Incretin-based therapies and acute pancreatitis risk: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonist Cases Reported to United States Poison Centers, 2017-2022

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are a class of medications for management of diabetes and obesity. The objective of this study is to characterize the epidemiology of GLP-1RA cases reported to US poison centers.

METHODS

We analyzed cases involving a GLP-1RA reported to the National Poison Data System during 2017-2022.

RESULTS

There were 5,713 single-substance exposure cases reported to US poison centers involving a GLP-1RA. Most cases were among females (71.3%) and attributable to therapeutic errors (79.9%). More than one-fifth (22.4%) of cases were evaluated in a healthcare facility, including 0.9% admitted to a critical care unit and 4.1% admitted to a non-critical care unit. Serious medical outcomes were described in 6.2% of cases, including one fatality. The rate of cases per one million US population increased from 1.16 in 2017 to 3.49 in 2021, followed by a rapid increase of 80.9% to 6.32 in 2022. Trends for rates of serious medical outcomes and admissions to a healthcare facility showed similar patterns with 129.9% and 95.8% increases, respectively, from 2021 to 2022.

CONCLUSIONS

Most GLP-1RA cases reported to US poison centers were associated with no or minimal effects and did not require referral for medical treatment; however, a notable minority of individuals experienced a serious medical outcome or healthcare facility admission. The rate of reported cases increased during the study period, including an 80.9% increase from 2021 to 2022. Opportunities exist to improve provider and patient awareness of the adverse effects of these medications.

Acute Pancreatitis in a Patient Taking Semaglutide

The Semaglutide and Cardiovascular Outcomes in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes (SUSTAIN-6) trial showed that semaglutide, a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1 RA), is effective in managing type 2 diabetes by stimulating insulin secretion and promoting weight loss. Though recent evidence suggests no increased risk of acute pancreatitis (AP) with subcutaneous semaglutide use, some studies report an increase in pancreatic inflammation with GLP-1 RAs. We present a case of AP in a patient recently started on subcutaneous semaglutide for type 2 diabetes. As GLP-1 RA use increases, clinicians should be aware of their potential to cause acute pancreatitis.

Liraglutide-Induced Pancreatitis: A Case Report and Literature Review

Liraglutide is an anti-diabetic medication used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus, obesity, and chronic weight management. It is a glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) agonist that helps reduce postprandial hyperglycemia for up to 24 h after administration. It stimulates endogenous insulin secretion according to glucose levels, and also delays gastric emptying and suppresses prandial glucagon secretion. Some of the common complications associated with liraglutide include hypoglycemia, headache, diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting. Uncommon adverse effects include pancreatitis, kidney failure, pancreatic cancer, and injection site reactions. In this article, we discussed a case of a 73-year-old male with a history of uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus on long-term insulin and liraglutide who presented with abdominal pain, subjective fevers, dry heaves, tachycardia, and mildly reduced oxygen saturation. The patient was diagnosed with pancreatitis on the basis of laboratory and imaging findings. Liraglutide was discontinued, and the patient received supportive care with significant clinical improvement. The use of GLP-1 inhibitors has been increasing not only for diabetes mellitus management, but also for its promising effect on weight management. The literature review endorses our case report findings, and also discusses other complications of liraglutide. Therefore, we recommend to be cognizant of these side-effects upon starting liraglutide.

Validation of Acute Pancreatitis Among Adults in an Integrated Healthcare System

BACKGROUND

Acute pancreatitis is a serious gastrointestinal disease that is an important target for drug safety surveillance. Little is known about the accuracy of ICD-10 codes for acute pancreatitis in the United States, or their performance in specific clinical settings. We conducted a validation study to assess the accuracy of acute pancreatitis ICD-10 diagnosis codes in inpatient, emergency department (ED), and outpatient settings.

METHODS

We reviewed electronic medical records for encounters with acute pancreatitis diagnosis codes in an integrated healthcare system from October 2015 to December 2019. Trained abstractors and physician adjudicators determined whether events met criteria for acute pancreatitis.

RESULTS

Out of 1,844 eligible events, we randomly sampled 300 for review. Across all clinical settings, 182 events met validation criteria for an overall positive predictive value (PPV) of 61% (95% confidence intervals [CI] = 55, 66). The PPV was 87% (95% CI = 79, 92%) for inpatient codes, but only 45% for ED (95% CI = 35, 54%) and outpatient (95% CI = 34, 55%) codes. ED and outpatient encounters accounted for 43% of validated events. Acute pancreatitis codes from any encounter type with lipase >3 times the upper limit of normal had a PPV of 92% (95% CI = 86, 95%) and identified 85% of validated events (95% CI = 79, 89%), while codes with lipase <3 times the upper limit of normal had a PPV of only 22% (95% CI = 16, 30%).

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that ICD-10 codes accurately identified acute pancreatitis in the inpatient setting, but not in the ED and outpatient settings. Laboratory data substantially improved algorithm performance.

Role of Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) Receptor Agonists in Hypoglycemia

A relatively recent addition to the arsenal of antidiabetic drugs used for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been the “incretin mimetics,” a group of drugs that work on the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor and enhance insulin secretion from the pancreatic β-cells in a glucose-dependent manner, more potently in hyperglycemic conditions, while suppressing glucagon secretion at the same time. Therefore, it was assumed that this class of drugs would have a lower risk of hypoglycemia than insulin secretagogues like sulphonylureas. However, GLP-1 receptor agonists have been proposed to cause hypoglycemia in healthy normoglycemic subjects implying that their action is not as glucose-dependent as once thought. Other studies concluded that they might not induce hypoglycemia and the risk is dependent on other individual factors. However, the FDA announced that the 12 GLP-1 receptor agonists currently available on the market had potential safety signs and evaluated the need for regulatory action. This review provides an overview of the studies that investigated the possible hypoglycemic effect of GLP-1 receptor agonists. In addition, the current review describes other adverse effects of GLP-1 receptor agonist treatment.

An update on the safety of insulin-GLP-1 receptor agonist combinations in type 2 diabetes mellitus

INTRODUCTION

Recent development of novel antidiabetic drugs with proven cardiovascular (CV) and renal benefit and positive effect on body weight enable to take a more complex approach toward the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). Fixed-ratio combinations of insulin-GLP-1 receptor agonist (FRC) utilize complementary mechanisms of action of their individual components and address multiple pathologies linked with T2DM at the same time.

AREAS COVERED

There are currently three FRCs on the market: iGlarLixi (glargine and lixisenatide in 2 different formulations) and IDegLira (degludec and liraglutide). We provide an up-to-date review on the rationale for the use of FRCs and their current position in the management of T2DM. We discuss the available evidence from randomized controlled trials, post hoc analyses, indirect comparative studies and real-world data on their effect on glycemic control, risk of hypoglycemia, body weight, CV safety, and their safety profile.

