Colesevelam HCl improves glycemic control and reduces LDL cholesterol in patients with inadequately controlled type 2 diabetes on sulfonylurea-based therapy

Combination Therapy When Metformin Is Not an Option for Type 2 Diabetes

Objective: Consensus on combination options for patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) unable to use metformin is lacking. This review summarizes data describing–non-metformin based combination therapy. Data Sources: PubMed searches (January 1990 to August 2014) were conducted with terms for newer drug therapies alone and with the term combination; filters were applied for Clinical Trial, Meta Analysis, and English language. Study Selection and Data Extraction: Results were reviewed for multicenter, randomized controlled trials of non-metformin–based combination therapy conducted in the past 5 years and specific to the US or multinational populations. Data Synthesis: Although multiple injectable and oral agents have been studied in combination with metformin for management of T2DM, data are more limited for combinations without metformin. Combinations of incretins (injectable glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or oral dipeptidyl peptidase-4 [DPP-4] inhibitors) with a sulfonylurea, thiazolidinedione, or insulin are well studied and provide greater glucose-lowering efficacy than monotherapy. Incretins are associated with a low risk of hypoglycemia when used as monotherapy; the dosage of sulfonylurea or insulin should be reduced when used in combination. Newer studies are investigating the combined use of an oral sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitor and a DPP-4 inhibitor. In a recent study, reductions in glycated hemoglobin (A1C) of 1.1% to 1.2% and reduced weight with no additive risk of hypoglycemia were observed. Conclusions: Selecting the most appropriate combination therapy for patients with T2DM requires balancing clinical benefits with the risks, such as weight gain and hypoglycemia. Treatment approaches should be individualized for vulnerable patient populations for whom metformin is not appropriate.

Effect of colesevelam HCl monotherapy on lipid particles in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Purpose

In addition to lowering hemoglobin A1C, colesevelam has been shown to improve the atherogenic lipoprotein profile of subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) when used in combination with metformin and/or sulfonylureas. A recent study evaluated the effects of colesevelam as antidiabetes monotherapy in adults with T2DM who had inadequate glycemic control (hemoglobin A1C ≥7.5 to ≤9.5 %) with diet and exercise alone; we report here the effects on lipoprotein particle subclasses.

Methods

Subjects were randomized to receive oral colesevelam 3.75 g/day (n = 176) or placebo (n = 181) for 24 weeks. Changes in lipoprotein particle subclasses were determined by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy.

Results

At Week 24 with last observation carried forward, colesevelam produced a reduction in total low-density lipoprotein (LDL) particle concentration (baseline: 1,611 nmol/L; least-squares [LS] mean treatment difference: −143 nmol/L, p < 0.0001) versus placebo; reductions were also seen in large, small, and very small LDL particle concentrations (all p < 0.05). There was also a reduction in total very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) and chylomicron particle concentration (baseline: 88 nmol/L; LS mean treatment difference: −1 nmol/L, p = 0.82) that resulted from a lowering in small VLDL particle concentration (baseline: 45 nmol/L; LS mean treatment difference: −5 nmol/L, p = 0.03). In addition, with colesevelam there was an increase in total high-density lipoprotein (HDL) particle concentration versus placebo (baseline: 31 μmol/L; LS mean treatment difference: +0.6 μmol/L, p = 0.20), due to increases in the large (baseline: 5 μmol/L; LS mean treatment difference: +0.5 μmol/L, p = 0.007) and medium (baseline: 3 μmol/L; LS mean treatment difference: +0.8 μmol/L, p = 0.02) HDL subclasses.

Conclusions

Colesevelam monotherapy in subjects with T2DM resulted in generally favorable changes in certain lipoprotein subclass profiles compared with placebo.

Pharmacologic treatment of type 2 diabetes: oral medications

OBJECTIVE

To review the oral and injectable pharmacologic treatment options for type 2 diabetes.

DATA SOURCES

A literature search was conducted using PubMed electronic database for studies published in English between 1993 and September 2014. Search terms included diabetes mellitus, type 2 diabetes, and the individual name for each antidiabetic medication reviewed. In addition, manual searches were performed for cross-references from publications. Package inserts, United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Web site, Institute for Safe Medication Practices Web site, American Diabetes Association Web site and scientific session poster presentations, and individual drug company Web pages were also reviewed.

STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION

This review focused on information elucidated over the past 10 years to assist prescribers in choosing optimal therapy based on individual patient characteristics. Studies leading to the approval of or raising safety concerns for the antidiabetic medications reviewed in this article were included.

DATA SYNTHESIS

In the past 10 years, there have been 4 novel oral antidiabetic medication classes and 9 new injectable agents and insulin products approved by the FDA for the treatment of type 2 diabetes as well as new information regarding the safety and use of several older antidiabetic medication classes. The distinctions were reviewed for each individual agent, and a comparison was completed if there was more than one agent in a particular therapeutic class. Using current information available, select investigational agents in phase III trials or those with a pending new drug application were highlighted.

CONCLUSION

There are now 9 distinct oral pharmacologic classes and a variety of insulin and noninsulin injectable medications available for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Metformin remains the first-line treatment option for most patients. When considering options for alternative or additional treatment, prescribers must weigh the benefits and risks using individual patient characteristics.

Surgery in the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

Background and Aims:

The prevalence of diabetes is increasing worldwide, and most of the cases are type 2 diabetes mellitus. The relationship between type 2 diabetes mellitus and obesity is well established, and surgical treatment is widely used for obese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The aim was to present current knowledge about the possible mechanisms responsible for glucose control after surgical procedures and to review the surgical treatment results.

Material and Methods:

Medical literature was searched for the articles presenting the impact of surgical treatment on glycemic control, long-term results, and possible mechanisms of action among obese individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Results:

Remission of type 2 diabetes mellitus after bariatric surgery depends on the definition of the remission used. Complete remission rate after surgery with the new criteria is lower than was considered before. Randomized controlled studies demonstrate that surgery is superior to best medical treatment for the patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. The recurrence of type 2 diabetes mellitus after bariatric surgery is observed in up to 40% of cases with ≥5 years of follow-up. Despite the recurrence of type 2 diabetes mellitus in this group, better glycemic control and lower risk of macrovascular complications are present. Incretin effects on glycemic control after bariatric surgery are well described, but the role of other possible mechanisms (bile acids, microbiota, intestinal gluconeogenesis) in humans is unclear.

Conclusion:

Surgery is an effective treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in obese patients. The most optimal surgical procedure for the treatment of obese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus is still to be established. More research is needed to explore the mechanisms of glycemic control after bariatric surgery.

