Effects of Rosuvastatin and Colestimide on Metabolic Parameters and Urinary Monocyte Chemoattractant Protein-1 in Type 2 Diabetic Patients with Hyperlipidemia:

Structural Comparison of Sulfonamide-Based Derivatives That Can Improve Anti-Coagulation Properties of Metformin

Due to its high efficiency, good safety profile, and potential cardio-protective properties, metformin, a dimethyl biguanide, is the first-line medication in antihyperglycemic treatment for type 2 diabetic patients. The aim of our present study was to assess the effects of eight new sulfonamide-based derivatives of metformin on selected plasma parameters and vascular hemostasis, as well as on endothelial and smooth muscle cell function. The compounds with an alkyl chain (1–3), trifluoromethyl substituent (4), or acetyl group (5) significantly elevated glucose utilization in human umbilical endothelial cells (HUVECs), similarly to metformin. Our novel findings showed that metformin analogues 1–3 presented the most beneficial properties because of their greatest safety profile in the WST-1 cell viability assay, which was also proved in the further HUVEC integrity studies using RTCA DP. Compounds 1–3 did not affect either HUVEC or aortal smooth muscle cell (AoSMC) viability up to 3.0 mM. Importantly, these compounds beneficially affected some of the coagulation parameters, including factor X and antithrombin III activity. In contrast to the above-mentioned metformin analogues, derivatives 4 and 5 exerted more profound anticoagulation effects; however, they were also more cytotoxic towards HUVECs, as IC₅₀ values were 1.0–1.5 mM. In conclusion, the chemical modification of a metformin scaffold into sulfonamides possessing alkyl substituents results in the formation of novel derivatives with potential bi-directional activity including anti-hyperglycemic properties and highly desirable anti-coagulant activity.

The interplay between statins and adipokines. Is this another explanation of statins' 'pleiotropic' effects?

Statin therapy comprises an integral part of secondary and to a lesser extent of primary cardiovascular disease prevention. This is attributed not only to their lipid-lowering properties, but as well to a plethora of pleiotropic actions. Recently, the cytokines secreted by adipose tissue, the so-called adipokines, have been proved to play a critical role in various pathophysiological functions, among which inflammation and atherosclerosis development and vulnerability. The aim of this literature review was to summarize the effects of statins and the underlying mechanisms on the circulating levels of the most common adipokines regulating atherosclerosis process, as a part of their pleiotropic function. Up to now, robust evidence implicates a significant statin-induced reduction of pro-inflammatory adipokines IL-6, TNF-a and visfatin. Weak evidence from limited, small and mostly non-randomized studies suggest increased levels of anti-inflammatory adipokines apelin, vaspin and omentin-1 after statin therapy. In the rest of most known adipokines, statins have shown either controversial (adiponectin, retinol binding protein-4 and fetuin-A) or negligible effects (leptin and resistin) on their circulating levels. Therefore, statins may favourably alter the balance of inflammatory/anti-inflammatory adipokines, implicating a novel atheroprotective mechanism. However, the interplay between statins and adipokines is still not fully elucidated and its potential clinical relevance is warranted.

Remodeling adipose tissue inflammasome for type 2 diabetes mellitus treatment: Current perspective and translational strategies

Obesity-associated type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) is characterized by low-grade chronic systemic inflammation that arises primarily from the white adipose tissue. The interplay between various adipose tissue-derived chemokines drives insulin resistance in T2DM and has therefore become a subject of rigorous investigation. The adipocytokines strongly associated with glucose homeostasis include tumor necrosis factor-α, various interleukins, monocyte chemoattractant protein-1, adiponectin, and leptin, among others. Remodeling the adipose tissue inflammasome in obesity-associated T2DM is likely to treat the underlying cause of the disease and bring significant therapeutic benefit. Various strategies have been adopted or are being investigated to modulate the serum/tissue levels of pro- and anti-inflammatory adipocytokines to improve glucose homeostasis in T2DM. These include use of small molecule agonists/inhibitors, mimetics, antibodies, gene therapy, and other novel formulations. Here, we discuss adipocytokines that are strongly associated with insulin activity and therapies that are under investigation for modulation of their levels in the treatment of T2DM.

Bile acid sequestrants for glycemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review with meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

AIM

To evaluate the effects of bile acid sequestrants (BASs) versus placebo, no intervention or active comparators on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes.

METHODS

Data were retrieved and a systematic review with meta-analyses was performed. We evaluated bias control and subgroup and sensitivity analyses were performed to evaluate heterogeneity and bias.