EXPERT OPINION

FRCs represent an efficacious option for treatment intensification from basal insulin or even the first insulin-based therapy in T2DM. Their excellent glucose-lowering efficacy is complemented with lower risk of hypoglycemia in comparison to basal insulin, neutral effect on body weight and the lower risk of gastrointestinal adverse effects in comparison to GLP-1 receptor agonists.

Distinguishing diabetes secondary to pancreatic diseases from type 2 diabetes mellitus

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Diabetes secondary to pancreatic diseases (i.e., acute pancreatitis, chronic pancreatitis, and pancreatic cancer) is increasingly studied, but remains challenging to distinguish from type 2 diabetes (T2DM). We review the clinical significance and potential biomarkers that may help differentiate these types of diabetes.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent studies have identified several complications (including nonvascular) that occur more frequently in patients with diabetes secondary to acute and chronic pancreatitis than T2DM, and biomarkers to differentiate these types of diabetes. There have been advances that may enable the enrichment of a population of adults with new onset diabetes to potentially screen for occult pancreatic cancer, but efforts are needed to identify and validate promising diagnostic biomarkers.

SUMMARY

High-quality studies are needed to more precisely understand the risk factors and natural course of diabetes secondary to pancreatic diseases. Mechanistic and interventional studies are awaited to provide insights that will distinguish diabetes secondary to pancreatic diseases and refine the management of hyperglycemia in this patient population.

Diabetes following acute pancreatitis

Diabetes represents a group of diseases involving persistent hyperglycaemia. Exocrine disorders of the pancreas are increasingly recognised to cause or precede the onset of diabetes, which in this context is referred to as pancreatogenic or type 3c diabetes. Diabetes, as a sequela of acute pancreatitis, is observed across the spectrum of severity in acute pancreatitis and can be associated with other clinical complications. The pathophysiology of acute pancreatitis-related diabetes is poorly understood, and observations suggest that it is probably multifactorial. In this Review, we discuss the epidemiology, pathophysiology, and management considerations of diabetes following acute pancreatitis, and highlight knowledge gaps in this topic.

Mildly symptomatic liraglutide-induced acute pancreatitis in a patient with type 2 diabetes mellitus: a case report

Background

Acute pancreatitis (AP) represents a serious clinical challenge as it can threaten the patient’s life if it is missed or improperly managed. Liraglutide is one of the glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RA) which represent a novel class of antidiabetic medications in the Egyptian market. Hereby, we report a case of liraglutide-induced acute pancreatitis with atypical presentation.

Case presentation

A 53-year-old Egyptian male patient with diabetes presented to the emergency department with abdominal discomfort and vomiting without significant abdominal pain. Serum lipase and amylase were elevated more than three folds the upper normal limit (NUL 300 and 110 U/L respectively); abdominal ultrasonography was inconclusive, but contrast-enhanced computed tomography was diagnostic. A diagnosis of liraglutide-induced AP was built after exclusion of other causes. After admission, his medications were modified and improved clinically after 1 week.

Conclusion

Mildly symptomatic AP in diabetic patients is a clinical challenge as it can be missed. Therefore, in certain clinical situations, AP should be suspected in patients administrating liraglutide particularly for those with autonomic neuropathy.

Safety and tolerability of once-weekly GLP-1 receptor agonists in type 2 diabetes

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE

In recent years, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) including once-weekly (QW) formulations have been incorporated into type 2 diabetes (T2D) clinical guidelines, making it essential that pharmacists and healthcare professionals (HCPs) have a clear understanding of their safety profiles. Currently, three QW GLP-1 RAs are approved and marketed in the United States for the treatment of T2D: dulaglutide, exenatide extended-release and semaglutide. This review provides pharmacists and HCPs with collated data related to potential safety and tolerability issues when patients use QW GLP-1 RAs, enabling patient education and treatment optimization.

METHODS

This is a narrative review comparing the safety and tolerability of the three QW GLP-1 RAs, using data from Phase 3 clinical trials. Extracted safety data included gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs), hypoglycaemia, injection-site reactions, pancreatitis, neoplasms, gallbladder events, and diabetic retinopathy (DR) and/or its complications (DRCs).

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A total of 30 trials were identified for inclusion; eight were head-to-head trials involving another GLP-1 RA; of these, six compared GLP-1 RAs with different dosing regimens (QW vs once-daily or twice-daily), and two were direct QW vs QW GLP-1 RA comparisons. The most commonly reported AEs were GI events (notably nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea), but there was variation between the three QW drugs. These were generally mild-to-moderate in severity and transient. Risk of hypoglycaemia, injection-site reactions, pancreatitis, neoplasms and gallbladder events was generally low across the GLP-1 RAs investigated. Overall rates of DR or DRC were low across the trials. Only in one trial (SUSTAIN 6) there were significantly more DRC events reported in patients treated with QW semaglutide (3.0%) compared with placebo (1.8%). This was likely due to the rapid improvement in glucose control in patients with pre-existing DR enrolled within that trial.

WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION

This review puts the latest clinical data from the marketed QW GLP-1 RAs into context with results from older Phase 3 trials, to enable pharmacists and HCPs to make informed treatment decisions. Each of the three QW GLP-1 RAs has their own safety profile, which should be considered when choosing the optimal treatment for patients.

Diabetes mellitus and the risk of pancreatitis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of cohort studies

BACKGROUND

Diabetes mellitus has been associated with increased risk of pancreatitis in several studies, however, not all studies have found an association. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective studies on diabetes mellitus and pancreatitis to clarify the association.

METHODS

PubMed and Embase databases were searched for studies on diabetes mellitus and pancreatitis up to 8^th of January 2020. Cohort studies that reported adjusted relative risk (RR) estimates and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for the association between diabetes diagnosis and pancreatitis were included and summary RRs (95% CIs) were calculated using a random effects model.

RESULTS

Eight cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis, and seven of these were included in the analysis of diabetes mellitus and acute pancreatitis (14124 cases, 5.7 million participants). Comparing diabetes patients with persons without diabetes the summary RRs (95% CIs) were 1.74 (95% CI: 1.33-2.29, I² = 95%) for acute pancreatitis, 1.40 (95% CI: 0.88-2.22, I² = 0%, n = 2) for chronic pancreatitis, and 1.39 (95% CI: 1.07-1.80, I² = 54%, n = 3) for pancreatitis overall. Although there was some indication of publication bias in the analysis of acute pancreatitis this appeared to be explained by one outlying study which when excluded did not substantially alter the association. The results persisted in several subgroup and sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

These results suggest that diabetes patients are at an increased risk of acute pancreatitis. Further studies are needed on diabetes and risk of chronic pancreatitis, pancreatitis overall and on gallstone-related and non-gallstone-related pancreatitis.

