Efficacy and safety of saroglitazar in managing hypertriglyceridemia in type-2 diabetes: A meta-analysis

Deciphering the molecular pathways of saroglitazar: A dual PPAR α/γ agonist for managing metabolic NAFLD

Saroglitazar (SARO), a dual peroxisome proliferator activated receptor (PPAR)-α/γ agonist, has been used to treat metabolic diseases such as insulin resistance and diabetic dyslipidemia in patients with non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). SARO, administered at a dose of 4 mg/day, has been consistently studied in clinical trials with different time points ranging from 4 to 24 weeks with NAFLD patients. Due to its PPAR-γ agonistic action, SARO prevents adipose tissue-mediated fatty acid delivery to the liver by increasing insulin sensitivity and regulating adiponectin and leptin levels in adipose tissue. In hepatocytes, SARO induces fatty acid β-oxidation in mitochondria and transcriptionally activates lipid metabolizing genes in peroxisomes. SARO inhibits insulin resistance, thereby preventing the activation of sterol regulatory element-binding proteins -1c and carbohydrate response element binding protein in hepatocytes through its PPAR-α agonistic action. SARO treatment reduces lipotoxicity-mediated oxidative stress by activating the nuclear factor erythroid 2-related factor 2 and transcriptionally expressing the antioxidants from the antioxidant response element in the nucleus through its PPAR-γ agonistic action. SARO provides a PPAR-α/γ-mediated anti-inflammatory effect by preventing the phosphorylation of mitogen-activated protein kinases (JNK and ERK) and nuclear factor kappa B in hepatocytes. Additionally, SARO interferes with transforming growth factor-β/Smad downstream signaling, thereby reducing liver fibrosis progression through its PPAR-α/γ agonistic actions. Thus, SARO improves insulin resistance and dyslipidemia in NAFLD, reduces lipid accumulation in the liver, and thereby prevents mitochondrial toxicity, oxidative stress, inflammation, and fibrosis progression. This review summarizes the possible molecular mechanism of SARO in the NAFLD.

Glucagon-Like Peptide-1 Receptor Agonists in Post-bariatric Surgery Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

A significant number of patients face the issue of weight gain (WG) or inadequate weight loss (IWL) post-bariatric surgery for obesity. Several studies have been published evaluating the role of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP1RA) for weight loss post-bariatric surgery. However, no systematic review and meta-analysis (SRM) till date has evaluated the efficacy, safety and tolerability of GLP1RA in this clinical scenario. Hence, this SRM aimed to address this knowledge gap.

METHODS

Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), case-control, cohort and observational studies involving use of GLP1RA in the intervention arm post-bariatric surgery. Primary outcome was weight loss post at least 3 months of therapy. Secondary outcomes were evaluation of body composition parameters, total adverse events (TAEs) and severe adverse events (SAEs).

RESULTS

From initially screened 1759 articles, 8 studies (557 individuals) were analysed. Compared to placebo, patients receiving liraglutide had significantly greater weight loss after 6-month therapy [MD - 6.0 kg (95% CI, - 8.66 to - 3.33); P < 0.001; I2 = 79%]. Compared to liraglutide, semaglutide had significantly greater percent reduction in body weight after 6-month [MD - 2.57% (95% CI, - 3.91 to - 1.23); P < 0.001; I2 = 0%] and 12-month [MD - 4.15% (95% CI, - 6.96 to - 1.34); P = 0.004] therapy. In study by Murvelashvili et al. (2023), after 12-month therapy, semaglutide had significantly higher rates of achieving > 15% [OR 2.15 (95% CI, 1.07-4.33); P = 0.03; n = 207] and > 10% [OR 2.10 (95% CI, 1.19-3.71); P = 0.01; n = 207] weight loss. A significant decrease in fat mass [MD - 4.78 kg (95% CI, - 7.11 to - 2.45); P < 0.001], lean mass [MD - 3.01 kg (95% CI, - 4.80 to - 1.22); P = 0.001] and whole-body bone mineral density [MD - 0.02 kg/m2 (95% CI, - 0.04 to - 0.00); P = 0.03] was noted with liraglutide.

