Efficacy and safety of sitagliptin/metformin fixed-dose combination compared with glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes: A multicenter randomized double-blind study

Targeted Oral Fixed-Dose Combination of Amphotericin B-Miltefosine for Visceral Leishmaniasis

The incidence of visceral leishmaniasis (VL) remains a significant health threat in endemic countries. Fixed-dose combination (FDC) of amphotericin B (AmB) and miltefosine (MLT) is a promising strategy for treating VL, but the parenteral administration of AmB leads to severe side effects, limiting its use in clinical practice. Here, we developed novel FDC granules combining AmB in the core with a MLT coating using wet granulation followed by the fluidized bed technology. The granules maintained the crystalline structure of AmB throughout manufacturing, achieving an AmB loading of ∼20%. The MLT coating layer effectively sustained AmB release from 3 to 24 h following Korsmeyer-Peppas kinetics. The formulation demonstrated remarkable stability, maintaining >90% drug content for over a year at both 4 °C and room temperature under desiccated conditions. In vivo efficacy studies in Leishmania infantum-infected hamsters showed 65-80% reduction in parasite burden in spleen and liver, respectively, suggesting potential as an oral alternative to current VL treatments. Uncoated and coated granules demonstrated comparable performance in key aspects, including in vivo efficacy and long-term stability.

Clinical Profile, Comorbidities and Therapies in Type 2 Diabetes Patients on Sitagliptin-Based Therapy in Indian Outpatient Setting

Objectives The study was conducted to generate real-world data on prescription patterns and patient profiles for sitagliptin-based therapies in real-world outpatient settings across India. Method A cross-sectional, observational, multicenter, real-world prescription event monitoring (PEM) study was conducted at 1058 sites across India over six months, from 1 August 2023 to 16 January 2024. Adult type 2 diabetes patients receiving sitagliptin-based mono or combination therapies were included in the study. Primary outcomes assessed included the dosage of sitagliptin and other medications and the specific drugs combined with sitagliptin. Secondary outcomes included demographic profiles, medication history, comorbidities, and glycemic parameters. Results A total of 10210 patients (n=6398 males; n=3812 females) completed the study. Duration of diabetes was available for 5422 patients, of which nearly half of the patients had diabetes for 1-5 years, while around 42.3% (n=2294) of the patients had diabetes for more than five years. Comorbidities were present in 36.02% (n=3678) of the patients. Hypertension and dyslipidemia were the most common comorbidities reported in 25.3% (n=2584) and 10.42% (n=1064), respectively. Sitagliptin was administered as monotherapy or in combination with other medications. Dual combination therapy was most common, with sitagliptin 50 mg+metformin 500 mg being the predominantly prescribed regimen. Triple combination therapy with sitagliptin+dapagliflozin+metformin was also prescribed in a substantial proportion of the patients. Variations in preferred regimens were observed among patients with different comorbid conditions, with sitagliptin 100 mg+dapagliflozin 10 mg being preferred in patients with established cardiovascular disease and heart failure and sitagliptin 50 mg+metformin 500 mg in diabetic patients with hypertension, dyslipidemia, and renal disease. Conclusion The study findings highlighted the preferences for the use of sitagliptin and its dual as well as triple combinations as integral components of diabetes management strategies in clinical practice in Indian outpatient settings. The study also found that diabetes with ASCVD and CV risk factors influence the use of sitagliptin and dapagliflozin in combination.

Can amphotericin B and itraconazole be co-delivered orally? Tailoring oral fixed-dose combination coated granules for systemic mycoses

The incidence and prevalence of invasive fungal infections have increased significantly over the last few years, leading to a global health problem due to the lack of effective treatments. Amphotericin B (AmB) and itraconazole (ITR) are two antifungal drugs with different mechanisms of action. In this work, AmB and ITR have been formulated within granules to elicit an enhanced pharmacological effect, while enhancing the oral bioavailability of AmB. A Quality by Design (QbD) approach was utilised to prepare fixed-dose combination (FDC) granules consisting of a core containing AmB with functional excipients, such as inulin, microcrystalline cellulose (MCC), chitosan, sodium deoxycholate (NaDC) and Soluplus® and polyvinyl pyrrolidone (PVP), coated with a polymeric layer containing ITR with Soluplus® or a combination of Poloxamer 188 and hydroxypropyl methyl cellulose-acetyl succinate (HPMCAS). A Taguchi design of experiments (DoE) with 7 factors and 2 levels was carried out to understand the key factors impacting on the physicochemical properties of the formulation followed by a Box-Behnken design with 3 factors in 3 levels chosen to optimise the formulation parameters. The core of the FDC granules was obtained by wet granulation and later coated using a fluidized bed. In vitro antifungal efficacy was demonstrated by measuring the inhibition halo against different species of Candida spp., including C. albicans (24.19-30.48 mm), C. parapsilosis (26.38-27.84 mm) and C. krusei (11.48-17.92 mm). AmB release was prolonged from 3 to 24 h when the AmB granules were coated. In vivo in CD-1 male mice studies showed that these granules were more selective towards liver, spleen and lung compared to kidney (up to 5-fold more selective in liver, with an accumulation of 8.07 µg AmB/g liver after twice-daily 5 days administration of granules coated with soluplus-ITR), resulting in an excellent oral administration option in the treatment of invasive mycosis. Nevertheless, some biochemical alterations were found, including a decrease in blood urea nitrogen (∼17 g/dl) and alanine aminotransferase (<30 U/l) and an increase in the levels of bilirubin (∼0.2 mg/dl) and alkaline phosphatase (<80 U/l), which could be indicative of a liver failure. Once-daily regimen for 10 days can be a promising therapy.