Efficacy and Safety of Dulaglutide Compared to Liraglutide: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

Diabetes mellitus has been always one of the most prevalent chronic diseases in the last decades. There exist a wide range of pharmacological agents for controlling this disease. However, these agents fare differently in terms of efficacy and safety. Hence, the aim of this study was to compare dulaglutide and liraglutide, two glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, in terms of efficacy and safety, drawing on a systematic review and meta-analysis. A systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out in January 2018. The articles were evaluated by two independent investigators and their quality was evaluated using Jadad scale and the Cochrane Collaboration’s tools. Finally, the eligible articles entered the study. HbA1c and FBS were considered as efficacy outcomes. Safety profile was evaluated based on several outcomes such as serious side effects and vital signs. Three articles met the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The results indicated that the mean difference (MD) of HbA1c reduction was -0.10% (95% CI, -0.20% to -0.01%, P=0.03) in the patients who received dulaglutide in comparison with the patients who received liraglutide. In addition, dulaglutide was safer than liraglutide in terms of gastrointestinal problems (RR=0.85, 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.99, P=0.04, I²=55%) and heart rate (RR=-1.14, 95% CI, -1.90 to -0.38, P=0.003, I²=0%). Once-weekly dulaglutide showed a further reduction in HbA1c compared to once-daily liraglutide. However, comparisons between these regimens indicated no significant difference between groups in either FBS reduction or safety profile. Similarly, no statistically significant difference was observed in treatment discontinuation, hypoglycemia events, and vital signs.

Risk of acute pancreatitis with incretin-based therapy: a systematic review and updated meta-analysis of cardiovascular outcomes trials

BACKGROUND

The link of acute pancreatitis (AP) with Incretin based therapies (IBTs) in type 2 diabetes has existed since United States Food and Drug Administration alert in 2010. This issue still remains unresolved due to conflicting results among studies.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We performed a systematic search of the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases until 31 July 2019, and retrieved all cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOTs) of IBTs conducted for ≥12 months that reported the pre-specified and or pre-adjudicated pancreatitis outcomes. Subsequently, we conducted a meta-analysis to study the risk of AP observed with IBT in CVOTs.

RESULTS

A meta-analysis of seven CVOTs of GLP-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) compared with placebo (N = 55,932) found no significant increase in AP (odds ratio [OR], 1.05; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.77-1.42; p = 0.77). In contrast, meta-analysis of five CVOTs comparing DPP-4 inhibitors with placebo (N = 47,714) and six CVOTs comparing DPP-4 inhibitors with placebo or active comparator (N = 53,747), found a significant increase (OR, 1.81; 95% CI, 1.21-2.70; p = 0.04 and OR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.08-2.18; p = 0.02, respectively) in AP without any significant heterogeneity.

CONCLUSIONS

This meta-analysis revealed a significant association between pancreatitis and DPP-4 inhibitors; however, no such association was observed for GLP-1RAs.

Pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer in patientes treated with Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 inhibitors: An extensive and updated meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

Observational studies and metanalyses of randomized trials on Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 inhibitors (DPP4i) reported discordant results on the risk of pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer with this class of drugs. Aim of the present meta-analysis is the assessment of the effect of DPP4i treatment on the incidence of pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer, collecting all available evidence from randomized controlled trials. Methods Data Sources: an extensive Medline, Embase and Cochrane Database search for sitagliptin or vildagliptin or omarigliptin or saxagliptin or alogliptin or trelagliptin or anagliptin or linagliptin or gemigliptin or evogliptin or teneligliptin was performed up to up to September 30th, 2019. All trials performed on type 2 diabetes, with duration ≥24 weeks, and comparing of DPP4i with placebo or active drugs were collected. The study has been registered on PROSPERO (#153344). Mantel-Haenszel odds ratio (MH-OR) with 95% Confidence Interval (95% CI) was calculated for all outcomes defined above. Results A total of 165 eligible trials were identified. DPP-4 inhibitors were not associated with an increased risk of pancreatitis (MH-OR 1.13 [0.86, 1.47]) or pancreatic cancer (MH-OR 0.86 [0.60, 1.24]) with no significant differences across individual molecules of the class.

CONCLUSIONS

available data do not support the hypothesis of an association of DPP4i treatment with pancreatitis. Present data do not suggest any association of DPP4i with pancreatic cancer, although they are insufficient to draw definitive conclusions.

Liraglutide as Adjunct to Insulin Treatment in Patients with Type 1 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A few Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) have evaluated the use of liraglutide in Type 1 Diabetes (T1D). Through the present systematic review and meta-analysis, we aim at critically appraising and summarizing those RCTs, providing precise effect estimates.

METHODS

We searched major databases and grey literature from their inception to October 2018, for RCTs with a duration ≥ 12 weeks, comparing liraglutide with placebo or any other comparator as adjunct to insulin in patients with T1D, investigating major efficacy and safety endpoints. This review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) statement.

RESULTS

We included 5 trials with 2,445 randomized participants. Liraglutide provided modest reductions in HbA1c, with liraglutide 1.8 mg producing the greatest decrease (MD = -0.24%, 95% CI -0.32 to -0.16, I2=0%). Significant weight reduction, up to 4.87 kg with liraglutide 1.8 mg was also observed (95% CI -5.31 to -4.43, I2=0%). Decrease in total daily insulin dose, primarily driven by a decrease in bolus insulin requirements, was demonstrated. Liraglutide decreased non-significantly the odds for severe hypoglycemia (OR=0.80, 95% CI 0.57-1.14, I2=0%), while it increased significantly the odds for gastrointestinal adverse events (for nausea, OR=4.70, 95% CI 3.68-6.00, I2=37%, and for vomiting, OR=2.50, 95% CI 1.54-4.72, I2=27%). A significant increase in heart rate was also demonstrated. No association with diabetic ketoacidosis or malignancies was identified.

CONCLUSION

In patients with T1D, liraglutide might prove be an adjunct to insulin, improving glycemic control, inducing body weight loss and decreasing exogenous insulin requirements and severe hypoglycemia.

Combining GLP-1 Receptor Agonists and Basal Insulin in Older Adults with Type 2 Diabetes: Focus on Lixisenatide and Insulin Glargine

Estimates suggest that there are currently 122.8 million adults 65-99 years of age living with diabetes, of whom 90-95% are diagnosed with type 2 diabetes (T2D). Over the past two decades, a greater understanding of the complex and multifactorial pathogenesis of T2D has resulted in the development and introduction of new-generation classes of glucose-lowering therapies, which are now extensively endorsed by prevailing guidelines and are increasingly being used worldwide. These newer agents may further assist in the effective pharmacological management of T2D through the provision of patient-centered care that acknowledges multimorbidity and is respectful of and responsive to individual patient preferences and barriers. Given these considerations, the therapeutic approach in older patients with T2D is complex, particularly in those who have functional dependence, frailty, dementia, or who are at end-of-life. It is currently too early to draw conclusions on the long-term use of newer glucose-lowering agents in this population, as their efficacy and safety in older adults remains largely unknown. In this review, we will discuss considerations for the use of glucose-lowering treatments in older adults, with particular focus on the use of basal insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists, and the rationale for the use of combination therapy comprising these agents. Finally, we will review clinical data from studies of the fixed-ratio combination of insulin glargine and lixisenatide in older patients with T2D. FUNDING: Sanofi US, Inc.

