Efficacy and safety of gemigliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus inadequately controlled with combination treatment of metformin and sulphonylurea: a 24-week, multicentre, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study (TROICA study)

Individual dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and acute kidney injury in patients with type 2 diabetes: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

This network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials aimed to determine whether any individual dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors increase the risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). The Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online via PubMed, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched to identify relevant studies. The primary outcome was AKI. A frequentist network meta-analysis was performed using a random-effects model to account for heterogeneity. Twenty-nine studies involving 56 117 participants were included. There were 918 cases of AKI (1.63%). The risk of bias was generally considered to be low. The only DPP-4 inhibitor that significantly increased the frequency of AKI when compared with placebo was sitagliptin (risk ratio 1.65, 95% confidence interval 1.22-2.23). However, because one study showed significant outliers in the funnel plot, in a highly heterogeneous population composed solely of patients undergoing surgery for coronary artery bypass graft, we conducted a post-hoc sensitivity analysis to exclude this study. The results showed no statistically significant difference in the risk of AKI between sitagliptin and placebo. Individual DPP-4 inhibitors do not appear to increase the risk of AKI. However, sitagliptin may be associated with AKI in patients with underlying severe cardiovascular disease.

Comparison of the effects of gemigliptin versus glimepiride on cardiac function in patients with type 2 diabetes uncontrolled with metformin: The gemi-heart study

AIM

To investigate the effects of gemigliptin on cardiac function and compare the effects of gemigliptin and glimepiride in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Sixty T2D patients being treated with metformin were assigned to a gemigliptin group (50 mg daily) or a glimepiride group (2 mg daily) for 24 weeks. The preadjudicated extension period was up to 52 weeks. Glucose metabolism variables and cardiac biomarkers were measured. Echocardiography was used to evaluate cardiac functions.

RESULTS

The HbA1c levels decreased significantly from 8.1% ± 0.6% to 6.8% ± 0.6% in the gemigliptin group and from 8.1% ± 0.6% to 7.0% ± 0.7% in the glimepiride group, without a between-group difference. Gemigliptin reduced insulin resistance, high sensitivity C-reactive protein and low-density lipoprotein cholesterol levels, and blood pressure, and increased adiponectin level compared with glimepiride therapy. Gemigliptin induced favourable changes in body composition. Left ventricular end-diastolic volume decreased in the gemigliptin group but increased in the glimepiride group, with a borderline between-group difference. Cardiac biomarkers did not change significantly in either group. At 52 weeks, the HbA1c levels in both groups increased slightly; 7.3% ± 0.8% in the gemigliptin group versus 7.7% ± 1.3% in the glimepiride group, without a between-group difference.

CONCLUSIONS

Gemigliptin had a comparable glucose-lowering efficacy without deleterious effects on cardiac functions or on biomarkers reflective of myocardial injury or heart failure during the 24-week observation period. However, larger, longer-term studies are needed to confirm these findings.

Efficacy of Gemigliptin Add-on to Dapagliflozin and Metformin in Type 2 Diabetes Patients: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study (SOLUTION)

BACKGRUOUND

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of add-on gemigliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) who had inadequate glycemic control with metformin and dapagliflozin.

METHODS

In this randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, double-blind, phase III study, 315 patients were randomized to receive either gemigliptin 50 mg (n=159) or placebo (n=156) with metformin and dapagliflozin for 24 weeks. After the 24-week treatment, patients who received the placebo were switched to gemigliptin, and all patients were treated with gemigliptin for an additional 28 weeks.

RESULTS

The baseline characteristics were similar between the two groups, except for body mass index. At week 24, the least squares mean difference (standard error) in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) changes was -0.66% (0.07) with a 95% confidence interval of -0.80% to -0.52%, demonstrating superior HbA1c reduction in the gemigliptin group. After week 24, the HbA1c level significantly decreased in the placebo group as gemigliptin was administered, whereas the efficacy of HbA1c reduction was maintained up to week 52 in the gemigliptin group. The safety profiles were similar: the incidence rates of treatment-emergent adverse events up to week 24 were 27.67% and 29.22% in the gemigliptin and placebo groups, respectively. The safety profiles after week 24 were similar to those up to week 24 in both groups, and no new safety findings, including hypoglycemia, were noted.

