Incretin-based drugs and adverse pancreatic events: almost a decade later and uncertainty remains

A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies of the association between the use of incretin-based therapies and the risk of pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND

Some early reports in the medical literature have raised concern about a possible increased risk of pancreatic cancer associated with the use of two broad classes of incretin-based therapies, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists. This possibility has been somewhat mitigated by the null findings meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials, but the usefulness of their findings was hampered by serious shortcomings of lack of power and representativeness. These shortcomings can typically be addressed by observational studies, but observational studies on the topic have yielded conflicting findings. A systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies was performed to qualitatively and quantitatively appraise the totality of evidence on the association between the use of incretin-based therapies and the risk of pancreatic cancer in routine clinical practice.

METHODS

The PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, and Google Scholar databases were searched. The study quality was appraised using the ROBINS-I tool and based on the presence of pharmacoepidemiology biases. A random-effects model was used to estimate the summary relative risks with corresponding CIs.

RESULTS

A total of 14 studies were included. The qualitative assessment revealed that all studies had inadequate follow-up (≤5 years), 12 studies were suspected to suffer from time-lag bias (due to inappropriate choice of comparator group) to varying extent, five studies included prevalent users, five studies did not implement exposure lag period, five studies had a serious risk of bias due to confounding, and one study had a time-window bias. The quantitative assessment showed no indication of an increased risk when all studies were pooled together (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.87, 1.24) and when the analysis was restricted to the studies with the least bias (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.51, 1.17). However, the pooled RRs were more frequently higher in the studies with less rigorous design and analysis. Specifically, a tendency toward an increased risk was observed in the studies with (RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.04, 1.72) or possibly with (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.89, 1.36) time-lag bias, in the studies that did not apply (RR 1.23, 95% CI 0.93, 1.63) or with potentially inadequate exposure lag period of 6 months (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.66, 1.94), in the studies that inappropriate comparator group of a combination of unspecified (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.25, 1.78) or non-insulin (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.93, 1.42) antidiabetic drugs, and in the studies with serious risk of bias due to confounding (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.56, 2.49).

CONCLUSIONS

In summary, the totality of evidence from observational studies does not support the claim that the use of incretin-based therapies is associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer in routine clinical practice. The increased risk of pancreatic cancer observed in observational studies reflects bias resulting from suboptimal methodological approaches, which need to be avoided by future studies.

Time to Treatment Intensification in Patients Receiving DPP4 Inhibitors Versus Sulfonylureas as the First Add-On to Metformin Monotherapy: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background: To verify whether, in patients on metformin (MET) monotherapy for type 2 diabetes (T2D), the add-on of a dipeptidyl peptidase inhibitor (DPP4i) compared to a sulfonylurea (SU) can delay the time to the subsequent treatment intensification (TI).

Methods: Population-based administrative data banks from four Italian geographic areas were used. Patients aged ≥18 years on MET monotherapy receiving first DPP4i or SU dispensing between 2008 and 2015 (cohort entry) were followed up to the occurrence of TI (insulin dispensing or add-on of a third non-insulin hypoglicemic >180 days after cohort entry), treatment discontinuation, switch, cancer, death, TI occurrence within, end of data availability, end of study period (31 December 2016), whichever came first. Patients on MET + DPP4i were matched 1:1 with those on MET + SU by sex, age, year of cohort entry, and data bank. Hazard Ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (95%CI) were estimated using multivariable Cox regression model including matching variables and potential confounders measured at baseline. Different sensitivity analyses were performed: i) matching at 180 days after cohort entry, ii) intent to treat (ITT) analysis, iii) matching by duration of MET monotherapy, iv) matching by propensity score.

Results: The matched study cohort included 10,600 patients. Overall, 763 TI were observed (4.5/100 person-years; mean follow-up = 1.6 years). The primary analysis showed no difference in time to TI between the two groups (HR = 1.02; 95% CI = 0.88–1.19). Sensitivity analyses confirmed this result, except from the ITT analysis (HR = 1.27; 1.13–1.43).

Conclusion: The use of a DPP4i rather than a SU as add-on to MET monotherapy was not associated with a delay in treatment intensification.

CD26/DPP-4: Type 2 Diabetes Drug Target with Potential Influence on Cancer Biology

Simple Summary

Dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-4 inhibitor is widely used for type 2 diabetes. Although DPP-4/CD26 has been recognized as both a suppressor and inducer in tumor biology due to its various functions, how DPP-4 inhibitor affects cancer progression in diabetic patients is still unknown. The aim of this review is to summarize one unfavorable aspect of DPP-4 inhibitor in cancer-bearing diabetic patients.

