Predisposing Factors for Any and Major Hypoglycemia With Saxagliptin Versus Placebo and Overall: Analysis From the SAVOR-TIMI 53 Trial

Hypoglycaemia and its management in primary care setting

Hypoglycaemia is common in patients with type 1 diabetes and type 2 diabetes and constitutes a major limiting factor in achieving glycaemic control among people with diabetes. While hypoglycaemia is defined as a blood glucose level under 70 mg/dL (3.9 mmol/L), symptoms may occur at higher blood glucose levels in individuals with poor glycaemic control. Severe hypoglycaemia is defined as an episode requiring the assistance of another person to actively administer carbohydrate, glucagon, or take other corrective actions to assure neurologic recovery. Hypoglycaemia is the most important safety outcome in clinical studies of glucose lowering agents. The American Diabetes Association Standards of Medical Care recommends that a management protocol for hypoglycaemia should be designed and implemented by every hospital, along with a clear prevention and treatment plan. A tailored approach, using clinical and pathophysiologic disease stratification, can help individualize glycaemic goals and promote new therapies to improve quality of life of patients. Data from recent large clinical trials reported low risk of hypoglycaemic events with the use of newer anti-diabetic drugs. Increased hypoglycaemia risk is observed with the use of insulin and/or sulphonylureas. Vulnerable patients with T2D at dual risk of severe hypoglycaemia and cardiovascular outcomes show features of "frailty." Many of such patients may be better treated by the use of GLP-1 receptor agonists or SGLT2 inhibitors rather than insulin. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) should be considered for all individuals with increased risk for hypoglycaemia, impaired hypoglycaemia awareness, frequent nocturnal hypoglycaemia and with history of severe hypoglycaemia. Patients with impaired awareness of hypoglycaemia benefit from real-time CGM. The diabetes educator is an invaluable resource and can devote the time needed to thoroughly educate the individual to reduce the risk of hypoglycaemia and integrate the information within the entire construct of diabetes self-management. Conversations about hypoglycaemia facilitated by a healthcare professional may reduce the burden and fear of hypoglycaemia among patients with diabetes and their family members. Optimizing insulin doses and carbohydrate intake, in addition to a short warm up before or after the physical activity sessions may help avoiding hypoglycaemia. Several therapeutic considerations are important to reduce hypoglycaemia risk during pregnancy including administration of rapid-acting insulin analogues rather than human insulin, pre-conception initiation of insulin analogues, and immediate postpartum insulin dose reduction.

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.

Alogliptin in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Receiving Metformin and Sulfonylurea Therapies in the EXAMINE Trial

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the antihyperglycemic efficacy and safety of adding the dipeptidyl dipeptidase-4 inhibitor alogliptin to metformin and sulphonylurea in the treatment of type 2 diabetes in the Examination of Cardiovascular Outcomes with Alogliptin versus Standard of Care Trial.

METHODS

Patients with type 2 diabetes and recent acute coronary syndrome were randomized to alogliptin or placebo and standard of care. Participants were followed for up to 40 (median 18) months. In a subgroup taking metformin and sulphonylurea at baseline, we evaluated change from baseline in glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), adverse events, cardiovascular outcomes, laboratory data, and other safety parameters.

RESULTS

There were 1398 patients receiving baseline dual therapy (metformin and sulphonylurea only) randomized to alogliptin (N = 693) or placebo (N = 705); 550 patients receiving alogliptin and 505 patients receiving placebo completed the Examination of Cardiovascular Outcomes with Alogliptin versus Standard of Care without addition of other antihyperglycemic therapies (P = .008). Changes from baseline to last visit in HbA1c were -0.4% on alogliptin and +0.1% on placebo (P < .001) in all those with baseline dual therapy and -0.4% for alogliptin and +0.2% for placebo (P < .001) in those without additional therapies. Reported rates of hypoglycemia were 8.8% for alogliptin and 6.7% for placebo (P = .16). Cardiovascular death and all-cause mortality rates were lower in those receiving alogliptin compared with those receiving placebo (hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% confidence interval, 0.28-0.84 and hazard ratio, 0.61; 95% confidence interval, 0.38-0.96, respectively).