CONCLUSION

Add-on gemigliptin was well tolerated, providing comparable safety profiles and superior efficacy in glycemic control over placebo for long-term use in patients with T2DM who had poor glycemic control with metformin and dapagliflozin.

Antidiabetic effect of gemigliptin: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials with Bayesian inference through a quality management system

Gemigliptin is one of the latest dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors developed by LG Life Sciences. Since the early 2000s, several randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of gemigliptin have been conducted. However, no study has directly compared its antidiabetic effects through a systematic review and meta-analysis. Therefore, in this study, we performed a systematic review and meta-analysis on RCTs. In particular, a subsequent meta-analysis was performed using Bayesian inference, and an updated quality management system model was integrated throughout our study. The mean differences and 95% confidence intervals for glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), fasting plasma glucose (FPG), homeostatic model assessment beta cell function (HOMA-β), and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) were evaluated for the efficacy outcomes of gemigliptin as compared to those of placebo and other oral antidiabetic drugs (OADs). In conclusion, we found that gemigliptin was superior to placebo and comparable to other OADs in terms of the effect on HbA1c, FPG, HOMA-β, and LDL. Further, gemigliptin was more effective than other OADs in HbA1c and HOMA-β in Bayesian inference analysis and statistically significant to other OADs in HbA1c and HOMA-β in sensitivity analysis excluding metformin. However, to confirm the results, more studies need to be analysed and the minimum clinically important difference must be applied.

Efficacy and Safety of the Novel Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Inhibitor Gemigliptin in the Management of Type 2 Diabetes: A Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

No meta-analysis has holistically analysed and summarised the efficacy and safety of gemigliptin in type 2 diabetes. The meta-analysis addresses this knowledge gap.

METHODS

Electronic databases were searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) involving diabetes patients receiving gemigliptin in the intervention arm and placebo/active comparator in the control arm. The primary outcome was change in haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c). The secondary outcomes were alterations in glucose, glycaemic targets, lipids, insulin resistance, and adverse events.

RESULTS

Data from 10 RCTs involving 1,792 patients were analysed. Four had an active control group (ACG), with metformin/dapagliflozin/sitagliptin/glimepiride as the active comparator; six had a passive control group (PCG), with placebo/rosuvastatin as controls. HbA1c reduction by gemigliptin at 24 weeks was comparable to ACG (mean difference [MD], 0.09%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.06 to 0.23; P=0.24; I2=0%; moderate certainty of evidence [MCE]), but superior to PCG (MD, -0.91%; 95% CI, -1.18 to -0.63); P<0.01; I2=89%; high certainty of evidence [HCE]). Gemigliptin was superior to PCG regarding achieving HbA1c <7% (12 weeks: odds ratio [OR], 5.91; 95% CI, 1.34 to 26.08; P=0.02; I2=74%; 24 weeks: OR, 4.48; 95% CI, 2.09 to 9.60; P<0.01; I2=69%; HCE). Gemigliptin was comparable to ACG regarding achieving HbA1c <7% after 24 weeks (OR, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.52 to 1.63; P=0.77; I2=66%; MCE). Adverse events were similar between the gemigliptin and control groups (risk ratio [RR], 1.06; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.36; P=0.66; I2=35%; HCE). The gemigliptin group did not have increased hypoglycaemia (RR, 1.19; 95% CI, 0.62 to 2.28; P=0.61; I2=19%; HCE).

CONCLUSION

Gemigliptin has good glycaemic efficacy and is well-tolerated over 6 months of use.

Age, sex, disease severity, and disease duration difference in placebo response: implications from a meta-analysis of diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

The placebo response in patients with diabetes mellitus is very common. A systematic evaluation needs to be updated with the current evidence about the placebo response in diabetes mellitus and the associated factors in clinical trials of anti-diabetic medicine.

METHODS

Literature research was conducted in Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov for studies published between the date of inception and June 2019. Randomized placebo-controlled trials conducted in type 1and type 2 diabetes mellitus (T1DM/T2DM) were included. Random-effects model and meta-regression analysis were accordingly used. This meta-analysis was registered in PROSPERO as CRD42014009373.

