Incretins and selective renal sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors in hypertension and coronary heart disease

State-of-the-Art Overview of the Pharmacological Treatment of Non-Alcoholic Steatohepatitis

Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is the most common cause of chronic liver disease worldwide, and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH), a subtype of NAFLD, can progress to cirrhosis, hepatocellular carcinoma, and death. Nevertheless, the current treatment for NAFLD/NASH is limited to lifestyle modifications, and no drugs are currently officially approved as treatments for NASH. Many global pharmaceutical companies are pursuing the development of medications for the treatment of NASH, and results from phase 2 and 3 clinical trials have been published in recent years. Here, we review data from these recent clinical trials and reports on the efficacy of newly developed antidiabetic drugs in NASH treatment.

Novel Antidiabetic Agents: Cardiovascular and Safety Outcomes

BACKGROUND

Concerns of elevated cardiovascular risk with some anti-diabetic medications warranted trials on the cardiovascular outcome to demonstrate cardiovascular safety of newly marketed anti-diabetic drugs. Although these trials were initially designed to evaluate safety, some of these demonstrated significant cardiovascular benefits.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

We reviewed the cardiovascular and safety outcomes of novel antidiabetic agents in patients with type 2 diabetes and established cardiovascular disease or at high risk of it. We included the outcomes of safety trials, randomized controlled trials, meta-analysis, large cohort studies, and real-world data, which highlighted the cardiovascular profile of DPP-4is, GLP-1RAs and SGLT-2is.

CONCLUSION

Although DPP-4is demonstrated non-inferiority to placebo, gaining cardiovascular safety, as well market authorization, SGLT-2is and most of the GLP-1RAs have shown impressive cardiovascular benefits in patients with T2D and established CVD or at high risk of it. These favorable effects of novel antidiabetic agents on cardiovascular parameters provide novel therapeutic approaches in medical management, risk stratification and prevention.

Latin American Consensus on the management of hypertension in the patient with diabetes and the metabolic syndrome

: The prevalence of hypertension, type 2 diabetes mellitus (DM2) and the metabolic syndrome continues to increase in Latin America, while the rates of diagnosis, treatment and control of these disorders remain low. The frequency of the risk factors that constitute the metabolic syndrome and are associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease has not diminished since the publication of the previous consensus. This document discusses the socioeconomic, demographic, environmental and cultural characteristics of most associated Latin American countries and partially explains the lack of better results in improving clinical and public health actions that allow high morbidity and mortality rates caused by cardiovascular diseases and DM2 to be reduced through programs aligned with the so-called precision medicine, which should be predictive, preventive, personalized and participatory. The Consensus ratifies the diagnostic criteria expressed in the previous consensus to define hypertension and DM2 but, for the metabolic syndrome, and in the absence of evidence, the recommendation is to implement a cohort study that determines the abdominal perimeter value associated with hard outcomes, such as DM2 and CVD. Meanwhile, we recommend modifying the criterion to more than 94 cm in men and more than 84 cm in women according to WHO recommendations. We also recommend the carrying out of a study that identifies the situation of hypertension and DM2 in people of African ancestry who, in Latin America, exceed 75 million and whose epidemiology does not include solid studies. With respect to the proposed therapeutic targets, we recommended maintaining those defined in the previous consensus, but insisting that early pharmacological management of prediabetes with metformin should be introduced, as should the treatment of diabetic hypertensive patients with a combination therapy of two fixed-dose antihypertensive drugs and management with statins. To increase adherence, the use of different drugs combined in a single pill (polypill) is recommended. The simplification of the therapeutic regimen is accompanied by greater control of cardiovascular risk factors, both in primary and secondary prevention, and has been shown to be cost-effective. The consensus recommends the use of the currently available polypill combining an angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor, a statin and aspirin for secondary cardiovascular prevention and in patients with a high cardiovascular risk, such as hypertension patients with DM2.

Cardiovascular outcome trials of the newer anti-diabetic medications

Concerns of elevated cardiovascular disease (CVD) risk with some anti-diabetic medications warranted phase 4 clinical trials to demonstrate CVD safety of newly marketed anti-diabetic drugs. Although initially designed to evaluate safety, some of these CVD outcome trials (CVOTs) have in fact shown CVD benefits. New medication classes, like glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) analogues and sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors, have shown reductions in the risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) including, myocardial infarction, stroke, CV death, and heart failure (HF). Perhaps more importantly, SGLT2 inhibitors demonstrated reduction in the risk of HF hospitalizations, being the first class of anti-diabetic drugs to do so. Conversely, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors did not significantly affect atherosclerotic CVD end-points and some actually increased the risk of HF hospitalizations. Further, the adverse/beneficial CVD effects of these medications may not be class specific. This review focuses on the main results of these CVOTs while highlighting the heterogeneity of CVD end-points within each class and discusses important mechanistic insights and adverse effect profiles.

