untoward effects with this combination. In this article, we provide an overview of the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety and examine the role of this combination within current practice.

Impact of teneligliptin on oxidative stress and endothelial function in type 2 diabetes patients with chronic kidney disease: a case-control study

Background

The aim of the present study was to elucidate the effect of teneligliptin on oxidative stress and endothelial function in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes and chronic kidney disease (CKD).

Methods

Forty-five patients with type 2 diabetes and CKD who received sitagliptin for at least 12 months were randomized to either continue sitagliptin (n = 23) or switch to teneligliptin (n = 22) for 24 weeks. The following parameters were evaluated at baseline and after 24 weeks of treatment with continued sitagliptin or teneligliptin: blood pressure, haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), urinary albumin excretion, endothelial function by reactive hyperaemia index (RHI; EndoPAT^® system), reactive oxygen metabolites (ROMs) measured by the d-ROMS test, 8-hydroxy-2′-deoxyguanosine, urinary liver-type fatty acid binding protein (L-FABP), and urinary 8-isoprostane.

Results

The two groups did not significantly differ with regard to age, male-to-female ratio, duration of diabetes, body mass index, HbA1c, eGFR, or urinary albumin excretion levels at baseline. We found no significant differences in changes of HbA1c, eGFR, or urinary albumin excretion levels between the two groups after 24 weeks of treatment. However, treatment with teneligliptin, but not sitagliptin, significantly improved RHI values and was correlated with the percent changes in RHI and d-ROMs.

Conclusions

The present study demonstrated that teneligliptin, can improve endothelial function and reduce renal and vascular oxidative stress in patients with type 2 diabetes and CKD, independently of reducing albuminuria or improving glucose control.

Trial registration UMIN000017180

Oral antidiabetics use among diabetic type 2 patients with chronic kidney disease. Do nephrologists take account of recommendations?

BACKGROUND

There is an increasing prevalence of diabetes type 2 and chronic kidney disease, challenging appropriate prescribing of oral anti-diabetic drugs (OADs).

METHODS

We have described the practice patterns of 13 nephrologists in 4 centers, in a cohort of 301 consecutive adult type 2 diabetic patients. Among oral anti-diabetic prescriptions, we have detailed drugs dosage for each subject, with 3 different formulae for estimating glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and its adequation according to the latest ERBP recommendations (2015). As individuals were mostly obese in this work, we also compare adequacy rates using both standard indexed CKD-EPI formula and CKD-EPI formula de-indexed from body surface area.

RESULTS

Using the CKD-EPI formula as the reference method for estimating GFR, 53.5% of patients were outside the recommendations, mostly for metformin (30% of the whole cohort) and for sitagliptin (17.9% of the whole cohort). With Cockcroft and Gault formula, 38.2% of persons were outside recommendations and 45.9% (p<0.001) with CKD-EPI de-indexed. Among individuals consulting a nephrologist for the first time (n=90), 61.1% were outside recommendations (p=0.1). Among those persons under diabetologist supervision (n=103), 63.1% were outside recommendations (p=0.09), and were taking significantly more often metformin and insulin.

CONCLUSION

We have found a substantial number of inadequate OAD prescriptions in type 2 diabetic patients with chronic kidney disease. The proportion of individuals outside guidelines was strongly affected by the method used for estimating GFR and by the type of practice, i.e., specialists versus general practitioners.

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition in chronic kidney disease and potential for protection against diabetes-related renal injury

AIMS

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is associated with a high risk of chronic kidney disease (CKD). About 20% of patients with T2DM have CKD of stage ≥ 3; up to 40% have some degree of CKD. Beyond targeting all renal risk factors together, renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blockers are to date the only effective mainstay for the treatment of diabetic kidney disease (DKD). Indeed, several potentially nephroprotective agents have been in use, which have been unsuccessful. Some glucose-lowering agents, including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), have shown promising results. Here, we discuss the evidence that glucose lowering with DPP-4i may be an option for protecting against diabetes-related renal injury.

DATA SYNTHESIS

A comprehensive search was performed of the literature using the terms "alogliptin," "linagliptin," "saxagliptin," "sitagliptin," and "vildagliptin" for original articles and reviews addressing this topic. DPP-4i are an effective, well-tolerated treatment option for T2DM with any degree of renal impairment. Preclinical observations and clinical studies suggest that DPP-4i might also be a promising strategy for the treatment of DKD. The available data are in favor of saxagliptin and linagliptin, but the consistency of results points to the possible nephroprotective effect of DPP-4i. This property appears to be independent of glucose lowering and can potentially complement other therapies that preserve renal function. Larger prospective clinical trials are ongoing, which might strengthen these hypothesis-generating findings.

CONCLUSIONS

The improvement in albuminuria associated with DPP-4i suggests that these agents may provide renal benefits beyond their glucose-lowering effects, thus offering direct protection from DKD. These promising results must be interpreted with caution and need to be confirmed in forthcoming studies.