RESULTS

We included 17 trials with a total of 2950 patients randomized to BASs (colesevelam or colestimide) versus placebo, no intervention, statins or sitagliptin. Random-effects meta-analysis showed that patients randomized to BASs had a lower hemoglobin A_1c at the end of treatment compared with the control group (mean difference-0.55%; 95% confidence interval-0.64 to -0.46). Analysis of trials with low risk of bias in all domains confirmed the findings. Data on adverse events were limited. There were no differences between trials stratified by the control group and no evidence of publication bias or small study effects.

CONCLUSIONS

Our analyses found that BAS treatment improves glycemic control. The size of the effect was clinically relevant and despite limited safety data, our findings support the inclusion of BASs in current diabetes management algorithms for type 2 diabetes.

Lipid-lowering efficacy of rosuvastatin

BACKGROUND

Rosuvastatin is one of the most potent statins and is currently widely prescribed. It is therefore important to know the dose-related magnitude of effect of rosuvastatin on blood lipids.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To quantify the effects of various doses of rosuvastatin on serum total cholesterol, low-density lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol, high-density lipoprotein (HDL)-cholesterol, non-HDL-cholesterol and triglycerides in participants with and without evidence of cardiovascular disease. Secondary objectives To quantify the variability of the effect of various doses of rosuvastatin.To quantify withdrawals due to adverse effects (WDAEs) in the randomized placebo-controlled trials.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) Issue 10 of 12, 2014 in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE (1946 to October week 5 2014), EMBASE (1980 to 2014 week 44), Web of Science Core Collection (1970 to 5 November 2014) and BIOSIS Citation Index (1969 to 31 October 2014). No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled and uncontrolled before-and-after trials evaluating the dose response of different fixed doses of rosuvastatin on blood lipids over a duration of three to 12 weeks.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed eligibility criteria for studies to be included and extracted data. WDAEs information was collected from the placebo-controlled trials.

MAIN RESULTS

One-hundred and eight trials (18 placebo-controlled and 90 before-and-after) evaluated the dose-related efficacy of rosuvastatin in 19,596 participants. Rosuvastatin 10 to 40 mg/day caused LDL-cholesterol decreases of 46% to 55%, when all the trials were combined using the generic inverse variance method. The quality of evidence for these effects is high. Log dose-response data over doses of 1 to 80 mg, revealed strong linear dose-related effects on blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol. When compared to atorvastatin, rosuvastatin was about three-fold more potent at reducing LDL-cholesterol. There was no dose-related effect of rosuvastatin on blood HDL-cholesterol, but overall, rosuvastatin increased HDL by 7%. There is a high risk of bias for the trials in this review, which would affect WDAEs, but unlikely to affect the lipid measurements. WDAEs were not statistically different between rosuvastatin and placebo in 10 of 18 of these short-term trials (risk ratio 0.84; 95% confidence interval 0.48 to 1.47).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The total blood total cholesterol, LDL-cholesterol and non-HDL-cholesterol-lowering effect of rosuvastatin was linearly dependent on dose. Rosuvastatin log dose-response data were linear over the commonly prescribed dose range. Based on an informal comparison with atorvastatin, this represents a three-fold greater potency. This review did not provide a good estimate of the incidence of harms associated with rosuvastatin because of the short duration of the trials and the lack of reporting of adverse effects in 44% of the placebo-controlled trials.

Adiponectin and lipoprotein metabolism

Adiponectin is secreted by the adipose tissue and it has been shown to be down-regulated in states of insulin resistance and in cardiovascular disease. It has also been found to be correlated with various parameters of lipoprotein metabolism, and in particular, it is associated with the metabolism of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) and triglycerides; adiponectin appears to induce an increase in serum HDL, and conversely, HDL can up-regulate adiponectin levels, and in addition, adiponectin lowers serum triglycerides through enhancement of the catabolism of triglyceride-rich lipoproteins. Studies investigating whether adiponectin is causally linked with lipoprotein metabolism have yielded conflicting data, and the mechanisms underlying the interplay between adiponectin and lipoproteins remain to be elucidated. The adiponectin-HDL relationship can explain at least in part the presumed protective role of adiponectin in cardiovascular disease and the adiponectin changes observed after dieting, exercise and lipid-lowering treatment. Statins, fibrates, niacin and n-3 fatty acids may influence circulating adiponectin levels, indicating that adiponectin may mediate some of the metabolic effects of these agents. Further studies to investigate more thoroughly the role of adiponectin in lipoprotein metabolism in the human setting should be carefully planned, focusing on causality and the possible impact of adiponectin on the pathogenesis of cardiovascular disease.

