Safety and tolerability of dapagliflozin, saxagliptin and metformin in combination: Post-hoc analysis of concomitant add-on versus sequential add-on to metformin and of triple versus dual therapy with metformin

Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors for people with chronic kidney disease and diabetes

BACKGROUND

Diabetes is associated with high risks of premature chronic kidney disease (CKD), cardiovascular diseases, cardiovascular death and impaired quality of life. People with diabetes are more likely to develop kidney impairment, and approximately one in three adults with diabetes have CKD. People with CKD and diabetes experience a substantially higher risk of cardiovascular outcomes. Sodium-glucose co-transporter protein 2 (SGLT2) inhibitors have shown potential effects in preventing kidney and cardiovascular outcomes in people with CKD and diabetes. However, new trials are emerging rapidly, and evidence synthesis is essential to summarising cumulative evidence.

OBJECTIVES

This review aimed to assess the benefits and harms of SGLT2 inhibitors for people with CKD and diabetes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 17 November 2023 using a search strategy designed by an Information Specialist. Studies in the Register are continually identified through regular searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled studies were eligible if they evaluated SGLT2 inhibitors versus placebo, standard care or other glucose-lowering agents in people with CKD and diabetes. CKD includes all stages (from 1 to 5), including dialysis patients.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted data and assessed the study risk of bias. Treatment estimates were summarised using random effects meta-analysis and expressed as a risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD), with a corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI). Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. The primary review outcomes were all-cause death, 3-point and 4-point major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), fatal or nonfatal myocardial infarction (MI), fatal or nonfatal stroke, and kidney failure.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-three studies randomising 65,241 people with CKD and diabetes were included. SGLT2 inhibitors with or without other background treatments were compared to placebo, standard care, sulfonylurea, dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, or insulin. In the majority of domains, the risks of bias in the included studies were low or unclear. No studies evaluated the treatment in children or in people treated with dialysis. No studies compared SGLT2 inhibitors with glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists or tirzepatide. Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors decreased the risk of all-cause death (20 studies, 44,397 participants: RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.94; I2 = 0%; high certainty) and cardiovascular death (16 studies, 43,792 participants: RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.74 to 0.93; I2 = 29%; high certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably make little or no difference to the risk of fatal or nonfatal MI (2 studies, 13,726 participants: RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.14; I2 = 24%; moderate certainty), and fatal or nonfatal stroke (2 studies, 13,726 participants: RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.30; I2 = 0%; moderate certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors probably decrease 3-point MACE (7 studies, 38,320 participants: RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98; I2 = 46%; moderate certainty), and 4-point MACE (4 studies, 23,539 participants: RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.70 to 0.96; I2 = 77%; moderate certainty), and decrease hospital admission due to heart failure (6 studies, 28,339 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79; I2 = 17%; high certainty). Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors may decrease creatinine clearance (1 study, 132 participants: MD -2.63 mL/min, 95% CI -5.19 to -0.07; low certainty) and probably decrease the doubling of serum creatinine (2 studies, 12,647 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.56 to 0.89; I2 = 53%; moderate certainty). SGLT2 inhibitors decrease the risk of kidney failure (6 studies, 11,232 participants: RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.79; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and kidney composite outcomes (generally reported as kidney failure, kidney death with or without ≥ 40% decrease in estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR)) (7 studies, 36,380 participants: RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.78; I2 = 25%; high certainty) compared to placebo. Compared to placebo, SGLT2 inhibitors incur less hypoglycaemia (16 studies, 28,322 participants: RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.89 to 0.98; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and hypoglycaemia requiring third-party assistance (14 studies, 26,478 participants: RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.88; I2 = 0%; high certainty), and probably decrease the withdrawal from treatment due to adverse events (15 studies, 16,622 participants: RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.08; I2 = 16%; moderate certainty). The effects of SGLT2 inhibitors on eGFR, amputation and fracture were uncertain. No studies evaluated the effects of treatment on fatigue, life participation, or lactic acidosis. The effects of SGLT2 inhibitors compared to standard care alone, sulfonylurea, DPP-4 inhibitors, or insulin were uncertain.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

SGLT2 inhibitors alone or added to standard care decrease all-cause death, cardiovascular death, and kidney failure and probably decrease major cardiovascular events while incurring less hypoglycaemia compared to placebo in people with CKD and diabetes.

