Effects of luseogliflozin on estimated plasma volume in patients with heart failure with preserved ejection fraction

Risks and Benefits of SGLT-2 Inhibitors for Type 1 Diabetes Patients Using Automated Insulin Delivery Systems-A Literature Review

The primary treatment for autoimmune Diabetes Mellitus (Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus-T1DM) is insulin therapy. Unfortunately, a multitude of clinical cases has demonstrated that the use of insulin as a sole therapeutic intervention fails to address all issues comprehensively. Therefore, non-insulin adjunct treatment has been investigated and shown successful results in clinical trials. Various hypoglycemia-inducing drugs such as Metformin, glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, amylin analogs, and Sodium-Glucose Cotransporters 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, developed good outcomes in patients with T1DM. Currently, SGLT-2 inhibitors have remarkably improved the treatment of patients with diabetes by preventing cardiovascular events, heart failure hospitalization, and progression of renal disease. However, their pharmacological potential has not been explored enough. Thus, the substantial interest in SGLT-2 inhibitors (SGLT-2is) underlines the present review. It begins with an overview of carrier-mediated cellular glucose uptake, evidencing the insulin-independent transport system contribution to glucose homeostasis and the essential roles of Sodium-Glucose Cotransporters 1 and 2. Then, the pharmacological properties of SGLT-2is are detailed, leading to potential applications in treating T1DM patients with automated insulin delivery (AID) systems. Results from several studies demonstrated improvements in glycemic control, an increase in Time in Range (TIR), a decrease in glycemic variability, reduced daily insulin requirements without increasing hyperglycemic events, and benefits in weight management. However, these advantages are counterbalanced by increased risks, particularly concerning Diabetic Ketoacidosis (DKA). Several clinical trials reported a higher incidence of DKA when patients with T1DM received SGLT-2 inhibitors such as Sotagliflozin and Empagliflozin. On the other hand, patients with T1DM and a body mass index (BMI) of ≥27 kg/m2 treated with Dapagliflozin showed similar reduction in hyperglycemia and body weight and insignificantly increased DKA incidence compared to the overall trial population. Additional multicenter and randomized studies are required to establish safer and more effective long-term strategies based on patient selection, education, and continuous ketone body monitoring for optimal integration of SGLT-2 inhibitors into T1DM therapeutic protocol.

Critical Analysis of the Effects of SGLT2 Inhibitors on Renal Tubular Sodium, Water and Chloride Homeostasis and Their Role in Influencing Heart Failure Outcomes

SGLT2 (sodium-glucose cotransporter 2) inhibitors interfere with the reabsorption of glucose and sodium in the early proximal renal tubule, but the magnitude and duration of any ensuing natriuretic or diuretic effect are the result of an interplay between the degree of upregulation of SGLT2 and sodium-hydrogen exchanger 3, the extent to which downstream compensatory tubular mechanisms are activated, and (potentially) the volume set point in individual patients. A comprehensive review and synthesis of available studies reveals several renal response patterns with substantial variation across studies and clinical settings. However, the common observation is an absence of a large acute or chronic diuresis or natriuresis with these agents, either when given alone or combined with other diuretics. This limited response results from the fact that renal compensation to these drugs is rapid and nearly complete within a few days or weeks, preventing progressive volume losses. Nevertheless, the finding that fractional excretion of glucose and lithium (the latter being a marker of proximal sodium reabsorption) persists during long-term treatment with SGLT2 inhibitors indicates that pharmacological tolerance to the effects of these drugs at the level of the proximal tubule does not meaningfully occur. This persistent proximal tubular effect of SGLT2 inhibitors can be hypothesized to produce a durable improvement in the internal set point for volume homeostasis, which may become clinically important during times of fluid expansion. However, it is difficult to know whether a treatment-related change in the volume set point actually occurs or contributes to the effect of these drugs to reduce the risk of major heart failure events. SGLT2 inhibitors exert cardioprotective effects by a direct effect on cardiomyocytes that is independent of the presence of or binding to SGLT2 or the actions of these drugs on the proximal renal tubule. Nevertheless, changes in the volume set point mediated by SGLT2 inhibitors might potentially act cooperatively with the direct favorable molecular and cellular effects of these drugs on cardiomyocytes to mediate their benefits on the development and clinical course of heart failure.

Efficacy and safety of luseogliflozin in improving glycaemic and non-glycaemic outcomes in type-2 diabetes: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

No meta-analysis is available analysing the role of luseogliflozin in type-2 diabetes. We undertook this meta-analysis to address this knowledge-gap.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for RCTs involving diabetes patients receiving luseogliflozin in intervention arm, and placebo/active comparator in control arm. Primary outcome was to evaluate changes in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes were to evaluate alterations in glucose, blood pressure, weight, lipids, and adverse events.

RESULTS

From initially screened 151 articles, data from 10 RCTs involving 1304 patients was analysed. Individuals receiving luseogliflozin 2.5 mg/d had a significantly lower HbA1c [MD -0.76% (95% CI: 1.01 to -0.51); P < 0.01; I² = 83%], fasting glucose [MD -26.69 mg/dl (95% CI: 35.41 to -17.96); P < 0.01; I² = 80%], systolic blood pressure [MD -4.19 mm Hg (95% CI: 6.31 to -2.07); P < 0.01; I² = 0%], body-weight [MD -1.61 kg (95% CI: 3.14 to -0.08); P = 0.04; I² = 0%], triglycerides PCG [MD -12.60 mg/dl (95% CI: 24.25 to -0.95); P = 0.03; I² = 0%], uric acid [MD -0.48 mg/dl (95% CI: 0.73 to -0.23); P < 0.01; I² = 49%] and alanine aminotransferase [MD -4.11 IU/L (95% CI: 6.12 to -2.10); P < 0.01; I² = 0%] compared to placebo. Occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse-events [RR 0.93 (95% CI: 0.72-1.20); P = 0.58; I² = 0%], severe adverse-events [RR 1.19 (95% CI: 0.40-3.55); P = 0.76; I² = 0%], hypoglycaemia [RR 1.56 (95% CI: 0.85-2.85); P = 0.15; I² = 0%] and genital infections [RR 1.42 (95% CI: 0.48-4.18); P = 0.53; I² = 0%] were not increased with luseogliflozin. Cardiovascular outcome trials are lacking and are urgently required.

CONCLUSION

Luseogliflozin has good glycaemic and non-glycaemic benefits similar to other SGLT2 inhibitors and is well tolerated.

Association between Cardiovascular Disease and Liver Disease, from a Clinically Pragmatic Perspective as a Cardiologist

Cardiovascular diseases and liver diseases are closely related. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease has the same risk factors as those for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease and may also be a risk factor for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease on its own. Heart failure causes liver fibrosis, and liver fibrosis results in worsened cardiac preload and congestion. Although some previous reports regard the association between cardiovascular diseases and liver disease, the management strategy for liver disease in patients with cardiovascular diseases is not still established. This review summarized the association between cardiovascular diseases and liver disease. In patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, the degree of liver fibrosis progresses with worsening cardiovascular prognosis. In patients with heart failure, liver fibrosis could be a prognostic marker. Liver stiffness assessed with shear wave elastography, the fibrosis-4 index, and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease fibrosis score is associated with both liver fibrosis in patients with liver diseases and worse prognosis in patients with heart failure. With the current population ageing, the importance of management for cardiovascular diseases and liver disease has been increasing. However, whether management and interventions for liver disease improve the prognosis of cardiovascular diseases has not been fully understood. Future investigations are needed.