RESULTS

Significantly weight elevation (effect size (ES) = 0.33 kg, 95% CI, 0.03 to 0.61 kg) was observed in patients with placebo treatments in T1DM subgroup while significantly HbA1c reduction (ES = - 0.12%, 95% CI, - 0.16 to - 0.07%) and weight reduction (ES = - 0.40 kg, 95% CI, - 0.50 to - 0.29 kg) were observed in patients with placebo treatments in T2DM subgroup. Greater HbA1c reduction was observed in patients with injectable placebo treatments (ES = - 0.22%, 95% CI, - 0.32 to - 0.11%) versus oral types (ES = - 0.09%, 95% CI, - 0.14 to - 0.04%) in T2DM (P = 0.03). Older age (β = - 0.01, 95% CI, - 0.02 to - 0.01, P < 0.01) and longer diabetes duration (β = - 0.02, 95% CI, - 0.03 to - 0.21 × 10^-2, P = 0.03) was significantly associated with more HbA1c reduction by placebo in T1DM. However, younger age (β = 0.02, 95% CI, 0.01 to 0.03, P = 0.01), lower male percentage (β = 0.01, 95% CI, 0.22 × 10^-2, 0.01, P < 0.01), higher baseline BMI (β = - 0.02, 95% CI, - 0.04 to - 0.26 × 10^-2, P = 0.02), and higher baseline HbA1c (β = - 0.09, 95% CI, - 0.16 to - 0.01, P = 0.02) were significantly associated with more HbA1c reduction by placebo in T2DM. Shorter diabetes duration (β = 0.06, 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.10, P < 0.01) was significantly associated with more weight reduction by placebo in T2DM. However, the associations between baseline BMI, baseline HbA1c, and placebo response were insignificant after the adjusted analyses.

CONCLUSION

The placebo response in diabetes mellitus was systematically outlined. Age, sex, disease severity (indirectly reflected by baseline BMI and baseline HbA1c), and disease duration were associated with placebo response in diabetes mellitus. The association between baseline BMI, baseline HbA1c, and placebo response may be the result of regression to the mean.

A prospective cohort study on effects of gemigliptin on cardiovascular outcomes in patients with type 2 diabetes (OPTIMUS study)

This study was performed to evaluate the long-term cardiovascular safety of gemigliptin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). After screening, eligible patients with T2DM were enrolled, received gemigliptin, and were followed up for a median of 2.50 years. The primary outcome was a composite of confirmed cardiovascular death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, or nonfatal ischemic stroke (3-point major adverse cardiovascular event [MACE]). The key secondary outcomes were incidence of all-cause mortality and any other cardiovascular events. A total of 5179 patients were included in the study and 5113 were treated with gemigliptin. Overall, the primary outcome occurred in 26 patients within 12 months (estimated incidence by Cox proportional hazard model 0.49%, 95% CI 0.29–0.69%) and in 54 patients within 54 months (estimated incidence from Cox proportional hazard model 1.35%, 95% CI 0.92–1.77%). During the study period, the incidence rates of each component of the primary composite outcome were 0.04% (0.2 events per 1000 person-years) for cardiovascular death, 0.51% (2.2 events per 1000 person-years) for nonfatal myocardial infarction, and 0.61% (2.5 events per 1000 person-years) for nonfatal ischemic stroke. The incidence of all-cause mortality was 0.82% (3.2 events per 1000 person-years) and the incidences of other cardiovascular events were all less than 0.3%. In conclusion, T2DM patients who received gemigliptin exhibited a low incidence of the primary composite MACE and all-cause mortality. Therefore, the use of gemigliptin is expected to be safe without an increase in cardiovascular risk.

Trial registration: The study was registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (identifier: NCT02290301).