CONCLUSION

Current data is encouraging regarding use of GLP1RAs for managing WG or IWL post-bariatric surgery. Deterioration of bone health and muscle mass remains a concern needing further evaluation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The predefined protocol has been registered in PROSPERO having registration number of CRD42023473991.

Orforglipron, a novel non-peptide oral daily glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist as an anti-obesity medicine: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Background

Orforglipron is a novel once-daily oral non-peptide glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist with several recently published randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating its role in diabetes and obesity. No meta-analysis has analyzed the efficacy and safety of orforglipron; this meta-analysis aimed to address this knowledge gap.

Methods

A systematic search was conducted in electronic databases to identify RCTs that included individuals with obesity who were administered orforglipron and compared to either a placebo or an active comparator. The primary outcome of interest was the percent change in body weight.

Results

From 12 initially screened articles, data from three RCTs involving 774 people were analyzed with a follow-up duration of up to 36 weeks. Compared to placebo, patients receiving orforglipron 12 mg/day (mean difference (MD), MD -5.48%, 95% CI [-7.64, -3.33], p < 0.01), 24 mg/day (MD -8.51%, 95% confidence interval (CI) [-9.88, -7.14], p < 0.01), 36 mg/day (MD -8.84%, 95% CI [-11.68, -6.00], p < 0.01) and 45 mg/day (MD -8.24%, 95% CI [-12.84, -3.63], p < 0.01) had a significantly greater percent reduction in body weight. The percentage of patients being able to achieve >15% weight loss from baseline was significantly higher with orforglipron 24 mg/day [Odds ratio (OR) 21.90 (95% CI [4.06, 118.15], p = 0.0003), 36 mg/day (OR 17.43, 95% CI [3.18, 95.66], p = 0.001) and 45 mg/day (OR 23.17, 95% CI [4.37, 123.03], p = 0.0002). Total but not severe adverse events were significantly higher with all the doses of orforglipron compared to placebo, with the hazard ratios being higher with higher doses. Gastrointestinal side-effects were predominant side effects, being dose-dependent, with nausea, vomiting, constipation, and gastroesophageal reflux being the predominant ones.

Conclusion

Orforglipron at 24-45 mg/day doses is an effective weight loss medication. The efficacy versus side effect profile suggests that 24-36 mg/day is the most optimal dose for orforglipron as an anti-obesity medicine.

Safety and tolerability of sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors in children and young adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

Sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) have been evaluated in children with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM), type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM), and several other nondiabetic conditions. Potential tolerability issues have prevented the routine use of SGLT2i in children with diabetes. However, no meta-analysis to date has evaluated the safety and tolerability of SGLT2i in children. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to address this knowledge gap.

METHODS

Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs), case control, and cohort studies involving children receiving SGLT2i in the intervention-arm. Primary outcome was occurrence of treatment emergent adverse events (TAEs). Secondary outcomes were evaluation of glycemic efficacy and occurrence of severe adverse events (SAEs), hypoglycemia, ketosis, genital or urinary infections, and any other adverse events.

RESULTS

From the 27 articles initially screened, data from 4 RCTs (258 children) were analyzed. In children with T2DM, occurrence of TAEs (odds ratio [OR], 1.77; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93-3.36; P=0.08; I2=0%), SAEs (OR, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.08-2.54; P=0.37; I2=0%), ketoacidosis (OR, 0.33; 95% CI, 0.01-8.37; P=0.50), urinary tract infections (OR, 2.34; 95% CI, 0.44-12.50; P=0.32; I2=0%), and severe hypoglycemia (OR, 4.47; 95% CI, 0.21-96.40; P=0.34) were comparable among the SGLTi group and placebo. Compared to placebo, T2DM children receiving SGLTi had significantly lower glycosylated hemoglobin at 24-26 weeks (mean difference [MD], -0.79%; 95% CI, -1.33 to -0.26; P=0.004; I2=0%). In T1DM children, β-hydroxybutyrate levels were significantly higher in the SGLTi group than the placebo group (MD, 0.11 mmol/L; 95% CI, 0.05-0.17; P=0.0005; I2=53%). In T1DM, there was not a single report of an SAE, ketoacidosis, or severe hypoglycemia in either the placebo or treatment groups, but time-in-range was considerably greater in the SGLT2i group than the placebo group (68%±6% vs. 50%±13%, P<0.001).