Patient tolerance and acceptance of colesevelam hydrochloride: focus on type-2 diabetes mellitus

Diabetes mellitus (DM) is a chronic disease with a U.S. prevalence of 25.8 million, and 90-95% of all cases are type-2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Despite the known mortality and morbidity associated with T2DM, the majority of patients do not achieve their hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) goals. Nonadherence is one of the contributing factors to the lackluster attainment of treatment goals. Drug tolerability may impact medication nonadherence; therefore, strategies to improve tolerability are important. Colesevelam, a second-generation bile acid resin, was designed with greater specificity and affinity for bile acids. Its physiochemical attributes contribute to an improved tolerability profile. Colesevelam has demonstrated efficacy in lowering HbA1c in addition to low-density lipoprotein-cholesterol, although clinical outcomes data are lacking. Several mechanisms of colesevelam's effect in T2DM have been proposed, including effects on insulin sensitivity and secretion, incretin effects, changes in bile acid composition, and splanchnic sequestration of mealtime glucose. Colesevelam is associated with reductions in HbA1c in T2DM patients ranging from 0.32 to 1.1 percentage points. Colesevelam is generally well tolerated, and indirect comparisons with cholestyramine suggest that it is associated with fewer gastrointestinal symptoms. Reported adherence and persistence to colesevelam treatment in observational studies are 33.3% and 49%, respectively.

Oral antihyperglycemic treatment options for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Table 3 provides an overview of the oral antihyperglycemic drugs reviewed in this article. A 2011 meta-analysis by Bennett and colleagues found low or insufficient quality of evidence favoring an initial choice of metformin, SUs, glinides, TZDs, or (table see text) DPP-4 inhibitors (alpha-glucosidase inhibitors, bromocriptine mesylate, and SGLT2 inhibitors were not included in this meta-analysis) with regard to the outcomes measures of all-cause mortality, cardiovascular events and mortality, and incidence of microvascular disease (retinopathy, nephropathy, and neuropathy) in previously healthy individuals with newly diagnosed T2DM. Likewise, the Bennett and colleagues meta-analysis judged these drugs to be of roughly equal efficacy with regard to reduction of HbA1c (1%–1.6%) from the pretreatment baseline. The ADOPT clinical trial of 3 different and, at the time, popular, oral monotherapies for T2DM provides support for the consensus recommendation of metformin as first-line therapy. The ADOPT trial showed slightly superior HbA1c reduction for rosiglitazone compared with metformin, which was in turn superior to glyburide. However, significant adverse events, including edema, weight gain, and fractures, were more common in the rosiglitazone-treated patients. The implication of this trial is that the combination of low cost, low risk, minimal adverse effects, and efficacy of metformin justifies use of this agent as the cornerstone of oral drug treatment of T2DM. Judicious use of metformin in groups formerly thought to be at high risk for lactic acidosis (ie, those with CHF, chronic kidney disease [eGFR >30 mL/min/1.73 m2], and the elderly) may be associated with mortality benefit rather than increased risk. Secondary and tertiary add-on drug therapy should be individualized based on cost, personal preferences, and overall treatment goals, taking into account the wishes and priorities of the patient.

Achieving glycemic control in elderly patients with type 2 diabetes: a critical comparison of current options

The prevalence of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is increasing in the elderly. Because of the unique characteristics of elderly people with T2DM, therapeutic strategy and focus should be tailored to suit this population. This article reviews the guidelines and studies related to older people with T2DM worldwide. A few important themes are generalized: 1) the functional and cognitive status is critical for older people with T2DM considering their life expectancy compared to younger counterparts; 2) both severe hypoglycemia and persistent hyperglycemia are deleterious to older adults with T2DM, and both conditions should be avoided when determining therapeutic goals; 3) recently developed guidelines emphasize the avoidance of hypoglycemic episodes in older people, even in the absence of symptoms. In addition, we raise the concern of glycemic variability, and discuss the rationale for the selection of current options in managing this patient population.

Expanded colesevelam administration options with oral suspension formulation for patients with diabetes and hypercholesterolemia

INTRODUCTION

Colesevelam HCl (colesevelam) is a bile acid sequestrant initially approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 2000 as an adjunct to diet and exercise to lower elevated low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels in adults with primary lipidemia, as monotherapy, or in combination with a statin. More recently, the drug was approved for use in adults with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) to improve glycemic control. Thus, colesevelam is currently the only single-agent monotherapy approved by the FDA to lower both LDL-C and glycated hemoglobin (A1c) levels in adults with T2DM and elevated LDL-C. Moreover, the formulation options for colesevelam have also expanded since its original approval.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Medline search was conducted to provide evidence to support the efficacy and safety for the use of colesevelam tablets or oral suspension preparations when treating patients with lipidemia, T2DM, or both. No limitations were placed on publication date or any other parameter.

RESULTS

Clinical studies have shown that colesevelam is efficacious in lowering LDL-C levels, improving the lipid profile, and improving glycemic control by reducing both A1c and fasting plasma glucose levels in T2DM. Equilibrium and kinetics data show that colesevelam is equivalent in its tablet and oral suspension formulation.

CONCLUSION

Having 2 effective oral routes enhances convenience and improves compliance, both of which contribute to maximal therapeutic outcomes. These compliance benefits are due to the ease and flexibility of preparing the powder in various beverages and the pleasant taste from the inclusion of a low-calorie citrus flavoring.

Tissue-specific actions of FXR in metabolism and cancer

The nuclear Farnesoid X Receptor (FXR) is a transcription factor critically involved in metabolic homeostasis in the gut-liver axis. FXR activity is mediated by hormonal and dietary signals and driven by bile acids (BAs), which are the natural FXR ligands. Given the great physiological importance in BA homeostasis, as well as in the regulation of glucose and lipid metabolism, FXR plays a pivotal role in the pathogenesis of a wide range of disease of the liver, biliary tract and intestine, including hepatic and colorectal cancer. In the last years several studies have shown the relative FXR tissue-specific importance, highlighting synergism and additive effects in the liver and intestine. Gain- and loss-of-FXR-function mouse models have been generated in order to identify the biological processes and the molecular FXR targets. Taking advantage of the knowledge on the structure-activity relationship of BAs for FXR, semi-synthetic and synthetic molecules have been generated to obtain more selective and powerful FXR activators than BAs. This article is part of a Special Issue entitled: Linking transcription to physiology in lipodomics.

