Vildagliptin has the same safety profile as a sulfonylurea on bone metabolism and bone mineral density in post-menopausal women with type 2 diabetes: a randomized controlled trial

Current knowledge of bone-derived factor osteocalcin: its role in the management and treatment of diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, osteopetrosis and inflammatory joint diseases

Osteocalcin (OC) is the most abundant non-collagenous and osteoblast-secreted protein in bone. It consists of two forms such as carboxylated OC (cOC) and undercarboxylated OC (ucOC). While cOC promotes bone mineralization and increases bone strength, ucOC is regarded an endocrinologically active form that may have several functions in multiple end organs and tissues. Total OC (tOC) includes both of these forms (cOC and ucOC) and is considered a marker of bone turnover in clinical settings. Most of the data on OC is limited to preclinical studies and therefore may not accurately reflect the situation in clinical conditions. For the stated reason, the aim of this review was not only to summarize current knowledge of all forms of OC and characterize its role in diabetes mellitus, osteoporosis, osteopetrosis, inflammatory joint diseases, but also to provide new interpretations of its involvement in the management and treatment of aforementioned diseases. In this context, special emphasis was placed on available clinical trials. Significantly lower levels of tOC and ucOC could be associated with the risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus. On the contrary, tOC level does not seem to be a good indicator of high bone turnover status in postmenopausal osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and rheumatoid arthritis. The associations between several pharmacological drugs used to treat all disorders mentioned above and OC levels have also been provided. From this perspective, OC may serve as a medium through which certain medications can influence glucose metabolism, body weight, adiponectin secretion, and synovial inflammation.

A novel mechanism of Vildagliptin in regulating bone metabolism and mitigating osteoporosis

Osteoporosis has become a global social problem with the tendency toward the aging population. The challenge in managing osteoporosis is to develop new anti-osteoporosis drugs that target bone anabolism. The purpose of this study was to uncover the novel mechanism of Vildagliptin on bone metabolism. We revealed that Vildagliptin significantly promoted osteogenic differentiation of precursor osteoblasts and bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells (BMSCs). At the same time, it significantly enhanced the polarization of RAW264.7 macrophages to the M2 type and the secretion of osteogenic factors BMP2 and TGF-β1. This was confirmed by the increased osteogenic differentiation observed in the osteoblast-RAW264.7 co-culture system. Moreover, Vildagliptin significantly enhanced the transformation of BMSCs into the osteogenic morphology in the osteoblast-BMSC co-culture system. Finally, Vildagliptin also inhibited osteoclastic differentiation of RAW 264.7 cells. The potential mechanism underlying these effects involved targeting the GAS6/AXL/ERK5 pathway. In the in vivo study, Vildagliptin significantly alleviated postmenopausal osteoporosis in ovariectomized mice. These findings represent the first comprehensive revelation of the regulatory effect of Vildagliptin on bone metabolism. Specifically, Vildagliptin demonstrates the ability to promote bone anabolism and inhibit bone resorption by simultaneously targeting osteoblasts, BMSCs, and osteoclasts. The bone-protective effects of Vildagliptin were further confirmed in a postmenopausal osteoporosis model. The clinical significance of this study lies in laying a theoretical foundation for bone protection therapy in type-2 diabetes patients with compromised bone conditions or postmenopausal osteoporosis.

Antidiabetic drug administration prevents bone mineral density loss: Evidence from a two-sample Mendelian randomization study