CONCLUSION

SGLT2i use in children and young adults appears to be both safe and tolerable based on our meta-analyses and review of the literature.

Futile cycles: Emerging utility from apparent futility

Futile cycles are biological phenomena where two opposing biochemical reactions run simultaneously, resulting in a net energy loss without appreciable productivity. Such a state was presumed to be a biological aberration and thus deemed an energy-wasting "futile" cycle. However, multiple pieces of evidence suggest that biological utilities emerge from futile cycles. A few established functions of futile cycles are to control metabolic sensitivity, modulate energy homeostasis, and drive adaptive thermogenesis. Yet, the physiological regulation, implication, and pathological relevance of most futile cycles remain poorly studied. In this review, we highlight the abundance and versatility of futile cycles and propose a classification scheme. We further discuss the energetic implications of various futile cycles and their impact on basal metabolic rate, their bona fide and tentative pathophysiological implications, and putative drug interactions.

Tetrazoles and Related Heterocycles as Promising Synthetic Antidiabetic Agents

Tetrazole heterocycle is a promising scaffold in drug design, and it is incorporated into active pharmaceutical ingredients of medications of various actions: hypotensives, diuretics, antihistamines, antibiotics, analgesics, and others. This heterocyclic system is metabolically stable and easily participates in various intermolecular interactions with different biological targets through hydrogen bonding, conjugation, or van der Waals forces. In the present review, a systematic analysis of the activity of tetrazole derivatives against type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) has been performed. As it was shown, the tetrazolyl moiety is a key fragment of many antidiabetic agents with different activities, including the following: peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) agonists, protein tyrosine phosphatase 1B (PTP1B) inhibitors, aldose reductase (AR) inhibitors, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors and glucagon-like peptide 1 (GLP-1) agonists, G protein-coupled receptor (GPCRs) agonists, glycogen phosphorylases (GP) Inhibitors, α-glycosidase (AG) Inhibitors, sodium glucose co-transporter (SGLT) inhibitors, fructose-1,6-bisphosphatase (FBPase) inhibitors, IkB kinase ε (IKKε) and TANK binding kinase 1 (TBK1) inhibitors, and 11β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenase type 1 (11β-HSD1). In many cases, the tetrazole-containing leader compounds markedly exceed the activity of medications already known and used in T2DM therapy, and some of them are undergoing clinical trials. In addition, tetrazole derivatives are very often used to act on diabetes-related targets or to treat post-diabetic disorders.

Optimal use of once weekly icodec insulin in type-2 diabetes: An updated meta-analysis of phase-2 and phase-3 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Previously published meta-analysis have analysed data from 3 small phase-2 randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Since then, 5 big phase-3 RCTs have been published on use of icodec in type-2 diabetes (T2D). This updated systematic review aimed to establish the best practices and safety of icodec in T2D.

METHODS

Databases were searched for RCTs involving T2D patients receiving icodec. Primary outcome was change in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes were alterations in glycaemic parameters and adverse events.