2023 UPDATE: Luso-Brazilian evidence-based guideline for the management of antidiabetic therapy in type 2 diabetes

BACKGROUND

The management of antidiabetic therapy in people with type 2 diabetes (T2D) has evolved beyond glycemic control. In this context, Brazil and Portugal defined a joint panel of four leading diabetes societies to update the guideline published in 2020.

METHODS

The panelists searched MEDLINE (via PubMed) for the best evidence from clinical studies on treating T2D and its cardiorenal complications. The panel searched for evidence on antidiabetic therapy in people with T2D without cardiorenal disease and in patients with T2D and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD), heart failure (HF), or diabetic kidney disease (DKD). The degree of recommendation and the level of evidence were determined using predefined criteria.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

All people with T2D need to have their cardiovascular (CV) risk status stratified and HbA1c, BMI, and eGFR assessed before defining therapy. An HbA1c target of less than 7% is adequate for most adults, and a more flexible target (up to 8%) should be considered in frail older people. Non-pharmacological approaches are recommended during all phases of treatment. In treatment naïve T2D individuals without cardiorenal complications, metformin is the agent of choice when HbA1c is 7.5% or below. When HbA1c is above 7.5% to 9%, starting with dual therapy is recommended, and triple therapy may be considered. When HbA1c is above 9%, starting with dual therapyt is recommended, and triple therapy should be considered. Antidiabetic drugs with proven CV benefit (AD1) are recommended to reduce CV events if the patient is at high or very high CV risk, and antidiabetic agents with proven efficacy in weight reduction should be considered when obesity is present. If HbA1c remains above target, intensification is recommended with triple, quadruple therapy, or even insulin-based therapy. In people with T2D and established ASCVD, AD1 agents (SGLT2 inhibitors or GLP-1 RA with proven CV benefit) are initially recommended to reduce CV outcomes, and metformin or a second AD1 may be necessary to improve glycemic control if HbA1c is above the target. In T2D with HF, SGLT2 inhibitors are recommended to reduce HF hospitalizations and mortality and to improve HbA1c. In patients with DKD, SGLT2 inhibitors in combination with metformin are recommended when eGFR is above 30 mL/min/1.73 m2. SGLT2 inhibitors can be continued until end-stage kidney disease.

Dapagliflozin Versus Vildagliptin as an Adjuvant to Metformin in Patients With Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized, Open-label Study

INTRODUCTION

The rising burden of diabetes mellitus led to the development of novel drugs like dapagliflozin and vildagliptin. Their efficacies in chronic diabetic patients have been thoroughly studied. However, there is a paucity of comparative studies on these drugs in newly diagnosed diabetic patients. The endpoints of our study were changes in glycated hemoglobin (HbA_1c), fasting blood glucose (FBG), and postprandial blood glucose (PPBG) at 24 weeks from baseline.

METHODS

This randomized, open-label, 24-week study was conducted at Kalinga Institute of Medical Sciences, Bhubaneswar, India, from January 2021 to November 2022. The participants were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive tablets of either dapagliflozin 10mg once daily or vildagliptin 50mg once daily as an add-on to metformin 500-2000 mg. The analyses were performed in the per-protocol population. We used R software v. 4.1.1 (R Foundation, Indianapolis, IN) for data analysis.