The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of common antidiabetic drugs on BMD by two-sample Mendelian randomization (MR). The single nucleotide polymorphisms that were strongly associated with insulin, metformin, rosiglitazone and gliclazide were extracted as instrumental variables (IVs) for MR analysis. The inverse variance weighted (IVW) method was used as the primary MR method to assess the causal effect of antidiabetic drugs on BMD, and other MR methods, including Weighted median, MR Egger and Weighted mode, were used for complementary analysis. Reliability and stability were assessed by the leave-one-out test. In the present work, IVW estimation of the causal effect of insulin on heel BMD demonstrated that there was a null effect of insulin on heel BMD (β = 0.765; se = 0.971; P = 0.430), while metformin treatment had a positive effect on heel BMD (β = 1.414; se = 0.460; P = 2.118*10-3). The causal relationship between rosiglitazone and heel BMD analysed by IVW suggested that there was a null effect of rosiglitazone on heel BMD (β = -0.526; se = 1.744; P = 0.763), but the causal effect of gliclazide on heel BMD evaluated by IVW demonstrated that there was a positive effect of gliclazide on heel BMD (β = 2.671; se = 1.340; P = 0.046). In summary, the present work showed that metformin and gliclazide have a role in reducing BMD loss in patients with diabetes and are recommended for BMD loss prevention in diabetes.

Gut microbiome dysregulation drives bone damage in broiler tibial dyschondroplasia by disrupting glucose homeostasis

Tibial dyschondroplasia (TD) with multiple incentives is a metabolic skeletal disease that occurs in fast-growing broilers. Perturbations in the gut microbiota (GM) have been shown to affect bone homoeostasis, but the mechanisms by which GM modulates bone metabolism in TD broilers remain unknown. Here, using a broiler model of TD, we noted elevated blood glucose (GLU) levels in TD broilers, accompanied by alterations in the pancreatic structure and secretory function and damaged intestinal barrier function. Importantly, faecal microbiota transplantation (FMT) of gut microbes from normal donors rehabilitated the GM and decreased the elevated GLU levels in TD broilers. A high GLU level is a predisposing factor to bone disease, suggesting that GM dysbiosis-mediated hyperglycaemia might be involved in bone regulation. 16S rRNA gene sequencing and short-chain fatty acid analysis revealed that the significantly increased level of the metabolite butyric acid derived from the genera Blautia and Coprococcus regulated GLU levels in TD broilers by binding to GPR109A in the pancreas. Tibial studies showed reduced expression of vascular regulatory factors (including PI3K, AKT and VEFGA) based on transcriptomics analysis and reduced vascular distribution, contributing to nonvascularization of cartilage in the proximal tibial growth plate of TD broilers with elevated GLU levels. Additionally, treatment with the total flavonoids from Rhizoma drynariae further validated the improvement in bone homoeostasis in TD broilers by regulating GLU levels through the regulation of GM to subsequently improve intestinal and pancreatic function. These findings clarify the critical role of GM-mediated changes in GLU levels via the gut-pancreas axis in bone homoeostasis in TD chickens.

Update on: effects of anti-diabetic drugs on bone metabolism

INTRODUCTION

Preclinical, clinical, and population-based studies have provided evidence that anti-diabetic drugs affect bone metabolism and may affect the risk of fracture in diabetic patients.

AREAS COVERED

An overview of the skeletal effects of anti-diabetic drugs used in type 2 diabetes is provided. Searches on AdisInsight, PubMed, and Medline databases were conducted up to 1^st July 2020. The latest evidence from randomized clinical trials and population-based studies on the skeletal safety of the most recent drugs (DPP-4i, GLP-1RA, and SGLT-2i) is provided.

EXPERT OPINION

Diabetic patients present with a higher risk of fracture for a given bone mineral density suggesting a role of bone quality in the etiology of diabetic fracture. Bone quality is difficult to assess in human clinical practice and the use of preclinical models provides valuable information on diabetic bone alterations. As several links have been established between bone and energy homeostasis, it is interesting to study the safety of anti-diabetic drugs on the skeleton. So far, evidence for the newest molecules suggests a neutral fracture risk, but further studies, especially in different types of patient populations (patients at risk or with history of cardiovascular disease, renal impairment, neuropathy) are required to fully appreciate this matter.

The Effects of Diabetes and Diabetic Medications on Bone Health

The incidence and prevalence of diabetes continues to increase, and proper understanding of the adverse effects on bone metabolism is important. This review attempts to discuss the pathophysiology of the effects of diabetes and diabetic medications on bone metabolism and bone health. In addition, this review will address the mechanisms resulting in increased fracture risk and delayed bone healing to better treat and manage diabetic patients in the orthopedic clinical setting.