Efficacy and Safety of Liraglutide Versus Placebo as Add-on to Glucose-Lowering Therapy in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes and Moderate Renal Impairment (LIRA-RENAL): A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVE

Renal impairment in type 2 diabetes limits available glucose-lowering treatment options. This trial was conducted to establish the efficacy and safety of liraglutide as an add-on to existing glucose-lowering medications in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes and moderate renal impairment.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

In this 26-week, double-blind trial, 279 patients with HbA1c 7-10%, BMI 20-45 kg/m(2), and moderate renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR] 30-59 mL/min/1.73 m(2); MDRD) were randomized (1:1) to once-daily liraglutide 1.8 mg (n = 140) or placebo (n = 139).

RESULTS

The estimated treatment difference in HbA1c from baseline to week 26 was -0.66% (-7.25 mmol/mol) (95% CI -0.90 to -0.43 [-9.82 to -4.69]), P < 0.0001). Fasting plasma glucose decreased more with liraglutide (-1.22 mmol/L [-22.0 mg/dL]) than with placebo (-0.57 mmol/L [-10.3 mg/dL], P = 0.036). There was a greater reduction in body weight with liraglutide (-2.41 kg) than with placebo (-1.09 kg, P = 0.0052). No changes in renal function were observed (eGFR relative ratio to baseline: -1% liraglutide, +1% placebo; estimated treatment ratio [ETR] 0.98, P = 0.36). The most common adverse events were gastrointestinal (GI) adverse effects (liraglutide, 35.7%; placebo, 17.5%). No difference in hypoglycemic episodes was observed between treatment groups (event rate/100 patient-years of exposure: liraglutide, 30.47; placebo, 40.08; P = 0.54). The estimated ratio to baseline for lipase was 1.33 for liraglutide and 0.97 for placebo (ETR 1.37, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Liraglutide did not affect renal function and demonstrated better glycemic control, with no increase in hypoglycemia risk but with higher withdrawals due to GI adverse events than placebo in patients with type 2 diabetes and moderate renal impairment.

Incretin-based therapy: renal effects

Glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogues and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors are new classes of hypoglycemic agents with numerous pleiotropic effects. The review summarises data about the influence of GLP-1 analogues and DPP-4 inhibitors on structural and functional changes in diabetic kidneys. Growing evidence indicates that the kidney is one of the loci of the effects and degradation of GLP-1. The potency of the effects of GLP-1 in diabetic kidneys can be reduced by decrease in GLP-1 receptor expression or enhancement of GLP-1 degradation. In experimental models of diabetic nephropathy and non-diabetic renal injury, GLP-1 analogues and DPP-4 inhibitors slow the development of kidney fibrosis and prevent the decline of kidney function. The mechanisms of protective effect include hyperglycaemia reduction, enhancement of sodium excretion, suppression of inflammatory and fibrogenic signalling pathways, reduction of oxidative stress and apoptosis in the kidneys. In clinical studies, the urinary albumin excretion reduction rate while using the GLP-1 analogue and DPP-4 inhibitor treatment was demonstrated in patients with type 2 diabetes. Long-term impact of these agents on renal function in diabetes needs further investigations.

Risk of pancreatic adverse events associated with the use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor drugs: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

AIM: To systematically assess risk of pancreatic adverse events with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor drugs.

METHODS: We searched PubMed, Embase, CINAHL, Cochrane review of clinical trials, pharmaceutical company clinical trials register, United States Food and Drug Administration website, European Medicines Agency website and ClinicalTrials.gov for randomized controlled trials from inception to October 2013. Randomized control trial studies were selected for inclusion if they reported on pancreatic complication events and/or changes in pancreatic enzyme levels (serum amylase and serum lipase) as adverse events or as serious adverse events for patients who were on GLP-1 receptor agonist and DPP-4 inhibitor drugs. Two independent reviewers extracted data directly. We performed Peto odds ratio (OR) fixed effect meta-analysis of pancreatic adverse events a, and assessed heterogeneity with the I² statistic.

RESULTS: Sixty-eight randomized controlled trials were eligible. A total of 60720 patients were included in our analysis of the association of risk of pancreatic complication events with GLP-1 agents. A total of 89 pancreatic related adverse events occurred among the GLP-1 agents compared to 74 events among the controls. There was a statistically significant increased risk of elevation of pancreatic enzymes associated with GLP-1 agents compared with control (Peto OR = 3.15, 95%CI: 1.56-6.39, P = 0.001, I² = 0%). There was no statistically significant difference in the risk of pancreatic adverse event associated with GLP-1 agent compared with controls (Peto OR = 1.00, 95%CI: 0.73-1.37, P = 1.00, I² = 0%). There were a total of 71 pancreatitis events in patients on GLP-1 agents and 56 pancreatitis events occurred in the control patients. There were 36 reports of pancreatic cancer in these studies. Of these cases, 2 used linagliptin, 2 used alogliptin, 1 used vildagliptin, 7 used saxagliptin while 6 used sitagliptin. The remaining 18 cases occurred among controls.