The effect of renal hyperfiltration on urinary inflammatory cytokines/chemokines in patients with uncomplicated type 1 diabetes mellitus

AIMS/HYPOTHESIS

High intraglomerular pressure causes renal inflammation in experimental models of diabetes. Our objective was to determine whether renal hyperfiltration, a surrogate for intraglomerular hypertension, is associated with increased excretion of urinary cytokines/chemokines in patients with type 1 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

Blood pressure, renal haemodynamic function (inulin and para-aminohippurate clearances for glomerular filtration rate (GFR) and effective renal plasma flow (ERPF), respectively) and urine samples were obtained during clamped euglycaemia in individuals with type 1 diabetes with either hyperfiltration (GFR determined using inulin [GFRINULIN] ≥ 135 ml min⁻¹ 1.73 m⁻², n = 28) or normofiltration (n = 21) and healthy control individuals (n = 18).

RESULTS

Baseline clinical characteristics, dietary sodium and protein intake and blood pressure levels were similar in the diabetic and healthy control groups. In addition, HbA1c levels were similar in the two diabetic groups. As expected baseline GFR was higher in hyperfilterers than either normofiltering diabetic patients or healthy control patients (165 ± 9 vs 113 ± 2 and 116 ± 4 ml min⁻¹ 1.73 m⁻², respectively, p < 0.01). ERPF and renal blood flow were also comparatively higher and renal vascular resistance was lower in hyperfiltering patients (p < 0.01). Hyperfiltering diabetic patients had higher excretion rates for eotaxin, IFNα2, macrophage-derived chemokine, platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF)-AA, PDGF-AB/BB and granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor (p ≤ 0.01). Urinary monocyte chemoattractant protein (MCP)-1 and RANTES (regulated on activation, normal T expressed and secreted) excretion was also higher in hyperfiltering vs normofiltering diabetic individuals (p < 0.01) and fibroblast growth factor-2, MCP-3 and CD40K excretion was elevated in hyperfiltering diabetic individuals vs healthy controls (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS/INTERPRETATION

Renal hyperfiltration is associated with increased urinary excretion of inflammatory cytokines/chemokines in patients with uncomplicated type 1 diabetes.

Monocyte Chemoattractant Protein 1 (MCP-1) in obesity and diabetes

Monocyte Chemoattractant Protein-1 (MCP-1) is the first discovered and most extensively studied CC chemokine, and the amount of studies on its role in the etiologies of obesity- and diabetes-related diseases have increased exponentially during the past two decades. This review attempted to provide a panoramic perspective of the history, regulatory mechanisms, functions, and therapeutic strategies of this chemokine. The highlights of this review include the roles of MCP-1 in the development of obesity, diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, insulitis, diabetic nephropathy, and diabetic retinopathy. Therapies that specifically or non-specifically inhibit MCP-1 overproduction have been summarized.

Hypoglycemic effects of colestimide on type 2 diabetic patients with obesity

Recent studies have shown colestimide, a bile acid-binding resin, to also exert a glucose-lowering effect via amelioration of insulin resistance. To evaluate the effects of colestimide on glucose metabolism and to elucidate the underlying mechanism, we conducted a 6-month, open-label pilot study on 43 type 2 diabetic patients with obesity (BMI ≥ 25). The subjects were randomized to either treatment with colestimide 4g/day (T group, n=23) or continuation of their current therapy (C group, n=20). In the T group patients, mean HbA1c and fasting glucose improved markedly (from 7.71 ± 0.32% to 6.97 ± 0.20%; from 147.4 ± 7.3mg/dL to 127.0 ± 5.0mg/dL, respectively), while obesity-related parameters, i.e. body weight, waist circumference, and visceral fat and subcutaneous fat as determined by umbilical slice abdominal CT, showed no significant changes. Fractionation analyses of serum bile acids revealed significantly increased cholic acids (CA) and decreased chenodeoxycholic acids (CDCA) in the T group patients. However, no correlation was observed between these changes and ΔHbA1c. According to logistic regression analysis, baseline HbA1c was the only variable predicting the decrease of HbA1c (>0.5%) among sex, age, BMI, total cholesterol, ΔCA and ΔCDCA. The index of insulin resistance, i.e. HOMA-R, did not improve, and the index of β cell function, i.e. HOMA-β, actually increased significantly. These results suggests that, in obese patients with type 2 diabetes, the mechanism underlying improved glycemic control with colestimide treatment involves enhanced β cell activity rather than improved insulin resistance.