Abstract

DPP-4/CD26, a membrane-bound glycoprotein, is ubiquitously expressed and has diverse biological functions. Because of its enzymatic action, such as the degradation of incretin hormones, DPP-4/CD26 is recognized as the significant therapeutic target for type 2 diabetes (T2DM); DPP-4 inhibitors have been used as an anti-diabetic agent for a decade. The safety profile of DPP-4 inhibitors for a cardiovascular event in T2DM patients has been widely analyzed; however, a clear association between DPP-4 inhibitors and tumor biology is not yet established. Previous preclinical studies reported that DPP-4 suppression would impact tumor progression processes. With regard to this finding, we have shown that the DPP-4 inhibitor induces breast cancer metastasis and chemoresistance via an increase in its substrate C-X-C motif chemokine 12, and the consequent induction of epithelial-mesenchymal transition in the tumor. DPP-4/CD26 plays diverse pivotal roles beyond blood glucose control; thus, DPP-4 inhibitors can potentially impact cancer-bearing T2DM patients either favorably or unfavorably. In this review, we primarily focus on the possible undesirable effect of DPP-4 inhibition on tumor biology. Clinicians should note that the safety of DPP-4 inhibitors for diabetic patients with an existing cancer is an unresolved issue, and further mechanistic analysis is essential in this field.

LINAGLIPTIN-INDUCED PANCREATITIS

Objective

To report a case of linagliptin-induced acute pancreatitis and remind clinicians about risks with incretin-based drugs. Patients at risk for pancreatitis should be switched to another type of hypoglycemic treatment.

Methods

We present the case of a 74-year-old Latina who presented to the emergency department with sudden onset of epigastric pain radiating to her back. Medical history, physical exam, laboratory tests, and medical images were compatible with acute pancreatitis. Upon further investigation, common causes for her pathology were excluded. Ten weeks prior to presentation she had changed her medications for diabetes mellitus type 2 to linagliptin.

Results

Using the Naranjo algorithm of adverse drug reactions, we concluded that linagliptin was the most likely culprit.

Conclusion

Incretin-based drugs, including dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, have been shown to be relatively safe for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Since their introduction to the market, conflicting data regarding pancreatic side effects have been published, including a small risk of developing acute pancreatitis with dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors like sitagliptin and saxagliptin. To date there has been only 1 case report associating linagliptin with acute pancreatitis in the English medical literature. Ours is the first case report in the United States associating linagliptin with acute pancreatitis. It is worth warning both patients and prescribers about this serious adverse effect, as it might affect the choice of antiglycemic agent.

Treatment with incretins does not increase the risk of pancreatic diseases compared to older anti-hyperglycaemic drugs, when added to metformin: real world evidence in people with Type 2 diabetes

AIMS

In people with metformin-treated diabetes, to evaluate the risk of acute pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer and other diseases of the pancreas post second-line anti-hyperglycaemic agent initiation.

METHODS

People with Type 2 diabetes diagnosed after 2004 who received metformin plus a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP-4i, n = 50 095), glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RA, n = 12 654), sulfonylurea (n = 110 747), thiazolidinedione (n = 17 597) or insulin (n = 34 805) for at least 3 months were identified in the US Centricity Electronic Medical Records. Time to developing acute pancreatitis, other diseases of the pancreas and pancreatic cancer was estimated, balancing and adjusting anti-hyperglycaemic drug groups for appropriate confounders.

RESULTS

In the DPP-4i group, the adjusted mean time to acute pancreatitis was 2.63 [95% confidence intervals (CI) 2.38, 2.88] years; time to pancreatic cancer was 2.70 (2.19, 3.21) years; and time to other diseases of the pancreas was 2.73 (2.33, 3.12) years. Compared with DPP-4i, the insulin group developed acute pancreatitis 0.48 years (P < 0.01) earlier and the GLP-1RA group developed pancreatic cancer 3 years later (P < 0.01). However, with the constraint of no event within 6 months of insulin initiation, the risk of acute pancreatitis in the insulin group was insignificant. No other significant differences were observed between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

No significant differences in the risk of developing pancreatic diseases in those treated with various anti-hyperglycaemic drug classes were found.