Pancreatitis Incidence in the Exenatide BID, Exenatide QW, and Exenatide QW Suspension Development Programs: Pooled Analysis of 35 Clinical Trials

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RAs) are widely used for treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus; however, there have been concerns that GLP-1RA treatment may be associated with an increased incidence of pancreatitis. This study aimed to evaluate the incidence of pancreatitis in a pooled population of type 2 diabetes trials from the clinical development program of the GLP-1RA exenatide as well as to describe patient-level data for all reported cases.

METHODS

The primary analysis examined pooled data among patients with type 2 diabetes from the controlled arms of 35 trials (ranging from 4 to 234 weeks' duration) in the integrated clinical databases for exenatide twice daily, once weekly, and once-weekly suspension, excluding comparator arms with other incretin-based therapies. The exposure-adjusted incidence rate (EAIR) of pancreatitis was calculated for exenatide and non-exenatide (non-incretin-based therapy or placebo) treatment groups. Patient-level data were described for all pancreatitis incidences.

RESULTS

The primary analysis included 5596 patients who received exenatide and 4462 in the non-exenatide group. The mean duration of study medication exposure for the exenatide and non-exenatide treatment groups was 57.0 and 47.9 weeks, respectively. Pancreatitis was diagnosed in 14 patients (exenatide, n = 8; non-exenatide, n = 6), of whom 13 recovered with or without sequelae. The pancreatitis EAIR was 0.1195 events per 100 patient-years [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.0516-0.2154] in the exenatide group versus 0.1276 events per 100 patient-years (95% CI 0.0468-0.2482) in the non-exenatide treatment group. The EAIR ratio for the exenatide versus non-exenatide treatment group was 0.761 (95% CI 0.231-2.510).

CONCLUSION

In this pooled analysis of 10,058 patients among studies comparing exenatide with other glucose-lowering medications or placebo, pancreatitis was rare. The EAIRs of pancreatitis were low and similar between exenatide and non-exenatide treatment groups. No evidence of an association between exenatide and pancreatitis was observed.

FUNDING

Bristol-Myers Squibb and AstraZeneca. Plain language summary available for this article.

Liraglutide use and evaluation of pancreatic outcomes in a US commercially insured population

AIMS

Both acute pancreatitis (AP) and pancreatic cancer (PC) have been areas of focus for studies of incretin drugs. This 5-year prospective cohort study aimed to quantify possible associations between liraglutide and risk of AP and PC as compared to other antidiabetic drugs (ADs).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients initiating liraglutide or other ADs who were enrolled in a US health plan (2010-2014) were included. Comparisons of AP and PC incidence rates were made between matched cohorts of liraglutide initiators and initiators of other ADs. Adjudicated AP cases and algorithm-based PC cases were identified. Propensity score-matched intention-to-treat (ITT) and time-on-drug (TOD) analyses were completed using Poisson regression. A latency analysis was performed for PC.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 405 days for AP cohorts (9995 liraglutide, 1:1 matched to all comparators) and 503 days for PC cohorts (35 163 liraglutide, 1:1 matched to all comparators). In the primary AP analysis, "current" use of liraglutide was not significantly associated with elevated risk across comparators (all comparators relative risk [RR] = 1.2; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.6-2.3). ITT results were similar where, in the primary analysis, no RRs were significantly associated with PC (all comparators RR = 0.7; 95% CI, 0.3-1.4); latency and TOD analyses did not alter findings. There was no evidence of a dose-response effect.

CONCLUSIONS

Liraglutide was not associated with an increased risk of AP or PC, although risk estimates were more variable for AP, and numbers of cases for both outcomes were limited because of the rarity of outcomes.

Comparison of biochemical parameters among DPP4 inhibitor users and other oral hypoglycaemic drug users: a cross-sectional study from Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka

BACKGROUND

Higher efficacy of incretin-based therapies for type 2 diabetes mellitus has been reported from Asia. Pancreatitis and hepatitis have also been suspected to occur due to dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor (DPP4I) treatment. The present study aims at comparing selected biochemical parameters among DPP4 inhibitor users and other oral hypoglycaemic drug users.

METHODS

Patients were recruited from the State Pharmaceutical Corporation, Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka, for a comparative cross-sectional study. Two groups were involved: "DPP4I" user group (n = 63) and "other oral hypoglycaemic" user group (n = 126). Mann-Whitney U test was performed to find a significant difference (p < 0.05) in the distributions of HbA_1C, pancreatic amylase, serum lipase, AST and ALT levels between the two groups.

RESULTS

Contradicting to previous Asian studies, distribution of HbA_1C (p = 0.569) between anti-diabetic regimes with and without DPP4 inhibitors showed no significant difference. Also, amylase (p = 0.171), AST (p = 0.238) and ALT (p = 0.347) failed to show significance. However, lipase was significantly (p = 0.012) high in the DPP4I group.

CONCLUSION

The study showed a significantly higher lipase level among the DPP4I users in comparison to other oral hypoglycaemic drug users, and possible reasons were discussed.

DPP-4 Inhibition and the Path to Clinical Proof

In the 1990s it was discovered that the enzyme dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inactivates the incretin hormones glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) and glucose-dependent insulinotropic polypeptide (GIP). DPP-4 inhibition results in raised levels of the two incretin hormones which in turn result in lowering of circulating glucose through stimulation of insulin secretion and inhibition of glucagon secretion. Since then, several small orally available molecules have been developed with DPP-4 inhibitory action. Early studies in the 1990s showed that the DPP-4 inhibitors improve glycemia in animals. Subsequent clinical studies during the 2000s showed a glucose-lowering action of DPP-4 inhibitors also in human subjects with type 2 diabetes. This action was seen when DPP-4 inhibitors were used both as monotherapy and as add-on to other therapies, i.e., metformin, sulfonylureas, tiazolidinediones or exogenous insulin. The DPP-4 inhibitors were also found to have a low risk of adverse events, including hypoglycemia. Five of the DPP-4 inhibitors (sitagliptin, vildagliptin, alogliptin, saxagliptin and linagliptin) were approved by regulatory authorities and entered the market between 2006 and 2013. DPP-4 inhibitors have thereafter undergone long-term cardiovascular outcome trials, showing non-inferiority for risk of major acute cardiovascular endpoints. Also the risk of other potential adverse events is low in these long-term studies. DPP-4 inhibitors are at present included in guidelines as a glucose-lowering concept both as monotherapy and in combination therapies. This article summarizes the development of the DPP-4 inhibition concept from its early stages in the 1990s. The article underscores that the development has its basis in scientific studies on pathophysiology of type 2 diabetes and the importance of targeting the islet dysfunction, that the development has been made possible through academic science in collaboration with the research-oriented pharmaceutical industry, and that the development of a novel concept takes time and requires focused efforts, persistence and long-term perserverance.