Bile acid sequestrants in type 2 diabetes: potential effects on GLP1 secretion

Bile acid sequestrants have been used for decades for the treatment of hypercholesterolaemia. Sequestering of bile acids in the intestinal lumen interrupts enterohepatic recirculation of bile acids, which initiate feedback mechanisms on the conversion of cholesterol into bile acids in the liver, thereby lowering cholesterol concentrations in the circulation. In the early 1990s, it was observed that bile acid sequestrants improved glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Subsequently, several studies confirmed the finding and recently - despite elusive mechanisms of action - bile acid sequestrants have been approved in the USA for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Nowadays, bile acids are no longer labelled as simple detergents necessary for lipid digestion and absorption, but are increasingly recognised as metabolic regulators. They are potent hormones, work as signalling molecules on nuclear receptors and G protein-coupled receptors and trigger a myriad of signalling pathways in many target organs. The most described and well-known receptors activated by bile acids are the farnesoid X receptor (nuclear receptor) and the G protein-coupled cell membrane receptor TGR5. Besides controlling bile acid metabolism, these receptors are implicated in lipid, glucose and energy metabolism. Interestingly, activation of TGR5 on enteroendocrine L cells has been suggested to affect secretion of incretin hormones, particularly glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP1 (GCG)). This review discusses the role of bile acid sequestrants in the treatment of type 2 diabetes, the possible mechanism of action and the role of bile acid-induced secretion of GLP1 via activation of TGR5.

Beyond intestinal soap--bile acids in metabolic control

Over the past decade, it has become apparent that bile acids are involved in a host of activities beyond their classic functions in bile formation and fat absorption. The identification of the farnesoid X receptor (FXR) as a nuclear receptor directly activated by bile acids and the discovery that bile acids are also ligands for the membrane-bound, G-protein coupled bile acid receptor 1 (also known as TGR5) have opened new avenues of research. Both FXR and TGR5 regulate various elements of glucose, lipid and energy metabolism. Consequently, a picture has emerged of bile acids acting as modulators of (postprandial) metabolism. Therefore, strategies that interfere with either bile acid metabolism or signalling cascades mediated by bile acids may represent novel therapeutic approaches for metabolic diseases. Synthetic modulators of FXR have been designed and tested, primarily in animal models. Furthermore, the use of bile acid sequestrants to reduce plasma cholesterol levels has unexpected benefits. For example, treatment of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) with sequestrants causes substantial reductions in plasma levels of glucose and HbA1c. This Review aims to provide an overview of the molecular mechanisms by which bile acids modulate glucose and energy metabolism, particularly focusing on the glucose-lowering actions of bile acid sequestrants in insulin resistant states and T2DM.

Bile acids, obesity, and the metabolic syndrome

Bile acids are increasingly recognized as key regulators of systemic metabolism. While bile acids have long been known to play important and direct roles in nutrient absorption, bile acids also serve as signalling molecules. Bile acid interactions with the nuclear hormone receptor farnesoid X receptor (FXR) and the membrane receptor G-protein-coupled bile acid receptor 5 (TGR5) can regulate incretin hormone and fibroblast growth factor 19 (FGF19) secretion, cholesterol metabolism, and systemic energy expenditure. Bile acid levels and distribution are altered in type 2 diabetes and increased following bariatric procedures, in parallel with reduced body weight and improved insulin sensitivity and glycaemic control. Thus, modulation of bile acid levels and signalling, using bile acid binding resins, TGR5 agonists, and FXR agonists, may serve as a potent therapeutic approach for the treatment of obesity, type 2 diabetes, and other components of the metabolic syndrome in humans.

Recent and emerging therapeutic medications in type 2 diabetes mellitus: incretin-based, Pramlintide, Colesevelam, SGLT2 Inhibitors, Tagatose, Succinobucol

Nearly 285 million people worldwide, with 10% being Americans, suffer from diabetes mellitus and its associated comorbidities. This is projected to increase by 6.5% per year, with 439 million inflicted by year 2030. Both morbidity and mortality from diabetes stem from the consequences of microvascular and macrovascular complications. Of the 285 million with diabetes, over a quarter of a million die per year from related complications, making diabetes the fifth leading cause of death in high-income countries. These startling statistics illustrate the therapeutic failure of current diabetes drugs to retard the progression of diabetes. These statistics further illustrate the continual need for further research and development of alternative drugs with novel mechanisms to slow disease progression and disease complications. The treatment algorithm updated in 2008 by American Diabetes Association and the European Association for the Study of Diabetes currently recommends the traditional medications of metformin, either as monotherapy or in combination with sulfonylurea or insulin, as the preferred choice in the tier 1 option. The algorithm only suggests addition of alternative medications such as pioglitazone and incretin-based drugs as second-line agents in the tier 2 "less well-validated" option. However, these traditional medications have not proven to delay the progressive course of diabetes as evidence of increasing need over time for multiple drug therapy to maintain sufficient glycemic control. Because current diabetes medications have limited efficacy and untoward side effects, the development of diabetes mellitus drugs with newer mechanisms of action continues. This article will review the clinical data on the newly available incretin-based drugs on the market, including glucagon-like peptide agonists and of dipeptidyl peptidase type-4 inhibitors. It will also discuss 2 unique medications: pramlintide, which is indicated for both type and type-2 diabetes, and colesevelam, which is approved by the United States Food and Drug Administration for both type-2 diabetes and hyperlipidemia. It will further review the clinical data on the novel emerging agents of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors, tagatose, and succinobucol, all currently in phase III clinical trials. This review article can serve as an aid for clinicians to identify clinical indications in which these new agents can be applied in the treatment algorithm.

Lowering low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is characterized by hyperglycemia, insulin resistance, and/or progressive loss of β-cell function. T2DM patients are at increased risk of micro- and macrovascular disease, and are often considered as representing an atherosclerotic coronary heart disease (CHD) risk equivalent. Interventions directed at glucose and lipid level control in T2DM patients may reduce micro- and macrovascular disease. The optimal T2DM agent is one that lowers glucose levels with limited risk for hypoglycemia, and with no clinical trial evidence of worsening CHD risk. Lipid-altering drugs should preferably reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein B (apo B) and have evidence that the mechanism of action reduces CHD risk. Statins reduce low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apo B and have evidence of improving CHD outcomes, and are thus first-line therapy for the treatment of hypercholesterolemia. In patients who do not achieve optimal lipid levels with statin therapy, or who are intolerant to statin therapy, add-on therapy or alternative therapies may be indicated. Additional available agents to treat hypercholesterolemic patients with T2DM include bile acid sequestrants, fibrates, niacin, and ezetimibe. This review discusses the use of these alternative agents to treat hypercholesterolemia in patients with T2DM, either as monotherapy or in combination with statin therapy.