RESULTS

114 (83.8%) of 136 enrolled participants completed this study. The mean age of the study population was 41.08±5.17 years. Additionally, 52 (45.6%) of them were females. The mean changes in HbA_1c from baseline were -1.19 (95% CI: -1.36 to -1.03) and -1.28 (95% CI: -1.37 to -1.18) in dapagliflozin and vildagliptin groups, respectively (p=0.21). The median changes in FBG and PPBG in both groups were -38.76, -46.13 (p=0.07), and -51.84, -53.56 (p=0.14), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Reductions in HbA_1c, FBG, and PPBG with add-on treatment of vildagliptin were more pronounced than dapagliflozin after a 24-week intervention. However, the differences were not statistically significant.

Effect of metformin monotherapy and dual or triple concomitant therapy with metformin on glycemic control and lipid profile management of patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus

Background

In this study, we aimed to compare the effects of metformin-based dual therapy versus triple therapy on glycemic control and lipid profile changes in Taiwanese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

Methods

In total, 60 patients were eligible for participation in this study. Patients received at least 24 months of metformin monotherapy, dual therapy, or triple therapy with metformin plus linagliptin (a dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitor) or dapagliflozin (a sodium-glucose cotransporter-2 (SGLT2) inhibitor). Blood samples were collected from each patient, followed by evaluation of changes in their blood glucose control and lipid profile-related markers.

Results

A combination of metformin and DPP4 and SGLT2 inhibitor therapy more effectively reduced low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) (p = 0.016) than metformin monotherapy. A combination of metformin and DPP4 and SGLT2 inhibitor therapy more effectively improved total cholesterol (Chol, p = 0.049) and high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C) than metformin monotherapy (p = 0.037). Metformin plus linagliptin dual therapy was more effective than metformin monotherapy in reducing glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1C, p = 0.011). Patients who received a combination of linagliptin and empagliflozin showed a significant reduction in their fasting blood glucose (p = 0.019), HbA1c (p = 0.036), and Chol (p = 0.010) compared with those who received linagliptin dual therapy. Furthermore, patients who received metformin plus dapagliflozin and saxagliptin showed significantly reduced Chol (p = 0.011) and LDL-C (p = 0.035) levels compared with those who received metformin plus dapagliflozin.

Conclusion

In conclusion, dual therapy with metformin and linagliptin yields similar glycemic control ability to triple therapy. Among metformin combination triple therapy, triple therapy of empagliflozin and linagliptin might have a better glycemic control ability than dual therapy of linagliptin. Moreover, Triple therapy of dapagliflozin and saxagliptin might have a better lipid control ability than dual therapy of dapagliflozin.

Role of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitors in the new era of antidiabetic treatment

The last few years important changes have occurred in the field of diabetes treatment. The priority in the therapy of patients with diabetes is not glycemic control per se rather an overall management of risk factors, while individualization of glycemic target is suggested. Furthermore, regulatory authorities now require evidence of cardiovascular (CV) safety in order to approve new antidiabetic agents. The most novel drug classes, i.e., sodium-glucose transporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2-i) and some glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RA), have been demonstrated to reduce major adverse CV events and, thus, have a prominent position in the therapeutic algorithm of hyperglycemia. In this context, the role of previously used hypoglycemic agents, including dipeptidyl peptidase 4 (DPP-4) inhibitors, has been modified. DPP-4 inhibitors have a favorable safety profile, do not cause hypoglycemia or weight gain and do not require dose uptitration. Furthermore, they can be administered in patients with chronic kidney disease after dose modification and elderly patients with diabetes. Still, though, they have been undermined to a third line therapeutic choice as they have not been shown to reduce CV events as is the case with SGLT2-i and GLP-1 RA. Overall, DPP-4 inhibitors appear to have a place in the management of patients with diabetes as a safe class of oral glucose lowering agents with great experience in their use.