Effects of pravastatin and rosuvastatin on the generation of adiponectin in the visceral adipose tissue in patients with coronary artery disease

Pravastatin increases the plasma adiponectin level. We examined whether this is a statins' class effect or specific to pravastatin. Of 50 patients undergoing cardiac surgery for coronary artery disease (CAD, n = 36) and valvular heart disease (VHD, n = 14), 23 with CAD and serum LDL-cholesterol level >100 mg/dL were randomized to pravastatin at 10 mg/day (PRAVA, n = 12) or rosuvastatin at 2.5 mg/day (ROSUVA, n = 11) for 2 months, and the other 13 with CAD and LDL-cholesterol ≤100 mg/dL were not treated with statin (Non-statin, n = 13). Patients with VHD did not have CAD and were not treated with statin. Blood was sampled at baseline and surgery. Visceral (VIS) and subcutaneous (SC) adipose tissues were harvested during surgery. At baseline, the plasma adiponectin level was low in patients with CAD compared with that of patients with VHD. At surgery, adiponectin level in PRAVA was increased to the level in VHD, whereas those in ROSUVA and Non-statin were unchanged. VIS contents and gene expressions of adiponectin in PRAVA and VHD were similar to each other and were both higher than those in Non-statin and ROSUVA. SC content and gene expression of adiponectin were similar among 4 groups. Protein carbonyl (PC) level, an indicator of oxidative stress, in VIS was lower in PRAVA and VHD than in ROSUVA and Non-statin. There was a negative correlation between the plasma adiponectin and VIS PC levels (r = -0.41, P < 0.05). Thus, pravastatin increases adiponectin generation, whereas rosuvastatin does not.

A crossover study of rosuvastatin and pitavastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes

INTRODUCTION

The effects of a low dose of rosuvastatin (ROS) and pitavastatin (PIT) on lipid profiles and inflammation markers were assessed in subjects with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

METHODS

A total of 90 Japanese type 2 diabetes patients with hyperlipidemia (low-density lipoprotein cholesterol [LDL-C] ≥140 mg/dL) were enrolled in this study. They were randomly assigned to four groups with open-label treatment with ROS (2.5 mg daily) or PIT (2 mg daily); two groups were sequentially treated with both drugs, with crossover of medication after 12 weeks, and the other two groups underwent treatment with either ROS or PIT for 24 weeks. The primary endpoints were the percentage changes in LDL-C, high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) and triglyceride, and the LDL-C/HDL-C ratio.

RESULTS

Both ROS and PIT lowered LDL-C and triglyceride, and increased HDL-C. In particular, significantly greater reduction in LDL-C was seen with ROS (-44.1%) than with PIT (-36.9%, P<0.01) in the crossover group from ROS to PIT, and the same result was detected in the crossover group from PIT (-34.8%) to ROS (-44.7%). The ratio of LDL-C/HDL-C was significantly reduced with ROS treatment (from 3.45 to 1.85) compared with that with PIT (from 3.45 to 2.22, P<0.01). Both ROS and PIT lowered plasma levels of high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha, and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1). In addition, the hsCRP level with the administration of ROS was significantly improved compared with the administration of PIT. There was no significant correlation between changes in LDL-C and hsCRP, TNF-alpha, and PAI-1 levels. ROS and PIT did not have an adverse effect on glycemic control in type 2 diabetes patients.

CONCLUSION

Therapy with both statins improved lipid profiles and reduced proinflammatory responses; however, 2.5 mg of ROS have a potent LDL-C-lowering and hsCRP-lowering effect compared with 2 mg of PIT in patients with diabetes.

Role of bile acid sequestrants in the treatment of type 2 diabetes

Cholestyramine is a first-generation bile acid sequestrant (BAS) and antihyperlipidemic agent that currently has limited use because of its relatively weak effect on lowering low density-lipoprotein (LDL)-cholesterol (C) and poor tolerability. The current first choice drugs for hyper-LDL-cholesterolemia are 3-hydroxy-3-methylglutaryl coenzyme A reductase inhibitors (statins) because of their strong LDL-C lowering effects and efficacy in prevention of cardiovascular disease. However, after lowering the target levels of LDL-C in very high risk patients, combination therapy with statins and other antihyperlipidemic drugs may become more important for treatment of hyper-LDL-cholesterolemia. Second-generation BASs such as colesevelam and colestimide have a glucose-lowering effect and improved tolerance, which has led to re-evaluation of their utility in combination with statins or antidiabetic agents.