Type 2 diabetes and metabolic syndrome: identification of the molecular mechanisms, key signaling pathways and transcription factors aimed to reveal new therapeutical targets

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a socially important disease with only symptomatic therapy developed due to lack of knowledge about its pathogenesis and underlying mechanism. Insulin resistance (IR) is the first link of T2DM pathogenesis and results in decrease of ability of insulin to stimulate glucose uptake by target cells. Development of IR involves genetic predisposition, excessive nutrition, stress, obesity or chronic inflammation due to disruption of insulin signaling within cells. Molecular mechanisms and markers of IR are characterized rather poorly, which prevents early diagnosis and creation of preventive therapy. Euglycemic clamp test is still a golden standard for IR diagnosis in clinic. Hyperglycemia is a distant consequence of IR in which damaging effect of oxidative and carbonyl stress is realized and diagnosis of T2DM is stipulated. Molecular chaperones and small heat-shock proteins have a protective effect at the early stages of T2DM pathogenesis, preventing development of reticulum stress and apoptosis. Endothelial dysfunction is related to T2DM and its cardiovascular complications, however, it is unknown on which stage of pathogenesis these changes occur and what are their molecular inductors. Finally, transcriptional activity and adipogenic differentiation play an important role in formation of new fat depots from predecessor cells and activation of brown and beige fat demonstrating hypolipidemic and hypoglycemic properties. The aim of this study was investigation of pathophysiological mechanisms of development of IR and endothelial dysfunction, role of transcription factor Prep1 and small heat shock proteins, evaluation of novel methods of diagnostics of IR and therapeutic potential of brown and beige fat, determination of biotargets for new antidiabetic drugs.

Efficacy and Safety of Once-Weekly Semaglutide for the Treatment of Type 2 Diabetes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Background: Semaglutide, a newly once-weekly glucagon like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist, has showed a favorable effect on glycaemic control and weight reduction in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the clinical efficacy and safety of semaglutide in T2DM.

Methods: A comprehensive searching was performed for Phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which reported the efficacy and safety data of semaglutide and other therapies. The efficacy data expressed as weight mean difference (WMD) and the safety data expressed as risk ratios (RRs) were calculated by employing random-effects model. Heterogeneity was assessed through I² test, and subgroup analyses were performed by different control groups, dosage of semaglutide, and durations of follow up.

Results: 9 RCTs including 9,773 subjects met the inclusion criteria. For efficacy, compared with other therapies, semaglutide resulted in a significant reduction in glycosylated hemoglobin (weight mean difference, WMD: −0.93%, 95% CI: −1.24 to −0.62, P < 0.001), fasting plasma glucose (WMD: −1.15 mmol/L, 95% CI: −1.67 to −0.63, P < 0.001), mean self-monitoring of plasma glucose (WMD: −1.19 mmol/L, 95% CI: −1.68 to −0.70, P < 0.001), body weight (WMD: –3.47 kg, 95% CI: −3.96 to −2.98, P < 0.001), body mass index (WMD: –1.25 kg/m², 95% CI: −1.45 to −1.04, P < 0.001), systolic blood pressure (WMD: −2.55 mmHg, 95% CI: −3.22 to −1.88, P < 0.001), with the exception of negative result of diastolic blood pressure (WMD: −0.29 mmHg, 95% CI: −0.65 to 0.07, P = 0.113) and increased impact on pulse rate (WMD: −2.21, 95% CI: 1.54 to 2.88, P < 0.001). The results were consistent across the key subgroups. For safety, semaglutide did not increase the risk of any adverse events, hypoglycemia and pancreatitis, but induced a higher risk of gastrointestinal disorders when compared with other therapies (RR: 1.98, 95%CI: 1.49 to 2.62, P < 0.001).

Conclusion: Semaglutide was effective and acceptable in patients with T2DM except for a high risk of gastrointestinal disorders. The capacity of glycaemic and body weight control of semaglutide appeared more effective than other add-on therapies including other GLP-1 receptor agonists of exenatide release and dulaglutide.

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.

What have we learnt from "real world" data, observational studies and meta-analyses

The incretin therapies glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA) and dipeptidyl peptidase-IV (DPP-IV) inhibitors are now well-established as second and third-line therapies and in combination with insulin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. Over the last decade, there is accumulating evidence of their efficacy and safety from both large multicentre randomized clinical trials (RCT) and observational studies. Cardiovascular outcome trials have confirmed that several of these agents are also non-inferior to placebo with the GLP-1 RA liraglutide and semaglutide recently found to be superior in terms of major adverse cardiovascular events. Observational studies and post-marketing surveillance provide real world evidence of safety and effectiveness of these agents and have provided reassurance that signals for pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer seen in clinical trials are not of major concern in large patient populations. Well-designed real world studies complement RCTs and systematic reviews but appropriate data and methodologies, which are constantly improving, are necessary to answer appropriate clinical questions relating to the use of incretin therapies.

A role for Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 in the regulation of β-cell autophagy

Autophagy is a highly conserved intracellular recycling pathway that serves to recycle damaged organelles/proteins or superfluous nutrients during times of nutritional stress to provide energy to maintain intracellular homeostasis and sustain core metabolic functions. Under these conditions, autophagy functions as a cell survival mechanism but impairment of this pathway can lead to pro-death stimuli. Due to their role in synthesising and secreting insulin, pancreatic β-cells have a high requirement for robust degradation pathways. Recent research suggests that functional autophagy is required to maintain β-cell survival and function in response to high fat diet suggesting a pro-survival role. However, a role for autophagy has also been implicated in the pathogenesis of type 2 diabetes. Thus, the pro-survival vs pro-death role of autophagy in regulating β-cell mass requires discussion. Emerging evidence suggests that Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 (GLP-1) may exert beneficial effects on glucose homeostasis via autophagy-dependent pathways both in pancreatic β-cells and in other cell types. The aim of the current review is to: i) summarise the literature surrounding β-cell autophagy and its pro-death vs pro-survival role in regulating β-cell mass; ii) review the literature describing the impact of GLP-1 on β-cell autophagy and in other cell types; iii) discuss the potential underlying mechanisms.

A comparative safety review between GLP-1 receptor agonists and SGLT2 inhibitors for diabetes treatment

INTRODUCTION

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1RA) and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) are of particular interest in type 2 diabetes treatment strategies, due to their efficacy in reducing HbA1c with a low risk of hypoglycaemia, to their positive effects on body weight and blood pressure and in light of their effects on cardiovascular risk and on nephroprotection emerged from the most recent cardiovascular outcome trials. Since it is therefore very likely that GLP-1RA and SGLT2i use will become more and more common, it is more and more important to gather and discuss information about their safety profile.

AREAS COVERED

Adverse events and the safety concerns most often emerged in trials with GLP-1RA namely, exenatide long acting release (LAR), dulaglutide, liraglutide, semaglutide, lixisenatide or SGLT2i, namely empagliflozin, dapagliflozin, canagliflozin and SGLT2i with an attempt at comparing the safety profiles of molecules of these two classes.