Effect of type 2 diabetes medications on fracture risk

Type 2 diabetes, one of the most frequent chronic diseases, has an important effect on bone metabolism, with most studies reporting an increased prevalence of fractures in these patients despite an apparently increased bone mineral density. Most probable explanation is an alteration of bone structure/quality with increased fragility but the different diabetes medications influence the risk of fracture. While metformin and incretin-based therapies are safe, thiazolidinediones and canagliflozin (sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor) negatively impact bone metabolism and should be avoided in subjects at increased risk of fractures. Insulin and sulphonylureas are generally safe but can increase the risk of hypoglycemia and falls with subsequent traumatic fractures. Their combination should be avoided, especially in elderly subjects.

Risk of fracture with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in real-world use: systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

In the present meta-analysis based on real-world data, the use of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP-4i), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1ra), or sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) was not associated with the risk of fracture.

INTRODUCTION

Cumulative evidence from randomized control trials (RCTs) with limited fracture events showed that the use of DPP-4i, GLP-1ra, or SGLT2i may not affect the risk of fracture. However, additional insights from large population-based studies with routinely collected data on fracture events and an adequate amount of fracture events are necessary to draw firm conclusions. To refine and complement the results from RCTs, a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies were performed to investigate the association between the use of DPP-4i, GLP-1ra, or SGLT2i and the risk of fracture in real-world settings.

METHODS

The PubMed and Web of Science databases were searched to identify relevant observational studies. A random-effect model was used to estimate the summary relative risks (RRs).

RESULTS

The use of DPP-4i (RR 0.83, 95% CI [confidence interval] 0.60, 1.14; n = 11), GLP-1ra (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.24, 1.74; n = 4), or SGLT2i (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.91, 1.16; n = 4) was not associated with the risk of fracture. In general, there was a consistent lack of association between the use of DPP-4i or GLP-1ra and the risk of fracture across nearly all subgroups, except for a significantly reduced risk of hip fracture with the use of GLP-1ra (RR 0.21, 95% CI 0.04, 0.98).

CONCLUSIONS

Cumulative real-world evidence does not support an association between the use of DPP-4i, GLP-1ra, or SGLT2i and the risk of fracture. Our findings, together with the cumulative evidence from RCTs, should reassure policy makers and medical practitioners that the use of these medications is unlikely to increase the risk of fracture among type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in general. Further studies need to investigate the long-term impact of these drugs on the fracture risk, particularly in high-risk populations.

Osteoporosis and vascular calcification: A shared scenario

Osteoporosis is a systemic skeletal disease, characterised by low bone mass and deterioration in the micro-architecture of bone tissue, which causes increased bone fragility and consequently greater susceptibility to fractures. It is the most frequent metabolic bone disease in our population, and fractures resulting from osteoporosis are becoming more common. Furthermore, vascular calcification is a recognised risk factor of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality that historically has been considered a passive and degenerative process. However, it is currently recognised as an active process, which has histopathological characteristics, mineral composition and initiation and development mechanisms characteristic of bone formation. Paradoxically, patients with osteoporosis frequently show vascular calcifications. Traditionally, they have been considered as independent processes related to age, although more recent epidemiological studies have shown that there is a close relationship between the loss of bone mass and vascular calcification, regardless of age. In fact, both conditions share risk factors and pathophysiological mechanisms. These include the relationship between proteins of bone origin, such as osteopontin and osteoprotegerin (OPG), with vascular pathology, and the intercellular protein system RANK/RANKL/OPG and the Wnt signalling pathway. The mechanisms linked in both pathologies should be considered in clinical decisions, given that treatments for osteoporosis could have unforeseen effects on vascular calcification, and vice versa. In short, a better understanding of the relationship between both entities can help in proposing strategies to reduce the increasing prevalence of vascular calcification and osteoporosis in the aging population.