Effect of different antidiabetic medications on atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk score among patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus: A multicenter non-interventional observational study

Objective

The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes associated with different combinations of oral diabetic drugs among patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

Method

A prospective multicenter longitudinal, noninterventional observation study design was applied. At baseline (0 month), clinical parameters including glucose profile, renal function, lipid profile and risk assessment for cardiovascular risks were calculated. Mean Weighted difference (MWD) with heterogeneity and effect z was calculated to determine the risk reduction at the end of the study.

Results

A total of 1,657 were enrolled to different cohorts with response rate of 75.5%. The distribution of patients was based on prescribed drug. A total of 513 (30.9%) in G1 (metformin alone), 217 (13.09%) in G2 (metformin with Glimepiride), 231 (12.85%) in G3 (Metformin with Gliclazide), 384 (23.17%) in G4 (metformin with Sitagliptin) and 312 (18.89%) in G5 (Metformin with Saxagliptin). There was no significant different in all clinical and social variables at baseline. The Intergroup analysis showed significant differences with all the primary outcome variables except BMI (p = 0.217) and eGFR (p = 0.782) among patients using sulphonylurea (SU) combination (G2 & G3). Findings also showed significant high frequency of emergency visit and hospitalization in G1 (78.16% & 30.8%) as compared to SU (70.1% & 28.3%, p = 0.001) and DPP-4 (56.6% & 20.4%, p = 0.001). The overall reported effect was z = 2.58, p = 0.001 for ASCVD risk reduction assessment.

Conclusion

The study concluded that significant effect of Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor on reduction of hospitalization, lipid profile and also ASCVD risk score of type-II diabetes mellitus patients regardless of clinical comorbidities. Also, sulfonylurea combinations have showed significant reduction in LDL and triglycerides values.

Efficacy and Safety of Treatment with Quadruple Oral Hypoglycemic Agents in Uncontrolled Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Multi-Center, Retrospective, Observational Study

BACKGROUND

Only few studies have shown the efficacy and safety of glucose-control strategies using the quadruple drug combination. Therefore, the aim of the present study was to investigate the usefulness of the quadruple combination therapy with oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs) in patients with uncontrolled type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHODS

From March 2014 to December 2018, data of patients with T2DM, who were treated with quadruple hypoglycemic medications for over 12 months in 11 hospitals in South Korea, were reviewed retrospectively. We compared glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c) levels before and 12 months after quadruple treatment with OHAs. The safety, maintenance rate, and therapeutic patterns after failure of the quadruple therapy were also evaluated.

RESULTS

In total, 357 patients were enrolled for quadruple OHA therapy, and the baseline HbA1c level was 9.0%±1.3% (74.9±14.1 mmol/mol). After 12 months, 270 patients (75.6%) adhered to the quadruple therapy and HbA1c was significantly reduced from 8.9%±1.2% to 7.8%±1.3% (mean change, -1.1%±1.2%; P<0.001). The number of patients with HbA1c <7% increased significantly from 5 to 68 (P<0.005). In addition, lipid profiles and liver enzyme levels were also improved whereas no changes in body weight. There was no significant safety issue in patients treated with quadruple OHA therapy.

CONCLUSION

This study shows the therapeutic efficacy of the quadruple OHA regimen T2DM and demonstrates that it can be an option for the management of T2DM patients who cannot use insulin or reject injectable therapy.

Cardiovascular risk of sitagliptin in treating patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) have a very high risk of cardiovascular related events, and reducing complications is an important evaluation criterion of efficacy and safety of hypoglycemic drugs. Previous studies have shown that the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors (DPP4i), such as sitagliptin, might reduce the incidence of major cardiovascular events (MACEs). However, the safety and efficacy of sitagliptin remains controversial, especially the safety for cardiovascular related events. Here, a systematic review was conducted to assess the cardiovascular safety of sitagliptin in T2DM patients. The literature research dating up to October 2018 was performed in the electronic database. The clinical trials about sitagliptin for T2DM patients were included. Two reviewers independently screened literature according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The primary outcome was the MACE, and the secondary outcome was all-cause mortality. Finally, 32 clinical trials composed of 16082 T2DM patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results showed that: there was no significant difference between sitagliptin group and the control group on MACE (odds ratio (OR) = 0.85, 95% confidence intervals (CIs) = 0.63–1.15), myocardial infarction (MI) (OR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.38–1.16), stroke (OR = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.44–1.54) and mortality (OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.26–1.07). These results demonstrated that sitagliptin did not increase the risk of cardiovascular events in patients with T2DM.