Optimal Pharmacologic Treatment Strategies in Obesity and Type 2 Diabetes

The prevalence of obesity has increased to pandemic levels worldwide and is related to increased risk of morbidity and mortality. Metabolic comorbidities are commonly associated with obesity and include metabolic syndrome, pre-diabetes, and type 2 diabetes. Even if the prevalence of obesity remains stable until 2030, the anticipated numbers of people with diabetes will more than double as a consequence of population aging and urbanization. Weight reduction is integral in the prevention of diabetes among obese adults with pre-diabetes. Lifestyle intervention and weight reduction are also key in the management of type 2 diabetes. Weight loss is challenging for most obese patients, but for those with diabetes, it can pose an even greater challenge due to the weight gain associated with many treatment regimens. This article will review optimal treatment strategies for patients with comorbid obesity and type 2 diabetes. The role of anti-obesity agents in diabetes will also be reviewed. This literature review will provide readers with current strategies for the pharmacologic treatment of obesity and diabetes with a focus on the weight outcomes related to diabetes treatments.

Safety and efficacy of colesevelam HCl in the treatment of elderly patients

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Colesevelam significantly lowers cholesterol in patients with hypercholesterolemia, and both cholesterol and hemoglobin A1C (A1C) in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). The purpose of this post hoc analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety/tolerability of colesevelam in older (≥65 years) and younger (<65 years) adults.

METHODS

We conducted post hoc analyses of pooled clinical trial data from seven phase II and III randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, primary hyperlipidemia and T2DM clinical trials. The hyperlipidemia safety/tolerability analysis included seven studies (≥65 years, n = 154; <65 years, n = 381); the efficacy analysis utilized one study with sufficient patients in both age groups for meaningful comparison. The T2DM analyses included four studies (safety/tolerability: ≥65 years, n = 249; <65 years, n = 880) or three studies (efficacy). In the hyperlipidemia studies, patients received colesevelam 1.5-4.5 g/day or placebo, alone or with a statin, for 4 weeks to 6 months. In the T2DM studies, colesevelam 3.75 g/day or placebo was added to existing antidiabetes therapies for 16 or 26 weeks. Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), A1C, and adverse events were assessed.

RESULTS

In the hyperlipidemia analysis, colesevelam versus placebo produced similar mean reductions from baseline in LDL-C in older (-16.6 vs. +0.5 %) and younger (-13.7 vs. +0.4 %) patients. In the T2DM analysis, older and younger patients had similar reductions from baseline in A1C (treatment difference -0.59 and -0.54 %, respectively; both p < 0.001) and LDL-C (-14.7 and -15.5 %, respectively; both p < 0.001) with colesevelam. In both analyses, adverse event incidence was generally similar between subgroups. In the T2DM analysis, hypoglycemia was slightly more frequent with colesevelam versus placebo in older patients (5.8 vs. 2.3 %); no reports of hypoglycemia were considered serious adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

In primary hyperlipidemia and in T2DM, colesevelam appeared to be generally as safe, well tolerated, and efficacious in patients aged ≥65 years as in those aged <65 years.

Update on Safety Issues Related to Antihyperglycemic Therapy

The American Diabetes Association emphasizes the importance of individualized patient care in the management of diabetes. One of the important considerations in choosing an antihyperglycemic agent is its side-effect and safety profile. This article reviews the common and clinically significant side effects of each class of agents, including ways to prevent and overcome their occurrence.

Glucose-lowering effects of intestinal bile acid sequestration through enhancement of splanchnic glucose utilization

Intestinal bile acid (BA) sequestration efficiently lowers plasma glucose concentrations in type 2 diabetes (T2D) patients. Because BAs act as signaling molecules via receptors, including the G protein-coupled receptor TGR5 and the nuclear receptor FXR (farnesoid X receptor), to regulate glucose homeostasis, BA sequestration, which interrupts the entero-hepatic circulation of BAs, constitutes a plausible action mechanism of BA sequestrants. An increase of intestinal L-cell glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) secretion upon TGR5 activation is the most commonly proposed mechanism, but recent studies also argue for a direct entero-hepatic action to enhance glucose utilization. We discuss here recent findings on the mechanisms of sequestrant-mediated glucose lowering via an increase of splanchnic glucose utilization through entero-hepatic FXR signaling.

Colesevelam, Ezetimibe, and Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes From a Health Care Database

BACKGROUND

Despite the prevalence of therapies available to patients at highest coronary heart disease risk, only a minority of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) patients reach desired cholesterol treatment levels, with limited data regarding their outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To examine "real-world" effectiveness of initiating treatment with either colesevelam or ezetimibe among individuals with evidence of T2DM and hypercholesterolemia (HCh). Key outcomes included treatment patterns and cardiovascular (CV) events.

METHODS

This retrospective administrative claims-based study utilized medical, pharmacy, and enrollment data linked to laboratory results information from a large United States health plan (January 1, 2006, to March 31, 2011) and included individuals with recorded evidence of T2DM and HCh. The index date was the date of first pharmacy claim for colesevelam or ezetimibe, with cohort assignment based on index medication. Assessments included baseline characteristics, follow-up treatment patterns, and composite CV event, with propensity score matching to correct for sample selection bias.

RESULTS

In total, 4231 individuals were identified with evidence of HCh and T2DM (ezetimibe n = 3384; colesevelam n = 847). After matching, the baseline characteristics between cohorts were rendered to be similar. Mean days of persistent medication use was lower with colesevelam compared with ezetimibe (P < 0.001). Compared with ezetimibe, a smaller percentage of individuals in the colesevelam cohort experienced a follow-up composite CV event, and adjusted Cox model results suggested decreased risk (hazard ratio = 0.58; P = 0.004) of a follow-up composite CV event.

CONCLUSION

In this health care database analysis among patients with HCh and T2DM, colesevelam was associated with decreased risk of a composite CV event compared with ezetimibe, despite lower persistence.

A reappraisal of the risks and benefits of treating to target with cholesterol lowering drugs

Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) is the number one cause of death globally, and lipid modification, particularly lowering of low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDLc), is one of the cornerstones of prevention and treatment. However, even after lowering of LDLc to conventional goals, a sizeable number of patients continue to suffer cardiovascular events. More aggressive lowering of LDLc and optimization of other lipid parameters like triglycerides (TG) and high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDLc) have been proposed as two potential strategies to address this residual risk. These strategies entail use of maximal doses of highly potent HMG CoA reductase inhibitors (statins) and combination therapy with other lipid modifying agents. Though statins in general are fairly well tolerated, adverse events like myopathy are dose related. There are further risks with combination therapy. In this article, we review the adverse effects of lipid modifying agents used alone and in combination and weigh these effects against the evidence demonstrating their efficacy in reducing cardiovascular events, cardiovascular mortality, and all cause mortality. For patients with established CVD, statins are the only group of drugs that have shown consistent reductions in hard outcomes. Though more aggressive lipid lowering with high dose potent statins can reduce rates of non fatal events and need for interventions, the incremental mortality benefits remain unclear, and their use is associated with a higher rate of drug related adverse effects. Myopathy and renal events have been a significant concern with the use of high potency statin drugs, in particular simvastatin and rosuvastatin. For patients who have not reached target LDL levels or have residual lipid abnormalities on maximal doses of statins, the addition of other agents has not been shown to improve clinical outcomes and carries an increased risk of adverse events. The clinical benefits of drugs to raise HDLc remain unproven. In patients without known cardiovascular disease, there is conflicting evidence as to the benefits of aggressive pursuit of numerical lipid targets, particularly with respect to all cause mortality. Certainly, in statin intolerant patients, alternative agents with a low side effect profile are desirable. Bile acid sequestrants are an effective and safe choice for decreasing LDLc, and omega-3 fatty acids are safe agents to decrease TG. There remains an obvious need to design and carry out large scale studies to help determine which agents, when combined with statins, have the greatest benefit on cardiovascular disease with the least added risk. These studies should be designed to assess the impact on clinical outcomes rather than surrogate endpoints, and require a comprehensive assessment and reporting of safety outcomes.