Cardiovascular Protection with Anti-hyperglycemic Agents

Diabetes mellitus is a major risk factor for cardiovascular (CV) disease. Conversely, CV disease is responsible for a majority of the deaths in patients with diabetes. Many drug trials have concentrated on blood glucose (hemoglobin A_1c) reduction. This strategy, while reducing microvascular outcomes like nephropathy and neuropathy, has little or no effect on reducing macrovascular events like heart attack, stroke, and heart failure. It has been postulated that hypoglycemia may counterbalance some of the beneficial effects of anti-hyperglycemic agents, but this is not proven. Further, trial evidence for thiazolidinediones (rosiglitazone and pioglitazone) showed increased risk of heart failure and raised concerns about increased myocardial infarction. This heightened awareness of potentially harmful CV effects of otherwise effective hypoglycemic drugs resulted in regulatory mandates for CV outcome trials to ascertain the safety of newer anti-hypoglycemic agents appearing on the market. Three new classes of anti-hyperglycemic agents have been introduced in recent years. While dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors exhibited increased heart failure hospitalization in the SAVOR-TIMI 53 trial evaluating saxagliptin and in the secondary analysis of the EXAMINE trial for alogliptin, the effects of glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) analogs and sodium-glucose co-transporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitors on CV outcomes in diabetes have largely been positive. The LEADER and SUSTAIN-6 trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of the GLP-1 analogs liraglutide and semaglutide, respectively, showed a statistically significant reduction in the primary outcome (major adverse cardiac events [MACE]: CV death, myocardial infarction, and stroke) and the secondary combined outcome when compared to placebo. Results of the TECOS trial for sitagliptin were, however, neutral (no net CV benefit or harm), questioning the class effect of GLP-1 analogs. Results of the SGLT2 inhibitor trials were more uniform. While EMPA-REG (evaluating empagliflozin) and CANVAS (evaluating canagliflozin) showed a reduction in the MACE end point, dapagliflozin had a net neutral effect on MACE in DECLARE-TIMI 58. All three SGLT2 inhibitors, however, showed a significant reduction in heart failure hospitalizations. Although initially designed to keep potentially harmful anti-hyperglycemic agents off the market, the CV outcome trials have provided clinicians with a new set of anti-hyperglycemic drugs with proven CV benefit in patients with diabetes and CV disease, thus expanding the field of CV secondary prevention. There is a need to inculcate GLP-1 analogs and SGLT2 inhibitors that reduce major CV events and heart failure hospitalizations (alongside lifestyle management and metformin) in the treatment of patients with diabetes and CV disease.

Molecular and clinical roles of incretin-based drugs in patients with heart failure

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonists and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors produce some beneficial and deleterious effects in diabetic patients not mediated by their glycemic lowering effects, and there is a need for better understanding of the molecular basis of these effects. They possess antioxidant and anti-inflammatory effects with some direct vasodilatory action (animal and human trial data) that may indirectly influence heart failure (HF). Unlike GLP-1R agonists, signaling for HF adverse effects was observed with two DPP-4 inhibitors, saxagliptin and alogliptin. Accordingly, these drugs should be used with caution in heart failure patients.

Cardiovascular Protection in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Review of Clinical Trial Results Across Drug Classes

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) have a significantly higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD)-namely myocardial infarction, heart failure, and stroke. Despite clear advances in the prevention and treatment of CVD, the impact of T2DM on CVD outcome remains high and continues to escalate. Available evidence indicates that the risk of macrovascular complications increases with the severity of hyperglycemia, thus suggesting that the relation between metabolic disturbances and vascular damage is approximately linear. Although current antidiabetic drugs are highly effective for the management of hyperglycemia, most T2DM patients remain exposed to a substantial and concrete risk of CVD. Over the last decade many glucose-lowering agents have been tested for their safety and efficacy in T2DM with CVD. Noteworthy, most of these studies failed to show a significant benefit in terms of CV morbidity and mortality, despite intensive glycemic control. The recent trials Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients-Removing Excess Glucose (EMPA-REG OUTCOME); Trial to Evaluate Cardiovascular and Other Long-term Outcomes with Semaglutide in Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes (SUSTAIN-6); Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results (LEADER); and Insulin Resistance Intervention After Stroke (IRIS) have shed some light on this important clinical issue, thus showing a convincing effect of empagliflozin, liraglutide, and pioglitazone on CVD outcomes. Here we provide a critical and updated overview of the main glucose-lowering agents and their risk/benefit ratio for the prevention of CVD in patients with T2DM.

Cardiovascular Protection in the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Review of Clinical Trial Results Across Drug Classes

Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) have a significantly higher risk of developing cardiovascular disease (CVD)-namely myocardial infarction, heart failure, and stroke. Despite clear advances in the prevention and treatment of CVD, the impact of T2DM on CVD outcome remains high and continues to escalate. Available evidence indicates that the risk of macrovascular complications increases with the severity of hyperglycemia, thus suggesting that the relation between metabolic disturbances and vascular damage is approximately linear. Although current antidiabetic drugs are highly effective for the management of hyperglycemia, most T2DM patients remain exposed to a substantial and concrete risk of CVD. Over the last decade many glucose-lowering agents have been tested for their safety and efficacy in T2DM with CVD. Noteworthy, most of these studies failed to show a significant benefit in terms of CV morbidity and mortality, despite intensive glycemic control. The recent trials Empagliflozin Cardiovascular Outcome Event Trial in Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus Patients-Removing Excess Glucose (EMPA-REG OUTCOME); Trial to Evaluate Cardiovascular and Other Long-term Outcomes with Semaglutide in Subjects with Type 2 Diabetes (SUSTAIN-6); Liraglutide Effect and Action in Diabetes: Evaluation of Cardiovascular Outcome Results (LEADER); and Insulin Resistance Intervention After Stroke (IRIS) have shed some light on this important clinical issue, thus showing a convincing effect of empagliflozin, liraglutide, and pioglitazone on CVD outcomes. Here we provide a critical and updated overview of the main glucose-lowering agents and their risk/benefit ratio for the prevention of CVD in patients with T2DM.