RESULTS

Data from 8 studies (4317 patients) was analysed. Compared to other basal insulins, icodec had comparable HbA1c lowering at 16-weeks [MD-0.19 %(95%CI: 0.58-0.20); P = 0.35; I2 = 92 %], better HbA1c lowering at 26-weeks [MD-0.19 %(95%CI: 0.35-0.013); P = 0.02; I2 = 94 %] and 52-weeks [MD -0.28 %(95%CI: 0.45-0.12); P = 0.0008; I2 = 100 %]. Percentage of participants achieving HbA1c<7 % with icodec was higher at 16-weeks [OR2.37(95%CI:1.05-5.35); P = 0.04], comparable at 26-weeks [OR1.38(95%CI:0.91-2.11); P = 0.13; I2 = 80 %], and higher at 52-weeks [OR1.55(95%CI:1.30-1.85); P < 0.00001; I2 = 0 %]. Percentage of participants achieving HbA1c<7 % without level 2/3 hypoglycaemia was higher with icodec at 26-weeks [OR1.37(95%CI:1.10-1.71); P = 0.004; I2 = 28 %] and 52-weeks [OR1.48(95%CI:1.24-1.77); P < 0.001; I2 = 0 %]. At 26-weeks, injection-site reactions was higher with icodec [OR1.95(95%CI:1.06-3.56); P = 0.03; I2 = 0 %]. At 26-weeks level-1 hypoglycemia [OR1.40(95%CI:1.02-1.94); P = 0.04; I2 = 58 %], but not level-2/3 hypoglycaemia was higher with icodec. Subset analysis revealed increased occurrence of level-1 [OR 4.19 (95 % CI: 3.20-5.50); P < 0.00001] and level-2 [OR 3.97 (95 % CI: 3.04-5.18); P < 0.00001] hypoglycaemia in participants who received one-time additional 50 % icodec loading dose as compared to those who did not. At 26-weeks, weight-gain was significantly higher with icodec [MD0.61 kg(95%CI:0.38-0.84); P < 0.00001; I2 = 98 %].

CONCLUSION

Icodec insulin is well tolerated with glycaemic efficacy similar to all other available basal insulins.

Dual PPRαϒ Agonists for the Management of Dyslipidemia: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials

Saroglitazar is a novel medication for dyslipidemia, but its specific effects remain unclear. Therefore, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of saroglitazar for managing dyslipidemia. The PubMed, Scopus, and EMBASE databases were systematically searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing 2 and 4 mg of saroglitazar with placebos for treating dyslipidemia. A random-effects model calculated the pooled mean differences for continuous outcomes with 95% confidence intervals. The study included seven RCTs involving 1975 patients. Overall, 340 (31.0%) and 513 (46.8%) participants received 2 and 4 mg of saroglitazar, respectively; 242 (22.11%) received the placebo. The mean ages ranged from 40.2 to 62.6 years, and 436 (39.8%) were women. Compared to the control group, 4 mg of saroglitazar significantly decreased the triglyceride and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol levels but did not affect the high-density lipoprotein cholesterol level. Furthermore, the alanine aminotransferase level significantly decreased, the creatine level significantly increased, and body weight did not differ between the groups. Finally, 4 mg of saroglitazar, compared to 2 mg, significantly lowered the triglyceride level. Saroglitazar (4 mg) may be an effective treatment, but safety concerns remain.

Performance of Fast-Acting Aspart Insulin as Compared to Aspart Insulin in Insulin Pump for Managing Type 1 Diabetes Mellitus: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

No meta-analysis has analysed efficacy and safety of fast-acting aspart insulin (FIAsp) with insulin pump in type 1 diabetes mellitus (T1DM).

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving T1DM patients on insulin pump receiving FIAsp in intervention arm, and placebo/active comparator insulin in control arm. Primary outcome was to evaluate changes in 1- and 2-hour post-prandial glucose (1hPPG and 2hPPG). Secondary outcomes were to evaluate alterations in percentage time with blood glucose <3.9 mmol/L (hypoglycaemia), time in range (TIR) blood glucose 3.9 to 10 mmol/L, insulin requirements and adverse events.

RESULTS

Data from four RCTs involving 640 patients was analysed. FIAsp use in insulin pump was associated with significantly greater lowering of 1hPPG (mean difference [MD], -1.35 mmol/L; 95% confidence interval [CI], -1.72 to -0.98; P<0.01; I2=63%) and 2hPPG (MD, -1.19 mmol/L; 95% CI, -1.38 to -1.00; P<0.01; I2=0%) as compared to controls. TIR was comparable among groups (MD, 1.06%; 95% CI, -3.84 to 5.96; P=0.67; I2=70%). Duration of blood glucose <3.9 mmol/L was lower in FIAsp group, approaching significance (MD, -0.91%; 95% CI, -1.84 to 0.03; P=0.06; I2=0%). Total hypoglycaemic episodes (risk ratio [RR], 1.35; 95% CI, 0.55 to 3.31; P=0.51; I2=0%), severe hypoglycaemia (RR, 2.26; 95% CI, 0.77 to 6.66; P=0.14), infusion site reactions (RR, 1.35; 95% CI, 0.63 to 2.93; P=0.77; I2=0%), and treatment-emergent adverse events (RR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.80 to 1.60; P=0.50; I2=0%) were comparable.