Drug treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus in patients for whom metformin is contraindicated

Metformin is considered an initial drug of choice for type 2 diabetes mellitus by leading recommendations. When contraindications to its use exist or patients cannot tolerate it due to adverse effects, clinicians have a variety of other classes of agents to treat hyperglycemia associated with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Each class of agent has its own benefit and safety profile. There are numerous factors to consider when selecting another agent in lieu of metformin including, but not limited to, overall efficacy in A1c reduction, adverse effect profile, cost, and patient preference. The number of factors influencing the decision process presents challenges and often no one specific agent is ideal. Each pharmacotherapeutic class of agents alternative to metformin for the treatment of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus as initial monotherapy is reviewed.

Coordinated Actions of FXR and LXR in Metabolism: From Pathogenesis to Pharmacological Targets for Type 2 Diabetes

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is the most prevalent metabolic disease, and many people are suffering from its complications driven by hyperglycaemia and dyslipidaemia. Nuclear receptors (NRs) are ligand-inducible transcription factors that mediate changes to metabolic pathways within the body. As metabolic regulators, the farnesoid X receptor (FXR) and the liver X receptor (LXR) play key roles in the pathogenesis of T2D, which remains to be clarified in detail. Here we review the recent progress concerning the physiological and pathophysiological roles of FXRs and LXRs in the regulation of bile acid, lipid and glucose metabolism and the implications in T2D, taking into account that these two nuclear receptors are potential pharmaceutical targets for the treatment of T2D and its complications.

Bile acid sequestrants: glucose-lowering mechanisms and efficacy in type 2 diabetes

Bile acids are synthesized in the liver from cholesterol and have traditionally been recognized for their role in absorption of lipids and in cholesterol homeostasis. In recent years, however, bile acids have emerged as metabolic signaling molecules that are involved in the regulation of lipid and glucose metabolism, and possibly energy homeostasis, through activation of the bile acid receptors farnesoid X receptor (FXR) and TGR5. Bile acid sequestrants (BASs) constitute a class of drugs that bind bile acids in the intestine to form a nonabsorbable complex resulting in interruption of the enterohepatic circulation. This increases bile acid synthesis and consequently reduces serum low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. Also, BASs improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. Despite a growing understanding of the impact of BASs on glucose metabolism, the mechanisms behind their glucose-lowering effect in patients with type 2 diabetes remain unclear. This article offers a review of the mechanisms behind the glucose-lowering effect of BASs, and the efficacy of BASs in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Cardiovascular safety profile of currently available diabetic drugs

BACKGROUND

Cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of morbidity and mortality among patients with diabetes, underscoring the importance of choosing drugs that do not increase cardiovascular risk and reduce the risk of cardiovascular events. Since 2008, the US Food and Drug Administration has recommended that new drugs for type 2 diabetes undergo clinical trials to demonstrate cardiovascular safety in addition to glycemic benefit. In 2012, the European Medicines Agency issued a similar recommendation.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed, Cochrane CENTRAL, EMBASE, and CINAHL databases from inception through August 2013 and compiled and reviewed the existing data on the cardiovascular safety profiles of currently available diabetic drugs.

RESULTS

While intensive glycemic control in diabetics has been consistently shown to reduce the risk of microvascular complications, the data on macrovascular risk reduction have not been as clear, and questions have been raised about possible increases in cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.

CONCLUSION

Careful selection of drug therapy-paying particular attention to cardiovascular safety-is important in optimizing diabetic therapy.

Colesevelam for Type 2 diabetes mellitus: an abridged Cochrane review

AIM

Colesevelam, a second-generation bile acid sequestrant, may be beneficial in controlling both glycaemia and lipids simultaneously. Our goal was to evaluate the systemic effects of colesevelam on Type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHOD

The original Cochrane review was conducted using the methodology for the systematic review of interventions of the Cochrane Collaboration in RevMan 5.2. We comprehensively searched the literature in several databases up to January 2012. Two reviewing authors independently selected and extracted the data, and then evaluated the quality of the randomized controlled trials that met the inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Six randomized controlled trials were selected, which ranged from 8 to 26 weeks in duration. A total of 1450 participants were divided into two groups: those treated with colesevelam and no other anti-diabetic drug treatments/placebo, or with colesevelam added on to anti-diabetic drug treatments. The colesevelam added on to anti-diabetic agents demonstrated a statistically significant reduction in the fasting blood glucose (mean difference of -0.82 mmol/l, 95% CI -1.2 to -0.44), HbA1c (mean difference -0.5%, 95% CI -0.6 to -0.4) and LDL cholesterol (mean difference -0.34 mmol/l, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.23). There were no reported data on weight. Non-severe hypoglycaemic episodes were infrequently observed.

CONCLUSION

The limited number of studies concerning the treatment with colesevelam added to anti-diabetic agents showed significant effects on glycaemic control; however, more research on the reduction of cardiovascular risks is required. Furthermore, long-term data on the health-related quality of life and all-cause mortality also need to be investigated.

Colesevelam in the treatment of hypercholesterolemia and hyperglycemia: a retrospective analysis from an ambulatory care medical network

OBJECTIVE

To examine outcomes associated with colesevelam treatment among patients with hypercholesterolemia in real-world clinical practice.

METHODS

This analysis was conducted as a retrospective, observational cohort study in an ambulatory-care medical network in Northern California. Patients with orders for colesevelam were identified in the electronic health record between January 2004 and December 2011. The date of the first order during the study period was designated the index date. Patients were evaluated for the following eligibility criteria: a diagnosis of hypercholesterolemia, ≥18 years of age at index date, baseline laboratory values ≤3 months before the index date, ≥12 months of treatment and follow-up, and no prior orders for colesevelam ≤12 months before the index date. Patients who were pregnant during the study period were excluded. Changes in LDL-C and percentage of patients at LDL-C goal were examined. Among patients with diabetes mellitus (DM), changes in glycated hemoglobin (HBA1C) and percentage of patients at HBA1C goal were also examined.