EXPERT OPINION

GLP-1RA and SGLT2i, although each associated with different specific side effects, share a 'similar' safety profile and are both drugs relatively easy to handle. The potentially complementary mechanisms of action, the cardio and nephroprotective effects demonstrated by molecules of both classes, make these drugs potentially useful even in add on to each other.

Vildagliptin loaded triangular DNA nanospheres coated with eudragit for oral delivery and better glycemic control in type 2 diabetes mellitus

Diabetes mellitus type 2 is a multidimensional disease associated with poor glycemic control through compromised sensitivity of pancreatic islet α and β cells against glucose and dwindled secretion of insulin which is linked with the quantity of incretin hormones that are abridged by dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) in diseased condition. Vildagliptin (VG) inhibits DPP-4 therefore regulates the incretins that conversely maintains glycemic control. The safe reach and absorption of VG from intestine was dubious. Therefore we used Electrostatic Attraction Method to develop drug loaded DNA nanotechnology triangles coated by Eudragit (Eud) to make stable nanospheres of Vildagliptin (VG). We further analyzed the formulated nanospheres by AFM, XRD, DSC, SEM, TGA, ATR-FTIR and native PAGE. Additionally the efficacy of formulated nanospheres for drug release and glycemic control was assessed in Db/Db mouse. Our results showed that formulated nanospheres are smooth, spherical, stable and uniform in size ranging from 500 to 2000 nm with drug entrapment efficiency up to 95 ± 2% and extended drug release up to 15 ± 2 h. FTIR and DSC results confirmed the absence of VG-DNA-Eud interaction and XRD studies revealed a change in the crystalline status of the VG in nanospheres. Ex-vivo studies indicate that Eud-DNA-VG nanospheres effectively bypasses the acidic pH of the stomach and enhances glycemic control in Db/Db mouse without any risk of pancreatitis or pancreatic cancer. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study conclusively reporting that VG loaded DNA Nano-architects coated with Eudragit are stable, safe and may improve therapeutic outcomes after oral delivery.

Safety issues with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer and cholelithiasis): Data from randomized controlled trials

AIM

Glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP1-RA) have been associated with an increased risk of pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer. Prior meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials failed to show any significant increase of risk; however, those meta-analyses did not include the recently published cardiovascular outcome trials (CVOT) with GLP1-RA, which provide a substantial additional body of data. The aim of the present meta-analysis is to assess the effect of GLP1-RA on pancreatitis, pancreatic cancers and cholelithiasis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A Medline search for GLP-1 receptor agonists (exenatide, liraglutide, lixisenatide, albiglutide, dulaglutide or semaglutide) was performed, collecting all randomized clinical trials with a duration >11 weeks, enrolling patients with type 2 diabetes and comparing a GLP-1 receptor agonist with placebo or any other non-GLP-1 receptor agonist drug.

RESULTS

Of the 113 trials fulfilling inclusion criteria, 13 did not report information on pancreatitis, whereas 72 reported no events in all treatment groups. The incidence of pancreatitis and pancreatic cancer with GLP1-RA was not significantly different from that observed in comparator arms (MH-OR [95% CI] 0.93 [0.65-1.34], P = .71, and 0.94 [0.52-1.70], P = .84, respectively), whereas, a significantly increased risk of cholelithiasis (MH-OR [95% CI] 1.30 [1.01-1.68], P = .041) was detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Presently available data confirm the safety of GLP-1 receptor agonists for pancreatitis. Conversely, therapy with those drugs is associated with an increased risk of cholelithiasis, which deserves further investigation.

Glucagon-Like Peptide 1 Receptor Agonists for Type 2 Diabetes

The incretin system has become an important target in the treatment of type 2 diabetes in recent years, and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) is of particular interest for its glucose-lowering effects. The physiological response to oral ingestion of nutrients, involving the incretin system, is reduced in some patients with type 2 diabetes but may be augmented by administration of GLP-1 receptor agonists. The GLP-1 receptor agonists currently approved in the United States for the treatment of type 2 diabetes include exenatide (administered twice daily), liraglutide and lixisenatide (administered once daily), and the once-weekly agents exenatide extended-release, albiglutide, and dulaglutide. These agents have been shown to reduce A1C (by ∼0.8-1.6%), body weight (by ∼1-3 kg), blood pressure, and lipids. GLP-1 receptor agonists are associated with a low risk of hypoglycemia, and the most common adverse effects are gastrointestinal. Proper patient selection and education can assist in achieving positive treatment outcomes.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and risk of acute pancreatitis in patients with type 2 diabetes

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist (GLP-1RAs) labels warn about acute pancreatitis (AP) and impose upon doctors the obligation to inform patients about symptoms of AP. Here we systematically reviewed the risk of AP in randomized placebo-controlled trials (RCTs) investigating the effect of GLP-1RAs in type 2 diabetes. We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis of long-term (minimum 24 months), placebo-controlled GLP-1RA RCTs in which AP was a predefined adverse event and adjudicated by blinded and independent adjudicating committees. Three high-quality RCTs included a total of 9347 GLP-1RA-treated and 9353 placebo-treated patients with type 2 diabetes. Compared to placebo, treatment with GLP1-RA was not associated with increased risk of AP (Peto odds ratio 0.745 [95% CI, 0.47-1.17]). Trial Sequential Analysis suggested that additional evidence is needed. In conclusion, this review found no evidence that treatment with GLP-1RA increases the risk of AP in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Combined Analysis of Three Large Interventional Trials With Gliptins Indicates Increased Incidence of Acute Pancreatitis in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes

OBJECTIVE

Data on the possible relationship of gliptin treatment with the incidence of acute pancreatitis have been controversial. The aim of the current study was to combine data on the incidence of acute pancreatitis from three large randomized controlled trials.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Three trials designed to test cardiovascular safety and efficacy of add-on treatment with a gliptin were included in the analysis, as follows: SAVOR-TIMI 53 (saxagliptin), EXAMINE (alogliptin), and TECOS (sitagliptin). The trials included 18,238 gliptin-treated patients and 18,157 placebo-treated patients. Data were combined using a random-effects model meta-analysis.

RESULTS

The incidence of acute pancreatitis was significantly increased in the gliptin-treated patients when compared with the control groups (odds ratio 1.79 [95% CI 1.13-2.82], P = 0.013). The difference in the absolute risk was small (0.13%).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with gliptins significantly increased the risk for acute pancreatitis in a combined analysis of three large controlled randomized trials.

Medical Management of Diabesity: Do We Have Realistic Targets?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The global prevalence of "diabesity"-diabetes related to obesity-is increasing steadily over the past few decades because of the obesity epidemic. Although bariatric surgery is an effective treatment option for patients with diabesity, its limited availability, invasiveness, relatively high costs and the potential for surgical and postsurgical complications restrict its widespread use. Therefore, medical management is the only option for a majority of patients with diabesity. Diabetes control with several anti-diabetic agents, including insulin, causes weight gain with probability of worsening diabesity. Rational use of anti-diabetic medications with weight loss potential in varying combinations may help to address this key issue for long-term management of diabesity. There is no consensus on such an approach from different professional bodies like American Diabetes Association, European Association for Study of Diabetes, or International Diabetes Federation. We attempt to discuss the key issues and realistic targets for diabesity management in this paper.