CONCLUSION

FIAsp use in insulin pump is associated with better post-prandial glycaemic control with no increased hypoglycaemia or glycaemic variability.

Efficacy and Safety of Saroglitazar in Patients with Cardiometabolic Diseases: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The incidence of cardiometabolic diseases is increasing because of an increase in the standard of living. Currently, clinical treatment strategies for cardiometabolic diseases mainly focus on maintaining glycemic and lipid profiles. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of saroglitazar in patients with metabolic disease and provide evidence for clinical decision making.

METHODS

We searched electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL], and Google Scholar) for randomized controlled trials that examined saroglitazar for the treatment of patients with cardiometabolic disease. A total of seven randomized controlled trials were included for the qualitative and quantitative synthesis. Mean difference (MD) and risk ratio with a 95% confidence interval (CI) were applied for continuous and dichotomous data, respectively.

RESULTS

The overall effect of saroglitazar showed significant changes in triglycerides, total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein, non-high-density lipoprotein, high-density lipoprotein, very low-density lipoprotein, alkaline phosphatase, and gamma-glutamyl transferase levels [MD: - 40.50; 95% CI - 58.09 to - 22.92; p < 0.00001; I² = 78%], [MD: - 7.49; 95% CI - 11.33 to - 3.65; p = 0.0001; I² = 41%], [MD: - 3.53; 95% CI - 6.91 to - 0.15; p = 0.04; I² = 19%], [MD: - 8.08; 95% CI - 15.63 to - 0.54; p = 0.04; I² = 58%], [MD: 2.04; 95% CI 0.17 to 3.92; p = 0.03; I² = 69%], [MD: - 6.10; 95% CI - 9.40 to - 2.80; p = 0.0003; I² = 65%], [MD: - 5.89; 95% CI - 7.50 to - 4.28; p < 0.00001; I² = 98%], and [MD: - 1.64; 95% CI - 2.83 to - 0.45; p = 0.007; I² = 95%], respectively. A subgroup analysis showed favorable outcomes with sarogiltazar 4 mg. There was a statistically non-significant reduced risk of adverse event occurrence in the saroglitazar treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study results conclude that the overall effect of saroglitazar was beneficial only in terms of lipid profiles and liver function parameters, whereas saroglitazar 4 mg showed a better therapeutic role in maintaining lipid and glycemic parameters in patients with cardiometabolic disease.

Impact of semaglutide on biochemical and radiologic measures of metabolic-dysfunction associated fatty liver disease across the spectrum of glycaemia: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

No meta-analysis has analysed efficacy and safety of semaglutide in metabolic-dysfunction associated fatty-liver disease (MAFLD).

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for RCTs involving people with MAFLD and/or type-2 diabetes (T2DM) receiving semaglutide. Primary outcome was to evaluate changes in alanine aminotransferase (ALT). Secondary outcomes were to evaluate alterations in other measures of NAFLD, glycaemia, lipids and adverse-events.