Recent updates on GLP-1 agonists: Current advancements & challenges

Glucagon-like peptide (GLP)-1 is an incretin hormone exhibiting several pharmacological actions such as neuroprotection, increased cognitive function, cardio-protection, decreased hypertension, suppression of acid secretion, increase in lyposis, and protection from inflammation. The most potent actions are glucose-dependent insulinotropic and glucagonostatic actions, stimulation of β-cell proliferation, enhanced insulin secretion and reduced weight gain in patients with type-2 diabetes pertaining to blood glucose control. Despite all these actions, its short half-life (around 2∼min) and degradation by a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 enzyme (DPP-4) limits the therapeutic utility of GLP1. In this review, we have discussed DPP IV-resistant analogs of GLP-1 currently present in clinical trials such as Exenatide, Liraglutide, Semaglutide, Efpeglenatide, Exenatide ER, Ittca 650 (Intarcia), Dulaglutide, Albiglutide, and Lixisenatide. Moreover, we have also discussed in detail the pharmacology, signaling mechanisms, and pharmacokinetic properties (Cmax, Tmax, T_1/2, Vd, and Bioavailability) of DPP IV-resistant analogs of (GLP-1). Interestingly, GLP-1 agonist drugs have shown better potential to treat type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) as compared to currently used drugs in clinics without causing the side effects of hypoglycemia and weight gain.

The Risk of Acute Pancreatitis After Initiation of Dipeptidyl Peptidase 4 Inhibitors: Testing a Hypothesis of Subgroup Differences in Older U.S. Adults

OBJECTIVE

To examine whether dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors (DPP-4I) increase acute pancreatitis risk in older patients and whether the association varies by age, sex, and history of cardiovascular disease (CVD).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted a cohort study of DPP-4I initiators versus thiazolidinedione (TZD) or sulfonylurea initiators using U.S. Medicare beneficiaries, 2007-2014. Eligible initiators were aged 66 years or older without history of pancreatic disease or alcohol-related diseases. Patients were followed up for hospitalization due to acute pancreatitis and censored at 90 days after treatment changes. Weighted Cox models were used to estimate the hazard ratio (HR) for acute pancreatitis. Analyses were performed overall as well as within subgroups defined by age, sex, and CVD history.

RESULTS

We found no increased risk of acute pancreatitis comparing 49,374 DPP-4I initiators to 132,223 sulfonylurea initiators (weighted HR 1.01; 95% CI 0.83-1.24) and comparing 57,301 DPP-4I initiators to 32,612 TZD initiators (weighted HR 1.11; 95% CI 0.76-1.62). Age and sex did not modify the association. Among patients with CVD, acute pancreatitis incidence was elevated in initiators of DPP-4I and sulfonylurea (2.3 and 2.4 per 1,000 person-years, respectively) but not in TZD initiators (1.5). Among patients with CVD, higher risk of acute pancreatitis was observed with DPP-4I compared with TZD (weighted HR 1.84; 95% CI 1.02-3.35) but not compared with sulfonylurea.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study provides evidence that DPP-4I is not associated with an increased risk of acute pancreatitis in older adults overall. The positive association observed in patients with CVD could be due to chance or bias but merits further investigation.

Oleanolic acid derivative DKS26 exerts antidiabetic and hepatoprotective effects in diabetic mice and promotes glucagon-like peptide-1 secretion and expression in intestinal cells

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) is an important target for diabetes therapy based on its key role in maintaining glucose and lipid homeostasis. This study was designed to investigate antidiabetic and hepatoprotective effects of a novel oleanolic acid derivative DKS26 in diabetic mice and elucidate its underlying GLP-1 related antidiabetic mechanisms in vitro and in vivo.

EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH

The therapeutic effects of DKS26 were investigated in streptozotocin (STZ)-induced and db/db diabetic mouse models. Levels of plasma glucose, glycosylated serum protein (GSP), lipid profiles, insulin, alanine aminotransferase (ALT) and aspartate aminotransferase (AST), oral glucose tolerance (OGT), pancreatic islets and hepatic histopathological morphology, liver lipid levels and expression of pro-inflammatory cytokines were assessed. Intestinal NCI-H716 cells and diabetic models were used to further validate its potential GLP-1-related antidiabetic mechanisms.

KEY RESULTS

DKS26 treatment (100 mg·kg^-1 ·day^-1 ) decreased plasma levels of glucose, GSP, ALT and AST; ameliorated OGT and plasma lipid profiles; augmented plasma insulin levels; alleviated islets and hepatic pathological morphology; and reduced liver lipid accumulation, inflammation and necrosis in vivo. Furthermore, DKS26 enhanced GLP-1 release and expression, accompanied by elevated levels of cAMP and phosphorylated PKA in vitro and in vivo.

CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

DKS26 exerted hypoglycaemic, hypolipidaemic and islets protective effects, which were associated with an enhanced release and expression of GLP-1 mediated by the activation of the cAMP/PKA signalling pathway, and alleviated hepatic damage by reducing liver lipid levels and inflammation. These findings firmly identified DKS26 as a new viable therapeutic option for diabetes control.