RESULTS

Overall, 468 and 181 patients with hypercholesterolemia met the predefined inclusion criteria with treatment and follow-up through 12 and 24 months, respectively. LDL-C decreased significantly from baseline by a mean of 11.4 mg/dL and 15.7 mg/dL (P < 0.0001, for each) at 12 and 24 months, respectively, and the percentages of patients at LDL-C goal increased by 13.9% and 21.0%. Among patients with DM and a baseline HBA1C ≥8%, 113 and 39 had treatment and follow-up through 12 and 24 months, respectively. HBA1C decreased significantly by a mean of 0.72% (P = 0.0001) and 0.75% (P = 0.010) and 11.5% and 12.8% were at HBA1C goal at 12 and 24 months, respectively. This study is limited by its retrospective and observational study design.

CONCLUSIONS

Colesevelam treatment in a real-world setting was associated with improvements in LDL-C and HBA1C through 24 months of follow-up.

Therapeutic options for lowering LDL-C in type 2 diabetes: a nurse practitioner's perspective

PURPOSE

The majority of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have multiple risk factors for cardiovascular disease (CVD). Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) is a key therapeutic target to reduce CVD risk. This article reviews therapeutic strategies that nurse practitioners (NPs) may use in the management of patients with T2DM requiring lipid management.

DATA SOURCES

The evidence used in developing this review included evidence-based reviews, clinical trials, guidelines, and consensus statements. Relevant publications were identified through a search of the literature using PubMed and other search engines.

CONCLUSIONS

Lowering LDL-C levels may reduce CVD risk, but achieving goals can be challenging. Lifestyle modifications (including diet, exercise, and smoking cessation) are key components of lipid management and reduction of CVD risk. Statins can be effective to reduce lipids. However, patients may not achieve lipid goals with monotherapy or may experience intolerable adverse effects. Alternative statins or statins along with other lipid-lowering agents remain good options.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Achieving LDL-C goals requires a comprehensive treatment plan that incorporates lifestyle and pharmacologic interventions. Patient commitment in setting goals and self-management is essential. NPs can play an important role in educating patients as well as prescribing appropriate treatments.

Role of colesevelam in combination lipid-lowering therapy

Hyperlipidemia is associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular events; reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), the primary target for cholesterol-lowering therapy, lowers the risk for such events. Although bile acid sequestrants were the first class of drugs to show a mortality benefit related to LDL-C lowering, statins are now considered first-line pharmacological therapy for reducing LDL-C levels because of their potency and their remarkable record of successful outcomes studies. Nevertheless, a substantial proportion of patients do not achieve LDL-C goals with statin monotherapy. In addition, because of adverse effects (primarily myopathy), some patients may be unwilling to use or unable to tolerate statin therapy at all or may not tolerate a full therapeutic statin dose. Also, statins may increase risk of new-onset diabetes in patients at high risk for diabetes. Thus, there remains a need for other lipid-lowering drugs to be used in combination with or in place of statins. The purpose of this article is to review available data from the literature on the use of colesevelam, a second-generation bile acid sequestrant, in combination with other lipid-lowering agents. Colesevelam has been studied in combination with statins, niacin, fibrates, and ezetimibe (including some three-drug combinations). An additive reduction in LDL-C was seen with all combinations. Other observed effects of colesevelam in combination with other lipid-lowering drugs include reductions in apolipoprotein (apo) B (with statins, fibrates, ezetimibe, statin plus niacin, or statin plus ezetimibe) and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (with statins), and increases in apo A-I (with statins, ezetimibe, or statins plus niacin). Triglyceride levels remained relatively unchanged when colesevelam was combined with statins, fibrates, ezetimibe, or statin plus ezetimibe, and decreased with the triple combination of colesevelam, statin, and niacin. Colesevelam offset the negative glycemic effects of statins and niacin in subjects with insulin resistance or impaired glucose tolerance. Colesevelam was generally well tolerated when added to other lipid-lowering therapies in clinical trials, with gastrointestinal effects such as constipation being the predominant adverse events. Since colesevelam is not absorbed and works primarily in the intestine, it has a low potential for systemic metabolic drug-drug interactions with other drugs. Colesevelam has been shown to not interact with the lipid-lowering drugs lovastatin and fenofibrate; where interaction may be anticipated, separating dosing times by 4 h reduces the impact of any interaction. Available data confirms that colesevelam has additive cholesterol-lowering effects when used in combination with other lipid-lowering therapies. Furthermore, in some patient populations, the additional glucose-lowering effect of colesevelam may be beneficial in offsetting hyperglycemic effects of other lipid-lowering drugs.

Diabetes treatments and cancer risk: the importance of considering aspects of drug exposure

Investigations of the association between diabetes, diabetes treatments, and cancer risk have raised several epidemiological challenges. In particular, a patient's exposure to glucose-lowering drugs needs to be represented accurately to allow unbiased assessment of the link between the treatments and cancer risk. Many studies have used a simple binary contrast (exposure to a specific drug vs no exposure), which has potentially serious drawbacks. In addition, methods used to determine the duration and cumulative dose of drug exposure differ widely between studies. In this Review, we discuss representation of drug exposure in pharmacoepidemiological investigations of the connection between diabetes drugs and cancer risk. We identify principles that might improve future research (particularly in observational studies), and consider issues related to reverse causation and detection bias.

Review of insulin-dependent and insulin-independent agents for treating patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus and potential role for sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors

Diabetes, especially type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), continues to be a global health care problem. Although the beneficial effects of glycemic control are well established, in the United States, > 40% of adults with diabetes fail to achieve target glycated hemoglobin levels. Antidiabetic drug classes vary with respect to their mechanisms of action, glucose-lowering potential, and safety and tolerability profiles. Antidiabetic drug classes include some agents that depend on the presence or action of insulin for their therapeutic effect. As the disease state of T2DM progresses, patient pancreatic β-cell function declines, and therapies that stimulate insulin secretion or improve insulin sensitivity become less effective for this population. Therefore, the development of additional antidiabetic agents with novel mechanisms of action that can be used alone or in combination with currently approved medications may help patients achieve glycemic control. Agents that have comparable glucose-lowering capabilities but different mechanisms of action may fill treatment gaps or meet the needs of patient subpopulations. For example, inhibitors of sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT2) represent an emerging class of glucose-lowering agents. The SGLT2 inhibitors reduce glucose reabsorption by the kidney, leading to increased urinary glucose excretion and caloric loss. In clinical trials, these agents have been shown to improve glycemic control and to reduce body weight in patients with T2DM. Additionally, SGLT2 inhibitors pose a low risk for hypoglycemia and are generally well tolerated; however, their use has been associated with an increase in the frequency of genital infections and, in some studies, urinary tract infections. Sodium-glucose co-transporter 2 inhibitors may provide an alternative or an addition to existing therapies for the treatment of patients with T2DM.