A safety and tolerability profile comparison between dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and sulfonylureas in diabetic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The first treatment approach for type 2 diabetes mellitus is lifestyle change and metformin, but it is usually not sufficient. For some time, the anti-hyperglycemic classes of sulfonylureas and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors were considered second-line of treatment, since they show similar efficacy effect. However, the recent ADA-EASD consensus gives the preference to DPP-4 inhibitors compared to sulfonylureas, except if cost is a major problem. We performed a meta-analysis for safety and tolerability profile to comprehend which treatment has less adverse events.

METHODS

PUBMED and EMBASE databases were searched from inception until July 2017 to retrieve RCT studies comparing DPP-4 inhibitors and sulfonylureas treatments in adult type 2 diabetes patients. There was no language restriction. We extracted and combined data from studies comparison that reported safety profile and weight change. A random effect, meta-analytic model was applied to all calculations. Cochrane collaboration tool was used to assess quality and bias of the included studies. Trial registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017075823).

FINDINGS

Out of 1472 articles identified in our search and screened for eligibility, 36 studies comparing DPP-4 inhibitors and sulfonylureas were identified. DPP-4 inhibitors in combination with metformin had less overall adverse events (RR: 0·90; 95% CI, 0·86-0·94; p < 0·0001; I² = 83%; 17 studies), cardiovascular events (RR: 0·54; 95% CI, 0·37-0·79; p = 0·002; I² = 0%; 6 studies), hypoglycemia (RR: 0·17; 95% CI, 0·13-0·22; p < 0·00001; I² = 76%; 17 studies) and severe hypoglycemic events (RR: 0·10; 95% CI, 0·05-0·19; p < 0·00001; I² = 0%; 12 studies). The mean difference of the weight change was 1·92 kg in favor of DPP-4 inhibitors in combination with metformin in relation to sulfonylureas in combination with metformin. Monotherapy with DPP-4 inhibitors also had less rates of hypoglycemia (RR: 0·31; 95% CI, 0·24-0·41; p < 0·00001; I² = 0%; 8 studies) and severe hypoglycemic events (RR: 0·26; 95% CI, 0·10-0·66; p = 0·004; I² = 0%; 8 studies) and patients did not gain 1·19 kg.

INTERPRETATION

These results suggest better safety profile for DPP-4 inhibitors than sulfonylureas for both comparisons, and it is more notable when the treatment regimen includes metformin.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Brazil.

Diabetes pharmacotherapy and effects on the musculoskeletal system

Persons with type 1 or type 2 diabetes have a significantly higher fracture risk than age-matched persons without diabetes, attributed to disease-specific deficits in the microarchitecture and material properties of bone tissue. Therefore, independent effects of diabetes drugs on skeletal integrity are vitally important. Studies of incretin-based therapies have shown divergent effects of different agents on fracture risk, including detrimental, beneficial, and neutral effects. The sulfonylurea class of drugs, owing to its hypoglycemic potential, is thought to amplify the risk of fall-related fractures, particularly in the elderly. Other agents such as the biguanides may, in fact, be osteo-anabolic. In contrast, despite similarly expected anabolic properties of insulin, data suggests that insulin pharmacotherapy itself, particularly in type 2 diabetes, may be a risk factor for fracture, negatively associated with determinants of bone quality and bone strength. Finally, sodium-dependent glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors have been associated with an increased risk of atypical fractures in select populations, and possibly with an increase in lower extremity amputation with specific SGLT2I drugs. The role of skeletal muscle, as a potential mediator and determinant of bone quality, is also a relevant area of exploration. Currently, data regarding the impact of glucose lowering medications on diabetes-related muscle atrophy is more limited, although preclinical studies suggest that various hypoglycemic agents may have either aggravating (sulfonylureas, glinides) or repairing (thiazolidinediones, biguanides, incretins) effects on skeletal muscle atrophy, thereby influencing bone quality. Hence, the therapeutic efficacy of each hypoglycemic agent must also be evaluated in light of its impact, alone or in combination, on musculoskeletal health, when determining an individualized treatment approach. Moreover, the effect of newer medications (potentially seeking expanded clinical indication into the pediatric age range) on the growing skeleton is largely unknown. Herein, we review the available literature regarding effects of diabetes pharmacotherapy, by drug class and/or by clinical indication, on the musculoskeletal health of persons with diabetes.