Monitoring safety and use of old and new treatment options for type 2 diabetic patients: a two-year (2013-2016) analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare patients' and physicians' perceptions regarding effectiveness and tolerability of non-insulin hypoglycemic drugs in a cohort of type 2 diabetic patients; to verify whether a possible tridimensional link between effectiveness, tolerability, and adherence affects long-term therapeutic outcomes.

METHODS

A two-year observational study was performed in 1389 Type 2 diabetic patients by involving general practitioner clinics and Diabetes Centers. A decimal scale and the Morisky questionnaire were used, respectively, to assess effectiveness and tolerability perceptions, and medication adherence.

RESULTS

Physicians perceived therapy as more efficacious compared to their patients: perceived effectiveness was steady for physicians during the study whereas patients' perception not significantly decreased (mean score from >8 to 7.84 ± 1.69). Physicians assigned higher tolerability scores compared to patients but only at the beginning of the study; interestingly, physicians' tolerability perception was poorer than patients' perception at last follow-up (mean score = 7.57 ± 1.40 vs. 7.88 ± 1.84). Favorable (score >7) patients' perceptions about treatment effectiveness and tolerability were associated with higher adherence. Patients showed medium adherence across the study.

CONCLUSIONS

A mutual relationship between clinical effectiveness, adverse drug reactions, and adherence has been established, significantly impacting the clinical management of diabetic patients. A careful monitoring of this link by clinicians appears therefore necessary.

Use of incretin agents and risk of acute and chronic pancreatitis: A population-based cohort study

AIM

To determine the association between the use of incretin agents (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists) for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) and the risk of any, acute and chronic pancreatitis.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A population-based cohort study was conducted using data from the UK Clinical Practice Research Datalink (CPRD 2007-2012). A total of 182 428 adult patients with ≥1 non-insulin antidiabetic drug (NIAD) prescription were matched to control subjects without diabetes. Cox regression was used to estimate adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of pancreatitis in incretin-users (N = 28 370) compared with controls and with other NIAD users. Adjustments were made for lifestyle, disease and drug history. In a sensitivity analysis, a new-user design was used.

RESULTS

Current incretin users had a 1.5-fold increased risk of any pancreatitis compared with NIAD users (adjusted HR 1.47, 95% CI 1.06-2.04). In incident current incretin users the risk of any and acute pancreatitis was increased 2.1- and 2.0-fold compared with NIAD users (adjusted HR 2.12, 95% CI 1.31-3.43 and adjusted HR 1.96, 95% CI 1.13-3.41), whereas there was no increased risk found for chronic pancreatitis.

CONCLUSIONS

Incretin use was associated with an increased risk of any pancreatitis. Moreover, risk of any and acute pancreatitis was higher when applying a new-user design. We were not able to detect an association with chronic pancreatitis, but the number in this subgroup was small.

Pancreatic safety in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes treated with once weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg up to 52 weeks in phase 3 clinical trials

The effects of incretin therapies on pancreatic safety are currently being evaluated. In 3 phase 3 clinical studies of once weekly dulaglutide 0.75 mg (dulaglutide) in Japanese patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D), symptoms suggestive of acute pancreatitis as well as pancreatic enzymes were assessed and the risk of acute pancreatitis was evaluated. Patients who met any of the predefined criteria (clinical signs/symptoms of acute pancreatitis, confirmed amylase or lipase level ≥3 times the upper limit of normal [ULN], abdominal imaging of the pancreas) were adjudicated for acute pancreatitis by a blinded external committee. A total of 43 events in 40 patients (dulaglutide, 35/917 patients; liraglutide, 2/137 patients; insulin glargine, 2/180 patients; and placebo, 2/70 patients) were adjudicated (1 patient had events adjudicated during both placebo and dulaglutide treatment); 2 patients treated with dulaglutide had acute pancreatitis confirmed (2/917 [0.2%]; 2.651 patients/1,000 patient-years). One of these patients was diagnosed by the investigator with acute pancreatitis related to dulaglutide, but there was no typical abdominal pain. The event in the other patient occurred following an endoscopic ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration. Transient increases in lipase ≥3×ULN were observed in 2% of patients in both the dulaglutide and liraglutide groups; the incidence in dulaglutide-treated patients was not significantly different from the incidences in liraglutide, placebo-, or insulin glargine-treated patients. Results of systematic assessments of pancreatic safety in 3 phase 3 studies for up to 52 weeks do not suggest an increased risk of acute pancreatitis in Japanese patients treated with dulaglutide.