Endothelial dysfunction in diabetes: pathogenesis, significance, and treatment

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) markedly increases the risk of cardiovascular disease. Endothelial dysfunction (ED), an early indicator of diabetic vascular disease, is common in T2D and independently predicts cardiovascular risk. Although the precise pathogenic mechanisms for ED in T2D remain unclear, at inception they probably involve uncoupling of both endothelial nitric oxide synthase activity and mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation, as well as the activation of vascular nicotinamide adenine dinucleotide phosphate oxidase. The major contributing factors include dyslipoproteinemia, oxidative stress, and inflammation. Therapeutic interventions are designed to target these pathophysiological factors that underlie ED. Therapeutic interventions, including lifestyle changes, antiglycemic agents and lipid-regulating therapies, aim to correct hyperglycemia and atherogenic dyslipidemia and to improve ED. However, high residual cardiovascular risk is seen in both research and clinical practice settings. Well-designed studies of endothelial function in appropriately selected volunteers afford a good opportunity to test new therapeutic interventions, paving the way for clinical trials and utilization in the care of the diabetic patient. However, based on the results from a recent clinical trial, niacin should not be added to a statin in individuals with low high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and very well controlled low-density lipoprotein cholesterol.

New and Future Medications for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

With almost 30 million individuals predicted to be diagnosed by the year 2025, type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has become one of the most prevalent diseases in the United States. Because of the progressive dysfunction of the pancreatic β-cells and increasing insulin resistance over time, the need for treatments with different mechanisms or addition of medications to a regimen is becoming commonplace. Because of this, developing new medications to treat T2DM has been the focus of a lot of recent research and drug development. Molecular substrates such as glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1), dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4), and the sodium glucose transporter-2 (SGLT2) have all become new therapeutic targets. GLP-1 agonists and DPP-4 inhibitors are 2 of the newest classes of Food and Drug Administration–approved medications for diabetes. By increasing GLP-1 to supraphysiologic levels (GLP-1 agonists) and delaying endogenous GLP-1 degradation (DPP-4 inhibitors), these drugs increase insulin secretion and decrease glucagon production. SGLT2 inhibitors, the newest antihyperglycemic class, promote glycosuria by inhibiting sodium and glucose reabsorption in the proximal tubule of the renal nephron. Other novel agents for the treatment of diabetes include the use of the dopamine agonist bromocriptine, the cholesterol medication colesevelam, and a new form of inhaled insulin.

Real-world utilization patterns and outcomes of colesevelam hcl in the ge electronic medical record

BACKGROUND

In randomized controlled trials (RCTs), colesevelam HCI, added to other anti-diabetic therapy, reduced hemoglobin A1C by approximately 0.3% to 0.4% over 16- to 26-weeks compared with an increase of approximately 0.1% to 0.2% for placebo, for a placebo-adjusted treatment effect of approximately 0.5%. Evidence on real-world effectiveness is unknown. This retrospective cohort study examined A1C changes following colesevelam HCL initiation in patients with diabetes, regardless of concomitant anti-diabetic medication use.

METHODS

2000-2011 GE Centricity electronic medical records data were used to identify patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) aged 18 or older initiating colesevelam HCL. The sample was further restricted to uncontrolled patients with database activity ≥ 395 days before and after colesevelam HCL initiation, A1C > 7% during 90 days prior to starting colesevelam HCL, without prior use of bile acid sequestrants, and with at least one A1C result between 42 to 210 days after initiation. Three overlapping time intervals were created for A1C measurement, including 16-weeks, 26-weeks, and 52-weeks following therapy initiation. The last observed A1C lab measurement during each interval was used to define change from baseline. Mean change in A1C was examined using paired t-tests. Sensitivity analyses considered only patients who remained on colesevelam HCL through each respective measurement period, as well as the effect of concomitant diabetes medications.

RESULTS

Of 1,709,393 patients in the GE database with T2DM, 1,747 met inclusion criteria. The cohort was 58% female, 38% age ≥ 65, and the majority was white. For the 16-week endpoint (N = 1,385), A1C dropped from a mean of 8.22% to 7.75% (mean change -0.47%; P < 0.0001). For the 26- and 52-week endpoints (N = 1,747), A1C dropped from a mean of 8.25% to 7.81% (mean change -0.44%; P < 0.0001) and 8.25% to 7.79% (mean change -0.46%; P < 0.0001), respectively. Sensitivity analyses showed that A1C reductions were of similar direction and magnitude for patients who remained on treatment, and for the subgroups of patients stratified by receipt of concomitant T2DM treatments.

CONCLUSIONS

The 0.44% to 0.47% A1C reduction observed in this study was similar to the reduction observed in RCTs, supporting the real-world effectiveness of colesevelam HCL in reducing A1C.

Comparative evaluation of in vitro efficacy of colesevelam hydrochloride tablets

CONTEXT

Colesevelam hydrochloride is used as an adjunct to diet and exercise to reduce elevated low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol in patients with primary hyperlipidemia as well as to improve glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes. This is likely to result in submission of abbreviated new drug applications (ANDA).

OBJECTIVE

This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of two tablet products of colesevelam hydrochloride based on the in vitro binding of bile acid sodium salts of glycocholic acid (GC), glycochenodeoxycholic acid (GCDA) and taurodeoxycholic acid (TDCA).

METHODS

Kinetic binding study was carried out with constant initial bile salt concentrations as a function of time. Equilibrium binding studies were conducted under conditions of constant incubation time and varying initial concentrations of bile acid sodium salts. The unbound concentration of bile salts was determined in the samples of these studies. Langmuir equation was utilized to calculate the binding constants k1 and k2.

RESULTS

The amount of the three bile salts bound to both the products reached equilibrium at 3 h. The similarity factor (f2) was 99.5 based on the binding profile of total bile salts to the test and reference colesevelam tablets as a function of time. The 90% confidence interval for the test to reference ratio of k2 values were 96.06-112.07 which is within the acceptance criteria of 80-120%.

CONCLUSION

It is concluded from the results that the test and reference tablets of colesevelam hydrochloride showed a similar in vitro binding profile and capacity to bile salts.

Effect of colesevelam and niacin on low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and glycemic control in subjects with dyslipidemia and impaired fasting glucose

BACKGROUND

Niacin monotherapy in patients with dyslipidemia and impaired fasting glucose (IFG) may result in hyperglycemia. Colesevelam has the unique dual approvals to lower low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) and to improve glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of combined colesevelam and niacin treatment on LDL-C-lowering and glycemic control in subjects with IFG and dyslipidemia.