RECENT FINDINGS

Rational use of anti-diabetic combinations can mitigate worsening of diabesity to some extent while managing patients. Retrospective studies showed that combination therapy with glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists and sodium glucose co-transporter 2 (SGLT-2) inhibitors, when administered along with other anti-diabetic medications, offer the best therapeutic benefit in the medical management of diabesity. Different combinations of other anti-diabetic drugs with minimum weight gain potential were also found useful. Because of insufficient evidence based on prospective randomised controlled trials (RCTs), future research should focus on evolving the appropriate rational drug combinations for the medical management of diabesity.

Pharmacology and therapeutic implications of current drugs for type 2 diabetes mellitus

Type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is a global epidemic that poses a major challenge to health-care systems. Improving metabolic control to approach normal glycaemia (where practical) greatly benefits long-term prognoses and justifies early, effective, sustained and safety-conscious intervention. Improvements in the understanding of the complex pathogenesis of T2DM have underpinned the development of glucose-lowering therapies with complementary mechanisms of action, which have expanded treatment options and facilitated individualized management strategies. Over the past decade, several new classes of glucose-lowering agents have been licensed, including glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonists, dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and sodium/glucose cotransporter 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors. These agents can be used individually or in combination with well-established treatments such as biguanides, sulfonylureas and thiazolidinediones. Although novel agents have potential advantages including low risk of hypoglycaemia and help with weight control, long-term safety has yet to be established. In this Review, we assess the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety profiles, including cardiovascular safety, of currently available therapies for management of hyperglycaemia in patients with T2DM within the context of disease pathogenesis and natural history. In addition, we briefly describe treatment algorithms for patients with T2DM and lessons from present therapies to inform the development of future therapies.

Omarigliptin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes

Omarigliptin is a new once-weekly dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitor developed for the treatment of type 2 diabetes. It is indicated to have favorable effects on glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA_1c), fasting and postmeal plasma glucose. It potently but reversibly inhibits DPP-4 enzyme, which prolongs the circulating half-life of glucagon-like peptide-1 that increases insulin secretion in a glucose-dependent manner. Benefiting from glucose-dependent insulin secretion, omarigliptin is associated with low risk of hypoglycemia. In contrast to the once-daily dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors (e.g., alogliptin, linagliptin, sitagliptin), once-weekly omarigliptin can improve patients' adherence and thus achieve optimal therapeutic efficacy. Herein, I review the pharmacological and clinical profile of omarigliptin for the treatment of type 2 diabetes based on the available clinical data.

Saxagliptin for the treatment of diabetes - a focus on safety

INTRODUCTION

The safety of agents used to treat type 2 diabetes (T2D), a chronic disease requiring life-long intervention, is of particular interest. Saxagliptin is a potent and selective DPP-4 inhibitor that has emerged as a therapeutic option for T2D.

AREAS COVERED

Its safety was assessed in a development program of 20 phase 2/3 randomized clinical trials and in SAVOR-TIMI 53 trial that evaluated the cardiovascular outcomes. In order to capture any further safety signals, mainly in the long-term, a post-marketing safety surveillance is ongoing. This paper discusses the tolerability and safety profile of the agent, including cardiovascular, renal, pancreatic, hepatic and bone adverse events.

EXPERT OPINION

Saxagliptin is a safe therapeutic option for patients with T2D, with low risk of hypoglycemia and good tolerability. It demonstrated cardiovascular safety (including in patients with pre-existing cardiovascular disease and/or HF) and safety with respect to all-cause mortality and adverse events of special interest. In SAVOR-TIMI53, saxagliptin was associated with an unexpected increased risk of HF hospitalization, mainly in the first 12 months; a mechanistic explanation for this has not been found. Further research needs to elucidate the effect of antidiabetic drugs on the heart, by including biomarkers and echocardiographic sub-studies within large outcome trials.

Glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist exenatide has no acute effect on MRI-measured exocrine pancreatic function in patients with type 2 diabetes: a randomized trial

AIMS

To investigate the effect of infusion of the glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist exenatide on exocrine pancreatic function.

METHODS

This was a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, crossover study in 12 male patients with type 2 diabetes, treated with oral glucose-lowering agents. On two separate occasions, exenatide or placebo (saline 0.9%) were administered intravenously, in randomized order. Exocrine pancreatic function was measured using secretin-enhanced magnetic resonance cholangiopancreatography. The primary outcome measure was defined as secretin-stimulated pancreatic excretion volume. Secondary outcome measures were maximum secretion speed and the time to reach this maximum. In addition, changes in pancreatic duct (PD) diameter were measured.

RESULTS

Exenatide did not change secretin-stimulated pancreatic excretion volume, as compared with placebo (mean ± standard error of the mean 142.2 ± 15.6 ml vs 142.6 ± 8.5 ml, respectively; p = 0.590). Also, exenatide did not change the maximum secretion speed (33.1 ± 1.4 vs 36.9 ± 2.2; p = 0.221), nor the time to reach this maximum (both 4 min 30 s). No differences in PD diameter were observed between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Infusion of exenatide did not directly influence MRI-measured exocrine pancreatic excretion in patients with type 2 diabetes. Although long-term studies are warranted, these findings suggest that potential adverse pancreatic effects of GLP-1 receptor agonists are not mediated by changes in exocrine pancreatic secretion.

Pharmacokinetic, pharmacodynamic and clinical evaluation of saxagliptin in type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

Dipeptide peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors such as saxagliptin are established and efficacious oral therapies in the management of type 2 diabetes. These agents have the potential to confer significant benefits in glycemic control without the risk of weight gain and hypoglycemia, which may be associated with other medications used to treat type 2 diabetes.

AREAS COVERED

This review examines the pharmacokinetics, efficacy and tolerability of saxagliptin for the management of type 2 diabetes.

EXPERT OPINION

Saxagliptin is routinely used in the management of type 2 diabetes as monotherapy, and in combination with other oral agents and insulin. Robust clinical trials have shown consistent improvements in glycated hemoglobin, fasting and postprandial glucose levels, with few adverse effects. The agent is well tolerated with low rates of hypoglycemia in the absence of insulin or sulphonylurea therapy.

Alogliptin + metformin combination for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus

The impact of type 2 diabetes mellitus continues to grow worldwide, with appropriate glycemic management being a cornerstone of treatment to minimize the risk of macrovascular and microvascular complications. While metformin is widely utilized as a first-line agent for patients without a contraindication to therapy, treatment guidelines recommend a variety of options for second-line dual therapy with patient-specific choices depending on assessment of hypoglycemia risk, weight effects, tolerability, cost and other considerations. Incretin-based therapies, inclusive of dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors, have become a widely utilized group of medications due to their potentially advantageous effects, such as a low risk of hypoglycemia and overall favorable tolerability profile. Accordingly, fixed-dose combination products containing metformin in combination with a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor have been developed by several manufacturers. This article summarizes the current evidence for the safety and efficacy of alogliptin and metformin used in combination for the treatment of type 2 diabetes mellitus.