Inflammation Meets Metabolic Disease: Gut Feeling Mediated by GLP-1

Chronic diseases, such as obesity and diabetes, cardiovascular, and inflammatory bowel diseases (IBD) share common features in their pathology. Metabolic disorders exhibit strong inflammatory underpinnings and vice versa, inflammation is associated with metabolic alterations. Next to cytokines and cellular stress pathways, such as the unfolded protein response (UPR), alterations in the enteroendocrine system are intersections of various pathologies. Enteroendocrine cells (EEC) have been studied extensively for their ability to regulate gastrointestinal motility, secretion, and insulin release by release of peptide hormones. In particular, the L-cell-derived incretin hormone glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) has gained enormous attention due to its insulinotropic action and relevance in the treatment of type 2 diabetes (T2D). Yet, accumulating data indicate a critical role for EEC and in particular for GLP-1 in metabolic adaptation and in orchestrating immune responses beyond blood glucose control. EEC sense the lamina propria and luminal environment, including the microbiota via receptors and transporters. Subsequently, mediating signals by secreting hormones and cytokines, EEC can be considered as integrators of metabolic and inflammatory signaling. This review focuses on L cell and GLP-1 functions in the context of metabolic and inflammatory diseases. The effects of incretin-based therapies on metabolism and immune system are discussed and the interrelation and common features of metabolic and immune-mediated disorders are highlighted. Moreover, it presents data on the impact of inflammation, in particular of IBD on EEC and discusses the potential role of the microbiota as link between nutrients, metabolism, immunity, and disease.

Incretin based drugs and the risk of pancreatic cancer: international multicentre cohort study

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the use of incretin based drugs compared with sulfonylureas is associated with an increased risk of incident pancreatic cancer in people with type 2 diabetes.

DESIGN

Population based cohort.

SETTING

Large, international, multicentre study combining the health records from six participating sites in Canada, the United States, and the United Kingdom.

PARTICIPANTS

A cohort of 972,384 patients initiating antidiabetic drugs between 1 January 2007 and 30 June 2013, with follow-up until 30 June 2014.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Within each cohort we conducted nested case-control analyses, where incident cases of pancreatic cancer were matched with up to 20 controls on sex, age, cohort entry date, duration of treated diabetes, and duration of follow-up. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for incident pancreatic cancer were estimated, comparing use of incretin based drugs with use of sulfonylureas, with drug use lagged by one year for latency purposes. Secondary analyses assessed whether the risk varied by class (dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists) or by duration of use (cumulative duration of use and time since treatment initiation). Site specific hazard ratios were pooled using random effects models.

RESULTS

During 2,024,441 person years of follow-up (median follow-up ranging from 1.3 to 2.8 years; maximum 8 years), 1221 patients were newly diagnosed as having pancreatic cancer (incidence rate 0.60 per 1000 person years). Compared with sulfonylureas, incretin based drugs were not associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer (pooled adjusted hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval 0.84 to 1.23). Similarly, the risk did not vary by class and evidence of a duration-response relation was lacking.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large, population based study the use of incretin based drugs was not associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer compared with sulfonylureas. Although this potential adverse drug reaction will need to be monitored long term owing to the latency of the cancer, these findings provide some reassurance on the safety of incretin based drugs.

Emerging opportunities for the treatment of metabolic diseases: Glucagon-like peptide-1 based multi-agonists

Obesity is a pathogenic gateway to the metabolic syndrome and the complications thereof, thus interventions aimed at preventing or reversing the metabolic derangements underlying obesity hold great therapeutic promise. However, the complexity of energy balance regulation, combined with the heterologous pathophysiology of human obesity, renders effective medicinal intervention very difficult. Indeed, the search for the silver bullet in anti-obesity medicines has been laden with drugs of underwhelming efficacy and unacceptable side effects. This can partly be the consequence that many of these drug interventions have been historically directed at single molecular targets. New multi-molecular combination therapies have shown promising clinical outcomes in terms of weight loss, yet multi-functional single molecules may offer even more advantages than adjunctive co-treatments. Single molecules with integrated activities derived from multiple hormones involved in the physiological control of metabolism have emerged as one of the more promising candidates for reversing obesity. The inclusion of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) as one of the constituents is a unifying factor amongst the majority of these unimolecular multi-agonists. The scope of this review is to summarize the current preclinical and clinical landscape of GLP-1-based therapies, focusing on combinatorial therapies with a particular emphasis on single molecule compounds displaying multi-agonist properties.