A review on phytochemical and pharmacological facets of tropical ethnomedicinal plants as reformed DPP-IV inhibitors to regulate incretin activity

Type 2 diabetes mellitus is a metabolic disorder resulting from impaired insulin secretion and resistance. Dipeptidyl peptidase (DPP)-IV is an enzyme known to trigger the catalysis of insulinotropic hormones, further abating the endogenous insulin levels and elevating the glucose levels in blood plasma. In the field of drug development, DPP-IV inhibitors have opened up numerous opportunities for leveraging this target to generate compounds as hypoglycemic agents by regulating incretin activity and subsequently decreasing blood glucose levels. However, the practice of synthetic drugs is an apparent choice but poses a great pharmacovigilance issue due to their incessant undesirable effects. The ideology was set to inventively look upon different ethnomedicinal plants for their anti-diabetic properties to address these issues. To date, myriads of phytochemicals are characterized, eliciting an anti-diabetic response by targeting various enzymes and augmenting glucose homeostasis. Antioxidants have played a crucial role in alleviating the symptoms of diabetes by scavenging free radicals or treating the underlying causes of metabolic disorders and reducing free radical formation. Plant-based DPP-IV inhibitors, including alkaloids, phenolic acid, flavonoids, quercetin, and coumarin, also possess antioxidant capabilities, providing anti-diabetic and antioxidative protection. This review article provides a new gateway for exploring the ability of plant-based DPP-IV inhibitors to withstand oxidative stress under pathological conditions related to diabetes and for reforming the strategic role of ethnomedicinal plants as potent DPP-IV inhibitors through the development of polyherbal formulations and nanophytomedicines to regulate incretin activity.

Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin vs monotherapy as added to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

This study aim at evaluating the efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin vs monotherapy as added to metformin in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM).

METHOD

PubMed, Cochrane library, Embase, CNKI and Wanfang databases were searched up to 31 December 2019. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) applicable in dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin vs monotherapy as added to metformin in the treatment of T2DM were included. The outcomes included changes in HbA1c, FPG, body weight, SBP, DBP and adverse reactions. Fixed or random effects model were used to assess these outcomes.

RESULTS

In this study, 8 RCTs involved 7346 patients were included. Compared with dapagliflozin plus metformin(DM) group, patients treated with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin add on to metformin(DSM) could significantly increase the adjusted mean change levels of HbA1c, FPG, SBP and DBP(P < .00001, SMD = -4.88, 95%CI = -6.93∼-2.83; P < .00001, SMD = -6.50, 95%CI = -8.55∼-4.45; P < .00001, SMD = -0.97, 95%CI = -1.15∼-0.78; P < .00001, SMD = -2.00, 95%CI = -2.20∼-1.80), but no major difference in body weight loss showed(P = .12, SMD = 0.92, 95%CI = -0.22∼2.06). Furthermore, DSM therapy displayed better effects than saxagliptin plus metformin(SM) in the adjusted mean change levels of HbA1c, FPG, body weight and SBP(P < .00001, SMD = -7.75, 95%CI = -8.84∼-6.66; P < .00001, SMD = -7.75, 95%CI = -8.84∼-6.66; P = .04, SMD = -3.40, 95%CI = -6.64∼-0.17; P = .04, SMD = -7.75, 95%CI = -8.84∼-6.66), whereas no obvious difference in lowering DBP(P = .18, SMD = -16.35, 95%CI = -40.12∼7.41). Additionally, compared with DM and SM groups, there were no remarkable difference in the incidence of nausea, influenza, headache, diarrhea, urinary tract infection and renal failure for patients taking DSM, but the incidence of genital infection and hypoglycemia were higher in DSM group.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients taking the DSM therapy had better effects in reducing the level of HbA1c, FPG, body weight, SBP and DBP than the DM and SM therapy. However, patients treated with DSM therapy are more likely to have hypoglycemia and genital infection. Dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin may be a suitable therapy strategy for patients with T2DM inadequately controlled with metformin, and this will provide a clinical reference for the treatment of T2DM.

Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus insulin glargine over 52 weeks as add-on to metformin with or without sulphonylurea in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized, parallel-design, open-label, Phase 3 trial

AIM

Efficacy and safety of dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin (DAPA + SAXA) were compared with insulin glargine (INS) in patients with type 2 diabetes (T2D) in a 52-week extension study.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This international Phase 3 study randomized adults with T2D on metformin with/without sulphonylurea. They received DAPA + SAXA or INS for 24 weeks (short-term) with a 28-week (long-term) extension. Week 52 exploratory endpoints included adjusted mean change from baseline in glycated haemoglobin A_1c (HbA1c) and body weight, and a proportion of patients achieving optimal glycaemic response without hypoglycaemia and without requiring rescue medication.

RESULTS

Of the 1163 patients enrolled, 643 received treatment; 600 (DAPA + SAXA, 306; INS, 294) entered the long-term phase. At 52 weeks, HbA1c [adjusted least squares (LS) mean; 95% confidence interval (CI)] decreased more with DAPA + SAXA (-1.5% [-1.6%, -1.4%]) than with INS (-1.3% [-1.4%, -1.1%]); the LS mean difference (95% CI) was -0.25% (-0.4%, -0.1%; P = 0.009). Total body weight reduced with DAPA + SAXA [LS mean (95% CI): -1.8 kg (-2.4, -1.3)] and increased with INS [LS mean (95% CI): +2.8 kg (2.2, 3.3)]. More patients on DAPA + SAXA (17.6%) achieved HbA1c <7.0% without hypoglycaemia versus those on INS (9.1%). Rescue medication was required by 77 patients (23.8%) and 97 patients (30.4%) in the DAPA + SAXA and INS groups, respectively.

CONCLUSION

DAPA + SAXA treatment was non-inferior to INS in reducing HbA1c and body weight, and in achieving optimal glycaemic control without hypoglycaemia in patients with T2D 52 weeks after initiation.

Portuguese-Brazilian evidence-based guideline on the management of hyperglycemia in type 2 diabetes mellitus

BACKGROUND

In current management of type 2 diabetes (T2DM), cardiovascular and renal prevention have become important targets to be achieved. In this context, a joint panel of four endocrinology societies from Brazil and Portugal was established to develop an evidence-based guideline for treatment of hyperglycemia in T2DM.

METHODS

MEDLINE (via PubMed) was searched for randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and observational studies related to diabetes treatment. When there was insufficient high-quality evidence, expert opinion was sought. Updated positions on treatment of T2DM patients with heart failure (HF), atherosclerotic CV disease (ASCVD), chronic kidney disease (CKD), and patients with no vascular complications were developed. The degree of recommendation and the level of evidence were determined using predefined criteria.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

In non-pregnant adults, the recommended HbA_1c target is below 7%. Higher levels are recommended in frail older adults and patients at higher risk of hypoglycemia. Lifestyle modification is recommended at all phases of treatment. Metformin is the first choice when HbA_1c is 6.5-7.5%. When HbA_1c is 7.5-9.0%, dual therapy with metformin plus an SGLT2i and/or GLP-₁RA (first-line antidiabetic agents, AD1) is recommended due to cardiovascular and renal benefits. If an AD1 is unaffordable, other antidiabetic drugs (AD) may be used. Triple or quadruple therapy should be considered when HbA_1c remains above target. In patients with clinical or subclinical atherosclerosis, the combination of one AD1 plus metformin is the recommended first-line therapy to reduce cardiovascular events and improve blood glucose control. In stable heart failure with low ejection fraction (< 40%) and glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) > 30 mL/min/1.73 m², metformin plus an SGLT-2i is recommended to reduce cardiovascular mortality and heart failure hospitalizations and improve blood glucose control. In patients with diabetes-associated chronic kidney disease (CKD) (eGFR 30-60 mL/min/1.73 m² or eGFR 30-90 mL/min/1.73 m² with albuminuria > 30 mg/g), the combination of metformin and an SGLT2i is recommended to attenuate loss of renal function, reduce albuminuria and improve blood glucose control. In patients with severe renal failure, insulin-based therapy is recommended to improve blood glucose control. Alternatively, GLP-₁RA, DPP4i, gliclazide MR and pioglitazone may be considered to reduce albuminuria. In conclusion, the current evidence supports individualizing anti-hyperglycemic treatment for T2DM.