METHODS

Men or women ≥ 18 years of age, with dyslipidemia (non-high-density lipoprotein cholesterol ≥ 100 mg/dL and ≤ 220 mg/dL; high-density lipoprotein cholesterol < 60 mg/dL) and fasting plasma glucose (FPG) ≥ 90 mg/dL and ≤ 145 mg/dL were randomly assigned 1:1 to colesevelam (3750 mg/d) with niacin titration (n = 70) or placebo with niacin titration (n = 70) over 12 weeks. Niacin was titrated from 500 mg/d up to a maximum of 2000 mg/d as tolerated, and all subjects took enteric-coated aspirin daily. Lipid and glycemic efficacy parameters were assessed as well as safety evaluations of adverse events, vital signs, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase, hematology, and urinalysis.

RESULTS

Adjunct colesevelam had significantly greater LDL-C-lowering effect than niacin alone (placebo); -20.67% vs -12.86%, respectively (P = .0088). Niacin-mediated increases in FPG were significantly less with adjunct colesevelam (1.8 mg/dL vs 6.7 mg/dL; P = .0046), and fewer colesevelam subjects had increases of ≥ 10 mg/dL in FPG (8 vs 17, respectively). Adjunct colesevelam resulted in significantly smaller increases in hemoglobin A1c than placebo (0.06% vs 0.18%, respectively; P = .005). Consistent with hemoglobin A1c and FPG changes, fructosamine levels significantly decreased with colesevelam treatment (-5.0 μmol/L) but increased with placebo (3.0 μmol/L; P =.0255).

CONCLUSIONS

Colesevelam as an adjunct to niacin therapy further lowers LDL-C while obviating the adverse effects of niacin on glucose metabolism in patients with dyslipidemia and IFG.

Colesevelam plus rosuvastatin 5 mg/day versus rosuvastatin 10 mg/day alone on markers of insulin resistance in patients with hypercholesterolemia and impaired fasting glucose

BACKGROUND

Statin use has been associated with adverse effects on insulin sensitivity and the development of new-onset diabetes. Colesevelam exhibits favorable effects on glucose metabolism. It is not known whether the combination of colesevelam plus low-dose statin has different effects on insulin resistance versus higher-dose statin in patients with impaired fasting glucose (IFG) and hypercholesterolemia.

METHODS

This was a prospective randomized open-label blinded end point (PROBE) study. Forty patients with hypercholesterolemia and IFG were randomized to receive rosuvastatin 5 mg/day plus colesevelam 3.75 g/day (RC, n=20) or rosuvastatin 10 mg (R, n=20) for 3 months. The primary end point was the difference in the change of homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index between the groups.

RESULTS

HOMA-IR index significantly decreased in the RC group (-32%, P=0.04 vs. baseline) but nonsignificantly increased (+15%, P=NS) in the R group. Insulin levels decreased in the RC group (-26%, P=NS) but increased in the R group (+15%, P=NS). Both changes in HOMA-IR and insulin differed significantly between groups (both p<0.05). Glucose levels decreased in the RC group (-5%, P=NS), whereas they remained unaltered in the R group. Similar reductions in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol were observed in both groups (-45%; P<0.001 vs. baseline). Triglycerides remained unchanged in the RC group but decreased in the R group (-24%, P<0.001 vs. baseline and P=0.02 vs. RC group).

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of colesevelam with rosuvastatin 5 mg/day may be associated with favorable effects on markers of insulin resistance compared with rosuvastatin 10 mg/day in patients with hypercholesterolemia and IFG. Whether this is associated with less new-onset diabetes remains unknown.

Novel therapeutic targets for nonalcoholic fatty liver disease

INTRODUCTION

Nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is a serious public health problem. It is now estimated to affect 30% of adults and about 10% of children in the U.S. Hispanics are disproportionably affected with not only higher rates of NAFLD but also more severe disease. Treatment options are currently limited.

AREAS COVERED

In this review, we will focus on a series of novel findings related to the pathobiology of liver damage in nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) that are attractive targets for development of novel therapeutic strategies for human NASH. In particular, we will discuss four different areas due to their novelty and growing importance including microparticles, the inflammasomes, gut-liver axis and dietary lipids.

EXPERT OPINION

There is an urgent need to develop novel safe and effective therapies for the growing NAFLD epidemic. The data discussed in this article provide strong rational to think out of the box when considering novel therapeutic targets for patients with NAFLD.

The effect of a bile acid sequestrant on glucose metabolism in subjects with type 2 diabetes

We designed an experiment to examine the effect of bile acid sequestration with Colesevelam on fasting and postprandial glucose metabolism in type 2 diabetes. To do so, we tested the hypothesis that Colesevelam increases the disposition index (DI), and this increase is associated with increased glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) concentrations. Thirty-eight subjects on metformin monotherapy were studied using a double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group design. Subjects were studied before and after 12 weeks of Colesevelam or placebo using a labeled triple-tracer mixed meal to measure the rate of meal appearance (Meal Ra), endogenous glucose production (EGP), and glucose disappearance (Rd). Insulin sensitivity and β-cell responsivity indices were estimated using the oral minimal model and then used to calculate DI. Therapy with Colesevelam was associated with a decrease in fasting (7.0 ± 0.2 vs. 6.6 ± 0.2 mmol/L; P = 0.004) and postprandial glucose concentrations (3,145 ± 138 vs. 2,896 ± 127 mmol/6 h; P = 0.01) in the absence of a change in insulin concentrations. Minimal model-derived indices of insulin secretion and action were unchanged. Postprandial GLP-1 concentrations were not altered by Colesevelam. Although EGP and Rd were unchanged, integrated Meal Ra was decreased by Colesevelam (5,191 ± 204 vs. 5,817 ± 204 μmol/kg/6 h; P = 0.04), suggesting increased splanchnic sequestration of meal-derived glucose.

Use and indications of cholestyramine and bile acid sequestrants

Cholestyramine is a bile acid sequestrant, like colestipol and colesevelam. These molecules are positively charged non-digestible resins that bind to bile acids in the intestine to form an insoluble complex, which is excreted in the feces. They are used mainly for the treatment of primary hypercholesterolemia and hypercholesterolemia associated with mild hypertriglyceridemia, in patients not responding to dietary treatment as well as a second line-treatment for pruritus associated with cholestatic disease, in patients with incomplete biliary obstruction. Several data indicate that modulation of bile acid homeostasis has a good clinical effect in managing diabetes mellitus and the diarrhea from bile acid malabsorption. In this review, we present the "in label" use and indication for these compounds, revisiting the other clinical applications that may benefit from the use of bile acid sequestrants in the near future.