CONCLUSIONS

Addition of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor alogliptin to dual therapy with metformin plus sulfonylurea significantly reduced HbA1c and was well tolerated. Lower mortality rates were seen in patients treated with alogliptin in this subgroup.

Efficacy and safety of saxagliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the comparative efficacy and safety of saxagliptin for type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

A systematic search of PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and two Chinese databases for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing saxagliptin with placebo or active comparators was performed up to July 2017. A complementary search was done to cover literature until March 2018. For continuous data, estimates were pooled using inverse variance methodology to calculate weighted mean differences (WMDs). Dichotomous data were presented as Mantel-Haenzel risk ratios (RRs).

RESULTS

Thirty-nine references of 30 RCTs involving 29,938 patients were analyzed. Compared with placebo, saxagliptin significantly reduced glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c, WMD -0.52%, 95% CI -0.60 to -0.44) and fasting plasma glucose (WMD -13.78 mg/dL, 95% CI -15.31 to -12.25), and increased the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7% (RR 1.64, 95% CI 1.53 to 1.75). When combined with submaximal-dose metformin, saxagliptin significantly increased the proportion of patients achieving HbA1c <7% compared with acarbose (RR 2.38, 95% CI 1.17 to 4.83) and uptitrated metformin (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.63). Saxagliptin was similar to other DPP-4 inhibitors but inferior to liraglutide and dapagliflozin on glycemic control. Saxagliptin significantly decreased the incidences of overall adverse events compared with acarbose (RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.57 to 0.89) and liraglutide (RR 0.41, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.71) when added to metformin. Weight gain and hypoglycemia with saxagliptin was slightly but significantly higher than placebo and lower than sulfonylureas. Saxagliptin did not increase the risk of arthralgia, heart failure, pancreatitis and other adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

Generally, saxagliptin has similar efficacy compared with most oral antidiabetic drugs and may be more effective than acarbose, while having a better safety profile than both acarbose and sulfonylureas.

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.

Risk Factors for Severe Hypoglycemia in Black and White Adults With Diabetes: The Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study

OBJECTIVE

Severe hypoglycemia is a rare but important complication of type 2 diabetes. Few studies have examined the epidemiology of hypoglycemia in a community-based population.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We included 1,206 Atherosclerosis Risk in Communities (ARIC) Study participants with diagnosed diabetes (baseline: 1996-1998). Severe hypoglycemic events were identified through 2013 by ICD-9 codes from claims for hospitalizations, emergency department visits, and ambulance use. We used Cox regression to evaluate risk factors for severe hypoglycemia.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 64 years, 32% were black, and 54% were female. During a median follow-up period of 15.2 years, there were 185 severe hypoglycemic events. Important risk factors after multivariable adjustment were as follows: age (per 5 years: hazard ratio [HR] 1.24; 95% CI 1.07-1.43), black race (HR 1.39; 95% CI 1.02-1.88), diabetes medications (any insulin use vs. no medications: HR 3.00; 95% CI 1.71-5.28; oral medications only vs. no medications: HR 2.20; 95% CI 1.28-3.76), glycemic control (moderate vs. good: HR 1.78; 95% CI 1.11-2.83; poor vs. good: HR 2.62; 95% CI 1.67-4.10), macroalbuminuria (HR 1.95; 95% CI 1.23-3.07), and poor cognitive function (Digit Symbol Substitution Test z score: HR 1.57; 95% CI 1.33-1.84). In an analysis of nontraditional risk factors, low 1,5-anhydroglucitol, difficulty with activities of daily living, Medicaid insurance, and antidepressant use were positively associated with severe hypoglycemia after multivariate adjustment.