CONCLUSION: Although GLP-1 based agents are associated with pancreatic enzyme elevation, we were unable to confirm a significant risk of pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer.

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition with linagliptin and effects on hyperglycaemia and albuminuria in patients with type 2 diabetes and renal dysfunction: Rationale and design of the MARLINA-T2D™ trial

Efficacy, Safety & Modification of Albuminuria in Type 2 Diabetes Subjects with Renal Disease with LINAgliptin (MARLINA-T2D™), a multicentre, multinational, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, phase 3b clinical trial, aims to further define the potential renal effects of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition beyond glycaemic control. A total of 350 eligible individuals with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes and evidence of renal disease are planned to be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either linagliptin 5 mg or placebo in addition to their stable glucose-lowering background therapy for 24 weeks. Two predefined main endpoints will be tested in a hierarchical manner: (1) change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin and (2) time-weighted average of percentage change from baseline in urinary albumin-to-creatinine ratio. Both endpoints are sufficiently powered to test for superiority versus placebo after 24 weeks with α = 0.05. MARLINA-T2D™ is the first of its class to prospectively explore both the glucose- and albuminuria-lowering potential of a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor in patients with type 2 diabetes and evidence of renal disease.

Overview of Data Concerning the Safe Use of Antihyperglycemic Medications in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and Chronic Kidney Disease

INTRODUCTION

It can be a challenge to manage glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and chronic kidney disease (CKD), due to both patient and medication issues. Although most antihyperglycemic medications can be used in mild kidney disease, many medications are either not advised or require dose adjustments in more advanced CKD. This review summarizes product label information, pharmacokinetic and clinical studies, and clinical guidelines relevant to use of antihyperglycemic medications in CKD.

METHODS

Product labels and guidelines from North America and Europe, as well as pharmacokinetic and clinical studies of diabetes medication use in CKD were identified through Medline and PubMed searches, up to February 2015. Available data are summarized and correlations between treatment recommendations and available research are discussed, as are glycemic targets for patients with CKD.

RESULTS

Newer medications have significantly more data available than older medications regarding use in CKD, although larger clinical studies are still lacking for some drugs. As CKD advances, dose adjustment is needed for many medications [numerous dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, some insulins, sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors], although not for others (thiazolidinediones, meglitinides). Some medications are not recommended for use in more advanced CKD (metformin, SGLT2 inhibitors, some glucagon-like protein-1 receptor agonists) for safety or efficacy reasons. There is not always good alignment between label recommendations, pharmacokinetic or clinical studies, and guideline recommendations for use of these drugs in CKD. In particular, controversy remains about the use of metformin in moderate CKD and appropriate use of liraglutide and sulfonylureas in advanced CKD.

CONCLUSION

Considerable variability exists with respect to recommendations and clinical data for the many antihyperglycemic drugs used in patients with T2DM and CKD.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

Changes of the glycemic control and therapeutic regimen for diabetes mellitus in the Japanese patients on hemodialysis

OBJECTIVES/METHODS

Diabetes mellitus (DM) has become important with regard to mortality in hemodialysis (HD) patients, so it is necessary to optimize the treatment of these patients. We examined the changes in glycemic control and therapeutic regimen, including insulin and oral hypoglycemic agent (OHA) and the diet/exercise in the HD patients.

RESULTS

Although DM was observed in 42 (32.6%) of the 129 (male/female 89/40) patients, there was a male predominance, with 35 DM patients being male (83.3%). The therapeutic regimens of DM patients were as follows: insulin was used in 13, OHA in 20, and diet/exercise in nine patients. The DM patients, who had not used insulin, included five patients receiving OHA (25.0%) and diet/exercise in five patients (55.6%). Nineteen of 20 OHA patients used a dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibitor. Although the postprandial blood glucose (PBG) in insulin was 191 ± 89 (the mean ± standard deviation [SD]) mg/dL, that in OHA group was 140 ± 36 mg/dL. The mean and the SD of the PBG were larger in insulin than in OHA group. The body mass index (BMI) and hemoglobin A1c were higher in patients treated with insulin (24.1 ± 4.2 kg/m(2), 7.1 ± 1.2%) than in patients treated with the OHA (21.2 ± 2.8 kg/m(2), 5.8 ± 0.5%; P<0.05) or diet/exercise (19.2 ± 3.6 kg/m(2), 5.3 ± 0.6%; P<0.05). The BMI and hemoglobin A1c were higher in diet/exercise compared to OHA and insulin groups.

CONCLUSION

The patients undergoing HD develop DM, especially males. The BMI and hemoglobin A1c were useful to determine whether there should be a change from insulin to OHA or to diet/exercise therapy. A dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibitor might be a preferable treatment for the DM patients with HD in terms of the mean and SD of PBG.