RESULTS

Data from 4 RCTs (2115 patients) was analysed. A greater lowering with injectable semaglutide 0.4mg/0.5 mg once weekly was seen with regards to ALT [MD -3.89U/L (95%CI: -5.41 to -2.36); P < 0.01; I² = 0%; 2050 patients], liver stiffness (fibroscan®) [MD -3.19 kPa (95%CI: -3.26 to -3.12); P < 0.01; 162 patients], steatosis [MD -13.40 dB/m (95%CI: 20.56 to -6.24); P < 0.01; 162 patients], triglycerides [MD -21.43 mg/dl (95% CI: 41.63 to -1.23); P = 0.04; I² = 99%; 2050 patients], total cholesterol [MD -5.53 mg/dl (95% CI: -8.45 to -2.61); P < 0.01; I² = 0%; 1888 patients], LDL-cholesterol [MD -3.55 mg/dl (95% CI: -5.87 to -1.23); P < 0.01; I² = 0%; 1888 patients], percent-weight [MD -8.99% (95%CI: -14.64 to -3.34); P = 0.002; I² = 100%; 2115 patient] and HbA1c [MD -0.77% (95%CI: 1.10 to -0.45); P = 0.002; I² = 100%; 2115 patients]. Number of patients inadequate to comment on histopathologic measures of MAFLD. Occurrence of treatment-emergent adverse-events [RR 2.31 (95% CI: 0.76-7.06); P = 0.14; I² = 82%] and severe adverse events [RR 1.07 (95%CI: 0.69-1.65); P = 0.77; I² = 33%] were comparable. Adverse-events leading to trial discontinuation [RR 2.37 (95% CI: 1.33-4.22); P = 0.003; I² = 24%], diarrhea [RR 2.05 (95%CI: 1.17-3.60); P = 0.01; I² = 66%], nausea [RR 4.98 (95%CI: 3.23-7.67); P < 0.001; I² = 0%] and vomiting [RR 3.90 (95%CI: 1.75-8.68); P < 0.01; I² = 54%] were higher with semaglutide.

CONCLUSION

This meta-analysis provides reassuring data on efficacy of low dose semaglutide injections in improving ALT and certain radiologic features in MAFLD. Current conclusions are limited by small number of patients evaluated. Urgent need remains for larger studies focussing on liver biopsy.

PPAR-Targeted Therapies in the Treatment of Non-Alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease in Diabetic Patients

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPAR), ligand-activated transcription factors of the nuclear hormone receptor superfamily, have been identified as key metabolic regulators in the liver, skeletal muscle, and adipose tissue, among others. As a leading cause of liver disease worldwide, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) cause a significant burden worldwide and therapeutic strategies are needed. This review provides an overview of the evidence on PPAR-targeted treatment of NAFLD and NASH in individuals with type 2 diabetes mellitus. We considered current evidence from clinical trials and observational studies as well as the impact of treatment on comorbid metabolic conditions such as obesity, dyslipidemia, and cardiovascular disease. Future areas of research, such as possible sexually dimorphic effects of PPAR-targeted therapies, are briefly reviewed.

Saroglitazar for Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease: A Single Centre Experience in 91 Patients

Background

Saroglitazar is a novel, dual peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors-α/γ agonist and is being investigated for the treatment of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

Patients and methods

Consecutive overweight (body mass index [BMI] >23 kg/m2) patients of NAFLD, diagnosed based on controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) >248 dB/m, and attending the outpatient department of a tertiary care centre in New Delhi, were enrolled. Patients with cirrhosis (liver stiffness measurement [LSM] >13.5 kPa) and those with concomitant liver disease due to other aetiologies (alcohol, viral, etc.) were excluded. All patients received saroglitazar 4 mg/day; in addition, they were advised to reduce weight and were counselled regarding diet and exercise. At 3-month follow-up, patients were categorized into those who were able to reduce ≥5% body weight and those who could n'ot, and both these groups were compared.

Results

A total of 91 patients (median age 45 years [range 18-66 years]; 81% men) were included in the study. The median BMI was 29.3 kg/m2 (range 23.6-42.2 kg/m2). The baseline median (range) aspartate transaminase, alanine transaminase, gamma glutamyl transferase, LSM and CAP values were 40 IU/dL (range 22-144 IU/dL), 48 IU/dL (range 13-164 IU/dL), 42 IU/dL (range 4-171 IU/dL), 6.7 kPa (range 3.6-13.1 kPa), and 308 dB/m (range 249-400 dB/m). All patients tolerated saroglitazar well. At 3-month, 57 patients (63%) were able to reduce ≥5% weight, whereas in the remaining 34 patients (37%), the weight reduction was <5% from baseline. Transaminases values improved in both the groups; however, LSM and CAP values improved only in patients who reduced weight.

Conclusion

In overweight patients with NAFLD, a 3-month therapy with saroglitazar is able to improve transaminases but not LSM and CAP values unless accompanied by weight reduction of at least 5%. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to document the independent effect of saroglitazar in these patients.