A safety and tolerability profile comparison between dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and sulfonylureas in diabetic patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The first treatment approach for type 2 diabetes mellitus is lifestyle change and metformin, but it is usually not sufficient. For some time, the anti-hyperglycemic classes of sulfonylureas and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors were considered second-line of treatment, since they show similar efficacy effect. However, the recent ADA-EASD consensus gives the preference to DPP-4 inhibitors compared to sulfonylureas, except if cost is a major problem. We performed a meta-analysis for safety and tolerability profile to comprehend which treatment has less adverse events.

METHODS

PUBMED and EMBASE databases were searched from inception until July 2017 to retrieve RCT studies comparing DPP-4 inhibitors and sulfonylureas treatments in adult type 2 diabetes patients. There was no language restriction. We extracted and combined data from studies comparison that reported safety profile and weight change. A random effect, meta-analytic model was applied to all calculations. Cochrane collaboration tool was used to assess quality and bias of the included studies. Trial registered with PROSPERO (CRD42017075823).

FINDINGS

Out of 1472 articles identified in our search and screened for eligibility, 36 studies comparing DPP-4 inhibitors and sulfonylureas were identified. DPP-4 inhibitors in combination with metformin had less overall adverse events (RR: 0·90; 95% CI, 0·86-0·94; p < 0·0001; I² = 83%; 17 studies), cardiovascular events (RR: 0·54; 95% CI, 0·37-0·79; p = 0·002; I² = 0%; 6 studies), hypoglycemia (RR: 0·17; 95% CI, 0·13-0·22; p < 0·00001; I² = 76%; 17 studies) and severe hypoglycemic events (RR: 0·10; 95% CI, 0·05-0·19; p < 0·00001; I² = 0%; 12 studies). The mean difference of the weight change was 1·92 kg in favor of DPP-4 inhibitors in combination with metformin in relation to sulfonylureas in combination with metformin. Monotherapy with DPP-4 inhibitors also had less rates of hypoglycemia (RR: 0·31; 95% CI, 0·24-0·41; p < 0·00001; I² = 0%; 8 studies) and severe hypoglycemic events (RR: 0·26; 95% CI, 0·10-0·66; p = 0·004; I² = 0%; 8 studies) and patients did not gain 1·19 kg.

INTERPRETATION

These results suggest better safety profile for DPP-4 inhibitors than sulfonylureas for both comparisons, and it is more notable when the treatment regimen includes metformin.

FUNDING

This study was funded by Takeda Pharmaceuticals, Brazil.

Weight effects of antidiabetic agents

Obesity and diabetes are on the rise, which remains a continuous health concern worldwide. It is important to consider weight effects of antidiabetic agents prior to initiation as different antidiabetic agents impact weight differently. Areas covered: New agents to treat diabetes, glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, have emerged over recent years that have been shown to result in weight reduction. Unfortunately, other antidiabetic medications used can cause weight gain such as with insulin, sulfonylureas, and thiazolidediones while some remain weight neutral (metformin and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors). The weight effects of these antidiabetic medications described are from select relevant guidelines, clinical trials, reviews, and meta-analysis found through PubMed and Ovid databases up to July 2017. Expert commentary: This article summarizes the current evidence available on the weight effects of these agents in patients with diabetes. Evaluating potential risks, such as weight gain, with potential benefits, such as improvement in glycemic control, will help with designing optimal therapeutic diabetes regimens.

Use of Sitagliptin With Closed-Loop Technology to Decrease Postprandial Blood Glucose in Type 1 Diabetes

BACKGROUND

Postprandial hyperglycemia poses a challenge to closed-loop systems. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, like sitagliptin, reduce postprandial glucose concentrations in patients with type 2 diabetes. The objective of this study was to assess sitagliptin's role in type 1 diabetes (T1DM) as an adjunct therapy in reducing postprandial blood glucose with an insulin-only closed-loop system.

METHODS

This was a randomized, double-blinded, placebo controlled, crossover design trial. The participants were18-35 years old, had T1DM, and an HbA1c of ≤ 8.5%. A dose determination study included eight subjects with T1DM. There were three study visits. Four hours after receiving study drug (placebo, sitagliptin 50 mg, sitagliptin 100 mg), subjects underwent a mixed meal tolerance test with assessment of hormone concentrations. In a second study, 15 subjects underwent two visits receiving either placebo or 100 mg of sitagliptin plus an insulin only closed-loop system for 25 hours with timed meals. Blood glucose and other hormone concentrations were analyzed using repeated measures ANOVA.

RESULTS

For the dose determination study, sitagliptin 100 mg resulted in reduced postprandial blood glucose ( P = .006). For the closed-loop study, glucose concentrations were lower in the treatment group, most prominently during the first two study meals ( P = .03). There was no difference in glucagon concentrations, but insulin concentrations and insulin delivery were lower in the treatment group.

CONCLUSIONS

Sitagliptin may be considered as an adjunct therapy in a closed-loop setting. Larger studies are needed to determine the role of oral agents like sitagliptin to lower postprandial hyperglycemia with closed loop.