[Short-term intensive combined therapy with metformin, sagliptin and dapagliflozin for newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes: efficacy, weight control and safety]

OBJECTIVE

To assess the efficacy and safety of short- term intensive hypoglycemic therapy with a triple regimen consisting of metformin, sagliptin and dapagliflozin in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes mellitus with hemoglobin Alc (HbA1c) of 9%-12%.

METHODS

We prospectively enrolled 58 patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes, who were treated with metformin combined with sagliptin and dapagliflozin for 12 weeks on the basis of diabetic diet and regular exercise. Blood glucose was monitored during the treatment and the changes in HbA1c, fasting blood glucose (FBG), 2-hour postprandial blood glucose (2 hPBG), fasting insulin (FINS), 2-hour postprandial insulin (2 hPINS), fasting C-peptide (F-CP), 2-hour postprandial C-peptide (2 hP-CP), and body weight after treatment as well as the incidence of hypoglycemia and adverse events associated with the treatment were recorded.

RESULTS

Two patients withdrew from the study for intolerance of gastrointestinal reactions, and another 2 withdrew for inconvenience of access to the medicines. Fifty-four of the patients finally completed the study, including 34 male and 20 female patients. After 12 weeks of therapy, all the patients showed significant improvements in FBG, 2 hPBG, HbA1c, HOMA-beta and HOMA-IR (P < 0.001) with a mean reduction of HbA1c level by (4.19 ± 1.07)%, and the goal of HbA1c control to below 7.0% was achieved in 83.33% of the patients. The reduction of HbA1c was correlated with FBG (r=0.487, P=0.000), 2 hPBG (r=0.310, P=0.023), and HOMA-β (r=-0.398, P=0.003). The patients had a mean body weight loss by 2.47±3.38 kg (P < 0.001) and a mean decrease of body mass index (BMI) by 0.90± 1.18 kg/m2 (P < 0.001) after the therapy. The body weight-reducing effect was associated with the patients' baseline body weight (r=0.678, P=0.000), BMI (r=0.818, P=0.000), F-CP (r=0.282, P=0.039) and HOMA-IR (r=0.297, P=0.029). During the therapy 8 patients experienced hypoglycemic symptoms (10 times, 14.81%); 3 patients were diagnosed with hypoglycemia (blood glucose ≤3.9 mmol/L, 3 times), and the overall incidence of hypoglycemia was 5.56%. No serious hypoglycemia or infections of the urinary and reproductive systems occurred in these patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Short-term intensive oral hypoglycemic therapy with metformin combined with sagliptin and dapagliflozin is effective for treatment of patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes with HbA1c of 9%-12% and shows a good weight-reducing effect with a low risk of hypoglycemia. The combined therapy can effectively improve β-cell insulin secretion function, and is suitable for treatment of newly diagnosed type 2 diabetic patients with high blood glucose.

Triple therapy with low-dose dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin versus dual therapy with each monocomponent, all added to metformin, in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes

AIM

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of triple therapy with low-dose dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin added to metformin in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This 24-week, double-blind trial (NCT02681094) randomized 883 patients (glycated haemoglobin [HbA1c] 7.5-10.0%) on metformin ≥1500 mg/d to add-on dapagliflozin 5 mg/d plus saxagliptin 5 mg/d or to add-on of either monocomponent. The primary endpoint was change in HbA1c from baseline.