Diabetes management before, during, and after bariatric and metabolic surgery

Metabolic surgery is unrivaled by other therapeutic modalities due to its ability to foster diabetes remission. Metabolic surgery is an integral therapeutic modality in obese and morbidly obese populations because pharmacological and behavioral therapy often fail to effectively manage type II diabetes. However, given the invasiveness of the metabolic surgery relative to behavioral therapy and the need to conform to preparatory and discharge guidelines, patients must adhere to strict nutritional and diabetes management protocols. Also, the pharmacological regimen that is instituted upon discharge is distinct from the preoperative regimen. Oftentimes, the dose for insulin and oral medications are significantly decreased or withdrawn. As time elapses and depending on several factors (e.g., exercise adherence), diabetes control becomes tenuous in a small portion of the patients because there is weight regain and on-going beta cell failure. At this time interval, intensification of diabetes therapy becomes prudent. Indeed, pharmacotherapy from the preoperative to the postoperative phase is labile and may be complex. Therefore, by discussing pharmacology options during the preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative period, the goal is to guide clinician-driven care.

The effects of diabetes therapy on bone: A clinical perspective

The effects of diabetes and diabetes therapy on bone are less known among clinicians. Traditionally, the emphasis of diabetes therapy has been on reducing cardiovascular risk by facilitating reductions in weight, blood pressure, blood sugar, systemic inflammation, and lipid levels. Now, with ample research demonstrating that patients with diabetes are more susceptible to bone fractures relative to controls, there has been a greater or renewed interest in studying the effects of diabetes therapy on bone. Interestingly, the majority of antidiabetic agents positively affect bone, but a few have detrimental effects. Specifically, although insulin has been demonstrated to be anabolic to bone, the rate of hypoglycemic episodes are increased with exogenous infusion; consequently, there is an increased fall and fracture frequency. Other agents such as thiazolidinediones have more direct negative effects on bone through transcriptional regulation. Even metabolic surgery, to a varying operation-dependent extent, exacerbates bone strength and may heighten fracture rate. The remaining diabetes agents seem to have neutral or positive effects on bone. With the increasing incidence of diabetes, it is more pertinent than ever to fully comprehend the effects of diabetes-related therapeutic modalities.

Review article: effects of type 2 diabetes therapies on bone metabolism

Diabetes complications and osteoporotic fractures are two of the most important causes of morbidity and mortality in older patients, and they share many features, including genetic susceptibility, molecular mechanisms, and environmental factors. Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) compromises bone microarchitecture by inducing abnormal bone cell function and matrix structure with increased osteoblast apoptosis, diminished osteoblast differentiation, and enhanced osteoclast-mediated bone resorption. The linkage between these two chronic diseases creates a possibility that certain antidiabetic therapies may affect bone function. The treatment of T2DM has been improved in the past two decades with the development of new therapeutic drugs. Each class has a pathophysiologic target related to the regulation of the energy metabolism and insulin secretion. However, both glycemic homeostasis and bone homeostasis are under the control of common regulatory factors. This background allows the individual pharmacological targets of antidiabetic therapies to affect bone quality due to their indirect effects on bone cell differentiation and the bone remodeling process. With a greater number of diabetic patients and antidiabetic agents being launched, it is critical to highlight the consequences of this disease and its pharmacological agents on bone health and fracture risk. Currently, there is little scientific knowledge approaching the impact of most anti-diabetic treatments on bone quality and fracture risk. Thus, this review aims to explore the pros and cons of the available pharmacologic treatments for T2DM on bone mineral density and risk fractures in humans.