CONCLUSIONS

Poor glycemic control, glycemic variability as captured by 1,5-anhydroglucitol, kidney damage, and measures of cognitive and functional impairments were strongly associated with increased risk of severe hypoglycemia. These factors should be considered in hypoglycemia risk assessments when individualizing diabetes care for older adults.

Hypoglycaemia manifestations and recurrent events: Lessons from the SAVOR-TIMI 53 outcome study

Hypoglycaemia is a well-known risk associated with the use of sulphonylureas and insulin, often limiting achievement of glycaemic goals. Recognizing the precipitants and recurrence patterns of hypoglycaemic events, particularly major events, is therefore clinically important. The SAVOR-TIMI-53 trial was a cardiovascular outcome study of 16 492 patients allocated to saxagliptin vs placebo added to conventional care for a median of 2.1 years. Hypoglycaemic events were a prespecified outcome in the study and were defined as a symptomatic episode that recovered with carbohydrates or any recorded blood glucose <3.0 mmol/l (<54 mg/dL). A major event was defined as one that required third-party assistance. Analysis of the features of the first hypoglycaemic event for each patient showed that a precipitant for the event was recognized by fewer than half of the patients, with the precipitant most often being a missed meal. In 40% of patients reporting major hypoglycaemic events, no precipitating factor was recognized, and in >60%, no previous hypoglycaemic event was reported during the timespan of the study, underscoring the lack of predictability of such an event.

An update on DPP-4 inhibitors in the management of type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

DPP-4 inhibitors are a class of compounds used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. The drugs inhibit the degradation of GLP-1, thus amplifying the incretin effect. They have moderate glycemic efficacy, a low propensity of causing hypoglycaemia and are weight neutral. The drugs are often used as second line therapy after metformin. Areas covered: This review summarizes the available compounds in the market and discusses the novel compounds that are currently under development. Several large cardiovascular outcome trials with some of the compounds have been completed, and their results and implications are considered. Fixed dose combination pills are currently the main focus of research and the contribution of these to the care of patients with diabetes is further discussed. Expert opinion: The DPP-4 inhibitors have been a successful class in drug development for diabetes. Taken orally and available as fixed dose combinations with metformin or with SGLT-2 inhibitors, they have reached a large market share of over 7 billion dollars. Other than retagliptin, it does not appear that any additional compound will be launched soon. Currently, the main focus is on the development of additional fixed dose combinations with SGLT-2 inhibitors, but the success of these combinations remains to be seen.

Effects of saxagliptin add-on therapy to insulin on blood glycemic fluctuations in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, control, open-labeled trial

BACKGROUND

To investigate whether saxagliptin add-on therapy to continuous subcutaneous insulin infusion (CSII) further improve blood glycemic control than CSII therapy in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes (T2D).

METHODS

This was a single-center, randomized, control, open-labeled trial. Newly diagnosed T2D patients were recruited between February 2014 and December 2015. Subjects were divided into saxagliptin add-on therapy to CSII group (n = 31) and CSII therapy group (n = 38). The treatment was maintained for 4 weeks. Oral glucose tolerance test was performed at baseline. Serum samples were obtained before and 30 and 120 minutes after oral administration for glucose, insulin, and C-peptide determination. Continuous glucose monitoring (CGM) was performed before and endpoint.

RESULTS

A total of 69 subjects were admitted. After 4-week therapy, CGM data showed that patients with saxagliptin add-on therapy exhibited further improvement of mean amplitude glycemic excursion (MAGE), the incremental area under curve of plasma glucose >7.8 and 10 mmol/L compared with that of control group. In addition, the hourly mean blood glucose concentrations, especially between 0000 and 0600 in patient with saxagliptin add-on therapy, were significantly lower compared with that of the control patients. Furthermore, patients in saxagliptin add-on group needed lower insulin dose to maintain euglycemic control. In addition, severe hypoglycemic episode was not observed from any group.

CONCLUSION

Saxagliptin add-on therapy to insulin had the ability of further improve blood glycemic controlling, with lower insulin dose required by patients with T2D to maintain euglycemic controlling.