Efficacy and safety of fixed-dose combination therapy with gemigliptin (50 mg) and rosuvastatin compared with monotherapy in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia (BALANCE): A multicentre, randomized, double-blind, controlled, phase 3 trial

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of a fixed-dose combination (FDC) of gemigliptin and rosuvastatin in patients with type 2 diabetes and dyslipidaemia.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

A total of 33 hospitals in Korea participated in this randomized, double-blind trial of diabetic patients with dyslipidaemia. A total of 290 participants were randomly assigned at a 1:1:1 ratio to receive an FDC of gemigliptin (50 mg) and rosuvastatin (20 mg) (GEMI/ROSU FDC group), gemigliptin (50 mg) (GEMI group) or rosuvastatin (20 mg) (ROSU group). Rosuvastatin was up-titrated from 5 to 20 mg/d throughout the study period. Primary efficacy measures were changes in HbA1c and LDL-C from baseline to Week 24 between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups and between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups, respectively. Secondary efficacy measures were changes in HbA1c and LDL-C between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups and between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups, respectively.

RESULTS

After 24 weeks of treatment, a significant reduction in HbA1c from baseline was noted in the GEMI/ROSU FDC group (-0.81% of LS mean; P < 0.0001 vs ROSU group), in addition to a significant reduction in LDL-C concentration (-51.9% of LS mean percentage changes, P < 0.0001 vs GEMI group). HbA1c was significantly reduced from baseline in both the GEMI/ROSU FDC and GEMI groups, but the reduction in HbA1c was significantly greater in the GEMI group than in the GEMI/ROSU FDC group, despite receiving the same dose of gemigliptin. The decrease in LDL-C over time was similar between the GEMI/ROSU FDC and ROSU groups. There were no significant differences in adverse events among the groups.

CONCLUSION

The FDC of gemigliptin and rosuvastatin is safe and is effective in reducing both blood glucose and LDL-C levels; thus, it could be a good therapeutic choice for type 2 diabetic patients with dyslipidaemia.

Combination therapy of oral hypoglycemic agents in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

The Korean Diabetes Association (KDA) recently updated the Clinical Practice Guidelines on antihyperglycemic agent therapy for adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). In combination therapy of oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs), general recommendations were not changed from those of the 2015 KDA guidelines. The Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines of the KDA has extensively reviewed and discussed the results of meta-analyses and systematic reviews of effectiveness and safety of OHAs and many clinical trials on Korean patients with T2DM for the update of guidelines. All OHAs were effective when added to metformin or metformin and sulfonylurea, although the effects of each agent on body weight and hypoglycemia were different. Therefore, selection of a second agent as a metformin add-on therapy or third agent as a metformin and sulfonylurea add-on therapy should be based on the patient's clinical characteristics and the efficacy, side effects, mechanism of action, risk of hypoglycemia, effect on body weight, patient preference, and combined comorbidity. In this review, we address the results of meta-analyses and systematic reviews, comparing the effectiveness and safety among OHAs. It will help to choose the appropriate drug for an individual patient with T2DM.

Gemigliptin: Newer Promising Gliptin for Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

The dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors have facilitated the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) owing to their superior efficacy and safety with low incidence of adverse effects. Gemigliptin is a new member of this family of drugs, and studies have revealed certain advantages of gemigliptin use compared to its previous congeners. Besides, this drug has also been studied for the treatment of T2DM as monotherapy, in combination with metformin or other oral antidiabetic drugs and in T2DM with moderate-to-severe renal failure. In this review, we explore the published data highlighting the pharmacology, efficacy, and safety of gemigliptin along with its recommendations for use in patients with T2DM.

Combination Therapy of Oral Hypoglycemic Agents in Patients with Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus

The Korean Diabetes Association (KDA) recently updated the Clinical Practice Guidelines on antihyperglycemic agent therapy for adult patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). In combination therapy of oral hypoglycemic agents (OHAs), general recommendations were not changed from those of the 2015 KDA guidelines. The Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines of the KDA has extensively reviewed and discussed the results of meta-analyses and systematic reviews of effectiveness and safety of OHAs and many clinical trials on Korean patients with T2DM for the update of guidelines. All OHAs were effective when added to metformin or metformin and sulfonylurea, although the effects of each agent on body weight and hypoglycemia were different. Therefore, selection of a second agent as a metformin add-on therapy or third agent as a metformin and sulfonylurea add-on therapy should be based on the patient's clinical characteristics and the efficacy, side effects, mechanism of action, risk of hypoglycemia, effect on body weight, patient preference, and combined comorbidity. In this review, we address the results of meta-analyses and systematic reviews, comparing the effectiveness and safety among OHAs. It will help to choose the appropriate drug for an individual patient with T2DM.