Efficacy and safety of long-acting growth hormone in adult growth hormone deficiency: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND & AIMS

No meta-analysis has analysed efficacy and safety of long-acting growth hormone (GH) therapy in adult GH deficiency. We undertook this meta-analysis to address this gap in knowledge METHODS: Electronic databases were searched for RCTs involving adult GH deficiency patients receiving weekly long-acting GH as compared to daily GH/placebo controls. Primary outcome was to evaluate changes in body-composition parameters. Secondary outcomes were to evaluate alterations in glycaemia and adverse-events.

RESULTS

Data from 5 studies involving 648 patients were analysed (4 studies having daily GH as active controls; 1 study having placebo as passive controls). Over 24-34 weeks clinical use, patients receiving long-acting GH had comparable change in lean mass [MD-0.28 kg (95%CI: 0.94 - 0.38); P = 0.41; I² = 29% (low heterogeneity)] and fat mass [MD-0.10 kg (95%CI: 1.97-1.78); P = 0.92; I² = 77%(considerable heterogeneity)] as compared to daily GH injections. Long-acting GH use was associated with significantly lower visceral adipose tissue [MD-1.75 cm²(95%CI: 2.14 to -1.35); P < 0.01; I² = 0% (low heterogeneity)] and higher gynoid fat-mass [MD 0.14 kg(95%CI:0.02-0.26); P = 0.03] compared to daily GH injections. Total adverse events [Risk ratio (RR) 1.65 (95% CI: 0.83-3.29); P = 0.15; I² = 68%] and severe adverse events [RR 0.60 (95% CI: 0.30-1.19); P = 0.14; I² = 0%] were not significantly different in long-acting GH group compared to controls. Occurrence of headache, arthralgia, nasopharyngitis, new onset diabetes, anti-GH antibodies were comparable among groups. Long-acting GH users had significantly higher treatment adherence compared to controls [OR 4.80 (95%CI:3.58-6.02); P < 0.01; I² = 0%].

CONCLUSION

Long-acting GH has comparable beneficial impact on body composition parameters in adult GH deficiency, is well tolerated without any increased adverse events.

Structural Basis for Anti-non-alcoholic Fatty Liver Disease and Diabetic Dyslipidemia Drug Saroglitazar as a PPAR α/γ Dual Agonist

Peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (PPARs) are nuclear receptor-type transcription factors that consist of three subtypes (α, γ, and β/δ) with distinct functions and PPAR dual/pan agonists are expected to be the next generation of drugs for metabolic diseases. Saroglitazar is the first clinically approved PPARα/γ dual agonist for treatment of diabetic dyslipidemia and is currently in clinical trials to treat non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD); however, the structural information of its interaction with PPARα/γ remains unknown. We recently revealed the high-resolution co-crystal structure of saroglitazar and the PPARα-ligand binding domain (LBD) through X-ray crystallography, and in this study, we report the structure of saroglitazar and the PPARγ-LBD. Saroglitazar was located at the center of "Y"-shaped PPARγ-ligand-binding pocket (LBP), just as it was in the respective region of PPARα-LBP. Its carboxylic acid was attached to four amino acids (Ser289/His323/His449/Thr473), which contributes to the stabilization of Activating Function-2 helix 12, and its phenylpyrrole moiety was rotated 121.8 degrees in PPARγ-LBD from that in PPARα-LBD to interact with Phe264. PPARδ-LBD has the consensus four amino acids (Thr253/His287/His413/Tyr437) towards the carboxylic acids of its ligands, but it seems to lack sufficient space to accept saroglitazar because of the steric hindrance between the Trp228 or Arg248 residue of PPARδ-LBD and its methylthiophenyl moiety. Accordingly, in a coactivator recruitment assay, saroglitazar activated PPARα-LBD and PPARγ-LBD but not PPARδ-LBD, whereas glycine substitution of either Trp228, Arg248, or both of PPARδ-LBD conferred saroglitazar concentration-dependent activation. Our findings may be valuable in the molecular design of PPARα/γ dual or PPARα/γ/δ pan agonists.