The GLP-1 agonist, liraglutide, as a pharmacotherapy for obesity

There is a global obesity epidemic that will continue to be a financial burden on healthcare systems around the world. Tackling obesity through diet and exercise should always be the first intervention, but this has not proved to be effective for a large number of patients. Pharmacotherapeutic options have been limited and many previously available drugs have been withdrawn due to safety concerns. Currently, only bariatric surgery has the capability to induce both substantial and durable weight loss. This article briefly reviews the history of pharmacotherapy for obesity before focusing on the clinical trial evidence for the use of the GLP-1 agonist liraglutide as a weight loss agent and comparing its efficacy with other emerging drug therapies for obesity.

Efficacy and safety of once-weekly glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists for the management of type 2 diabetes: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

To assess the efficacy and safety of recently approved once-weekly glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) in patients with type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials comparing any GLP-1 RA licensed for once-weekly dosing (albiglutide, dulaglutide or exenatide extended release) with placebo or other antidiabetic agents. We searched Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Library and grey literature for articles published up to December 2014 and extracted data in duplicate.

RESULTS

In our systematic review we included 33 trials with a total of 16 003 participants. Compared with placebo the change in glycated haemoglobin (HbA1c) concentration was -0.66% [six studies; 95% confidence interval (CI) -1.14 to -0.19; I(2)  = 88%] with albiglutide, and -1.18% (seven studies; 95% CI -1.34 to -1.02; I(2)  = 65%) with dulaglutide. Based on data from placebo-controlled trials, we did not detect statistically significant weight-sparing benefits for albiglutide or dulaglutide. Compared with other antidiabetic agents, once-weekly GLP-1 RAs outperformed sitagliptin, daily exenatide and insulin glargine in terms of HbA1c-lowering (mean differences -0.40%; 95% CI -0.66 to -0.14; I(2)  = 85%, -0.44%; 95% CI -0.58 to -0.29; I(2)  = 40% and -0.28; 95% CI -0.45 to -0.10; I(2)  = 81%, respectively). The main adverse effects of treatment included gastrointestinal and injection site reactions.

CONCLUSIONS

Given their dosing scheme and overall efficacy and safety profile, once-weekly GLP-1 RAs are a convenient therapeutic option for use as add-on to metformin.

Liraglutide: a review of its use in adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Subcutaneous liraglutide (Victoza(®)), a glucagon-like peptide 1 receptor agonist, is approved for the treatment of adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Once-daily liraglutide, as monotherapy or add-on therapy to other antidiabetic agents (including basal insulin), was an effective and generally well tolerated treatment in adult patients with type 2 diabetes in several well-designed phase III trials and in the real world clinical practice setting. In addition to improving glycaemic control, liraglutide had beneficial effects on bodyweight, systolic blood pressure and surrogate measures of β-cell function in clinical trials, with these benefits maintained during long-term treatment (≤2 years). Liraglutide has a convenient once-daily administration regimen, a low potential for drug-drug interactions and low propensity to cause hypoglycaemia. Thus, liraglutide continues to be a useful option for the management of type 2 diabetes. This article reviews the therapeutic use of liraglutide in adult patients with type 2 diabetes and summarizes its pharmacological properties.

Incretin manipulation in diabetes management

Incretin-based therapies have revolutionized the medical management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) in the 21^st century. Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) suppresses appetite and gastric motility, and has trophic effects on pancreas, cardio-protective and renal effects. GLP-1 analogues and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors form the incretin-based therapies. Significant reduction of hemoglobin A1c when used as monotherapy and in combination regimens, favorable effects on body weight, and low risk of hypoglycemia are their unique therapeutic benefits. Their safety and tolerability are comparable to other anti-diabetic medications. Concern about elevated risk of pancreatitis has been discarded by two recent meta-analyses. This article discusses the therapeutic manipulation of incretin system for the management of T2DM.

Alogliptin benzoate for management of type 2 diabetes

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, a new class of oral hypoglycemic agents, augment glucose-dependent insulin secretion and suppress glucagon levels through enhancement of the action of endogenous incretin by inhibiting DPP-4, an incretin-degrading enzyme. DPP-4 inhibitors are generally well tolerated because of their low risk of hypoglycemia and other adverse events. Moreover, with their potential to improve beta cell function, a core defect of type 2 diabetes, DPP-4 inhibitors are becoming a major component of treatment of type 2 diabetes. Alogliptin benzoate is a newly developed, highly selective DPP-4 inhibitor which has been approved in many countries throughout the world. Once-daily administration of alogliptin as either monotherapy or combination therapy with other oral antidiabetic drugs or insulin has a potent glucose-lowering effect which is similar to that of other DPP-4 inhibitors, with a low risk of hypoglycemia and weight gain. The cardiovascular safety of this drug has been confirmed in a recent randomized controlled trial. This review summarizes the efficacy and safety of alogliptin, and discusses the role of DPP-4 inhibitors in the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

Adverse Effects of GLP-1 Receptor Agonists

Glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonists are a class of injective anti-diabetic drugs that improve glycemic control and many other atherosclerosis-related parameters in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D). However, the use of this relatively new class of drugs may be associated with certain adverse effects. Concerns have been expressed regarding the effects of these drugs on pancreatic and thyroid tissue, since animal studies and analyses of drug databases indicate an association of GLP-1 receptor agonists with pancreatitis, pancreatic cancer, and thyroid cancer. However, several meta-analyses failed to confirm a cause-effect relation between GLP-1 receptor agonists and the development of these adverse effects. One benefit of GLP-1 receptor agonists is that they do not cause hypoglycemia when combined with metformin or thiazolidinediones, but the dose of concomitant sulphonylurea or insulin may have to be decreased to reduce the risk of hypoglycemic episodes. On the other hand, several case reports have linked the use of these drugs, mainly exenatide, with the occurrence of acute kidney injury, primarily through hemodynamic derangement due to nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. The most common symptoms associated with the use of GLP-1 receptor agonists are gastrointestinal symptoms, mainly nausea. Other common adverse effects include injection site reactions, headache, and nasopharyngitis, but these effects do not usually result in discontinuation of the drug. Current evidence shows that GLP-1 receptor agonists have no negative effects on the cardiovascular risk of patients with T2D. Thus, GLP-1 receptor agonists appear to have a favorable safety profile, but ongoing trials will further assess their cardiovascular effects. The aim of this review is to analyze critically the available data regarding adverse events of GLP-1 receptor agonists in different anatomic systems published in Pubmed and Scopus. Whenever possible, certain differences between GLP-1 receptor agonists are described. The review also provides the reader with structured data that compare the rates of the most common adverse effects for each of the various GLP-1 receptor agonists.