RESULTS

Baseline mean ± SD patient characteristics were: age 56.7 ± 10.5 years; HbA1c 8.2 ± 0.9%; and diabetes duration 7.6 ± 6.1 years. Triple therapy significantly decreased HbA1c versus dual therapy (-1.03% vs. -0.63% [dapagliflozin] vs. -0.69% [saxagliptin]; P < .0001). More patients achieved HbA1c <7.0% with triple versus dual therapy (41.6% vs. 21.8% [dapagliflozin; P < .0001] vs. 29.8% [saxagliptin; P = .0018]). Triple therapy significantly decreased fasting plasma glucose (-1.5 mmol/L vs. -1.1 mmol/L [dapagliflozin; P = .0135] vs. -0.7 mmol/L [saxagliptin; P < .0001]) and body weight (-2.0 kg vs. -0.4 kg [saxagliptin; P < .0001]), and β-hydroxybutyrate levels were lower than with dapagliflozin plus metformin (mean difference -0.51; P = .0009). Urinary tract/genital infections and hypoglycaemia occurred in <5.0% and 5.8% of patients, respectively, with triple therapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Triple therapy with once-daily dapagliflozin 5 mg, saxagliptin 5 mg and metformin significantly improved glycaemic control versus dual therapy with either agent added to metformin in uncontrolled type 2 diabetes, and was generally well tolerated.

Clinical Use of DPP-4 Inhibitors

DPP-4 inhibitors were introduced for the treatment of type 2 diabetes in 2006. They stimulate insulin secretion and inhibit glucagon secretion by elevating endogenous GLP-1 concentrations without an intrinsic hypoglycaemia risk. Their efficacy potential to lower HbA1c is in the range between 0.5 and 1.0% and their safety profile is favorable. DPP-4 inhibitors are body weight neutral and they have demonstrated cardiovascular safety. Most compounds can be used in impaired renal function. Guidelines suggest the additional use of DPP-4 inhibitors after metformin failure in patients that do not require antidiabetic therapy with proven cardiovascular benefit. Recently, DPP-4 inhibitors have increasingly replaced sulfonylureas as second line therapy after metformin failure and many metformin/DPP-4 inhibitor fixed dose combinations are available. In later stages of type 2 diabetes, DPP-4 inhibitors are also recommended in the guidelines in triple therapies with metformin and SGLT-2 inhibitors or with metformin and insulin. A treatment with DPP-4 inhibitors should be stopped when GLP-1 receptor agonists are used. DPP-4 inhibitors can be used as monotherapy when metformin is contraindicated or not tolerated. Some studies have shown value of initial metformin-DPP-4 inhibitor combination therapy in special populations. This article gives an overview on the clinical use of DPP-4 inhibitors.

Safety and tolerability of dapagliflozin, saxagliptin and metformin in combination: Post-hoc analysis of concomitant add-on versus sequential add-on to metformin and of triple versus dual therapy with metformin

The safety of triple oral therapy with dapagliflozin plus saxagliptin plus metformin versus dual therapy with dapagliflozin or saxagliptin plus metformin was compared in a post-hoc analysis of 3 randomized trials of sequential or concomitant add-on of dapagliflozin and saxagliptin to metformin. In the concomitant add-on trial, patients with type 2 diabetes on stable metformin received dapagliflozin 10 mg/d plus saxagliptin 5 mg/d. In sequential add-on trials, patients on metformin plus either saxagliptin 5 mg/d or dapagliflozin 10 mg/d received dapagliflozin 10 mg/d or saxagliptin 5 mg/d, respectively, as add-on therapy. After 24 weeks, incidences of adverse events and serious adverse events were similar between triple and dual therapy and between concomitant and sequential add-on regimens. Urinary tract infections were more common with sequential than with concomitant add-on therapy; genital infections were reported only with sequential add-on of dapagliflozin to saxagliptin plus metformin. Hypoglycaemia incidence was <2.0% across all analysis groups. In conclusion, the safety and tolerability of triple therapy with dapagliflozin, saxagliptin and metformin, as either concomitant or sequential add-on, were similar to dual therapy with either agent added to metformin.